Maynman:

You said nothing.
The book of genesis was written in different time and location than book of timothy and book of peter etc. So your verses on timothy and peter are only talking about that particular book not the whole bible that was complied by CANON not to forget they were written by unknown authors.

Maynman:


the New Testament especially is the most corrected document in history, this is more than just copyist error, this are blatant edit and forgery, this is because the New Testament you base your life on, the only place where iesus chrestus is mentioned, was originally meant for the CHRESTIANS.

OLAADEGBU:




To be inerrant is to be free from error. Only the original autographs (the original manuscripts written by the apostles, prophets, etc.) are under the divine promise of inspiration and inerrancy. The books of the Bible, as they were originally written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (2 Timothy 3:16–17; 2 Peter 1:20–21), were 100 percent inerrant, accurate, authoritative, and true. There is no biblical promise that copies of the original manuscripts would be equally inerrant or free from errors. As the Bible has been copied thousands of times over thousands of years, some copyist errors have likely occurred.

It is important to remember that the biblical manuscripts we have today are in 99 percent agreement with one another. Yes, there are some minor differences, but the vast majority of the biblical text is identical from one manuscript to another. Most of the differences are in punctuation, word endings, minor grammatical issues, word order, etc.—issues easily explainable as scribal mistakes or changes in spelling rules. No important theological issue is thrown into doubt by any supposed error or contradiction. Biblical manuscripts from the fifteenth century agree completely with manuscripts from the third century. We can have absolute confidence that the Bible we have today is almost exactly identical to what the apostles and prophets wrote 2,000-plus years ago.

https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-inerrancy.html

Maynman:


You said nothing.
The book of genesis was written in different time and location than book of timothy and book of peter etc. So your verses on timothy and peter are only talking about that particular book not the whole bible that was complied by CANON not to forget they were written by unknown authors.
The four New Testament gospels are attributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, but were originally anonymous until attributed to them by the Church Fathers later in the second century..

the New Testament especially is the most corrected document in history, this is more than just copyist error, this are blatant edit and forgery, this is because the New Testament you base your life on, the only place where iesus chrestus is mentioned, was originally meant for the CHRESTIANS

OLAADEGBU:




To be inerrant is to be free from error. Only the original autographs (the original manuscripts written by the apostles, prophets, etc.) are under the divine promise of inspiration and inerrancy. The books of the Bible, as they were originally written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (2 Timothy 3:16–17; 2 Peter 1:20–21), were 100 percent inerrant, accurate, authoritative, and true. There is no biblical promise that copies of the original manuscripts would be equally inerrant or free from errors. As the Bible has been copied thousands of times over thousands of years, some copyist errors have likely occurred.

Source

LordReed:


LoLz. Original manuscript that were no where to be found as at the time the translations were done? Don't be a joker.

And it doesn't address why the so called error of copying is still in the so called inerrant Bible.

OLAADEGBU:


To be inerrant is to be free from error. Only the original autographs (the original manuscripts written by the apostles, prophets, etc.) are under the divine promise of inspiration and inerrancy. The books of the Bible, as they were originally written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (2 Timothy 3:16–17; 2 Peter 1:20–21), were 100 percent inerrant, accurate, authoritative, and true. There is no biblical promise that copies of the original manuscripts would be equally inerrant or free from errors. As the Bible has been copied thousands of times over thousands of years, some copyist errors have likely occurred.

It is important to remember that the biblical manuscripts we have today are in 99 percent agreement with one another. Yes, there are some minor differences, but the vast majority of the biblical text is identical from one manuscript to another. Most of the differences are in punctuation, word endings, minor grammatical issues, word order, etc.—issues easily explainable as scribal mistakes or changes in spelling rules. No important theological issue is thrown into doubt by any supposed error or contradiction. Biblical manuscripts from the fifteenth century agree completely with manuscripts from the third century. We can have absolute confidence that the Bible we have today is almost exactly identical to what the apostles and prophets wrote 2,000-plus years ago.

We should not be quick to say, "Oh, that is just a scribal error." The Bible's "errors" can be explained in a logical and believable manner. Discrepancies that cannot be explained—or are very difficult to explain—could very well have an answer that we simply do not know at this point. Just because we cannot find a solution does not mean that a solution doesn't exist. Believing there to be a scribal error must be the absolute last resort in clearing up any supposed Bible "error."

