A Dark and Stormy World
by Larry Vardiman

The greatest weather catastrophe in earth history—that’s a good way to describe the Flood. The Flood caused radical changes in the land, seas, and atmosphere, the weather would never be the same. In fact, it took centuries before the climate settled into the relative stability we see today. The lesson? Our earth has still not fully recovered from the Flood!

Most people envision Noah and his family stepping off the Ark into a warm and sunny world. They imagine balmy breezes and the fragrant aroma of plants and trees just beginning to bloom. The end of the catastrophic, worldwide Flood must have been a dramatic relief to Noah’s family, but it doesn’t mean they were greeted by a gentle spring day.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n4/dark-stormy-world

Our Future World? 
A Creationist Perspective: Part 4

The present is not the key to the future . . .

The earth is around six thousand years old.  Three-fourths of the planet is now covered by water, and a thin veneer of atmosphere continues to protect us from harmful radiation.

Currently 6.7 billion humans call earth home.  They share the planet with a variety of amazing plants and animals—nearly 2 million species catalogued so far—living together in a complex web of life filling the sky, sea, and land.

But the world is changing.  While the earth’s plates have slowed to a crawl, volcanoes and earthquakes continue to reshape the surface.  Hurricanes and local floods cause enormous damage.  Occasionally, species still arise and go extinct.  The ozone appears to be thinning, temperatures are rising, glaciers are receding, and the sea level is rising.

How can we know what will happen next?

Scoffers say that the present world is the key to understanding what happened in the past and what will happen in the future.  They trust that the same slow processes we see today have always been and will always be.

But we know from the Bible that unique events happened in the past, never to be repeated.  For example, God created everything “very good” out of nothing.  We also know that God destroyed that world in a global Flood.

We also find geologic evidence of unique catastrophes in the past—thick mud layers over continents, coal seams covering entire states, craters of supervolcanoes, canyons cut thousands of feet deep, miles of underground cave passages, and remnants of thick ice sheets that once moved over continents.

So we have no reason to believe that the present can tell us about the past . . . or the future.  Based on God’s Word, we know that unique events are in store for the future, as they were for the past.  As God once destroyed the earth by Flood, He will judge it by fire.

As stewards of God’s earth living in the present, we still have a responsibility to study the earth’s clues.  Only by combining our knowledge of God’s Word and God’s world can we better understand how to live in the present and how to prepare for the future.

The everlasting Creator, who made all things in six days, sustains them now by His word.  One day He will fulfill His glorious work by providing a new world, where He will dwell forever with His redeemed people.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n4/future-world

Global Warming in Perspective   by Melinda Christian  

The study of earth’s history is not a subject of idle curiosity.  We need to know more if we hope to solve the environmental crisis that face humanity.  That’s one reason that a biblical perspective on history is so important.  It helps us make sense of the problems we face today and prepare for the future.

These days it seems you can hardly turn on the TV, go online, or open your morning newspaper without being confronted with the idea of global warming.  In his 2006 Oscar-winning documentary An Inconvenient Truth, former U.S. Vice President Al Gore presents global warming as an imminent threat to the planet and paints an alarming picture of a future in which mankind ultimately destroys life on earth.

But global warming is far more complex than one 96-minute film can convey, and most people are simply not getting some of the most important information.

How do we approach the subject of global warming? 

It’s clear that global warming is a complex and emotionally charged issue, one that cannot be ignored in today’s cultural and political climate.  New claims and counter-claims appear in the press with numbing regularity, leaving many Christians uncertain what to believe.  Rather than getting lost in the details, it is necessary first to uncover the basic facts and then to understand the assumptions that drive the interpretations of those facts.

Although many people may think otherwise, all of us have assumptions (beliefs) that influence how we look at the facts. If a scientist believes in billions of years of earth history, he will assume, for example, that polar ice needed hundreds of thousands of years to build up over two miles in depth.  Scientists who believe in the biblical account of Noah’s Flood, on the other hand, believe the ice must have appeared shortly after the Flood.  Depending on their assumptions, equally skilled scientists can reach very different conclusions.

In the global warming debate, it is important to separate fact from interpretation. We hear a great deal about the dangers of CO2 emissions and greenhouse gases, but rarely do we hear the facts behind the hype.

Even "facts" need to be qualified.  For example, NASA has reported that the average number of major hurricanes (categories 4 and 5) has doubled since 1970.  But this is “selective data sorting.”  When you calculate the average of all hurricanes, you find much less of an increase.  In fact, the year 2007 saw a decrease in hurricanes.  So NASA’s "fact" may be true, but it is not the whole truth.

