What Are Miracles...

[Consilius]

If anything in the Bible turns out not to be true, it can only then be taken as a metaphor or a misunderstanding from the people who wrote it before modern science existed.

A lot of the Bible has turned out not to be true. The vast majority of the Genesis story has been disproven, and that is the basis for the entire narrative which follows. If the fundamentals are incorrect, just how wrong does does the rest of it have to be before you admit to yourself that God himself is a metaphor or misunderstanding?

Many religions tell stories about the world's genesis, but at the heart of it we have a God who makes the universe, and a rebellious mankind that is responsible for sin. That is all that is needed for the Christian salvation story. I agree that what is in the Bible up to the story of Abraham is probably not historical account—even the scripture writers weren't there at the time. The contents of Genesis is oral tradition with obscured facts because the value that Christians place on it lies in their message. Whether or not these things actually happened is simply a perk.

I should also say that universe made without God is also an unproven assertion that is under heavy debate. I'm not going to enter into that debate with you.

It is an unproven assertion which is almost certainly true, and science will demonstrate this in time. Yours is an unprovable assertion based upon your desire for it to be true and nothing else. Your assertion has been designed, specifically, to be unprovable, so that no advance in science can ever rob you of your fantasy. You can't ever prove it, therefore, it can never be demonstrated to be factual and it is just wasted breath.
[/quote]
What a typical atheist would say. It's all bias. Watch me do the same:
A universe that came out of nothing is an unprovable assertion based on your desire to be right. YOUR assertion has been designed so that it cannot be proven (not to mention that it has NOT been proven in a lab) so that nothing can rob you of you thinking that your right. YOU can never prove it, therefore, it can never be demonstrated to be factual and is just a wasted breath.

The detective who finds the kidnapped child could have been born in a Third World country. He could never have had access to formal education. He could have had his moral corrupted by a pair of drunken parents, f they had not killed him before he reached puberty. This detective could have been incompetent and not know how to do his job well. This detective could have been on a corruption case in D.C. while the kidnapping occurred in West Virginia.
Nobody does it alone.

Almost nobody accomplishes anything without the help of other people. There is no evidence for, or need of, a God in this scenario. Other people are enough.
[/quote]
Where you are born, according to atheism, is a result of chance. Christians say it is God laying out a path for a person. Explain how you not existing in the body of a black child in Mozambique is a product of you or your parents' effort.

Are you going to insist that, out of every Christian on this planet, not one of them has presented a logical argument for Christianity?

Not one. Ever. It doesn't matter even if someone did. A sound logical argument is suggestive. By itself, it proves nothing.
[/quote]
More bias. I am a Christian because I feel no atheist has provided a sound logical argument.
It doesn't matter if someone DID present a sound logical argument? When Christians say that, you give it a label…BIGOTRY.