Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Reptiles live the longest. They continue to grow and do not stop growing. Down in Florida they have turtles that are over 300 years old. Perhaps that is why the Dino's got so big. They had a long life and just kept growing. Crocs get pretty big also. But they usually shoot them when they get to big to manage and control.Oh? So who lives 1000 years now?
How about you show me talking snakes in the Bible; otherwise, I'll assume you are the one making up this fable.I agree with you, it's more of a myth than a fairytale, although talking snakes puts it into the fable category as well.
How about you show me talking snakes in the Bible; otherwise, I'll assume you are the one making up this fable.
I'm sure, if you are truly an evolutionist that understands subtle differences in species, you'll be able to answer my challenge.
(Lurkers: You're about to be educated in the difference between a real evolutionist and an Internet evolutionist.)
How about you show me talking snakes in the Bible; otherwise, I'll assume you are the one making up this fable.
I'm sure, if you are truly an evolutionist that understands subtle differences in species, you'll be able to answer my challenge.
(Lurkers: You're about to be educated in the difference between a real evolutionist and an Internet evolutionist.)
I'm even calling it a snake myself, evolutionist.How about you tell me, what species your documentation refers to; otherwise I'll assume you have never heard of serpents referred to as snakes in colloquial converstation. Additionally, I'll assume you've never heard of other translations which use the word "snake," or have never read a book, watched a play, seen a movie or seen art with a depiction of a snake with Eve.
Anywho, it's not my fable to have to defend, or think there's some relevance to be argued about serpent v. snake, but yours Chief.
WOW -- caught a second evolutionist.Not sure where you're going with this, but I am curious. Anyway, serpent is a term that encompasses all species of snake. And Genesis 3:1 - "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?"
So you've got a serpent (a snake of unspecified species) who says something (talks).
So please, let the education of the lurkers begin!
WOW -- caught a second evolutionist.
Two for the price of one.
Would you Internet evolutionists like for this Independent Baptist to let you off the hook and describe this talking snake [sic] for you?
RememberHow about you tell me, what species your documentation refers to; otherwise I'll assume you have never heard of serpents referred to as snakes in colloquial converstation. Additionally, I'll assume you've never heard of other translations which use the word "snake," or have never read a book, watched a play, seen a movie or seen art with a depiction of a snake with Eve.
Anywho, it's not my fable to have to defend, or think there's some relevance to be argued about serpent v. snake, but yours Chief.
(Link to OP Lost due to thread deletion, but thanks internet archiveAV1611VET said:If your original Hebrew disagrees with my original King James --- your original Hebrew is wrong. If your original Hebrew agrees with my original King James, your original Hebrew is right.
WOW -- you are an educated man, aren't you?Yep. I am eager to see your point. Usually you're pretty predictable in what your final play is gonna be, but I can't pinpoint this one. I'm guessing something about how serpent /= snake, or that since the serpent talked, it can't be of the snake species.
Here, let me help you out:Remember
(Link to OP Lost due to thread deletion, but thanks internet archive)
AV1611VET said:WOW -- you are an educated man, aren't you?
Here it is, evolutionist, plain as the writing on a clipboard:
Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.
Now, before you go claiming that evolution says some snakes [sic] are indeed 'beasts of the field', let me point out what further happens to this dragon-beast after the Fall:
Genesis 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life.
-- He lost his legs!
A real evolutionist would have caught this (and don't get any ideas, I'm not a real evolutionist).
And again, I won't mention knowing the difference between singular and plural ---- but I will ask you this:
I'll bet you Internet evolutionists think that we KJVOs believe God created the heavens and the earth on the first day of creation, don't you?
I'll bet you Internet evolutionists think that we KJVOs believe God created the heavens and the earth on the first day of creation, don't you?
It shows.I don't think most of us 'internet evolutionists' worry very much what order you believe God did things in Genesis.
You guys 'gain an insight into the true depths of the fantasy world I [or we?] live in', and you make a doosey of a mistake like Frenchy made?Beyond gaining an insight into the true depths of the fantasy world you live in, it's all rather irrelevant to us.
It shows.
You guys 'gain an insight into the true depths of the fantasy world I [or we?] live in', and you make a doosey of a mistake like Frenchy made?
Surprise me with an example, please.
Anywho, it's not my fable to have to defend, or think there's some relevance to be argued about serpent v. snake, but yours Chief.
We don't care. As French said:
I'd say he did a good job of "fablizing" it -- wouldn't you?Anywho, it's not my fable to have to defend, or think there's some relevance to be argued about serpent v. snake, but yours Chief.
I'd say he did a good job of "fablizing" it -- wouldn't you?
(Or can't you tell the difference between his fabled version and the Bible's actual version yourself?)
Oh, that's right ---- you don't care.
That explains it --
QED my previous.In an attempt to play along I've reread your post and as far as I can make out you are drawing attention to God condemning snakes to crawl on their bellies and eat dust. Presumably this is to show that Genesis is describing the evolutionary history of snakes losing their legs. If so, are you then going to try and draw a parallel between Genesis and the rest of the 3 and half billion years of evolutionary history of life on earth? Because if you are you have a lot of work to do.
A myth with a talking [insert animal here] a fable it makes.I'd say he did a good job of "fablizing" it -- wouldn't you?
(Or can't you tell the difference between his fabled version and the Bible's actual version yourself?)
Oh, that's right ---- you don't care.
That explains it --
A myth with a talking [insert animal here] a fable it makes.
BTW, Your AVKJB never states the serpent had legs to begin with, and you know what your documentation says about adding to scripture. Tsk, tsk.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?