Let’s examine the basic facts and assumptions behind five major claims about global warming . . .

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n4/global-warming

The Genesis Flood -- Dr Henry Morris.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXkXxaNYJCc?version=3&hl=en_GB

Loving Science, Loving God
by Kurt Wise and Gregg Allison

Starting with the facts of God’s Word and world, we fashion models to know God and see His truth.

Christians generally agree that evangelizing unbelievers, serving other believers, and worshipping God are worthwhile activities. But what about the sciences—especially those with little to no practical use to humanity? Is there value in puzzling over hollow trunks of fossil trees or craters on distant planets? We believe so. In fact, we believe science is an essential activity of the church.

Check the link below to find out the whys and the hows of doing science.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n4/loving-science

Evidence that the universe is young which confirms the accuracy of the Bible Truth.

OLAADEGBU:

Science in the Bible

The Bible offers many specific examples of amazingly accurate science, and science has uncovered many amazing evidences that the universe and earth are young, as the Bible describes.

Astronomy.

Scientific Evidence of a young universe:

1. Spiral galaxies
2. "Missing" supernova remnants
3. Short-lived comets
4. Moon moving away from Earth

OLAADEGBU:

Science in the Bible Contd.

The Bible offers many specific examples of amazingly accurate science, and science has uncovered many amazing evidences that the universe and earth are young, as the Bible describes.

Geology.

Scientific evidence of a young earth:

1. Continents erode too fast

2. Too much mud on the sea floor

3. Too much sodium in the ocean

4. Too rapid decay of earth's magnetic field.

OLAADEGBU:

Science in the Bible (Contd).

Biology.

Scientific evidence of a recent creation:

1. DNA programming for irreducibly complex protein sequences.
2. Lack of missing links in the fossil record
3. Dinosaur blood vessels in fossils.

OLAADEGBU:

Let's look at another example where science confirms the Bible.

Anthropology:

The Bible claims that all humans are "one blood" descended from one man and one woman (Acts 17:26; 1 Cor. 15:45; Gen.3:20). Some 19th-century biologists argued that different races descended from lower animals, but today genetics has verified that there is only one human race.

OLAADEGBU:

BIOLOGY:

The Bible claims that God created animals "after their kind."

Nineteenth-century biologists argued that animals evolved from other, very different animals, but today biology confirms that creatures reproduce within their own kind.

OLAADEGBU:

GEOLOGY:

The Bible claims that God destroyed the earth and the creatures inhabiting it in the worldwide Flood.  Nineteenth-century geologists argued that rock layers and the fossils found in them were formed as sediments were deposited slowly, but today geology confirms that many rock layers were deposited catastrophically, burying fossils within only minutes or hours.

So if the Bible wins hands down in every earthly thing we can test, why don’t people trust what it says? The issue is not the truth of Scripture, but vain reasoning and “willful ignorance” (Romans 1:21; 2 Peter 3:5).

Dr. Andrew Snelling holds a PhD in geology from the University of Sydney and has worked as a consultant research geologist to organizations in both Australia and America. Author of numerous scientific articles, Dr. Snelling is now director of research at Answers in Genesis–USA.

The Genesis Flood -- Dr Henry Morris (Part 2).


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PU_0C8uhBI?version=3&hl=en_GB

The Genesis Flood -- Dr Henry Morris (Part 3).


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALLbMQAs2Nk?version=3&hl=en_GB

Geologic ages/column is an evidence that the Bible is true.

Luke 9:48 -

And said unto them, Whosoever shall receive this child in my name receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me receiveth him that sent me: for he that is least among you all, the same shall be great.

smallest to the primitive eye

Leviticus 11:6
6 The rabbit, though it chews the cud, does not have a divided hoof; it is unclean for you.

hahhaahahhahah@!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Deuteronomy 14:11-18
11 You may eat any clean bird. 12 But these you may not eat: the eagle, the vulture, the black vulture, 13 the red kite, the black kite, any kind of falcon, 14 any kind of raven, 15 the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk, 16 the little owl, the great owl, the white owl, 17 the desert owl, the osprey, the cormorant, 18 the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.

bat!!!!!!! are birds!!! wow he hehehe

Leviticus 11:20
20 All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you.

get it all fours, heheheheheheheh maybe the guys back then we half blind, get it, a cockroach has walks on fours, right? haahahahhahaha


Genesis 7:11 God opens the "windows of heaven." He does this every time it rains.
Genesis 8:2 "The windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained." This happens whenever it stops raining
just like a fairy tale,

Genesis 11:1 11:1 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.
Body Language? ha!

