Alpha wrote:pyre wrote:Alpha wrote:
Because it blames God by making His account in Genesis not literal, when in the context of the Holy Bible (which is proven to be divine rather than human in origin)
Prove it. Quoting the bible will be ruled out, seeing as how that would be tautologic. Saying that the bible has many historical accuracies will be ruled out, as my AP US history book is full of them and it wasn't divine. Using B to reinforce A will be ruled out because I could rewrite my APUSH book and put the sentence: "There is no Asian Landmass" in there and it would still be a false statement
go.
Fine, I will not mention those things which you say. However, I will like to add that in the area of history,
no other book has more historic evidence to support it than the Holy Bible. Now that we got historic/archaeological evidence out of the way, we can move on.
There is also prophetic evidence, scientific evidence, the light of creation, and the light of conscience.
Therefore, a person who says God does not exist without adhereing to these evidences and testing the promises of God in His word, is like a person who denies a microbe by refusing to look into a microscope.