Atheist or Agnostic

What a compelling argument. /sarcasm
Where are all the pagan gods? One book stands unchallenged. The Bible.
what was the first living thing?
How did the universe come into being?

Have you ever studied actual biology?
It is crazy to believe living things are not created by an intelligent Creator.

How did the Bible predict all those things with exact details and exact timing?
How could the Bible have all that advance scientific knowledge that has only been discovered recently?
 
Where are all the pagan gods? One book stands unchallenged. The Bible.
what was the first living thing?
How did the universe come into being?

Have you ever studied actual biology?
It is crazy to believe living things are not created by an intelligent Creator.

How did the Bible predict all those things with exact details and exact timing?
How could the Bible have all that advance scientific knowledge that has only been discovered recently?
Questions aren't arguments, and unsupported claims aren't proof.

The Bible is disproved in my latest thread.
 
We have been here before. Is it "absolute truth" that hills can sing and trees have hands? See Isaiah 55:12 for a piece of poetry in the Bible, not a piece of "absolute truth".
Just poetic language.

Can you give any real evidence of anything existing before about 6000 years ago without an assumption?
 
Just poetic language.
Exactly my point. Poetic language is not "absolute truth" as you claimed above. You made an incorrect claim.

Can you give any real evidence of anything existing before about 6000 years ago without an assumption?
Nor can you. We both have to assume that Last Thursdayism is incorrect. There is no possible evidence that can disprove Last Thursdayism; all such supposed evidence was created last Thursday, along with everything else.
 
No assumptions about God, for or against. Just science.
Most of these are not even anything that is claimed to be older than 6000 years old.

Those that are attempts are just the same old false assumptions. Note the word estimated. C-14 decay will not work. Assuming growth rates of today apply to the past is a big assumption. Of course, forgetting the worldwide flood is another assumption.

Nothing yet but good try.

Did you try any calendars yet?
 
Most of these are not even anything that is claimed to be older than 6000 years old.

Those that are attempts are just the same old false assumptions. Note the word estimated. C-14 decay will not work. Assuming growth rates of today apply to the past is a big assumption. Of course, forgetting the worldwide flood is another assumption.

Nothing yet but good try.

Did you try any calendars yet?
No false assumptions. Just science. You only asked for evidence of anything, not just living things, but anything older than 6000 years. I have done that, but now back to you. Where's the proof you were boasting about?
 
No false assumptions. Just science. You only asked for evidence of anything, not just living things, but anything older than 6000 years. I have done that, but now back to you. Where's the proof you were boasting about?
Of course you failed again.
Do you have anything else?
You failed again because your beloved theories are false.
But do not feel bad or take these repeated defeats personally or be sad.
You have been dealt a losing hand.

BTW, no one has ever met the challenge.
 
Of course you failed again.
Do you have anything else?
You failed again because your beloved theories are false.
But do not feel bad or take these repeated defeats personally or be sad.
You have been dealt a losing hand.

BTW, no one has ever met the challenge.
Nope, not failed at all. But enough side tracking. Where is your proof? Why do you keep running away from this question?
 
Back
Top