Judges 5:20 "The stars in their courses fought against Sisera." Unless astrology is true, how can the stars affect the outcome of a battle?
Stars right? Those small twinkle stars that are decorating the tent called the sky, ha ha ha, really?/

1 1:39-40 When Solomon was annointed king the people sang and shouted so loudly that it caused an earthquake!
hahahahaha, haahhaahahah

Job 37:18 God spread out the sky, which is a solid structure, hard and strong like a mirror.
Now this is not just wrong it is dumb

Matthew 2:9: The star , went before them
This is not even scientifically possibly

Matthew 9:2-6 Jesus heals a paralytic man by forgiving his sins. (Paralysis is caused by sin right ?.)

Matthew 10:1 Jesus gives his disciples "power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness." hahaahahaahahahha so aaa, bacteria is a spirit.


Mark 8:22-23 Jesus cures a blind man by spitting in his eyes. How Romantic right?

Mark 11:34 The light of the body is the eye: therefore when thine eye is single, thy whole body also is full of light; but when thine eye is evil, thy body also is full of darkness.
Evil eyes everyone, and we wonder why witchcraft and christianity blend so well


Romans 10:18 But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.
End being what? one of the four corners of the earth right? maybe the world ends right after egypt, forget the aborgines man.


James 3:7 For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind
INcluding the ones we have not discovered yet, ?

Revelation 9:1 And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit.
Think of it, the star would not fall it would basically swallow or repel , we can only imagine what will happen if a star by the way not a meteorite comes towards our small earth and fairly small sun.

The worst aspect about some of the posts on AiG is people with little or no scientific background giving 'advice' on how to respond to phenomena like global warming.

Instead of focusing on areas they claim to have expertise in, they want to explain things beyond their capabilities.

One more comment - when the AiG folk claim that things like erosion of the continents and sodium levels in the oceans support a young earth, they make their own assumptions that if such rates have been constant in the past then things should have progressed far beyond where they are now.

These same scientists make different assumptions elsewhere, claiming things like radioisotopic decay may have been speeded up in the past.

Which are is to be believed? That processes have remained at the same pace for long periods of time or that they have changed in the past? The 'science' of the so called 'creationists' involves picking and choosing assumptions as they fit, ending up in a mess that make inconsistencies in the flawed evolution theories seem minuscule.

It is better to stand on your biblical beliefs and remain on that ground than engage in dodgy research in an attempt to 'prove' what the bible says - these efforts tend to discredit believers rather than reinforce their beliefs.

Deuteronomy 14:11-18
11 You may eat any clean bird. 12 But these you may not eat: the eagle, the vulture, the black vulture, 13 the red kite, the black kite, any kind of falcon, 14 any kind of raven, 15 the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk, 16 the little owl, the great owl, the white owl, 17 the desert owl, the osprey, the cormorant, 18 the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.

bat!!!!!!! are birds!!! wow he hehehe

These are the types of examples that show that the bible is not written as a record of precise biological classifications, rather it was for instruction on behaviour.

This response of yours shows your limitation in the comprehension and understanding of Scriptures. The fact that you doubt the accuracy of the Bible on this verse shows you to be a skeptic parading as a Christian scientist.

OLAADEGBU:

This response of yours shows your limitation in the comprehension and understanding of Scriptures. The fact that you doubt the accuracy of the Bible on this verse shows you to be a skeptic parading as a Christian scientist.

Sorry sir - thou with unlimited comprehension and understanding of the Scriptures!

I do not doubt the accuracy of the bible, however I do not regard it as the embodiment of biological classification as that is NOT its purpose.

To clarify - the verse quoted is an instruction on what not to eat, not on the classification of organisms. That's the point that (yet again) is lost on you.

debosky:

Sorry sir - thou with unlimited comprehension and understanding of the Scriptures!

What I have by the grace of God is just the basic understanding of the Scriptures. You don't have to be a theologian to know that Bible is fresher than tomorrow's newspaper.

debosky:

I do not doubt the accuracy of the bible, however I do not regard it as the embodiment of biological classification as that is NOT its purpose.

If you don't doubt the accuracy of the Bible then you will realise that even though the Bible is not a science textbook it is accurate when it talks about any scientific discipline.

debosky:

To clarify - the verse quoted is an instruction on what not to eat, not on the classification of organisms. That's the point that (yet again) is lost on you.

When you start off with the assumption that the Bible cannot be accurate when it speaks about biology except for instructions then you arrive at the wrong conclusion.

Biblical Accuracy
by Henry Morris, Ph.D.

"If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?" (John 3:12).

