new

[Topic title: Why I'll take the bible's word over a scientist's/historian's/etc. word.]

It seems to me that every time we have evidence that seems to prove the bible wrong or contradict the bible, or there's a lack of evidence for something in the bible, that eventually, the bible has always proven true.

For example:

People thought that the Hittites didn't exist, but guess what, we discovered the Hittite civilization.
Also, when Mt. Saint Helen erupted it caused rapid formations that scientists thought took long periods of time.

I will come back with more examples later. But my point is that when the bible has been challenged, with time it has always proved true.

So that's why right now, when there's supposed evidence for an old earth, or something else that scientists say is true that contradicts the bible I'm not going to throw away the bible and say that it's inaccurate. Or start trying to fit an old earth into the creation story.

So some might say that I'm ignoring the evidence, but truly I'm paying attention to the greater evidence, which is the bible, which with time has been faithful to stand up to criticism and prove true.

Minor Question gets big answer (because it's saved in a text file...)

Why is Atheism a Joke?

Serious version: Atheism is a joke for various reasons. Its proponents disagree completely on different (sometimes key) points, and often the theories they put forward it have simply overwhelming evidence against it, but since many have based their careers around it (such as Evolutionary Biology) they can't admit it's false without being out of a job. Therefore, instead of going where the evidence leads – there is a creator of the universe, they attempt to find the best natural answer instead of the best answer.
Another reason is society’s view of Atheism. Take Freethinkers as an example. As far as they’re concerned, there isn’t substantial scientific evidence for there being a God. Therefore, there isn’t one. Do you see the problem here? If not, think about it the other way around. There is isn’t substantial scientific evidence for there NOT being a God, so therefore there is one. It’s a contradiction (and this very contradiction was what made me go from Atheism to Agnosticism three years ago). But, no, people choose that unless science can prove there is a God they’ll be Atheists, which in terms of a reasonable decision is— well, look at the point about three lines up.
If you wanted, I could go on, but I really don’t feel like it. Look up some Lee Strobel books if you want, such as The Case for a Creator.

Less Serious Version: Chavs, Gangsters and other such unsocial groups are Atheists. Since they are, they are the main view of Atheism as a whole, since they’re often the loudest and first to proclaim their views. Another reason is that Atheists make absurd claims, such as ‘The Bible/Quran/Torah/other holy book isn’t real’. Uh, hello? *Picks Up Bible* Yep, this seems pretty real and tangible to me— Finally, Atheists claim that our body is made up of something called DNA. That’s all well and good, but DNA stands for Deoxyribonucleic Acid. Acid! What happens when Acid comes into contact with our skin? It dissolves! So, our body simply cannot contain this substance since it’s completely unrealistic.

I like the second version.
---
Most people have a joke in their signature, so I'll join the bandwagon:
Atheism.