As A Rule: Scrutinize Your Own Beliefs.

The beliefs we hold most dear are the ones we must scrutinize most carefully. It is a hypocrite who will gleefully attack another without checking her beliefs. A hypocrite is one who lashes out, who demands examination of another's beliefs but refuses to examine her own. Imagine someone who doesn't believe in gods or creationism, but believes Shakespeare wrote part of the King James Bible. At first glance it may appear to be not such an odd contradiction. But when I explain further you will see. "Shakespeare wrote Psalm 46 because the 46th word is 'shake' and the 46th to last word is 'spear'. His fingerprints are all over it. He wanted to remain anonymous, but left those clues." This a positive assertion. It is a statement that claims something either true or false is true. Something that requires evidence. The experience of fanatical, almost religious-like rage directed at me when I criticized the claim inspired me to think. I felt I wasted too much time debating a handful of angry cult worshippers. Granted they're not in an actual cult as far as I know. But then I started thinking about how even some of us atheists may have some belief that we, individually, irrationally hold. This was, after all, such an example. And this is why I'm using it as such. I asked for evidence, explaining that I was dubious of her claim. I gave some credit and assumed that it wasn't meant as actually writing the psalm, but rather mere involvement in translating the Latin source to English. So all that was required was evidence that Shakespeare was asked to participate in the project. That, for me, would have gone a long way in favor of her position. So, eventually another person provided a link to the King James Bible Trust website. There all that could be found was an article they had written about Shakespeare. Guess what? It mentioned how important as the greatest writer in the history of the English language he was. It mentioned how Shakespeare quoted the Bible in his plays. But no where did they mention whether he was involved. They seemed to think he was tremendously important but they don't say if the project was ever even mentioned to him. So, indeed, Shakespeare was in the right place at the right time. But, honestly that's as close to evidence as they could muster. And it's just not good enough. There are a few coincidences that make it not an impossible claim, but that's not the same thing as supporting the claim. Being possible is not equal to being likely.