Many who profess to be Christian intellectuals today are arguing that we should defer to the evolutionists in matters of science and history, since the real message of the Bible is spiritual. The Genesis account, for example, is not meant to give us details of the events of creation, for scientists can give us this information. It merely assures us that God is somehow behind it all. But if this were all that God meant to tell us, its very first verse is enough for that! What is the need to describe all the days and acts of creation at all if the record has no real relevance to history or science?

As the Lord Jesus told Nicodemus in our text verse, if we cannot trust God's Word when it relates "earthly things," how can we possibly rely on its testimony of "heavenly things"? To some extent we can check for ourselves whether or not it is accurate when it records facts of history and processes of nature, but we have no means at all of determining whether it speaks the truth when it deals with heaven and hell, with salvation and eternal life, or with God's purpose for the world in the ages to come.

The fact is that the Bible is accurate in all matters with which it deals, scientific and historical as well as spiritual and theological. It is a dangerous thing to listen to these modern "pied pipers" of evangelicalism whose self-serving compromises with evolutionary scientism have already led multitudes of young people astray in our Christian colleges and seminaries.

We yet may not have all the answers to alleged problems in the Bible, but we can be absolutely sure of God's Word. When the answers are found, they will merely confirm what He has said all along. He is able and willing to speak the truth, and He means what He says! HMM

OLAADEGBU:

What I have by the grace of God is just the basic understanding of the Scriptures. You don't have to be a theologian to know that Bible is fresher than tomorrow's newspaper.

Then drop the superior attitude of trying to put down everyone who doesn't agree with your own OPINIONS. I guess your basic understanding of the bible is what entitles you to demean my understanding? Yet again more evidence of your disgusting arrogance and pride.

If you don't doubt the accuracy of the Bible then you will realise that even though the Bible is not a science textbook it is accurate when it talks about any scientific discipline.

Very good - is the passage in Leviticus talking about a scientific discipline? Yes or no answer please.

When you start off with the assumption that the Bible cannot be accurate when it speaks about biology except for instructions then you arrive at the wrong conclusion.

Where do you get off creating assumptions that don't exist in the first place? Did I say the bible CANNOT be accurate about biology? Is that statement contained in any of my posts?

The passage given in Leviticus is INSTRUCTION on what not to eat. If you believe the intent of the passage is to provide an accurate biological description, then please explain to me how a bat is a bird biologically.

The problem with your ilk is your nauseating need to append labels to everyone who doesn't agree with your OPINION. You are the most arrogant poster I have come across in this section that deems himself the person to title everyone else and able to determine what assumptions have been made.

debosky:

Then drop the superior attitude of trying to put down everyone who doesn't agree with your own OPINIONS. I guess your basic understanding of the bible is what entitles you to demean my understanding? Yet again more evidence of your disgusting arrogance and pride.

I apologise if I come across as arrogant and pride because this is not intentional.  You are right that I may not agree with your opinion but then you are entitled to it.  The Bible is not about opinions, the 10 commandments are not called the 10 suggestions and He did not leave His word to be subject to private interpretations because it is self explanatory.

debosky:

Very good - is the passage in Leviticus talking about a scientific discipline? Yes or no answer please.

Yes.  Biology to be precise.

debosky:

Where do you get off creating assumptions that don't exist in the first place? Did I say the bible CANNOT be accurate about biology? Is that statement contained in any of my posts?

This is what you wrote:

debosky:

These are the types of examples that show that the bible is not written as a record of precise biological classifications, rather it was for instruction on behaviour.

what I understand by the above quote is that you are saying that the Bible cannot be relied upon for any scientific, in this case 'precise biological classification'.  I gathered that you think that it only instructs us on moral and spiritual matters.  I also remember that you have said earlier in this thread that the Genesis record is only saying who created all things.

debosky:

The passage given in Leviticus is INSTRUCTION on what not to eat. If you believe the intent of the passage is to provide an accurate biological description, then please explain to me how a bat is a bird biologically.

This is what the passage reads:

"These are the birds you are to detest and not eat because they are detestable: the eagle, the vulture, the black vulture, the red kite, any kind of black kite, any kind of raven, the horned owl, the screech owl, the grull, any kind of hawk, the little owl, the cormorant, the great owl, the white owl, the desert owl, the osprey, the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat" (Leviticus 11:13-19; NIV).

The alleged problem here is in the translation of the Hebrew word owph.  I believe that this has been explained earlier in this thread but those who are just interested in posting supposed errors in the Bible are not waiting or expecting an answer.  The Hebrew word owph means a fowl or a winged creature.  The KJV actually translated it as a fowl.  The owph actually means 'to fly or 'has wings'.  This word includes birds and bats and even flying insects.  But when some translations of the Bible use the word birds it then appears as if there are scientific errors in the Bible thus undermining biblical authority.  A bat has wings and can fly and thus qualifies as an owph (winged creature).

debosky:

The problem with your ilk is your nauseating need to append labels to everyone who doesn't agree with your OPINION. You are the most arrogant poster I have come across in this section that deems himself the person to title everyone else and able to determine what assumptions have been made.

