I always find it quite amusing whenever theists jump to evolution when faced with questions about the validity of their religious doctrine. I still don't see how it follows that if evolution is wrong or makes a statement about nature that you don't find comforting, that this somehow logically leads to the conclusion that religion is correct.
Perhaps instead of asking "How is the bible true?" the question should be "assuming you have picked it up for the first time, how would you come to the conclusion it is true with no one else telling you?"
You could compare that to a biology textbook whereby one could pick it up and duplicate everything in it in order to demonstrate its validity.
Perhaps instead of asking "How is the bible true?" the question should be "assuming you have picked it up for the first time, how would you come to the conclusion it is true with no one else telling you?"
You could compare that to a biology textbook whereby one could pick it up and duplicate everything in it in order to demonstrate its validity.
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media.giphy.com/media/FJovzGlbuoEXm/giphy.gif)