It is possible that minor errors have crept into our modern manuscripts and translations of the Bible. Copyists and translators are human beings, and they make mistakes. The fact that the Bible we have today is incredibly accurate is a testimony to its inspiration and preservation by God.

Source

LordReed:


Oga there are no original manuscripts for you to compare it with what you have so you are just dreaming something up and saying it is true without anything backing it.

OLAADEGBU:


To be inerrant is to be free from error. Only the original autographs (the original manuscripts written by the apostles, prophets, etc.) are under the divine promise of inspiration and inerrancy. The books of the Bible, as they were originally written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (2 Timothy 3:16–17; 2 Peter 1:20–21), were 100 percent inerrant, accurate, authoritative, and true. There is no biblical promise that copies of the original manuscripts would be equally inerrant or free from errors. As the Bible has been copied thousands of times over thousands of years, some copyist errors have likely occurred.

It is important to remember that the biblical manuscripts we have today are in 99 percent agreement with one another. Yes, there are some minor differences, but the vast majority of the biblical text is identical from one manuscript to another. Most of the differences are in punctuation, word endings, minor grammatical issues, word order, etc.—issues easily explainable as scribal mistakes or changes in spelling rules. No important theological issue is thrown into doubt by any supposed error or contradiction. Biblical manuscripts from the fifteenth century agree completely with manuscripts from the third century. We can have absolute confidence that the Bible we have today is almost exactly identical to what the apostles and prophets wrote 2,000-plus years ago.

We should not be quick to say, "Oh, that is just a scribal error." The Bible's "errors" can be explained in a logical and believable manner. Discrepancies that cannot be explained—or are very difficult to explain—could very well have an answer that we simply do not know at this point. Just because we cannot find a solution does not mean that a solution doesn't exist. Believing there to be a scribal error must be the absolute last resort in clearing up any supposed Bible "error."

It is possible that minor errors have crept into our modern manuscripts and translations of the Bible. Copyists and translators are human beings, and they make mistakes. The fact that the Bible we have today is incredibly accurate is a testimony to its inspiration and preservation by God.

Can we still trust the Bible? Absolutely! Modern Bible translations are God’s Word. The Bible today is just as authoritative as it was in the first century AD. We can completely trust the Bible as being God's message to us. Yes, the biblical promises of inspiration and inerrancy only apply directly to the original manuscripts. But that does not impact our modern Bible's accuracy and authority. God’s Word endures forever, despite the occasional failings and mistakes of copyists and translators.

Source

OLAADEGBU:


To be inerrant is to be free from error. Only the original autographs (the original manuscripts written by the apostles, prophets, etc.) are under the divine promise of inspiration and inerrancy. The books of the Bible, as they were originally written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (2 Timothy 3:16–17; 2 Peter 1:20–21), were 100 percent inerrant, accurate, authoritative, and true. There is no biblical promise that copies of the original manuscripts would be equally inerrant or free from errors. As the Bible has been copied thousands of times over thousands of years, some copyist errors have likely occurred.

It is important to remember that the biblical manuscripts we have today are in 99 percent agreement with one another. Yes, there are some minor differences, but the vast majority of the biblical text is identical from one manuscript to another. Most of the differences are in punctuation, word endings, minor grammatical issues, word order, etc.—issues easily explainable as scribal mistakes or changes in spelling rules. No important theological issue is thrown into doubt by any supposed error or contradiction. Biblical manuscripts from the fifteenth century agree completely with manuscripts from the third century. We can have absolute confidence that the Bible we have today is almost exactly identical to what the apostles and prophets wrote 2,000-plus years ago.

We should not be quick to say, "Oh, that is just a scribal error." The Bible's "errors" can be explained in a logical and believable manner. Discrepancies that cannot be explained—or are very difficult to explain—could very well have an answer that we simply do not know at this point. Just because we cannot find a solution does not mean that a solution doesn't exist. Believing there to be a scribal error must be the absolute last resort in clearing up any supposed Bible "error."

