Questions that evolutionists and billions of years proponents cannot answer but disprove their theories.

[McBell]

Stop the constant false accusations. Even for an evolutionists it is unseemly.

Have you ever read the Bible? Please try to give an honest answer.

I have read numerous versions of the Bible.

Which versions have you read?
Wait, your not knowing which one you currently use does not bode well for you knowing which ones you have read.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Oh my.

You have fulfilled Biblical prophecy many times now.

1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
2 Tim 3:1-5

 

[McBell]

You have fulfilled Biblical prophecy many times now.

1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
2 Tim 3:1-5

With your track record of being flat out wrong so much more than you are even marginally correct, it is rather difficult to take you seriously.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

With your track record of being flat out wrong so much more than you are even marginally correct, it is rather difficult to take you seriously.

Bingo. You have fulfilled Biblical prophecy many times now.

1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
2 Tim 3:1-5

Which versions do you use?
Have you ever read the Bible?

 

[McBell]

Bingo. You have fulfilled Biblical prophecy many times now.

1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
2 Tim 3:1-5

With your track record of being flat out wrong so much more than you are even marginally correct, it is rather difficult to take you seriously.

Which versions do you use?

Already answered

Have you ever read the Bible?

Already answered

 

[YoursTrue]

Ezekiel 18:20
The person who sins will die. A son will not be punished for his father’s sins, and a father will not be punished for his son’s sins. The righteousness of the righteous person will be his own, and the wickedness of the wicked person will be his own.

That is correct.
Genetics is something different. I don't think you believe what the Bible says but we are all descendants of Adam and Eve, whose genetic ability to keep living was changed and passed on sin and death after their sin, along with other sad consequences to their offspring.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

The NIV gives the modern interpretation of fowl which is bird.

But what does Leviticus 11:13 say in Hebrew? (That’s what really matters, doesn’t it? Because many translations are often misleading.)

The term used in Leviticus is “flying creatures”, which is הָע֔וֹף (hā·‘ō·wp̄)

Not “bird”, which is
צִפּ֥וֹר (ṣip·pō·wr)

The bat is certainly a “flying creature”!

A little research can do wonders, and keep people from being unwittingly dishonest.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That is correct.
Genetics is something different. I don't think you believe what the Bible says but we are all descendants of Adam and Eve, whose genetic ability to keep living was changed and passed on sin and death after their sin, along with other sad consequences to their offspring.

How can one be a descendant of a myth?

 

[McBell]

That is correct.
Genetics is something different. I don't think you believe what the Bible says but we are all descendants of Adam and Eve, whose genetic ability to keep living was changed and passed on sin and death after their sin, along with other sad consequences to their offspring.

The longest I seen the children pay for the sins of the fathers is ten generations.

Now I am no math expert, but I am pretty sure I am well past the tenth generation from Adam.

 

[Subduction Zone]

But what does Leviticus 11:13 say in Hebrew? (That’s what really matters, doesn’t it? Because many translations are often misleading.)

The term used in Leviticus is “flying creatures”, which is הָע֔וֹף (hā·‘ō·wp̄)

Not “bird”, which is
צִפּ֥וֹר (ṣip·pō·wr)

The bat is certainly a “flying creature”!

A little research can do wonders, and keep people from being unwittingly dishonest.

You may be right. But you still can't even begin to rescue the myths of Genesis.

 

[YoursTrue]

The longest I seen the children pay for the sins of the fathers is ten generations.

Now I am no math expert, but I am pretty sure I am well past the tenth generation from Adam.

Most people, I believe, wouldn't know 10 generations back, that includes dna tests also, I'm pretty sure. So that statement could mean more than the literal passage of sin.

 

[McBell]

Most people, I believe, wouldn't know 10 generations back, that includes dna tests also, I'm pretty sure. So that statement could mean more than the literal passage of sin.

what?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

The bible contains numerous errors.

No, nothing substantial, that alters or affects its tenets & doctrine.

If you think so, start a thread on one that you think is an error.

No Gish, just one or two (substantial) errors.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, nothing substantial, that alters or affects its tenets & doctrine.

If you think so, start a thread on one that you think is an error.

No Gish, just one or two (substantial) errors.

Since the topic of this thread bears directly on the flood and the fall why not keep up the discussion about errors here?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

So for so many versions to say the same thing, one would think they got it right.
Right?

You would think… but then, we have John 1:1. Of course, the reason for that mistranslation, is bias.

 

[John53]

No, nothing substantial, that alters or affects its tenets & doctrine.

If you think so, start a thread on one that you think is an error.

No Gish, just one or two (substantial) errors.

Never said they were substantial. I doubt there are any books that are error free. What I find interesting is that some can't acknowledge a simple fact.

 

[McBell]

You would think… but then, we have John 1:1. Of course, the reason for that mistranslation, is bias.

I agree.
The blatant inconsistency of the translation of that particular word through out the Bible makes the bias painfully obvious

 

[Subduction Zone]

You would think… but then, we have John 1:1. Of course, the reason for that mistranslation, is bias.

It is a very vague verse and that leads to mistranslation.

 

[John53]

But what does Leviticus 11:13 say in Hebrew? (That’s what really matters, doesn’t it? Because many translations are often misleading.)

They're still The Bible and therefore in error. A translation error is still an error.

The term used in Leviticus is “flying creatures”, which is הָע֔וֹף (hā·‘ō·wp̄)

Not “bird”, which is
צִפּ֥וֹר (ṣip·pō·wr)

The bat is certainly a “flying creature”!

A little research can do wonders, and keep people from being unwittingly dishonest.

I don't speak Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek and have to rely on English translations. Some may (perhaps rightfully) even question my English abilities.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

They're still The Bible and therefore in error. A translation error is still an error.

But copy errors cast no blight on the originals

Or I should say, errors made in newer copies, have no effect on older copies.

That’s really how manuscript scholars determine the accuracy of ancient writings.