Help

[Skaloop]

George Bush is the author of the memo, which was typed by SL.

Just like Capt. Kirk authored both memos above, but in the first one, he typed it; in the second one Yeoman Janice Rand typed it.

Get the point, now?

I understand that. That wasn't my question. My question was whether George W. Bush is still president. We have written documentation indicating that he authored his resignation. I typed it up for him as he dictated it to me over the telephone.

Now, do you get my point? It's quite simple, really. George W. Bush is not the author of the memo. He had absolutely no input or even knowledge that I typed it up. They are not his words, they are mine. Despite the presence of his initials.

 

[AV1611VET]

There ya go. A group of one you are.

Wrong branch --- U.S. Navy --- Vietnam Era Vet.

In other words, you think the KJV is more accurate then the KJV, because you use the KJV as the reference, not the hebrew scripture.

I've given the entire line of authorized versions many times, but for the record, here it is again:

• 96AD --- completed Scriputres
• AV100 Koine Greek Version
• AV330 Gothic Version
• AV700 Anglo-Saxon Version
• AV1389 Wycliffe Bible
• AV1530 Tyndale Bible
• AV1568 Bishops' Bible
• AV1587 Geneva Bible
• AV1611 King James Version

 

[AV1611VET]

Then why even hold such an inconsistent interpretation. Just say you think the earth is 6000 years old and be done with it.

No, that would lead to a false impression of me, as well as unnecessary posting. People would want to argue that it's really 4.55 billion years - and I would agree, and by then we would already be off-topic.

What would you think if you saw in my profile that I was a YEC, then later saw me post that God embedded great age into His Creation?

To claim that evidence shows that the earth is 4.5 billion years old but then turn around and reject all other evidence that shows history with exactly the same methods is inconsistent.

I have asked for someone to show me an object dated 4.55 billion years old, and am still awaiting the answer. If it's a process, and not an object, then I disagree that that process has been going on for 4.55 billion years. If it's an object, and not a process, then I'll agree with them for the sake of argument.

A 4.55 billion-year-old rock could be in existence for only 6000 years, but a process can't have been going on for 4.55 billion years - there's a big difference.

Why be inconsistent for the sake of agreement? Where's the logic in that?

I'm not being inconsistent, I'm being flexible.

 

[Edx]

What would you think if you saw in my profile that I was a YEC, then later saw me post that God embedded great age into His Creation?.

I'd say you must be one of those YECs that thinks god made the earth old as if it had existed for billions of years, but that that he still only did it 6,000 odd years ago. And thats what I still consider you to be as far as Im concered.

A 4.55 billion-year-old rock could be in existence for only 6000 years, but a process can't have been going on for 4.55 billion years - there's a big difference.

No a billion year OLD rock, cant have existed anything less than a billion years. Thats why we say OLD. Old is descrbes the passage of time, not the molecular structure. If there was no time, it cant age and it cant be a billion years old if it only existed for 6,000.


Ed

 

[MrGoodBytes]

No, that would lead to a false impression of me, as well as unnecessary posting. People would want to argue that it's really 4.55 billion years - and I would agree, and by then we would already be off-topic.

You would only agree because you redefined "age" in a way not even the YECs agree with.

 

[AV1611VET]

You would only agree because you redefined "age" in a way not even the YECs agree with.

Not hardly --- age is age is age.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'd say you must be one of those YECs that thinks god made the earth old as if it had existed for billions of years, but that that he still only did it 6,000 odd years ago. And thats what I still consider you to be as far as Im concered.

Go right ahead and consider me anything you want to. Just get my name right on the check.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

Not hardly --- age is age is age.

I have yet to see anyone - except you - arguing that an object has been "in existence" for 6000 years and, at the same time, is 4.5 billion years old.

 

[AV1611VET]

I have yet to see anyone - except you - arguing that an object has been "in existence" for 6000 years and, at the same time, is 4.5 billion years old.

Ya --- I know --- like I told someone else here, you like to call yourself an Atheist, but also think you know every nuance of not only the Bible, but Christian Theology. Then when you get a good dose of Theology 201, and don't understand it, it's the person posting that's wack-o.

Such arrogance on your part.

 

[AV1611VET]

You would only agree because you redefined "age" in a way not even the YECs agree with.

Probably because I'm not a YEC.

And I don't "redefine" anything.

I'm using conventional definitions of simple words (like "age" and "day"). If you can't get it, I would suggest you make an effort to do so, instead of accusing me of redefining words.

I can only TEACH it --- but it's up to you to LEARN it.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

Ya --- I know --- like I told someone else here, you like to call yourself an Atheist, but also think you know every nuance of not only the Bible, but Christian Theology. Then when you get a good dose of Theology 201, and don't understand it, it's the person posting that's wack-o.

Such arrogance on your part.

I do not claim to know every nuance of the Bible. On the contrary, I freely admit that most christians I know, including you, possess knowledge about the Bible by far exceeding my own.

 

[AV1611VET]

I do not claim to know every nuance of the Bible. On the contrary, I freely admit that most christians I know, including you, possess knowledge about the Bible by far exceeding my own.

Thank you for the compliment, but may I suggest, if you're going to post in a Christian Forum, you learn the doctrine first?

 

[MrGoodBytes]

Thank you for the compliment, but may I suggest, if you're going to post in a Christian Forum, you learn the doctrine first?

You see, that is exactly the problem. Your views don't show up on any doctrine listing.

 

[XTE]

Guys, AV1 knows everything better than you do. He has all the right answers, always tells the truth and never deviates because the answers WERE BORN INTO HIM. The Bible clearly has something to say about everything. If it's about Nintendo, it's in there somewhere!

Tell them AV1! Tell them what the Bible has to say concerning Nintendo Gamecube vs. Nintendo Wii!

 

[[serious]]

I've given the entire line of authorized versions many times, but for the record, here it is again:

• 96AD --- completed Scriputres
• AV100 Koine Greek Version
• AV330 Gothic Version
• AV700 Anglo-Saxon Version
• AV1389 Wycliffe Bible
• AV1530 Tyndale Bible
• AV1568 Bishops' Bible
• AV1587 Geneva Bible
• AV1611 King James Version

So if you don't speak English or ancient greek you are hosed, eh?

 

[MrGoodBytes]

So if you don't speak English or ancient greek you are hosed, eh?

Matthew 22:14: For many are called, but few are chosen.

 

[sodapop112]

guys god told me the wii's gona own the ps3

 

[AV1611VET]

Tell them AV1! Tell them what the Bible has to say concerning Nintendo Gamecube vs. Nintendo Wii!

It says the Wii will prevail.

The Wii (pronounced as the word "we"...) is Nintendo's seventh-generation video game console.

• ... we will shew forth thy praise to all generations.

 

[AV1611VET]

You see, that is exactly the problem. Your views don't show up on any doctrine listing.

Ya ... well ... I'll send 'em a Bible ... how's that?

 

[AV1611VET]

So if you don't speak English or ancient greek you are hosed, eh?

Nope --- they all say the same thing.