Can anybody tell me how the Bible is scientific fact WITHOUT giving the following answers:?
To “Your Mirror”, I say this: “no”. That is called shifting the burden of proof. This person is asking you to provide proof for the claim that the bible is scientific fact. To ask for proof that it is *not* fact is the same as asking for proof that there is *not* a teapot on Mars. *You* have to justify *your* claim of factuality. You may counter by saying that it is our equal duty to do the opposite, but that is actually untrue: It is you and your ilk attempting to gain recognition of the bible as fact and thus you must prove your claim. A very long trail of science is our proof. To “Saint of Sorts”: non sequitur. That’s Latin for “it does not follow” and is a common logical fallacy. It means that the first part of your argument does not support the last part of your argument. Breathing air and seeing life is no proof that God exists. You must provide the link between the two by proving that God is the creator of these things. To “K”: What part of rule #8 don’t you understand? Scientif
