Please show me a video of a religious zealot telling people about "the religious mind" or "the Christian." 
The keyword there is, of course, "possibly". If Rowbotham were a zealot there would be no question at all on what is true. This one word alone in this entire work TOTALLY blows any criticism of Rowbotham as being a religious zealot out of the water.
"IF it can be shown," then "possibly," here is the conclusion.
Learn to read. The work has big words and complex subjects and themes for some readers, certainly, but this denial is clearly amateur, childish, and deliberate.
Your entire rebuttal of Rowbotham's thesis still consists in picking the phrasing instead of the content. That's not an acceptable reason. You can continue, but the denial, childishness, and lack of reading is on your part.
If you spent more time reading lengthy books, you would see that words like 'possibly' don't weaken an argument. On the contrary, authors strengthen their argument by using logic.
The conclusion of an 'if/then' structure isn't less endorsed by an author. If the author wasn't convinced of the argument, he wouldn't make it. The logical structure only serves to convince others, it doesn't speak of the author's conviction.
Rowbotham doesn't say that Christianity needs to be proven. He says that his book
proves Christianity.
"The Christian will be greatly strengthened, and his mind more completely satisfied, by having it in his power to demonstrate that the Scriptures are philosophically true, than he could possibly be by the simple belief in their truthfulness unsupported by practical evidence."
'Earth not a globe' attempts to display the practical evidence that the Scriptures are true, both literally and philosophically, so that Christianity
will be strengthened.
"If the truth of the philosophy of the Scriptures can be demonstrated, then, possibly, their spiritual and moral teachings may also be true;
We know, from the previous statement, that this condition is fulfilled by Rowbotham's evidence.
So this "if" doesn't mean that a doubt remains. This "if" means that Rowbotham's work proves the conclusion, which follows "then".
What exactly is this conclusion?
they may, and indeed must, have had a Divine origin; and, therefore, there must exist a Divine Being, a Creator and Ruler of the physical and spiritual worlds; and that, after all, the Christian religion is a grand reality, and that he himself, through all his days of forgetfulness and denial of God, has been guarded and cared for as a merely mistaken creature, undeserving the fate of an obstinate, self-willed opponent of everything sacred and superhuman."
Show Posts