You are well entitled to your opinion of me and I will not begrudge you that.   I do not apologise for taking my final authority from the Word of God instead of the opinions of men.

OLAADEGBU:

I apologise if I come across as arrogant and pride because this is not intentional.  You are right that I may not agree with your opinion but then you are entitled to it.  The Bible is not about opinions, the 10 commandments are not called the 10 suggestions and He did not leave His word to be subject to private interpretations because it is self explanatory.

This is where you descend into the ridiculous yet again - are we debating the 10 commandments here? Why do you always seek to deviate matters away from what is being discussed?

You are not only arrogant, you are clearly confused and unable to maintain a rational discussion.

PS - the bible DOES contains opinions and recommendations - Paul clearly stated that

In 1 Corinthians 7:39-40 - but then again, Ola the arrogant one knows everything doesn't he?

This is what you wrote:

what I understand by the above quote is that you are saying that the Bible cannot be relied upon for any scientific, in this case 'precise biological classification'.  I gathered that you think that it only instructs us on moral and spiritual matters.  I also remember that you have said earlier in this thread that the Genesis record is only saying who created all things.

Your understanding is completely off the mark - my point is very clear - that passage was NOT trying to make a biological classification of birds. I have not said it cannot be relied on for anything scientific. Again, you are making wild ASSUMPTIONS about what I am saying without any basis.

"These are the birds you are to detest and not eat because they are detestable: the eagle, the vulture, the black vulture, the red kite, any kind of black kite, any kind of raven, the horned owl, the screech owl, the grull, any kind of hawk, the little owl, the cormorant, the great owl, the white owl, the desert owl, the osprey, the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat" (Leviticus 11:13-19; NIV).

The alleged problem here is in the translation of the Hebrew word owph.  I believe that this has been explained earlier in this thread but those who are just interested in posting supposed errors in the Bible are not waiting or expecting an answer.  The Hebrew word owph means a fowl or a winged creature.  The KJV actually translated it as a fowl.  The owph actually means 'to fly or 'has wings'.  This word includes birds and bats and even flying insects.  But when some translations of the Bible use the word birds it then appears as if there are scientific errors in the Bible thus undermining biblical authority.  A bat has wings and can fly and thus qualifies as an owph (winged creature).

Again this proves my point - insects, birds and bats are not classified together under contemporary biological classification. 'winged creatures' is not an accepted biological classification in the science of biology so it is pointless trying to link that passage to current day biological classification, they are two completely different things.

I NEVER SAID THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THAT PASSAGE - I have simply said, its purpose has been misinterpreted.

However, in your ultra defensiveness, you are trying to read ridiculous meanings into what I have posted.

You are well entitled to your opinion of me and I will not begrudge you that.   I do not apologise for taking my final authority from the Word of God instead of the opinions of men.

Your final authority gives you no right to claim the power to read other's thoughts - that is witchcraft if you don't know. Stick to the issues and stop trying to define people and read their thoughts.

@Olaadegbu: And science says bats are mammals, not birds. This alone may have sunk the bible in the eyes of science or science is wrong when it does accept bat as a bird.

debosky:

This is where you descend into the ridiculous yet again - are we debating the 10 commandments here? Why do you always seek to deviate matters away from what is being discussed?

You are not only arrogant, you are clearly confused and unable to maintain a rational discussion.

PS - the bible DOES contains opinions and recommendations - Paul clearly stated that

In 1 Corinthians 7:39-40 - but then again, Ola the arrogant one knows everything doesn't he?

When you cannot answer the question that cast doubt on the inerrancy of the Bible you end up with ad hominem and ridicule on the person. These are the common underhand tactics employed by atheistic evolutionists and I am not surprised.

debosky:

Your understanding is completely off the mark - my point is very clear - that passage was NOT trying to make a biological classification of birds. I have not said it cannot be relied on for anything scientific. Again, you are making wild ASSUMPTIONS about what I am saying without any basis.

It was you who missed the point. The NIV translation mislead you by writting the word 'bird' for owph when it meant winged creatures and not limiting it to birds. Skeptics used this to attack biblical authority on science and instead of you to explain where the error was you jumped to conclusion that the verse cannot be used to explain biological classifications but instructions.

debosky:

Again this proves my point - insects, birds and bats are not classified together under contemporary biological classification. 'winged creatures' is not an accepted biological classification in the science of biology so it is pointless trying to link that passage to current day biological classification, they are two completely different things.

