I think you got my purpose crossed.
when I said
good. so now you will no longer try to prove that the flood did happen and that the earth is only x thousand years old. that the fall is real, and the cause of all our misery, that God is real, or anything else in the bible really, really did happen?or is that just a slip up, and the bible should be accepted as the truth?
it was in response to something you said.
when asked if the fact that nothing about the past can be known included the bible, you said yes. which would mean that the flood can't be known, that the wars can't be known, that everything in any way historical in the bible might not have really happened.
But you do belief they happen, in fact you KNOW they happened. It is all true. which makes your statement that nothing about the past can be known, including that which is in the bible, contradictory.
I know a lot more about evolution than just 1% of it. I don't know all of it, true, but . . .
I'm glad you sorted out the contradiction with the end of your post, though. Which means that the past can be known. which means that the bible can be proved, not just believed. actually, this whole thing is screwed up. my fualt, partially. let's start from the beginning.
faith writes
The reason it's unfalsifiable is that there is no way to prove anything about the past
to which rickJB responds with
Does this assertion include the content of the Bible?
to which Faith responds
Of course. The contents of the Bible are meant to be believed, not proved.
which is when I enter the picture.
what you have said, so far, amounts to this.
nothing about the past can be known, including what's in the bible, and the bible is to be believed, not proved.
So I state that either you will stop trying to prove the flood and whatnot, or that you screwed up, and meant to say that the bible is true.
If the later is the case (which it is:
If one believes something, one believes it is the truth.
) that means that things about the past can be known.
which makes your statements contradictory. That's what I was getting at.
this latter part makes more sense, no?
All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences