[Chimera]

What a lame answer. No explaination, no support, no evidence. What an interesting debate tactic

Well who else would decide who's right about the Bible besides the person that judges whether or not you go to heaven? It doesn't require an explanation or evidence. It's common sense. Use critical thinking.

The two don't have to disprove each other to see that they are not on equal ground. Science can provide EVIDENCE for its CONCLUSIONS. Religion can provide NO EVIDENCE for its conclusions. Therefore, they are NOT equal. Your point fails.

1. Speaking of the two as mutually exclusive, Science CANNOT provide valid evidence to disprove God and Christianity can't provide valid evidence to prove God. How are they not equal? 2. If the world's greatest atheist scientist can't disprove the existence of God, how do you expect the world's greatest religious scientist? 3. Science and religion are not mutually exclusive.

There is more biblical support for the idea that the bible was not meant to be reinterpreted over and over.

As in what?

Furthermore, the bible was meant to be historicaly accurate.

In your opinion, many disagree.

There is more biblical support for the idea that the bible was not meant to be reinterpreted over and over. Furthermore, the bible was meant to be historicaly accurate. Take Genesis for example, a volume of the bible that many contend is not meant to be a literal account of the creation. If it was not literal, why are Genesis accounts quoted litleraly throughout the bible? The story of Cain and Able in Genesis 4 is litleraly quoted in Hebrews 11:4. The flood account in Genesis 7 is literally quoted in Matthew 24:39. There are other books that are literaly quoted as well. Jonah and the great fish in Jonah 2 is literaly quoted in Matthew 12:40. There is a lot of biblical support for a literal bible.

1. As I said, the Bible is a book of spiritual truth, of course it's quoted. Matthew used the situations to compare to the coming of Christ. I'm sorry but that's far from anything you're trying to prove.In Hebrews you have examples of faith ALL used to make a point. Every example you've provided are all used as exactly how I said to take the Bible. A book of spiritual truth. There is absolutely nothing in the Bible that says "Take all of this literally". It doesn't exist. By the very fact that it is NOT there, I am free to interpret it as I will because I am given free will.

Uh...I said REinterpret, genius.

You're falling back. Answer my Shakespeare question. Or answer all of my questions. You're ignoring so many parts of my post it's not even funny.

I don't have the information on the makeup of those organizations, but they do have christian followers. This thread is about Christianity, so it is them that we are discussing. Whether there are non- christian followers in those organizations is irrelevant to this thread.

By your words, they could potentially have atheist followers, or other religious followers as well.Without the followers being exclusively Christian, your point is moot, due to the fat that it applies across a broad spectrum of belief systems.

t was a simple rubuttal to one of the weakest arguments available. How did it contradict any of my claims

Well, as one supporting science so, it's contradictory to say that considering that the scientific method should test EVERYTHING and assume NOTHING.

God did not make Adam and Eve because God cannot make anything appear out of nowhere as this breaks the laws of science and nature.

So does God, your argument is dumb.