Atheists, Naturalists, Humanists, et al...and their hypocritical standard regarding evidence...

When a Christian points to the Bible as a historical record and proof of God's existence in both spirit (Holy Spirit and Father) and bodily form (Jesus) the non-Christian, namely along the lines of atheistic orientation will deny this as authoritative proof. Even non-Christians of the theistic streams will do this as well.

This is a double standard, one of hypocrisy. It is because their collective presuppositions within their world view will not allow such evidence as it contradicts their accepted beliefs.

While Christians do the same in effect when the tables are turned some Christians are at least honest such as myself in that we recognize that we do come with our own set of presuppositions when it comes to interpreting how we view the world as a whole.

The disconnect here is that while atheists and other non-Christians who have a mind-set centered around evolutionism  accept secular evolutionary publications (books, journals, magazines, et al...) as authoritative proof they deny any and all other written works if they conflict with their presuppositions (world view).

The Bible is a proven historical record in the minds of those who hold a Christian world view and is supported by many archaeological and experiential proofs over many centuries. Of course any and all evidence will be seen to the contrary by those of differing world views but this does not detract in any way the fact that the Bible is a historical record with many more manuscripts and documents that date closer to the original writings than any other historical work (Plato, etc) yet for some reason the Bible gets much more criticism in it's authenticity and authority than do any of the other ancient works. When this is done it is hypocritical.

So when people embrace Niles Eldredge and Stephen Jay Gould's words in regards to punctuated equilibrium as gospel truth to any degree and without any real empirical evidence other than speculated hope and then turn around and deny Peter's written report of his eyewitness account of the Lord Jesus Christ and that he audibly witnessed God speak from heaven this is a true double standard.

The crazy twist here is that Peter's historical record is even more honestly in line with the so-called accepted historical and empirical evidence that evolutionists claim to adhere to than the "hopeful monster" idea (punctuated equilibrium) ever will be. Regardless of one's world view this should be seen as what is happening here...it is hypocrisy.

For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount. We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. 2 Peter 1:16-21