Unless it's first hand how can anything be believed (including history) without concrete evidence?
We have visual and physical evidence of the events listed in History books. If ya think about it believing that god created all is about the same as believing in the Big bang theory. Both are ways certain groups think the universe and everything was created but no one really knows for sure and most likely will never know. Its like an open ended question where you just fill in the blank with whatever you want. But we know for sure that the civil war existed because of all the photos, written accounts, and physical evidence.

Me personally I am more of a scientific guy. I'm not saying that i dont believe that there might be a god but it just makes more sense to me that the universe was created from itself a long ass time ago. Way before man, the dinosaurs, or even single celled organisms existed.
miley Reviewed by miley on . Argument made by religious people that just isn't valid A lot of people justify their belief in a certain religion by claiming that there is basically no difference between believing in religious texts and believing in commonly accepted historical texts. They'll say something like, "What's the difference between believing in the Bible and believing all the written accounts of the Civil War, for example? You choose to believe those accounts, even though you weren't actually there, just like I choose to believe in the Bible even though I wasn't Rating: 5