They have never shown the Big Bang to be correct. There is much you do not realize what fact from hypothesis is. You are a closed book, so I am not going to bother, but to say you do not know for a fact is probably the only place I can agree with you, and maybe reach at least one point.

Protestant Christians accept God by faith, not by empirically knowing.

You have mistakenly thought species have been observed to evolve into a completely different species, and now you are assuming the Big Bang is 'right'. Maybe you will learn what is fact from what we do not empirically know.

Wow, you flat out avoided that. No admittance of being incorrect or anything; just ignored it. You love to say I am a closed book, but you don't take being wrong very well. I will admit when I am wrong in a heartbeat if I am proven to be wrong. I have actually done so on another post by you, where I did not look at your research. I admitted it and then researched it. This is not an ego thing brother, it is a discovery of what we don't know or can prove. I love to learn new stuff. Just because something is against your religion, is no reason to hate it. You should just try and figure out why to learn.

BTW, I don't recall ever saying the big bang is fact, there are however many facts the point to the fact that all we know came from a centralized location and is gaining speed away from that location. It is all very strange and yet very cool.

I believe that the Big Bang theory is true. To me, it's one of the greatest arguments for the existence of God. "Something (matter and energy)" came into existence out of "nothing". Without God that is impossible.

AND

I also believe that Genesis 1-3 is true, although some parts of Gen 1 may be misinterpreted, especially in regards to the age of the earth. I don't believe that a young earth is a necessity for believing that Gen 1-3 is true.

"I will admit when I am wrong in a heartbeat if I am proven to be wrong."

Generally speaking, there are no proofs but in mathematics.

What you are not getting is in your own words, you want something "proven wrong", when I have shown that we do not have empirical evidence to give a definitive answer in either direction. In your words, how can something be "proven wrong" when it is impossible to be "proven right" in the first place?

You refuse to yield one point. You said Dawkins would say no, but he says yes. Fact, you were wrong.

BTW, if Jesus returning from the dead was so observed as you claim because your bible says so, why would this amazing news not be written down until over 30 years after the fact. I will tell you why. As a charlitin, you have to wait until all the "witnesses" die before you change their story and create one of your own.

"I am well aware of who Richard Dawkins is.
Richard Dawkins is an intelligent man.
And he would have said 'no'.

No, we have never, throughout the history of mankind, observed one species evolve into a completely different species. Since you believe a unobserved phenomenon is a 'fact', btw Jesus rose from the grave."

Life has never been observed to come from non-living matter as well.

This is correct.

And can you empirically prove the gospels were written 30 years after Jesus resurrection?

"I believe that the Big Bang theory is true. To me, it's one of the greatest arguments for the existence of God. "Something (matter and energy)" came into existence out of "nothing". Without God that is impossible."

I simply do not associate the BB hypothesis with the Genesis account, and I accept the Genesis account by faith. I do not believe Monsignor Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître was trying to be sacrilegious by any means whatsoever, I believe he was just giving an idea, and making the idea a fact without evidence I can assume was not his intention at all.

Nope, I only know what "historians" attempted to suggest. You are right, I have no way of knowing that, Just like you can't empirically believe that the event happened at all or even prove this particular Jesus was a real person (it was one of the most common name in the region at that time I am told). See, I can pretend the things I hear are real too. So, why believe in that more than evolution. At least evolution has tons of stages to show how these things happen.

You run from what is not something you agree with. That is not using your brain to think for yourself. I don’t blame you for this. Many of us struggled with “breaking these chains” for years before it made sense to us. Sadly, some of us had to figure it out on our own, but now we have the wonderful world of the internet. We can all learn from people that have already shown where the bible stole its stories from, how these religions spout off about morals but commit some of the most horrible crimes against humanity, and you get to learn about what we know so far about the world and universe. We know so little. If you put a pen dot on a basketball, that dot still would not represent what we know about the universe so far. It would not be small enough.

But to tell everyone, just because you were told it is the truth and not really dig into it to discover whether it is even foundationally plausible or not even having real supporting proof, well for me that’s just irresponsible when you have access to know the difference.

Anyone who as actually read “any” bible, I am astounded how anyone can still go to church. Those books are such horrible, disgusting, killing, tormenting, bigoted, cruel books.

The big bang is a theory; one that can't be proven yet. But it also has the potential of being dis-proven. Creation is imaginary, so it can not only be proven, but it can't be disproved either. It is because it is not real. You make excuses for the bibles imperfections and yet you go out of your way to let one tiny detail in science make you think an entire theory is hogwash. You are not being rational in your thinking.

AND GENESIS: Your book contradicts when man was made in under 10 pages. If that point is messed up, how can you even allow any of the rest of it to have any validity?

You still have never told me how the ark story could have been a real event. But even that does not matter. What matters, is you telling yourself, “what is the one thing that makes you believe so much that you are willing to ignore reason for believing.” You don't need to tell me. You need to figure that out for yourself, because if you care about being honest with yourself, you need to find out if that one thing is real or could in fact be false. For me, it needs to be “beyond a shadow of a doubt” with evidence that lets me know the odds of it being any other way is so slim it is almost nonexistent. If you can disprove to yourself something you hold dear (and you should be willing to do that if you are going to spend your life believing it), then you are being honest with yourself. No one else can be more honest to you than you, but you have to be willing.

The fact is, I don’t care if you believe or not, as long as you are not hurting others. But it does bother me if you are telling people stuff that is not true, just because you believe it is.