Originally Posted by shackleton

As I read these arguments back and forth it seems as though Weinhold is saying that Genesis cannot be proven "scientifically" because to do that it would have to be, (A) observed and (B) reproducable, and since it was not observed, it was a story handed down for several generations then put to paper by Moses, and it obviously cannot be reproduced there is no "scientific" way of prooving the events in Genesis. Wienhold is not saying that these events did not happen nor that they are not true. He is saying that it is given to us in the form of a "true" story.

Weinhold, is this an accurate assumption, or am I way off?