Creation: Genesis contradictions? - by Don Batten

[DogmaHunter]

No, he was correct in his statement. It was a stand alone statement that only suggest that you do your homework a bit better. It was not meant to support or oppose any point so it was not a red herring. Again, you failed in using logical fallacies correctly.

It seems to be a tactic to avoid having to answer difficult questions or to simply stop the conversation altogether when he feels cornered.

 

[Aman777]

Some do,some don't...I'm in the latter camp,but I would like a Bible with litte to NO errors in it...any ideas?

All you have to do is understand Genesis Chapter one since it is the complete History/outline of ALL of the 6 Days/Ages of the Creation of the perfect 3rd Heaven. This changes old time superstitious "beliefs" into empirical Facts. The problem is with the ancient interpretation. Only the people of today can possibly understand Genesis. Dan 12:4 Amen?

 

[freezerman2000]

No,I want an ENTIRE Bible that is error free.

 

[Aman777]

No,I want an ENTIRE Bible that is error free.

Amen. Let me be more specific. Since Genesis chapter one is the complete HISTORY of God's 6 Days (periods of time) of the Creation and ALL of the rest of the Bible refers BACK to the events of these 6 Days, Chapter one cannot be understood without the details from Gen 2:4 to the end of Revelation of the events of God's 6 Days/Ages of Creation AND living in an Age of increased knowledge.

This interpretation has been hidden until the last days of this Earth in the Scientific discoveries of our time. It's empirical evidence of the Literal God since NO man could have known of the latest discoveries of today's Science 3k years ago. Amen?

 

[OzSpen]

There is no evidence...

Red herring.

 

[OzSpen]

Interesting that you should provide links to three scholars that have both evangelical beliefs and are biblical maximalists, and reject the prevailing documentary hypothesis.

Yet despite this, none of them consider the creation account literal or factual, and generally see the pre-united monarchy period as "history turned to mythology" to use Kitchen's words.

Gene,

And you provide no specific references for your sources.

You don't like my providing examples from three outstanding scholars who are evangelicals. Then what do you do? You promote promote the Documentary Hypothesis of JEDP authorship of the Pentateuch, which is a liberal theological view associated with higher critical methodology. So, you are really being hypocritical when you don't like one theological view, but you are not backward in promoting your own view that is contrary to the one I espoused.

Walter Kaiser Jr (reference details already provided) wrote:

Since we have seen so many specific challenges over the years yield to such specific data in favor of the text, a presumption tends to build that we should go with the text until definite contrary information is available. This methodology that says that the text is innocent until proven guilty is not only recommended as a good procedure for American jurisprudence, but it is recommended in the area of examining the claims of the Scipture as well (Kaiser Jr 2001: 108).

Oz

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have and I know when you use a red herring fallacy. You do it, but won't admit it.

No, you simply don't understand your logical fallacies.

 

[SkyWriting]

No, it's why detectives look for additional physical / empirical evidence to cooberate or double check what claimed eyewitnesses told them.

Not if they can avoid it. They try very hard not
to bring in the lab. I worked with such people.

 

[SkyWriting]

Not so. The police in my country call for eyewitness testimony. Of course, all evidence available needs to be examined, but eyewitness testimony is considered of considerable value.

It is generally primary.

 

[SkyWriting]

Many different types of dogs can be developed this way, but they can never develop a cat by selectively breeding dogs. Natural selection can never extend outside of the DNA limit. DNA cannot be changed into a new species by natural selection. The same process of selective breeding is done with flowers, fruits, and vegetables.

New variations of the species are possible, but a new species has never been developed by science. In fact, the most modern laboratories are unable to produce a left-hand protein as found in humans and animals. Evolutionist fail to admit that no species has ever been proven to have evolved in any way. Evolution is simply pie-in-the-sky conjecture without scientific proof.

New species have been developed, but "species" is not a biblical boundary anywise.

 

[SkyWriting]

All you have to do is understand Genesis Chapter one since it is the complete History/outline of ALL of the 6 Days/Ages of the Creation of the perfect 3rd Heaven. This changes old time superstitious "beliefs" into empirical Facts. The problem is with the ancient interpretation. Only the people of today can possibly understand Genesis. Dan 12:4 Amen?

That would be dumb to write scripture only for "people of today."

 

[SkyWriting]

Now, about the to contradictory accounts. It is my position that we must step outside the fundamentalist box and come to the text open-minded. It is my position that there are two contradictory accounts.

No, they compliment each other. Have an open mind.

 

[Herman Hedning]

Red herring.

Blue banana.

 

[OzSpen]

Blue banana.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Not if they can avoid it.

LOL, WHAT???

Did you really just say that detectives are going to try to AVOID finding physical evidence to solve their case or confirm witness testimonies??????????????

Just how far removed from reality are you?

They try very hard not to bring in the lab. I worked with such people.

Right, right.......

So when they arrive at a murder scene and there is a body there with a knife shoved in its chest and no other wounds, and there is a "witness" that "testifies" that the guy was killed by a shotgun ... then detectives will just "avoid" investigating the crime scene and simply accept that the cause of death was a shotgun.

Yep.

 

[SkyWriting]

LOL, WHAT???

Did you really just say that detectives are going to try to AVOID finding physical evidence to solve their case or confirm witness testimonies?Just how far removed from reality are you?

A client of mine I worked with for a couple months was a retired city
detective from the Medical Examiner's Office office. They avoided
calling in the lab guys as much as possible becasue they get in the
way of solving the case.

Ask them yourself.



At trial, when possible, prosecutors are always keen on calling forensic experts to testify —
even when no forensic evidence has been found.

 

[Aman777]

That would be dumb to write scripture only for "people of today."

It's God's brilliant plan for assuring that only those who believe in Him BY FAITH can be saved. As we enter the last days there are tens of thousands of denominations, each teaching their own doctrine, making it impossible to believe the views of them all. God hid His Truth in the latest discoveries of Science and this will become apparent to everyone before the end. It's proof of the Literal God. His name is Jesus and Jesus IS Lord. Amen?

 

[Aman777]

No, they compliment each other. Have an open mind.

Amen. Hog has an error filled view which does not agree with Scripture. It falsely assumes that God just made a mistake and told us two contradictory accounts in the first two chapters of Genesis.

 

[Jay Follett]

It's God's brilliant plan for assuring that only those who believe in Him BY FAITH can be saved.

Are you saying that the gullible are the only ones who will be saved? the ones who use the brains God gave them and ask for evidence will be damned?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Try dropping in to your nearest liberal Presbyterian, Methodist or Episcopalian church and ask them if they believe in YHWH and accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour? Even go a step further and ask if they believe Acts 4:12 (ESV) about Jesus, 'And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved'.

You will quickly find that to own the name of Protestant does not necessarily equate with being a Christian who accepts Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour and the only way to obtain eternal salvation.

Oz

That's not the definition this site abides by, nor what I said. I said a Christian believes in the biblical god (YHWH, though many don't know that name), and accepts Jesus Christ as their lord and savior. Nothing else. It doesn't matter if they think that is the only way to salvation or not, that is literally all that is needed to be a Christian. The qualifications for specific denominations are different, but to be a Christian in general, you need only those two things.