Free Indeed

The Bible is evidence.

Keith&Co.

Okay, fine, pretend that the word 'evidence' is that slippery.
Now, do you have any ADDITIONAL evidence that can be used to corroborate the biblical evidence?

dimbulb

The Bible is hearsay of hearsay of hearsay...
Not to mention explicitly excluded from this proceeding.

Not admissible.

Case dismissed. :wave:

Next.

Sabine Grant

Topic better suited for BC&H.

Kharakov

Do you consider it evidence against Jewish myths as per Titus 1:13-15?

Additionally, doesn't everyone start with natural experiences (even if you define them as caused by God) instead of stuff written in a book?

bacht

Yes, but not of what you're talking about. Maybe the Bible is evidence for the ignorance and superstition of pre-scientific peoples, but as history or journalism? Not really, or not much

I thought the Tower of Babel was usually identified with a Sumerian ziggurat like the one at Ur? These structures were maybe slightly later than the Giza pyramids, but within the same era (middle-late 3rd millenium bce)

TheRealityOfMan

Free Indeed - did you personally use a scientific experiment to test God?

Did you ever properly write it up so your peers could review it?

Wooster

Was there a reason why you didn't answer my questions? You just went off on something I didn't talk about, why?

Amaleq13

You have yet to identify a single legitimate fallacy. Your continued faith does not constitute a fallacy on the part of your opponents. Your refusal or inability to deal with the presented evidence does not constitute a fallacy on the part of your opponents.

You have faith that your opponents are wrong and that appears to be all you have.

But they don't have faith in the same things you do. This is simply false. You have can many scientists with some sort of vague belief in the existence of some sort of supreme being or power but you will be quite hard pressed to find even a few that support the beliefs you've been defending in this thread.

I'm not sure what you intended to write but this sentence is incoherent. The fact is there are several different areas of science that independently reach the same conclusion. This convergence is part of the reason why the vast majority of scientists in related fields accept evolution as the best explanation.

You need to obtain better sources for scientific information. Evolutionary changes are seen laboratory settings all the time.

Why make stuff up when the real answer is you just don't know?

ApostateAbe

You can't just ask us to accept as fact everything we read in your particular religious book. Do we also accept the Koran and the Four Vedas as evidence? Do we accept Dianetics? Maybe the Christian Protestant Bible really is fact, but we don't just accept it on faith like maybe you would. Demonstrate the claim. It won't be easy. Many of us have already concluded that the Bible is inconsistent with history, inconsistent with scientific knowledge, inconsistent with logic, and inconsistent with itself. What you really need is external evidence. Where are the foundations of the tower of Babel? Where are the remains of the diaspora? There are a lot of ways that the Bible could be proved correct by looking at the world. Where is the global layer of sediment deposited by the flood? Where do we find the salt water and sea life in all of the inland lakes? Where is Noah's Ark? Where are the dinosaur bones and trilobite shells in human camps? Where are the Egyptian recordings of the ten plagues? Where are the remains of the exodus out of Egypt? Where is the huge temple of Solomon?