Sue the T-Rex

[joshua 1 9]

No, you didn't.

Ok lets start at the beginning and take it step by step or word by word. Matt1:1 starts off with the word "book" (biblos). Now what is your objection? Does science have evidence to show that this is NOT a book or Biblos in the Greek?

Gensis 1:1 starts off with the word: "beginning". Now what is your objection. Does science say there was a beginning or does Science have proof or evidence that there was no beginning? Just so there is no confusion, the Hebrew word here is "firstfruit" when a tree first begins to produce fruit. This may confuse you because you may think of beginning as when a seed first begain to sprout. But for God the begining is when the tree begins to produce fruit for the first time. Of course the seed is in the fruit. So the beginning is before the seed sprouting, the beginning is when the seed is produced and first is formed.

Do you have a problem with this? Does science contradict the first word we read in our Bible? If not then we can go on, point by point, line upon line, precept upon precept.

 

[bhsmte]

Wow, just wow!!!

 

[Loudmouth]

Ok lets start at the beginning and take it step by step or word by word. Matt1:1 starts off with the word "book" (biblos). Now what is your objection? Does science have evidence to show that this is NOT a book or Biblos in the Greek?

Non sequitur.

Gensis 1:1 starts off with the word: "beginning". Now what is your objection. Does science say there was a beginning or does Science have proof or evidence that there was no beginning?

Genesis has to get all of it right.

It has plants forming before there is a Sun. Is that what happened?

It has whales emerging before land animals. Is that what happened?

Genesis has land animals emerging after grasses and fruit trees. Is that what happened?

 

[joshua 1 9]

Genesis has to get all of it right.

You study the Bible word by word. We are looking at the very first word. What is your objection to the very first word in the Bible. Is it true or not?

Genesis has to get all of it right.

We will go onto the second word after you answer the question about the first word. We have to do this one word at a time. Was there a beginning or not? Does science say there was a beginning or not? Is this a book or not? Does science say the Bible is a book or not?

Of course whole books could be written on the word "beginning". Right now we are only look at the word "book" and we are only looking at the word "beginning". Is Genesis a book about the beginning or not? Yes or no, fact or fiction, is this a true statement according to science or not?

 

[Loudmouth]

You study the Bible word by word. We are looking at the very first word. What is your objection to the very first word in the Bible. Is it true or not?

We are looking at the entire thing.

 

[joshua 1 9]

We are looking at the entire thing.

Of course we are, starting with the first word. Was there a beginning? Is this a book about the beginning. No reason to go to the second word if we do not first look at the first word in the Bible.

 

[Loudmouth]

Of course we are, starting with the first word. Was there a beginning? Is this a book about the beginning. No reason to go to the second word if we do not first look at the first word in the Bible.

Did plants appear before the Sun?

 

[joshua 1 9]

Did plants appear before the Sun?

The word "plants" and the word "Sun" is not in the first 32 verses of the Bible. We are still looking at the word "beginning". Is this true or false. Do you agree that there was a beginning or not? Ok let me help you out here. I googles the word "beginning" and this is what comes up: "the point in time or space at which something starts". Of course this is not God's dictionary, it is man's dictionary. Still the word beginning is in the dictionary. Does science have a beginning? Does science use the word beginning? Does science know what the word "beginning" means?

How about if we look at Stephen Hawking. He gave a lecture about "The Beginning of Time". This is how he started that lecture:"In this lecture, I would like to discuss whether time itself has a beginning, and whether it will have an end. All the evidence seems to indicate, that the universe has not existed forever, but that it had a beginning, about 15 billion years ago." Do you agree with Hawking that all the evidence seems to indicate that the universe had a beginning?

 

[Loudmouth]

The word "plants" and the word "Sun" is not in the first 32 verses of the Bible.

Is Genesis only 32 verses long?

We are still looking at the word "beginning".

I am looking at the words "plants" and "Sun".

 

[joshua 1 9]

Is Genesis only 32 verses long?

