So you agree that people lived into their 600's?? I don't care what you say about environment, living conditions.. NOT a chance. Your skin, let alone the rest of your organs, would not survive that long..
That's because we are borne from a different genetic pool, one more dilute than that which existed years and years ago. I already said that. It's entirely possible that the cells in a person's body of that era were more aptly equipped to regenerate. I'm not saying I absolutely believe it but I wouldn't doubt it.
That seems to be a rather essential component you are missing in this entire debate - moderation. One's beliefs are not binary values - they can be more than two polar opposites.
Noah fit two of EVERY animal on the Earth into a single ship? With food and fresh water, and an automated waste disposal system?
Who is to say that there were fewer species of animals back in that time period and that newer ones were not created by genetic mutation, cross-breeding, and so forth?
The earth is only 6000 years old?
Depending upon which translation you use, from my understanding, this can change. Some more modern translations indicate that the "seven days" spoken of in Genesis is not necessarily meant to be taken literally; it is an ambiguous unit of time. What if humans have only existed for 6000 years? It is widely accepted by scientists that humanity has only been in existence for a comparatively short time as opposed to the rest of the world.
And if both those are true, where are the bones of the BILLIONS of people that died in the flood? Where's the 'flood sedimentary level' at?
Dinosaurs and man walked the earth together?
I'll have to research those - I'll get back to you (no sarcasm).
And many MEN wrote the bible?? How many? Where's the list of names?
Does many = 1, >1.. >10?
More than ten. Although authorship is vague for about forty of the books the other ones scholars are fairly certain of, and some of the others they have definite implications as to who wrote what...
Who were the authors of the books of the Bible?
And how many years AFTER most of the "facts" was it written? it definitely wasn't a diary or a journal. ANd what difference does it make if it was ONE person or 100 people that wrote a piece of fiction?
Since you mentioned Stephen King earlier, I take it you're a fan of fiction in general. I'm sure you're familiar with the fact taht continuity becomes harder and harder to maintain the more people are involved with a project... It's become easier thanks to better record keeping, but back in those days it was still fairly difficult, and the fact that multiple authors corroborated each other in addition to archeological finds is proof enough for me that there is at least something true in the Bible.
So you agree with me, we just have to determine where the line is between fact and fiction within the Bible.
If there is one. Like I keep saying there's no real way to prove many things either way so it's a personal decision. I might also add that Stephen King expressly states that his works are fictional, so the "line" is far easier to arrive at, making for a rather poor comparison between the Bible and a modern thriller novel.
Can you ABSOLUTELY PROVE that EVERYthing in the Bible happened, without referring back to the bible? If not than by your logic you have no case, and the entire book is a sham, a fraud, and the biggest scam ever put upon humanity.
No, I cannot. See above for my argument that refutes this - just because not EVERYTHING is one hundred percent verifiably true does not mean that everything contained therein is false, and yet you continue to shamelessly parade around proclaiming superiority as such. Assuming that somehow everybody thought in extreme terms such as you do, and you basically won this argument, I would still have zero respect for you because we live in polite society, the fabric of which is manners.
Anybody that calls somebody's deep personal beliefs a fairy tale and equates it to children's stories has no manners, period. I'm being kind of presumptuous here, but I'd like to see how many friends you'd have if you ran into a crowded church and told each and every person there that they are living a lie because you said so. How do you think that'd go over? I'm sure your atheist buddies would find it laughable, but that doesn't change the fact that it's downright wrong.
**EDIT: I need to re-address one of your points citing your use of 'my' logic. What you are stipulating is not my logic at all. My logic is that you cannot prove something unless you can provide sufficient evidence that beyond a doubt other possibilities are false. If you can tell me precisely where the Earth came from, then God doesn't exist. Unfortunately, we don't really know, so at this point anything's up in the air. You cannot prove that everything in the Bible is false, therefore the Bible itself is not fictional. You also cannot prove that everything in the Bible is true, so it's not infallibly true either. It's anybody's best guess. Once again, I implore you to stop contorting what others say to further your own sad point.