If I recall right, he said earlier he saw no proof to contradict his beliefs. (Paraphrased heavily). I think I see why...he's seemingly utilizing only apologist data to inform himself. I'm not one to chase down details, but I don't recall seeing his 'timeline' claims on when the bible was written anywhere else. Ever. The debate is always for later on. Jumping on to quotations as evidence like he did was weak.
When in doubt, let 'god's words' be the final say.
Dick move.
Oh well.
When in doubt, let 'god's words' be the final say.
Dick move.
Oh well.
