[circlecity]

"Ask for empiricle evidence....and the respondant may not use any biblical "proof" as "evidence"in the answer."

We do have empircal proof - eyewitness testimony as recorded in the historical narratives of the Bible. It's the only type of empirical proof available for any historical event.

[JDW11235]

“It’s the only type of empirical proof available for any historical event.”

Unless you’re a pseudo scientist, than you can make up anything and say that’s how it happened, passing it off as “science.”

[Logic n' Reason]

We do have empircal proof - eyewitness testimony as recorded in the historical narratives of the Bible. It's the only type of empirical proof available for any historical event.

HorseHockey!

"biblical evidence" to prove a biblical "fact" is a prime example - tho certainly not the only one - of using circular logic to prove a statement.

"Eye witness" "testimony"???? You've got to be kidding, right?? There is just so much wrong with that little piece of "proof" that there isn't room here to write it all down.

And if using the bible to "prove" biblical "fact" is your only weapon....you're un-armed.