You are basing your answers on writings/scriptures that have no validity…
Definition of valid –… to be well-grounded on principles or evidence; able to withstand criticism or objection, as an argument; sound.
Although you have claimed many times that the scriptures are not a reliable source, this does not make them so. (I claim I can sing, but everyone else knows better. And the more I claim it, the surer everyone else is of the truth!)
Please prove to me, in one specific instance from the scriptural record, the invalidity of the document. You see, one of the definitions of the term valid is “able to withstand criticism”.
The Bible (or at least parts of it) has faced attacks from its enemies for close to 3500 yrs, and it is still “standing”. In the last century it has been “validated” by archeology many times over.
One instance is the book of Daniel, where Belshazzar, King of Babylon is mentioned. Critics found fault with this mention, since no Babylonian records named such a king. That is until the 19th century, when archeologists uncovered a stone with the writing of a Babylonian king speaking of his son Belshazzar as co-regent. Amazing discovery, since, in the Old Testament, this King B actually offered Daniel the position of being 3rd in power in the Kingdom. Third, because King B. was actually the second in command.
Hey thanks for dropping by and reading my post, especially if you are an atheist friend. I hope to hear from you and would appreciate a comment to begin a discussion.
Have a great day.
Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion.