Atheism: The True Path?

[fr0d0]

There is no "scientific logic" for god at all so how can there be "scientific logic" for the claim that such a being is timeless?

I agree. I was wanting you to separate the two. But nevermind.

We're still using exactly the same original source in EVERY version there is. The most accurate version currently is the NIV originally published in 1978, with a minor revision in 1984.

No you're not ... there are many Christians who reject all versions of the bible except King James and careful reading of the two in parallel demonstrate differences that can be significant.

The KJV is the poetic version supposedly. It certainly isn't the most accurate. Although I know people who favour i fervently those same people would never justifiably exclude other versions. Yeah there's the street bible; but this isn't a strict translation; maybe not much more accurate than the lolcat translation. Time moves on, we have greater or less understanding of the original meaning and the translations reflect that. The fact remains though: all translations are just that: translations of the original.

Interpretation and what people take as meaning varies but the source remains the same.

Not if you're using NIV as your source no.

Like I said the NIV is the most accurate around today.

Evolution is not contrary to the bible. Some peoples interpretation of the bible is. There's more evidence to suggest that the bible is actually more accurate scientifically than has been interpreted down the centuries. Flat Earth theory for example wasn't biblical.

Yes it is because it specifies a god that created animals and humans personally when evolution most definitely does not specify that and it does it in a 6 day period for which there is even less. Furthermore it claims evidence of a 40 day rainstorm & consequent flood that covered every mountain (to more than 5 cubits as I recall) for which there is no geological support and which, if true, would result in VERY different evolutionary evidence ... it's that that sends the fundies into such hysterical cataclysms of evidence twisting.

Again your interpreting by stating 6 x 24 hour days. The text doesn't say that. Genesis 1 is quite strongly accepted as an allegorical account. Same with the flood story. You couldn't even claim that it's debatable that it's meant to be a scientific account.

Sorry.. who has no choice?

You don't. You have to argue your god is somewhere else, somewhere that can't be tested or reached by science ... you have no choice.

Kyu

I agree.