Source

OLAADEGBU:
🌌 Science and the Genesis narrative completely align.

Maynman:

Bwahahahah

author=OLAADEGBU post=120447322]

Joshua’s long day

Did it really happen—and how?

It is interesting to note that parallel accounts in the records of other nations show that the incident of "Joshuas Long Day" is not an isolated one. There is indisputable evidence from the modern science of ethnology that such an event occurred as Joshua records.
In the ancient Chinese writings there is a legend of a long day. The Incas of Peru and the Aztecs of Mexico have a like record. There is a Babylonian and Persian legend of a day that was miraculously extended. Herodotus, an ancient historian, recounts that while in Egypt, priest showed him their temple records, and that he read of a day which was twice the natural length of any day that had ever been recorded (Robert Boyd, Boyds Bible Handbook, pp. 122,123).

"In the ancient Chinese writings there is a legend of a long day. The Incas of Peru and the Aztecs of Mexico have a like record. There is a Babylonian and Persian legend of a day that was miraculously extended. Herodotus, an ancient historian, recounts that while in Egypt, priest showed him their temple records, and that he read of a day which was twice the natural length of any day that had ever been recorded (Robert Boyd, Boyds Bible Handbook, pp. 122,123)."

1. "The Ojibways tell of a long night without any light.
2. The Wyandot Indians told missionary Paul Le Jeune of a long night.
3. The Dogrib Indians of the North-West tell of a day when the sun was caught at noon and it instantly became dark.
4. The Omahas say that once the sun was caught in a trap by a rabbit who checked his traps at the break of dawn, presumably before sunrise. 35 (This may be Hezekiah's sign, instead.)
5. Finally, the Bungee Indians from the Lake Winnipeg area of Canada also tell of a long night."

Parallels have been found in Chinese, Egyptian and Mexican stories, but these will not coincide with the date or time of day (E.W. Maunder, JTVI, 1921, pp. 120-148); and an astronomical aberration would not have gone unrecorded in Babylon (John Lilley, The New Laymans Bible Commentary, G.C.D. Howley, F.F. Bruce, H.L. Ellison, eds., Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1979, pp. 320,321).

The Greek historian Herodotus recorded that when he visited Egypt, the priests there showed him an ancient manuscript that told the story of a day that lasted twice as long as a normal day. As they had accurate water clocks that could record time, they could easily record that a long day had taken place.

Fernand Crombette translated some Egyptian hieroglyphics that said - "The sun, thrown into confusion, had remained low on the horizon, and by not rising, had spread terror amongst the great doctors. Two days had been rolled into one....

Gill, writing in 1810, quoted from a manuscript that unfortunately appears to have been lost. This said that in the time of their seventh Emperor, "..the sun did not set for ten days... and though the time of the sun's standing still were enlarged beyond the bounds of truth, yet it seems to refer to this fact, and was manifestly about the same time; for this miracle was wrought in the year of the world 2554...." clearly an embellishment of the story.

Day and night

North America. Several North American Indian tribes have accounts of long nights. The Ojibways, Wyandots and the Bungees tell of a long night. The Omahas tell of the sun being caught in a rabbit's trap and only released just before dawn. The Dogribs tell of the sun suddenly becoming dark at noon.

Mexican Indians. They tell of a long night.

Aztecs. They have a legend of the sun not appearing for a very long time, so a conclave of the gods was called and a sacrifice made.

Quiche Mayans of Guatemala. " They did not sleep; They remained standing and great was the anxiety of their hearts and their stomachs for the coming of the dawn and the day.... 'Oh... if we only could see the rising of the sun.'"

Peru. The sun was hidden for nearly 20 hours. again an embellishment of the real story.

West Africa. A West African story of a long night, it said that the night lasted too long because the owl overslept and did not awaken the sun.

Instead of proving the Biblical account false, these myths show that people from all over the world seemed to have the same experience of either a long day or a long night and therefore gives credit to the Biblical record.

The terminology of Joshua 10:12-13, of the sun and moon 'standing' or 'waiting,' is the same as used in Mesopotamian celestial omen texts.