I NEVER SAID THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THAT PASSAGE - I have simply said, its purpose has been misinterpreted.

However, in your ultra defensiveness, you are trying to read ridiculous meanings into what I have posted.

All you posted boils down to say that the Bible can only be trusted with moral and spiritual instructions and not for scientific or historical explanations therefore giving an excuse or escape route for the supposed contradictions in the Bible.

debosky:

Your final authority gives you no right to claim the power to read other's thoughts - that is witchcraft if you don't know. Stick to the issues and stop trying to define people and read their thoughts.

Let me tell you what discerns your thoughts:

"For the word of God is quick and powerful and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened to the eyes of him with whom we have to do" (Hebrews 4:12-13).

Sweetnecta:

@Olaadegbu: And science says bats are mammals, not birds. This alone may have sunk the bible in the eyes of science or science is wrong when it does accept bat as a bird.

You too have swallowed the bait hook, line and sinker. Don't blame it on the inerrant Word of God blame it on the translation. Translators are not always perfect when handling the inerrant Word of God.

OLAADEGBU:

When you cannot answer the question that cast doubt on the inerrancy of the Bible you end up with ad hominem and ridicule on the person. These are the common underhand tactics employed by atheistic evolutionists and I am not surprised.

When did you ask a question instead of making baseless claims to know what my assumptions were? Show me the question you asked.

Ridiculous self righteous nonsense as usual - no one is ridiculing you here, you are ridiculing yourself with this nonsense.

When we talk about 'inerrancy', just want are you talking about? Is the NIV translation the bible or not? Did it not 'err' (according to you) by mistranslating the word 'owph'?

It was you who missed the point. The NIV translation mislead you by writting the word 'bird' for owph when it meant winged creatures and not limiting it to birds. Skeptics used this to attack biblical authority on science and instead of you to explain where the error was you jumped to conclusion that the verse cannot be used to explain biological classifications but instructions.

So the bible misleads now? Or is it the translation that misled or is the NIV not the bible? Can you see the clear folly of the nonsense you are posting here?

I did not jump to any conclusion - the verse still does not explain biological classification. [/b[b]]There is no biological classification based solely on the ability to walk or fly - as a result, 'winged creatures' is NOT a biological classification. . The mere fact that humans and crickets can walk will not make you classify them into the same biological category.

All you posted boils down to say that the Bible can only be trusted with moral and spiritual instructions and not for scientific or historical explanations therefore giving an excuse or escape route for the supposed contradictions in the Bible.

I have never said that - I have argued about a specific verse and[b] its validity as a biological classification.[/b] Yet again, in your nauseating and puerile arrogance, you have claimed to 'boiled down' my post. Again, claiming to read minds is witchcraft.

Let me tell you what discerns your thoughts:

"For the word of God is quick and powerful and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are Unclad and opened to the eyes of him with whom we have to do" (Hebrews 4:12-13).

Why not leave the word of God to discern my thoughts? Or are you now the word of God that can read my thoughts?

You are a thoroughly confused and deluded person.

You are also a persistent LIAR - continuously saying I make claims I have NEVER made. You should be ashamed of your disgraceful behaviour here.

Why do you have to LIE in order to prove a point?

Show me the original, Mr. Ola  ade gbu.

Or there is no original, but most ancient manuscripts in another man's tongue, aka el greco, etc?

debosky:

When did you ask a question instead of making baseless claims to know what my assumptions were? Show me the question you asked.

Ridiculous self righteous nonsense as usual - no one is ridiculing you here, you are ridiculing yourself with this nonsense.

When we talk about 'inerrancy', just want are you talking about? Is the NIV translation the bible or not? Did it not 'err' (according to you) by mistranslating the word 'owph'?

Have you soon forgotten the objections raised by zataxs, and you are quick to call someone else names?

debosky:

So the bible misleads now? Or is it the translation that misled or is the NIV not the bible? Can you see the clear folly of the nonsense you are posting here?

I did not jump to any conclusion - the verse still does not explain biological classification. [/b[b]]There is no biological classification based solely on the ability to walk or fly - as a result, 'winged creatures' is NOT a biological classification. . The mere fact that humans and crickets can walk will not make you classify them into the same biological category.

It is not news that there are translational errors but that does not distract from the inerrancy of the Word of God. Those who trust in the accuracy in the Word of God would diligently search it out instead of joining forces with skeptics to undermine it.

debosky:

I have never said that - I have argued about a specific verse and[b] its validity as a biological classification.[/b] Yet again, in your nauseating and puerile arrogance, you have claimed to 'boiled down' my post. Again, claiming to read minds is witchcraft.

