Disproving the Bible

[SteveII]

Fidel--A logically sound Christian worlview must be open to where the science leads. If we have evidence that the earth is more than 6000 years old, then that is that. I was pointing out that the literal 6-day view is not the only one. Let me add that disproving the 6-day interpretation in no way disproves the existence of God nor other biblical claims.

While you might only desire facts, beliefs are not irrelevant. Philosophy and science go hand in hand.

You are right to say that science is not concerned with disproving the Bible. That would be a philosophical statement which science, by definition, cannot make. However, many people (including the first post in this thread) seem to think it does and has.

---

@SteveII
-1. If God exists, miracles exist
2. God Exists
3. Therefore miracles exist.
If you try to make a point in an inescapable fallacy of circular reasoning, you will not get far.

If you read the context, you will see that I was pointing out that miracles are not a good argument to disprove the Bible. You would have to disprove the existence of God (or at least show that it is less likely than the negation) to disprove the existence of miracles, which then can be used as an argument against the Bible.