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.
There is plenty of empirical scientific evidence that shows the Bible is accurate and true.
...Genesis is neither accurate nor true.
The Bible says: "In the Beginning" Science confirms that there was a beginning. Science talks about "Adam" & "Eve" this confirms that there was a common ancestor. I can give you many, many, many examples of where Science confirms that the Bible is true.Reference for scientific journal that backs up Genesis, John.
There is nothing that says Genesis is not accurate. What science falsifys is some of the traditions and some of the popular misconceptions or misinterpretations of the Bible. That is why I say, Science helps us to better understand out Bible. If it were not for science we may never have known that some of our traditional interpretations of the Bible are wrong.Can't find any? That's because there is a wealth of scientific evidence (I refer you to every biology, astrophysics, physics and geology journal ever printed) that says Genesis is neither accurate nor true.
Rabbits don't chew cud!!!!
Spiritual rabbits do.
Insects aren't four-legged!!!
Many spiritual insects have four legs.
The world is not flat!!!
From a spiritual perspective the world is flatter than this thread.
Pi does not equal 3!!!
In spiritual math PI is not only 100% 3 but is 100% 1 as well.
Earth is in motion!!!!
The earth is the undisputed spiritual center of the universe.
Reference for scientific journal that backs up Genesis, John.
Can't find any? That's because there is a wealth of scientific evidence (I refer you to every biology, astrophysics, physics and geology journal ever printed) that says Genesis is neither accurate nor true.
I refer you to every biology, astrophysics, physics and geology journal ever printed) that says Genesis is neither accurate nor true.
Rabbits don't chew cud!!!!
Spiritual rabbits do.
Insects aren't four-legged!!!
Many spiritual insects have four legs.
The world is not flat!!!
From a spiritual perspective the world is flatter than this thread.
Pi does not equal 3!!!
In spiritual math PI is not only 100% 3 but is 100% 1 as well.
Earth is in motion!!!!
The earth is the undisputed spiritual center of the universe.
Punchy said:Are you referring to Genesis or how young earth creationists interpret Genesis?
The Bible says: "In the Beginning" Science confirms that there was a beginning. Science talks about "Adam" & "Eve" this confirms that there was a common ancestor. I can give you many, many, many examples of where Science confirms that the Bible is true.
There is nothing that says Genesis is not accurate. What science falsifys is some of the traditions and some of the popular misconceptions or misinterpretations of the Bible. That is why I say, Science helps us to better understand out Bible. If it were not for science we may never have known that some of our traditional interpretations of the Bible are wrong.
LittleNipper said:There is a wealth of information that says that these values are not observable but inferred. ALL inference is capable of being controlled by Satan unless GOD is the foundation of the revelation....
I haven't read the book, but would be interested in seeing an accurate description of it. From things I've seen from Ross and Rana, it probably proposes the special creation of a pair of humans ~100,000 years ago. Somewhere I read that they were now proposing that Adam's sperm had lots of different genetic variants, including (some? lots?) of stuff lifted from existing non-human primates (H. erectus, maybe?), as a way of getting around the genetic evidence for the antiquity of humans. If they pursued this approach aggressively enough, they mght be able to come up with a model that was indistinguishable genetically from evolution, which strikes me as both clever and perverse.Can we please stay on point. Has anyone read this book or at least know what it's about?
I'm referring to the literal interpretation as used by, but not limited to, YECs.
Well, I'm willing to consider it, however I need something more than words. Please, give me the Bible's deffinition of "legs", or what is not "leg".You may not wish to accept that insects have both arms and legs but that doesn't preclude that such a rationalization is not more descriptive of how insects actually use their appendages.
Indeed! Yet...And the Earth does stick to its route arond the sun ------ it hasn't taken off for the outer reaches of the Universeas of yet......
Stupid question, but how does one defend grasshoppers having only 4 legs. I would love to know the mental gymnastics needed for that.
Not to take this down too much of a tangent, but from what I've read the reference is to creepeth, which the grasshoppers only do with 4 of their legs while the other two are use for jumping. Or something like that.
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?