Proof that God doesn't exist

[Drich]

The bible gives many "born on" dates for things, specifically relative to other things. The creation account is chock full of them. Genesis 14 (as an example that cuts through your bullshit)

The bulk of Genesis 14 is about the lot's captivity. I read Gen 14 and did not see a "born on date." Are you sure you have the right reference. If so then please explain/show it to me.

puts the "born on" date of the earth (and curiously seed bearing plants, trees, and fruiting flora) before the "born on" date of the sun and moon. No matter what you choose to interpret the "days" in genesis as that will yield a date. That those dates cannot be reconciled with reality is again independent of whatever you choose to interpret the "days" in genesis as.

In the "Days of creation" There isn't a time line that has been established as to how long 'in the beginning" actually was, nor what took place then, for: 1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was[a] on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.

This is a statement made part from what happened on "Day one" (The creation of Light.) All of these elements God created "In the beginning" Before light was created on Day one. And again "In the beginning" There isn't a time framed mentioned. So again. No Born on date

There is no need to address a specific apologetic because there is no possible means of reconciliation.

I know you want this to be true so that you can dismiss what you can't responsiably argue. So lets see if/when you fall back on this little escape clause you tagged onto your opening arguement.

---

[quote="Drich"]The bible does not confirm nor deny the existance of evolution buddy. The only account given is in what happens in the Garden. The only thing we can say for sure is that it did not happen there.

Forget the words God willed for a second. You've forgotten that his first will (the universe) is returning an explanation that we now call evolution. Assuming we're not being deceived, this dictates that God's words are allegorical.

Not nessarily. For this could also mean we simply do not have a complete understanding of God word, nor the universe He created. How persumptious does one have to be to boast a conclusion with only a partial understanding? This to mee seems like a fools folly.