The area of religion is a contentious one, particularly when it comes to matters of, ah, fact. For the Christian, it is a fact that Christ is risen, but for the atheist, or agnostic, the matter is, at least, capable of debate.
However, I am more concerned with mundane matters in the City of Dis. Like the detective, I am mainly interested in:
When attempting to establish points 1 to 3, I am only interested in original material, or validated (i.e. peer reviewed) secondary sources. This is to say, that stunning material from a source of unknown origin will be treated with deep caution, but not necessarily, rejected.
As to point 4, you will have to forgive me if I draw my own conclusions from the source material, and if I didn't there really wouldn't be much point to this web site.
If you find any errors of fact in this web site, as defined above, please do not hesitate to contact, me, Therion Ware, telling me what's in error, and citing your sources. If it turns out that I'm wrong (which is, ah, "just possible"...) I will delighted to correct the appropriate section.
I make extensive use of the Encyclopedia Britannica. This is, I feel, fair use of the material (which I paid a fortune for in the paper edition, and paid rather less for in the CD version). More to the point, Britannica is a recognised reference work that accepts entries only from recognised experts in their various fields. Many other, more specialised works are used as well, again in the context of the "fair use" rules.
More generally, I am not terribly interested in the following forms of theistic argument: