[ Post a Response | No Answers in Genesis Discussion Board ]
Posted by James on December 28, 2015, 4:58 pm
Since Ken Ham in his debate with Bill Nye goes on and on about how we cannot observe the past so this "historical science" cannot be true because no one was there to observe it and therefore it is just an assumption. But he is adamant about Noah and the flood occurring. The problem with Noah and the flood and Adam and Eve is that there is no recorded history of that taking place when it took place. The bible was written hundreds of years after those events took place, and because of that, there was no one to make the observation of those events, therefore those events are just assumed to have happened.
Based on that, the Bible is now telling people about something that was only assumed to have happened, because there was no observation of said events happening, which only means the bible is now telling untruths about one thing. There is no proof about Noah or Adam and Eve or any event that took place hundreds of years before the Bible was written, only what was written in the book, which means the rest of the Bible should not be taken as factual. The Bible is all about historical science which cannot be proven with observational science and therefore cannot be believed by anyone with a sane mind.
There are many religions. Christianity not even being the oldest. They all have creation stories as well. That's all they are though, stories.
- Observational Science - James December 28, 2015, 4:58 pm
« Back to index
- Good post - well put. n/t - woodbine December 31, 2015, 2:23 am
- Scientism - Daryl December 30, 2015, 11:27 am
- Re: Observational Science - Dave December 30, 2015, 9:05 am
- Skip History class , perhaps? - JJJHS December 30, 2015, 4:08 am
- You... - Devolution December 29, 2015, 9:20 pm
Hosted for FREE by Boardhost.
Create your own free message board!