The Bible IS a credible ancient text

DrDavidT

Member
Too many people dismiss its contents because they declare it a religious document but there have been too many archaeological and scientific discoveries that show the contents are fact, verifiable in many cases, and talking about real locations, people, and events. Even Genesis 1 has verifiable proof that creation happened as God wrote in the first chapter
 

Nouveau

Active member
Too many people dismiss its contents because they declare it a religious document but there have been too many archaeological and scientific discoveries that show the contents are fact, verifiable in many cases, and talking about real locations, people, and events.
That it includes some real people and locations does not in anyway validate its supernatural claims.

Even Genesis 1 has verifiable proof that creation happened as God wrote in the first chapter
What is this verifiable proof?
 

DrDavidT

Member
Sure it does. The more natural proofs there are the more likely the supernatural ones are true as well. Verifiable proof is something that secular science cannot produce for their evolutionary thinking
 

The Pixie

Active member
Too many people dismiss its contents because they declare it a religious document but there have been too many archaeological and scientific discoveries that show the contents are fact, verifiable in many cases, and talking about real locations, people, and events. Even Genesis 1 has verifiable proof that creation happened as God wrote in the first chapter
What is your verified proof that there is a solid dome over the world?

Gen 1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

Or that the earth existed - and had plant-life - before the sun and stars existed?

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

Perhaps you meant Genesis 1 has verifiable proof that creation happened as man has later re-interpreted it in the first chapter?
 

DrDavidT

Member
Who says I was talking about the dome? You should ask better questions than trying to find errors in someone else's comments.

Then you make the same mistake most people make about light. You cannot create the vessel until you have the product you want it to contain. In other words, God knew light had to be created first before he needed to create the sun. it is not impossible for light to exist prior to the sun being created.

The sun is not the originator of light, it is merely the container.

Perhaps you meant Genesis 1 has verifiable proof that creation happened as man has later re-interpreted it in the first chapter?
No, and do not try to change my words.
 

Nouveau

Active member
Sure it does. The more natural proofs there are the more likely the supernatural ones are true as well. Verifiable proof is something that secular science cannot produce for their evolutionary thinking
False on both counts, and you didn't answer my question.

This thread is not off to a good start.
 
Sure it does. The more natural proofs there are the more likely the supernatural ones are true as well. Verifiable proof is something that secular science cannot produce for their evolutionary thinking
So in your world, if the sea of Galilee is a real place, then its justified to claim Jesus walked on water? is that what you're claiming?
 

DrDavidT

Member
False on both counts, and you didn't answer my question.

This thread is not off to a good start.
First, I corrected you, I was not referring to the dome. second, prove that I am wrong on both counts. Just because you are unwilling to believe the truth doesn't mean it is untrue
 

DrDavidT

Member
Also false. The nuclear reactions in a star create and emit photons.
yet flashlights, cell phone lights, car lights, and many other sources of light do not use nuclear power and still produce light. Unbelievers only limit their arguments to the sun because they do not want to admit that they are wrong.

h and if you do not like my answers too bad. that is what you get when you treat me in such a distasteful manner. I do not caste pearls before swine
 

Nouveau

Active member
First, I corrected you, I was not referring to the dome. second, prove that I am wrong on both counts. Just because you are unwilling to believe the truth doesn't mean it is untrue
I never even mentioned any dome.

Why are you calling yourself a Dr if you can't even keep track of who you are talking to?
 

Nouveau

Active member
yet flashlights, cell phone lights, car lights, and many other sources of light do not use nuclear power and still produce light. Unbelievers only limit their arguments to the sun because they do not want to admit that they are wrong.

h and if you do not like my answers too bad. that is what you get when you treat me in such a distasteful manner. I do not caste pearls before swine
I didn't limit my arguments to the Sun. I was simply correcting your factually incorrect claim about the Sun not being an originator of light.

I'm sorry you find correction to be distasteful. Maybe discussion forums are not for you.

And it's not that I dislike your answers. I was saying you still haven't provided any.

Again, your OP speaks of verifiable proof of Biblical creation. Where is that proof?
 

Hypatia_Alexandria

Active member
Too many people dismiss its contents because they declare it a religious document but there have been too many archaeological and scientific discoveries that show the contents are fact, verifiable in many cases, and talking about real locations, people, and events. Even Genesis 1 has verifiable proof that creation happened as God wrote in the first chapter
Your thread title is incorrectly worded. "The Bible" is not "a text.

The collection comprises various different texts all written at different times. Insofar as the Hebrew texts are concerned these had their final redaction following the exile in the 6th century BCE.
 

Hypatia_Alexandria

Active member
. Even Genesis 1 has verifiable proof that creation happened as God wrote in the first chapter
Well then, if you contend that "creation happened as God wrote in the first chapter" it follows that the creation account in the second chapter of Genesis must be wrong as the events in creation in that account follow an entirely different sequence.
 

DrDavidT

Member
I didn't limit my arguments to the Sun. I was simply correcting your factually incorrect claim about the Sun not being an originator of light.

I was not incorrect. You are. The sun is only the vessel for light it is not the originator of light. God knew what needed to be done first and he did it. You do not create the flashlight unless you have something for it to do

Well then, if you contend that "creation happened as God wrote in the first chapter" it follows that the creation account in the second chapter of Genesis must be wrong as the events in creation in that account follow an entirely different sequence.

That is an erroneous and misguided statement. You do not seem to understand the difference between a general and a specific creation revelation.
 
Top