Rebellion is witchcraft and obedience to the Word of God is better than sacrifice. Those who attack the Word of God so as to get people to doubt it are practising the old trick of their master who deceived Eve.

debosky:

Why not leave the word of God to discern my thoughts? Or are you now the word of God that can read my thoughts?

You are a thoroughly confused and deluded person.

You are also a persistent LIAR - continuously saying I make claims I have NEVER made. You should be ashamed of your disgraceful behaviour here.

Why do you have to LIE in order to prove a point?

Thanks for the compliment. Jesus gave us another yardstick to discern the truth, He said that by their fruits you shall know them.

Sweetnecta:

Show me the original, Mr. Ola ade gbu.

Or there is no original, but most ancient manuscripts in another man's tongue, aka el greco, etc?

I know you will be grinning from ear to ear thinking that we have a problem with the Bible. The enemy has tried to puncture holes to no avail. God is capable of preserving His word. The original manuscripts were written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek and understanding those words and the context that it was use will go a long way in keeping us from error.

The Genesis Flood -- Dr Henry Morris (Part 4).


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0OZujIZaSc?version=3&hl=en_GB

Inerrancy According To Christ
by Henry Morris, Ph.D.

"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled?" (Matthew 5:18).

Here is the commentary of the Lord Jesus on the doctrine of plenary verbal inspiration.  Not only were the words of the Bible divinely inspired, but even the very letters!

The "jot" was the smallest letter of the Hebrew alphabet (jod, the tenth letter).  The "tittle" was a small horn-like appendage which transformed one Hebrew letter into another.  Thus, a stronger statement of absolute verbal inspiration than this could hardly be imagined.

Further, the phrase "in no wise" is actually a double negative in Greek.  In New Testament Greek it was used for strong emphasis.  According to none other than the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, every word—even every letter—of the "law" must be fulfilled.  This certainly includes the books of the Pentateuch—including even the often-maligned and distorted opening chapters of Genesis!

He applied the same principle to other parts of Scripture as well.  "The Scripture cannot be broken," He said (John 10:35) in the course of an exposition of Psalm 82:6, based on one single word used in the verse, supporting the vital doctrine of His own deity.

It is clear that Christ taught the doctrine of full, verbal, inspiration of the Holy Scriptures.  It is sad and inexcusable that so many today, who call themselves Christians, repudiate this vital teaching of the Lord Jesus by rejecting, diluting, or "interpreting" the plain statements of the word of God.  And, lest anyone equivocate by suggesting that, since the original writings have all been lost, we no longer can know what the divinely given words may have been, we should remember Christ’s promise: "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away" (Matthew 24:35). HMM

OLAADEGBU:

Have you soon forgotten the objections raised by zataxs, and you are quick to call someone else names?

Was I involved in a conversation with zataxs? I made a point on one of his quotations to illustrate a common error in misinterpreting the bible.

It is not news that there are translational errors but that does not distract from the inerrancy of the Word of God. Those who trust in the accuracy in the Word of God would diligently search it out instead of joining forces with skeptics to undermine it.

Those undermining the word are those who insist on forcing interpretations into the word that it was never intended to be used for. It is quite foolish to be screaming about inerrancy without explaining there are errors in translation.

Rebellion is witchcraft and obedience to the Word of God is better than sacrifice. Those who attack the Word of God so as to get people to doubt it are practising the old trick of their master who deceived Eve.

Another off tangent post - does this address the question of a biological classification of creatures by ability to fly? Will you ever answer a question directed at you?

Thanks for the compliment. Jesus gave us another yardstick to discern the truth, He said that by their fruits you shall know them.

With the numerous lies you have told against my person, I am interested in knowing what your fruits of persistent lying tell us about you.

By their fruits (lies) you shall know them.

Science cant confirm the Bible, since it proves only natural causes and these must be observable, the "supernatural" does not qualify as a subject of study under science, so OLAADEGBU your premise is faulty.

debosky:

Was I involved in a conversation with zataxs? I made a point on one of his quotations to illustrate a common error in misinterpreting the bible.

Who was involved in a conversation with zataxs? Is it not based on what zataxs posted claiming that the Bible is not scientifically accurate? It is even good that you'v admitted that you made a point on it even though your point corroborates his claim.

debosky:

Those undermining the word are those who insist on forcing interpretations into the word that it was never intended to be used for. It is quite foolish to be screaming about inerrancy without explaining there are errors in translation.