There is no doubt, based on scripture and historical records, that this long day occurred just as the Bible records it. How God accomplished this amazing miracle is unknown

Mankind Has Always Been Intelligent

Take a look at the world's first computer made in 46 BC! The antikythera device, a major world mystery and the world's first computer was invented around 46 BC! Amazingly discovered at the bottom of the Mediterranean, it's abilities are far beyond anything evolutionists thought the Ancients were capable of producing! So much for the evolutionary view of man slowly evolving over millions of years!! There are mountains of evidence that man has always been intelligent from the BEGINNING.

https://www.livescience.com/1166-scientists-unravel-mystery-ancient-greek-machine.html

NASA Astronaut Says Bible And Science In Agreement: 'Bible Was True....God Is The Creator

After travelling from space for 534 cumulative days, a NASA astronaut claimed that the 'Bible and science are not in conflict but in agreement: God is the Creator.

OLAADEGBU:


Source

Maynman:

So what exactly did “ Bible And Science Agree on”?
And how did science disagree with quran?

Maynman:

Show me the scientists who said this?

OLAADEGBU:


Your 'ancestors'

OLAADEGBU:

PEOPLE OF SCIENCE WHO BELIEVED IN GOD

Evolutionist Richard Dawkins once stated: "It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid, or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that)."

WERNHER VON BRAUN 1912-1977

One of the world's top scientists was a man by the name of Wernher von Braun. He attended the University of Berlin, and after his graduation began developing rockets for his native country of Germany. However, in 1945 he came to the United States, and ten years later, in 1955, he became a U.S. citizen.

Dr. von Braun was the leading force behind America's own space programme.

Dr. von Braun was not ashamed of his belief in God. When he died in 1977, coworkers found in his files letters he had written to other scientists (like the famous medical doctor, Albert Schweitzer), in which he tried to show them why they too should believe in God.

LOUIS PASTEUR (1822-1895)

Louis Pasteur was trained in chemistry and physics, but perhaps is best known to us today as the "father of bacteriology." He discovered that many of the diseases that affect humans and animals are the result of dangerous germs that invade the body. He not only discovered many of the bacteria that caused diseases, but was also responsible for developing vaccines to combat them.

Dr. Pasteur was a man who firmly believed in God, and developed the concept that life must come from life, we know this as biogenesis. Evolutionists refuse to accept this law of science.

GEORGE WASHINGTON CARVER (1864-1943)

Born from parents who were slaves, Carver learned how to make 118 different products using a sweet potato. He developed over 300 products using the peanut.

George became the director of agricultural research at the Tuskegee Institute in Alabama.
George Washington Carver was an amazing inventor. But he also believed strongly in God.

SIR ISAAC NEWTON (1642-1727)

One encyclopedia said that Sir Isaac Newton was "one of the greatest names in the history of human thought." Albert Einstein, one of the most popular scientists to ever to have lived, said that his work would have been impossible without the work done by Newton.

Newton once said: "God is a living, intelligent and powerful Being.....He is supreme, and most perfect."

OTHER MEN OF SCIENCE:

Johannes Kepler
Michael Faraday
Galileo Galilei
Carolus Linnaeus
Raymond Damadian
Melvin A. Cook
Dmitri Kouznetsov

We should never let those who believe in evolution get away with saying that all the smart people believe in evolution or "You don't understand the science" That simply is not true. Thousands of intelligent men and women all over the world believe that God created this Universe, and that the Bible is His Word.

OLAADEGBU:


Here is the list of some true scientists but I'll leave you to figure out your pseudo scientists who editing and changing their findings until they eventually agree with the science clearly stated in the Bible.

OLAADEGBU:


Your 'ancestors'


Source

Maynman:


It was you that complied their findings, then tell us the names of the pseudo scientists that you complied their works, you became empty like yahweh.

Shameless liar!

OLAADEGBU:


Thank God that atheists are always wrong.

OLAADEGBU:


Thank God that atheists are always wrong.

OLAADEGBU:


Source

LordReed:


46BC? I thought you'd claim it was made by Adam and Eve. LMFAO!

OLAADEGBU:


Come off it! Adam and Eve existed about 4,000 years before Christ.

OLAADEGBU:


Come off it! Adam and Eve existed about 4,000 years before Christ.