Ok, what is reality? What is truth? What is knowledge? Answer these three things for me and we will see if my statement is unsupportable.
Reality is the physical world which can be measured and tested and shown to provide repeatable results for those tests.
Truth is that which complies with reality.
Knowledge is that which is demonstrably factual.
The concepts of evolution are testable and can be demonstrated to be repeatable. They are a part of reality. Some parts of the Theory of Evolution may eventually require adjustments, but evolution has been observed, is utilized in medicine with predictable results and thus, can be demonstrated. The concepts of creationism cannot be demonstrated, cannot be explained via any demonstrable mechanisms and rely upon the existence of a force which has never been demonstrated to exist and for which there exists no empirical evidence.
We do not live in a geocentric universe, contrary to the claims of the Bible. We do not live under a solid dome, contrary to te claims of the Bible. There is no, and has never been a reservoir of water above the non-existent solid dome, contrary to the claims of the Bible. Plants did not exist on the Earth prior to the existence of the sun, contrary to the claims of the Bible. The atmosphere did not form after the planet formed covered in water, contrary to the claims of the Bible. The Earth has never been completely flooded, contrary to the claims of the Bible. Leprosy cannot be cured with a primitive ritual involving dripping bird blood upon the patient, contrary to the claims of the Bible. As the CWV is based largely upon the Bible and almost entirely in a world of spirituality and the non-physical, your statement is most certainly not supportable. If you think it is, then simply offer the support which means evidence, not just empty statements.
Keep in mind that personal experiences are no more evidence of Christianity than they are for Islam, Heaven's Gate, the beliefs of David Koresh or the beliefs once held by David Berkowitz concerning demons speaking through dogs. All of these things proclaim personal experience as their primary evidence.
I have demonstrated plants growing devoid of sun
How have you demonstrated this? How have you been able to make plants grow in temperatures of -454°F? How have you managed to get plants to grow without the light necessary for photosynthesis?
it doesn't state the sun, moon and stars were created within the Earth's atmoshere. You make false claims and then claim they prove the Bible false.
And no matter how many times I show Christians that it does indeed say this, I continue to be challenged. None-the-less...
[Bible]Genesis 1:14-15[/Bible]
Where are the lights made?
"In the firmament". What is the "firmament"? According to the vast majority of Christian sites on the web, the "firmament" is the Earth's atmosphere. According to the context used in the Bible, the "firmament" is the Earth's atmosphere. And according to ancient Hebrew etchings which were not privy to the discoveries of science concerning the configuration of our solar system and the Earth, the firmament is the atmosphere under a solid dome, (which doesn't exist). If you look to the ancient Hebrew illustrations which are based upon the original Hebrew version of Genesis and created by those to whom Hebrew was the native language, you see exactly what I've claimed and you see that it still correlates properly with what is claimed in the KJV of the Holy Bible. It does say just what I've stated that it says.
The problem for today's Christians is that as science continues to make new discoveries which lie in conflict with the claims of the Bible, they must interpret what they read in the Bible to try to make it fit with what science can demonstrate to be without question. So despite over 16-centuries of the Bible stating; being interpreted to state, and still claiming, a geocentric universe, Christians today demand that the book doesn't insinuate geocentrism. And they defend this despite the fact that were they to make such a statement even 400 years ago, they would likely find themselves to be the centerpiece of a large bon fire hosted by the very church to which they have dedicated their beliefs.
As the findings of science become less and less open to challenge, people just change what they claim the Bible says. The original Hebrew stays the same and, at least as far as Genesis goes, the KJV seems to be relatively loyal to the original Hebrew. But Christians today are not at all loyal to the original Hebrew because it is so easily shown to be wrong via the discoveries of science over the past 400-years. You think the Bible doesn't say what it says because you've been told to interpret what you read to comply with the discoveries of the very science you dispute when you defend creationism. Eventually, the findings of science regarding evolution will be so completely beyond challenge that Christians will have to shift their footing and begin claiming that the Bible doesn't claim creationism as creationists intepret it today. This process is already well underway, but I understand that it will be far more compelling for you once the transition is complete than it is to hear it from someone who doesn't believe as you believe.
I apologize for only addressing your first and last point. It seems I'm always pressed against a time barrier and must be gone for most of the day. I'll try to address more when I return.