What I am doing is to address these supposed contradictions in the Bible showing that skeptics are being fallacious in their claims. You are the one bring your own interpretation based on faulty assumptions into it giving the impression that the Bible cannot be trusted when it comes to history and science.

debosky:

Another off tangent post - does this address the question of a biological classification of creatures by ability to fly? Will you ever answer a question directed at you?

Was it not you that accused me of witchcraft? Where you addressing the question of biological classification when you brought up the accusation of witchcraft? I was only responding to your off tangent post and you are here accusing me of not answering questions directed at me? There is one biblical character that specialises in this craft and he is called the accuser of the brethren.

debosky:

With the numerous lies you have told against my person, I am interested in knowing what your fruits of persistent lying tell us about you.

By their fruits (lies) you shall know them.

I'll leave you to continue your accusations and personal attacks against my person with the words of Jesus Christ who is my final authority:

"Give not that which is holy to the dogs, neither cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you." -- Matthew 7:6

OLAADEGBU:

Who was involved in a conversation with zataxs? Is it not based on what zataxs posted claiming that the Bible is not scientifically accurate? It is even good that you'v admitted that you made a point on it even though your point corroborates his claim.

My point corroborates nothing - my point is that certain verses are provided for instruction and not for biological classification. That does not corroborate any claim he made. An instruction involving a variety of organisms in DIFFERENT biological classes is not a scientific endeavour in the first place, so there is no science to even speak of.

What I am doing is to address these supposed contradictions in the Bible showing that skeptics are being fallacious in their claims. You are the one bring your own interpretation based on faulty assumptions into it giving the impression that the Bible cannot be trusted when it comes to history and science.

What is my own interpretation in this case? Is it an interpretation to ask you whether 'flying creature' is a biological classification? Despite my numerous warnings for you to stop, you continue to make ridiculous claims about the impression I am making. This is the umpteenth time you will tell this lie.

Was it not you that accused me of witchcraft? Where you addressing the question of biological classification when you brought up the accusation of witchcraft? I was only responding to your off tangent post and you are here accusing me of not answering questions directed at me? There is one biblical character that specialises in this craft and he is called the accuser of the brethren.

As you said, it is by their fruits you will know them - if you insist on claiming to have abilities to read my mind, then you are the one accusing yourself of witchcraft not me.

I'll leave you to continue your accusations and personal attacks against my person with the words of Jesus Christ who is my final authority:

I am not making any accusations - you have told numerous lies against me here, from calling me an evolutionist atheist, to claiming I made assumptions that I never made. Those are FACTS not accusations.

I'll leave you to contemplate also with the words of Jesus:

John 8:44
For you are the children of your father the devil, and you love to do the evil things he does. He was a murderer from the beginning. He has always hated the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, it is consistent with his character; for he is a liar and the father of lies.

The Genesis Flood -- Dr Henry Morris (Part 4).


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0OZujIZaSc?version=3&hl=en_GB


The Genesis Flood -- Dr Henry Morris (Part 5).


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SzTJIE5HNY?version=3&hl=en_GB

Dr Henry Morris has been exposing the circular reasoning of evolutionists when they say the date the age of the rocks and fossils.  He quotes The World Book Encyclopedia vol. 15 in part 4 of the videoclip as saying:

"the age of rocks may be determined by the fossils that are found in them" 

Vol. 7 of the same book says:

"Scientists determine when fossils were formed by finding out the age of the rocks in which they lie" 

So we can see how these evolutionists have been contradicting themselves and going in vicious cycles by saying that the age of the rocks may be determined by the fossils that they are found in and in another place they say that fossils are dated by the age of the rocks in which they lie.  See confusion and contradiction rolled up in one and our resident scientists have swallowed this lie hook, line and sinker.

True believers are encouraged to watch how the Genesis Flood answers the question about the age of the rocks and fossils.

Kay 17:

Science cant confirm the Bible, since it proves only natural causes and these must be observable, the "supernatural" does not qualify as a subject of study under science, so OLAADEGBU your premise is faulty.

Science can be divided into observable and origin sciences. We all agree on the observable science since it is verifiable and repeatable but origin or historic science would depend on the scientist's presupposition. We cannot repeat what happened in the past hence we have to rely on our presuppositions. The scientist who is a Christian has faith in the eyewitness account of the past who observed what was created and recorded as a basis for our starting point. We believe God is certain about the truth and that makes our faith certain on what happened in the past. The scientist who is an evolutionist has not got a witness of past events so he has to base his decisions on assumptions and conjectures. When true scientists practice good science we see that their findings is consistent with what is written in the Bible. If you have any objections to this claim kindly point out where a scientific finding contradicts what the Bible says.