Actually it is 34 verses, if you include the two days God rested. There are three verses in chapter two that should be in chapter one.

2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
Then you have something totally different: "these are the generations". The generations begins with Adam and Eve around 6,000 years ago. There are lots of detailed stores in the Bible about all the different people that make up the generations or the descendants of Adam and Eve. God created Adam to tend the garden. He was to till the ground.

2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,
2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

 

[Loudmouth]

Actually it is 34 verses, if you include the two days God rested. There are three verses in chapter two that should be in chapter one.

Is Genesis only two chapters long?

What if I said that John Smith was never proven wrong? I then look at a list of things John Smith has said.

1. London is a city found in the UK.
2. Unicorns are used to pull coaches in Central Park, NY.
3. The density of water is 15 g/ml.

Could I prove that John Smith has never been proven wrong by focusing on #1 and ignoring all the other claims?

 

[joshua 1 9]

Is Genesis only two chapters long?

Genesis is really only one chapter long. Then as I say three verses spill over into chapter two. Then in chapter two you begin something totally different, the story of Adam and Even in Eden 6,000 years ago. This is what we call the genealogy. In my family we can trace our genealogy back to 800 ad. Before that I would need to use DNA to trace my family. There are no written records before that. In Europe they use to keep track of the pedigree of the people. They still do that today for animals. In the Bible they kept track of the genealogy to keep a "pedigree" of the Bible people.

 

[AV1611VET]

Is Genesis only two chapters long?

What if I said that John Smith was never proven wrong? I then look at a list of things John Smith has said.

1. London is a city found in the UK.
2. Unicorns are used to pull coaches in Central Park, NY.
3. The density of water is 15 g/ml.

Could I prove that John Smith has never been proven wrong by focusing on #1 and ignoring all the other claims?

Was Charles Darwin proven wrong by looking at a list of the things he had said?

 

[Atheos canadensis]

I presented evidence that proves the Bible to be true beyond any doubt. Even you do not deny the evidence and you do not deny what science can verify to be true in regard to the Bible. You do not have evidence for everything in science so you can not hold the Bible to a higher standard then you yourself follow. What is good for one is good for the other. No double standards are allowed. Science has limits. You want scientific evidence but you can not blame me for the limits of science. Remember GOD has the answer for every question and the solution for every problem, NOT Science.

Science does not deny faith or what faith can accomplish. They understand the power of positive thinking. Science understands the placebo effect. Science understands the power of suggestion. These are all scientific beliefs that are based on faith. If you reject religion then you have to reject science. If you reject science then you have to reject religion. You can not have one or the other, you have to accept both or none. God reveals Himself through the Bible and God reveals Himself through Science.

It seems that part of your issue here is that you two are using the term "scientific evidence" to mean different things. You seem to be using it in regard to your area of interest, i.e. history and archaeology. In these respects you think the accuracy of the Bible is well-supported. Loudmouth is referring more to the biological and geological aspects of the Bible which are not at all accurate, at least not if one uses a literal reading.

The fossil record is simply not compatible with the order of creation in Genesis. The rock record is simply not compatible with a global flood depositing everything. Do you think that the bible is accurate in this regard? Did the Flood really deposit the entire rock record? Did organisms really come into existence in the order they appear in the Bible?

 

[bhsmte]

It seems that part of your issue here is that you two are using the term "scientific evidence" to mean different things. You seem to be using it in regard to your area of interest, i.e. history and archaeology. In these respects you think the accuracy of the Bible is well-supported. Loudmouth is referring more to the biological and geological aspects of the Bible which are not at all accurate, at least not if one uses a literal reading.

The fossil record is simply not compatible with the order of creation in Genesis. The rock record is simply not compatible with a global flood depositing everything. Do you think that the bible is accurate in this regard? Did the Flood really deposit the entire rock record? Did organisms really come into existence in the order they appear in the Bible?

I asked him this specific question at least twice yesterday.

 

[Atheos canadensis]

I asked him this specific question at least twice yesterday.

Maybe he will answer it this time?