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.
What's wrong? don't like the order of the Creation week?
Kinda stands out in a crowd, doesn't it?
Is that why there's five different explanations for our moon?Yeah, now that we understand the world around us better than the writers of Genesis did.
Nope -- the fact that God said it, settles it.Let me guess, according to twisted creato-logic, the fact that the Genesis account is backward is actually proof that it is correct.
Either that, or there is -- like the White Cliffs of Dover.Kinda like the fact that there is no evidence for The Flood...
Like I said ... no proof necessary.... or creation ex nihilo is proof that it happened... right?
What is the white cliffs of Dover got to do with a flood?Is that why there's five different explanations for our moon?
Nope -- the fact that God said it, settles it.
Either that, or there is -- like the White Cliffs of Dover.
Like I said ... no proof necessary.
God said it, that settles it, evidence to the contrary can take a hike.
God cleaned up the mess after the Flood, stockpiling coccoliths (or coccospores, or whatever they're called) as evidence.What is the white cliffs of Dover got to do with a flood?
The King James translators beat me to it.You never answered me about the word 'nephesh'.
God cleaned up the mess after the Flood, stockpiling coccoliths (or coccospores, or whatever they're called) as evidence.
The King James translators beat me to it.
Who cares right now?Well, since I come from southern England and my home town is on the chalk layers, how does one explain the greensand layers underneath the chalk and Jurrasic limestone underneath that?
God cleaned up the mess after the Flood, stockpiling coccoliths (or coccospores, or whatever they're called) as evidence.
The King James translators beat me to it.
Yup -- sure do.So now you believe in evidence?
Are you getting dumber as you get older?God cleaned up the mess after the Flood, stockpiling coccoliths (or coccospores, or whatever they're called) as evidence.
And all five explanations are much more likely than the one you see in Genesis.Is that why there's five different explanations for our moon?
But even in The Bible, God said very little. What you really mean (but always neglect) is the KJV1611 writers translated it, you interpreted it, that settles it.Nope -- the fact that God said it, settles it.
Book and chapter? No? Oh... one of your "opinions," then... got itEither that, or there is -- like the White Cliffs of Dover.
Of course not, that would cramp your style.Like I said ... no proof necessary.
God said it, that settles it, evidence to the contrary can take a hike.
Why? are assuming I was ever smart?Are you getting dumber as you get older?
Why is it called the earth, then?The earth in Gen 1:1 should not be our earth. I would say it means something which is not space, it includes material and energy.
Does the Bible say anything about the creation of the angels? Based on my search, they aren't even mentioned until Genesis 16 or somethingAnd I agree with you on the creation of gods, except in Christianity, they are called angels.
If I'm omnipotent, I can make them so they don't screw up.And I don't think it is a good idea to give the creation power to those gods. They are not as powerful and may screw things up.
Your subjective opinion. I think a water ball is quite niceHave ocean first does not make a good sense. Unless the earth is a water ball, the ocean water must sit on rocks. If so, the rocks should be created first. This illustrates how wise was the Bible writers. As impressive as the vast ocean is, the creation of ocean is listed on Day 3 in the Bible after many other more essential items were created.
He's cuckoo for coccospheres.
I've only been saying that here for years, and you're just now getting around to agreeing?I think we can all agree at this point that a summary of the answer for the O.P. is NO.
I've only been saying that here for years, and you're just now getting around to agreeing?
Oh well, we'll be happy to prove it again -- just holler.
I've only been saying that here for years, and you're just now getting around to agreeing?
Oh well, we'll be happy to prove it again -- just holler.
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?