Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sorry Eusebius, facts have evidence and there is no evidence that proves Genesis. As a matter of fact (no pun intended), science provides evidence to the contrary.
BTW, what evidence do you have that Sants and the reindeer is a made-up story?
Sorry Amaznjohn but the historical documents called "The Old Testament" is evidence enough to prove Gehesis as an historical event. What is Sants? Everyone knows Sants is a made up story unless, of course, one is I.Q. defecient or very immature.
Sorry Amaznjohn but the historical documents called "The Old Testament" is evidence enough to prove Gehesis as an historical event. What is Sants? Everyone knows Sants is a made up story unless, of course, one is I.Q. defecient or very immature.
I'm thinking "Sants" is just a typo. However, you can probably figure out what is meant by sants. Let's see, it is mentioned in context with a reindeer story, so it may be Santa, and looking at the keyboard, the S is right next to the A, so I know it might be a stretch but I am going to go out on a limb and bet that Santa is what was meant.
Sorry Amaznjohn but the historical documents called "The Old Testament" is evidence enough to prove Gehesis as an historical event. What is Sants? Everyone knows Sants is a made up story unless, of course, one is I.Q. defecient or very immature.
Your latter sentence can be applied to your first sentence, dependent upon what a "defecient" is.
I'm thinking "Sants" is just a typo. However, you can probably figure out what is meant by sants. Let's see, it is mentioned in context with a reindeer story, so it may be Santa, and looking at the keyboard, the S is right next to the A, so I know it might be a stretch but I am going to go out on a limb and bet that Santa is what was meant.
New laptop, and I'm not accustomed to the shifting of the QWERTY keyboard. This probably won't be the last mistake I'll make.
Sorry Amaznjohn but the historical documents called "The Old Testament" is evidence enough to prove Gehesis as an historical event.
The events described in the first chapter of Genesis occurred without a single human witness, and left no p physical trace that would rule out any alternative explanation. So just where do you think the information came from , to be written as these "historical documents"? Who saw God create the heavens, or where is your physical evidence that proves that it was God who created the heavens, and that they could not have formed in any other way?
Give me one single example of a non-biblical event widely accepted by historians, for which no human being left a record of having observed the event, and there is no archaeological evidence of the event having occurred in the manner described in the historical document. Just one.
Do you really believe that Phileas Fogg and Passepartout really went around the world in 80 days as a historical fact, merely because a story was written to that effect which sounded plausible? Is that story historical proof that they actually did that? After all, nothing else is required to make something a historical fact, except for someone to have written it down, without having seen it, long after the fact, with no eyewitness accounts to support it. I invite you to watch the movie "Galaxy Quest", in which aliens picked up earth TV signals, and believed that everything they saw on sitcoms was "historically true". That was evidence enough to prove "Gilligan's Island" as an historical event.
The events described in the first chapter of Genesis occurred without a single human witness, and left no p physical trace that would rule out any alternative explanation. So just where do you think the information came from , to be written as these "historical documents"? Who saw God create the heavens, or where is your physical evidence that proves that it was God who created the heavens, and that they could not have formed in any other way?
Give me one single example of a non-biblical event widely accepted by historians, for which no human being left a record of having observed the event, and there is no archaeological evidence of the event having occurred in the manner described in the historical document. Just one.
Do you really believe that Phileas Fogg and Passepartout really went around the world in 80 days as a historical fact, merely because a story was written to that effect which sounded plausible? Is that story historical proof that they actually did that? After all, nothing else is required to make something a historical fact, except for someone to have written it down, without having seen it, long after the fact, with no eyewitness accounts to support it. I invite you to watch the movie "Galaxy Quest", in which aliens picked up earth TV signals, and believed that everything they saw on sitcoms was "historically true". That was evidence enough to prove "Gilligan's Island" as an historical event.
So how do you propose that ANY historical event can be proven true then? At any rate, all your examples fail because they can be PROVEN to be works of fiction.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
