Setting the Record Straight

[AV1611VET]

How AV explains the Narwhal:

Link, please?

 

[Oafman]

Link, please?

It's just a silly picture. There's no link. No studies have been conducted into the idea of unicorns piloting narwhals

 

[AV1611VET]

For the record, I'm not so sure about #4 anymore.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

Who's on First?

 

[driewerf]

For the record, I'm not so sure about #4 anymore.

What are you not sure about? That you wrote this, that the views exposed in number 4 are correct?
For the record:

I'm hoping to show that not nearly -- (not even close to...) -- as many animals had to board the Ark as some think.

Picture this as an oversimplified example:

The Ark comes to rest with just the aforementioned animals (plus Noah and his family) aboard.

The unicorns disembark -- go out -- get pregnant and give birth to another unicorn, a horse, a cow, a lion and a tiger.

They get pregnant again and give birth to a hippopotamus, a platypus, an aardvark, etc.

See where I'm coming with this?

A kind is an animal with DNA specially encoded for punctuated equilibrium; and because of them, you don't need the Ark crammed full of every living creature in existence at the time, and you don't need long explanations as to how tree sloths got from the Ark to where they're found today, etc.

 

[PersephonesTear]

12. Noah lived in present-day New Jersey.

That is correct.

Could you explain to me how you reached this conclusion, including which scripture verses support it?

A Bible commentator -- and I can't remember who it was -- once stated that the language of the King James Bible is a Heavenly language; not even spoken by the English in the 17th century.

I have claimed that Adam & Eve spoke Jacobean English, but in light of this comment by the aforementioned commentator, I'll go either way.

Let's just say for now they spoke King Jamesese, which is sufficient to make my point.

In defending it as Jacobean English, I have contended that said English was lost at the Tower of Babel, and began a slow comeback to culminate in the time of King James I of England.

Same question. How was this conclusion reached, and which scriptures support it?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Could you explain to me how you reached this conclusion, including which scripture verses support it?

Same question. How was this conclusion reached, and which scriptures support it?

I think it's a necessary consequence of a belief in KJVo - the only way to explain why the King James Bible is The Bible is that it was the language of Adam and Eve, etc. Of course, that only pushes the question back a step: why is the KJV the most (or only) accurate translation of the Bible?

 

[AV1611VET]

What are you not sure about?

That they gave birth to different species anymore.

I do believe they were aboard the Ark though.

 

[AV1611VET]

Could you explain to me how you reached this conclusion, including which scripture verses support it?

At the time of the Flood, the earth was one giant supercontinent called Eden.

When God told Noah to build the Ark, God specified to use a substance called "pitch."

Pitch comes from trees that are native to both New Jersey and Mesopotamia.

Since the Ark rested -- not began -- in Mesopotamia, I surmise that Noah lived in the region of this supercontinent that is now New Jersey.

This interpretation also attests to the fact that the Flood wasn't just a local Flood, but was indeed global.

Same question. How was this conclusion reached, and which scriptures support it?

In this passage ...

Revelation 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

... I submit that the "books" mentioned are the 66 books of the King James Bible, which is the Last in a series of seven divine Translations alluded to in ...

Psalm 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

Off the top of my head, the others are: the Gothic Bible, the Wycliffe, the Geneva (God's choice for the Pilgrims), the Bishop's Bible, the Coverdale, and the Tyndale.

(I think.)

 

[AV1611VET]

I think it's a necessary consequence of a belief in KJVo -

No.

That's a pet theory of mine -- not KJVO doctrine.

... the only way to explain why the King James Bible is The Bible is that it was the language of Adam and Eve, etc.

No.

Of course, that only pushes the question back a step: why is the KJV the most (or only) accurate translation of the Bible?

Because God superintended the work.

 

[Sayre]

17. Strong's Concordance is "a tool of Satan."

This is correct.

Why?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

No.

That's a pet theory of mine -- not KJVO doctrine.

No.

Because God superintended the work.

Well yes - anything short of divine intervention and it couldn't work. But why King James' English? Why not Hebrew, or Koine Greek? It would make the pertinent texts... pertinent.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

There's a goofy site that has me "apparently believing" the following; and I want to set the record straight here:

List of 20 daft statements.

This is correct.

I have to ask, if you were to stand up in your church or in front of your religious social group, or even just in front of your friends and family, and recite this list and explain that you believe most of it, would they take you seriously or would they howl with laughter, or would they just roll their eyes. I mean, what I'm getting at is, are these sort of beliefs par for the course in your crowd, or do they think you're as nutty as a fruitcake?

 

[AV1611VET]

Why?

It authors confusion.

Did Moses cross the Red Sea, or did he cross the Sea of Reeds?

Was the Tabernacle in the Wilderness covered with badgers' skins, or was it covered with seal skins, dugong skins, or porpoise skins?

Was Jesus born of a virgin, or was He born of a young maiden?

Etc.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well yes - anything short of divine intervention and it couldn't work. But why King James' English? Why not Hebrew, or Koine Greek? It would make the pertinent texts... pertinent.

Well, let's take Genesis 1 & 2 for example.

If Adam wrote Genesis 1 & 2, then it could not have been Hebrew, as the Hebrews came later.

Unless, of course, you apply the same logic to the Hebrew language as I am to Jacobean English.

Ditto for Koine Greek.

 

[AV1611VET]

I have to ask, if you were to stand up in your church or in front of your religious social group, or even just in front of your friends and family, and recite this list and explain that you believe most of it, would they take you seriously or would they howl with laughter, or would they just roll their eyes. I mean, what I'm getting at is, are these sort of beliefs par for the course in your crowd, or do they think you're as nutty as a fruitcake?

My church wouldn't have me do that.

We refrain from asking the kinds of questions you guys ask; simply because they are not covered in the Scriptures.

If you were to come to our church and start asking questions like:

1. What language did Adam & Eve speak?
2. Where did the Flood waters go?
3. Where did Jesus get His y-chromosome?

... they would roll their eyes.

My pastor would answer those kinds of questions with:

"We'll find out when we get to Heaven, if God so chooses to tell us."

To answer your question though, I would guess and say they would think I'm goofy ... but they already think that.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Well, let's take Genesis 1 & 2 for example.

If Adam wrote Genesis 1 & 2, then it could not have been Hebrew, as the Hebrews came later.

I thought Christians were pretty unanimous that Moses wrote Genesis, and the rest of the Pentateuch?

If Adam wrote Genesis 1 and 2, and he didn't write it in Hebrew, why does that mean he wrote it in English? Wouldn't a proto semitic language be more probable?

 

[AV1611VET]

I thought Christians were pretty unanimous that Moses wrote Genesis, and the rest of the Pentateuch?

Moses edited the book of Genesis, he didn't write it.

In fact, he wasn't even born yet.

If Adam wrote Genesis 1 and 2, and he didn't write it in Hebrew, why does that mean he wrote it in English?

As I said before, I think God speaks Jacobean English.

I can't prove it, of course, but it's a pet theory of mine.

Wouldn't a proto semitic language be more probable?

No.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

Well, this is a depressing thread ...

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, this is a depressing thread ...

Because I'm a noted strange person, with noted strange beliefs, and I remind you too much of yourself?

(Just asking. )

ETA: My beliefs get a LOT WEIRDER!

I believe Jesus was born of a virgin and walked on water!

In fact, my beliefs are so weird, I could be put to death for them in another country!