(March 4, 2016 at 4:25 pm)Drich Wrote:
Nice try... but no.
It's real simple.. deceptively simple. (that is why so many of you object, because you haven't quite figured out how iron clad this is.)
The OP uses an old atheist argument that plant life can not exist without the sun. the assumption being the sun is the only source of light possible. However if one remains with in the confines of the narrative (which is what one does in the old atheist argument the OP uses) Light and darkness is created on the first day, which points to a light source other than the sun.
Now that said the conclusion of the old 'atheist argument' God/the bible is not scientific accurate itself is what is in error. Not the bible. Which again points to the lack of a 'scientific' basis in which that particular argument attacks scripture.
Oh, sorry Drich. I thought we were discussing reality, not engaging in hermetically sealed literary interpretation. Enjoy your circle jerk.
