[BroJoeK]

Sunken Div: "The oft-cited date of the OT Great Flood is 2200 BC.
There remains zero evidence that it ever took place."

trebb: "My Bible says it happened - good enough for me."

Resettozero: "We disagree on both evidence for the Great Flood and lack of evidence that the Pharaoh's army was destroyed during a chase..."

By "evidence", Sunken Div obviously means: scientifically confirmed hard physical evidence, and in that he is 100% correct.

Other types of evidence, such as Bible texts, other ancient texts and non-scientific claims regarding certain geological features -- all these you can believe & interpret however you wish.
Regardless, they remain non-scientific.

[Resettozero]

By "evidence", Sunken Div obviously means: scientifically confirmed hard physical evidence, and in that he is 100% correct.

Not arguing this point with any FReeper. Just today learned of the poster's POV. And now yours and another one or two.

I get it.

[trebb]

By "evidence", Sunken Div obviously means: scientifically confirmed hard physical evidence, and in that he is 100% correct. Other types of evidence, such as Bible texts, other ancient texts and non-scientific claims regarding certain geological features -- all these you can believe & interpret however you wish. Regardless, they remain non-scientific.

I absolutely agree - was just making the statement that I have faith in Biblical text. If I didn't, I would also have to question my faith in God Himself and I choose not too. Apologetics makes some very scientific arguments when it comes to explaining what needed to take place for the Bible itself to have been written, by some 150 authors, over 2,000 years and not contradict itself.