I have asked this question before, though not on this forum, and not recieved a real answer. Maybe I'll get on here.
How can anyone argue using the Bible (or any other holy book) as fact when;
a) They can't provide evidence that there is a god of any sort. b) Even assuming a, they would need to show that this god is the one that they worship c) Even assuming a and b, they would still need to show that their holy book comes from their god or at least is sanctioned by him/her/it.
quote:Originally posted by William E. Harris: Now that I have laid that groundwork (and you will have to guess where I am going with this), I will would ask if you would change your mind about the bible as history, it the ARK was actually discovered on Ararat?
Unfortunately it is not that simple. If you provided sufficient evidence, I would have no option but too 'belief' in the flood story (provided that there are no remaining impossabilities). However, that does not mean the the WHOLE bible is suddenly true.