|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,767 Year: 4,024/9,624 Month: 895/974 Week: 222/286 Day: 29/109 Hour: 2/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Inerrant Bible? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
gene90 Member (Idle past 3849 days) Posts: 1610 Joined: |
I don't know, but I think hieroglyphics are textual/historical evidences, not C-14 material. Naturally the ego-crazed Pharoah will want to have his terrible name plastered in as many different places as possible and with an edited and rather biased historical description of his reign. I should probably look into this.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
no2creation Inactive Member |
[QUOTE][b]Genesis 30
30:36 And he set three days' journey betwixt himself and Jacob: and Jacob fed the rest of Laban's flocks. 30:37 And Jacob took him rods of green poplar, and of the hazel and chestnut tree; and pilled white streaks in them, and made the white appear which was in the rods. 30:38 And he set the rods which he had pilled before the flocks in the gutters in the watering troughs when the flocks came to drink, that they should conceive when they came to drink. 30:39 And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstreaked, speckled, and spotted. 30:40 And Jacob did separate the lambs, and set the faces of the flocks toward the ringstreaked, and all the brown in the flock of Laban; and he put his own flocks by themselves, and put them not unto Laban's cattle. 30:41 And it came to pass, whensoever the stronger cattle did conceive, that Jacob laid the rods before the eyes of the cattle in the gutters, that they might conceive among the rods. 30:42 But when the cattle were feeble, he put them not in: so the feebler were Laban's, and the stronger Jacob's. 30:43 And the man increased exceedingly, and had much cattle, and maidservants, and menservants, and camels, and asses.
[/QUOTE] [/b]So please correct me if I'm wrong but... Jacob took some fresh-cut branches from hazel and chestnut trees and made white stripes on them by peeling the bark and exposing the white wood of the branches (calls these rods). Then he placed the peeled branches(rods)in the watering troughs, so that they would be directly in front of the animals when they came to drink. When the animals came to drink, they mated in front of the branches (rods). They had offspring that were speckled, streaked and/or spotted. He had made separate flocks for himself and didn't put them with Labans animals. Whenever the stronger females were in heat, Jacob placed the branches in the troughs in front of the animals so they would mate near the branches. If the animals were weak, he would not put them there. Therefore the weak animals went to Laban and the strong animals went to Jacob. Jacob was a smart man! I'm sure this has shown up before...But how would a Creation Scientist explain this? Since Creation Scientists are constantly explaining "The Great Flood and Noahs ark" story, then they should also be able to explain other stories like the one above. If Genesis is meant to be taken literally, then maybe someone could give me a reasonable explanation to how this happened?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"I don't know, but I think hieroglyphics are textual/historical evidences, not C-14 material."
--I would agree there. "Naturally the ego-crazed Pharoah will want to have his terrible name plastered in as many different places as possible and with an edited and rather biased historical description of his reign. I should probably look into this."--Even though history isn't one of my favorite subjects, and I rather have a dislike for it out of its almost complete bordom it offers me, it would be interesting to see what you find. In Joz's words, "off you go..." ------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"If Genesis is meant to be taken literally, then maybe someone could give me a reasonable explanation to how this happened?"
--Sounds like Population genetics, that is, the use of dominant and recessive alleles in segregation of the lambs/goats, keep in mind a previous verse: 35 That same day he removed all the male goats that were streaked or spotted, and all the speckled or spotted female goats (all that had white on them) and all the dark-colored lambs, and he placed them in the care of his sons.36 Then he put a three-day journey between himself and Jacob, while Jacob continued to tend the rest of Laban's flocks. --The classic Mendel experiments seemingly contrasts this effect. ------------------ [This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 04-19-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
no2creation Inactive Member |
quote: How many days did this take? Three?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"How many days did this take? Three?"
--How many days did what take? What might you be refering to? ------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
w_fortenberry Member (Idle past 6133 days) Posts: 178 From: Birmingham, AL, USA Joined: |
quote: The answer to your question is found in chapter 31.
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brad McFall Member (Idle past 5058 days) Posts: 3428 From: Ithaca,NY, USA Joined: |
quote: If this is due to Death I would need to find more harmony here as to the requirement of a literal understanding gene90, but rather it seems to me that the exception is confused with a aposteriori error because the aprioriness is not usually (philosophically) suppor()ted.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brad McFall Member (Idle past 5058 days) Posts: 3428 From: Ithaca,NY, USA Joined: |
I had asked a question about this to some dispensationalists in Lewiston not Auburn ME (Known as LA down-east) and they could not the dividing of the word back to this conversation. Maybe I will try it some day. Still reading Jerimiah after Isiah.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Philip Member (Idle past 4748 days) Posts: 656 From: Albertville, AL, USA Joined: |
Brad mentioned the 'dispensationalist' approach to the Bible (perhaps understanding it). The expository scriptures do harmonize under such an approach, for the most part, albeit, without the poetic Halleluia's, etc. which are way beyond any literalist's approach.
[This message has been edited by Philip, 05-26-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brad McFall Member (Idle past 5058 days) Posts: 3428 From: Ithaca,NY, USA Joined: |
I still prefer litterally approaching the reading of the text. The reason is that the IMAGE of organisms with horns I have never been able to remmeber back to my reading of living herps DIFFERENT than the pictures of dino bones. When reading the Bible More literally I find that as I do not really know the dispensationalist techinique I do think now of references in the books and though this may not be my duty to have so divided it I rather once I gain a better literal comprehension THEN go to the Gospels. My feeling is that many Christians tend often than not to Start their. A result is that I am more familiar with Jude than Paul though I read more Paul than Luke for any narrative other i read OT not object technology.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
w_fortenberry Member (Idle past 6133 days) Posts: 178 From: Birmingham, AL, USA Joined: |
quote: I think the verses you are trying to compare are Luke 23:39-42 and Matthew 27:41-44. Is it not possible that both accounts are correct? Could not both thieves have reviled Christ at first with one continuing to do so while the other repented? Such an interpretation would be without inconsistencies.
quote: Yes. I do.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Member (Idle past 1505 days) Posts: 2161 From: Cambridgeshire, UK. Joined: |
quote: Why ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Philip Member (Idle past 4748 days) Posts: 656 From: Albertville, AL, USA Joined: |
quote: --The literal is often poetical and vice-versa. When you read "Halleluiah", you may praise God literally and/or poetically to varying degrees. Dispensations (I agree) are biased and biasing, yet useful at times to rationally 'transend' this cursed reality, though not as 'resurrecting' as the raw biblical words themselves.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Philip Member (Idle past 4748 days) Posts: 656 From: Albertville, AL, USA Joined: |
I believe the Bible is inerrant, if only due to the death, burial, and resurrection of the Christ for a sin-cursed creation. For this gospel is extremely conspicuous (as devised by God Himself) throughout those scriptures alone. Science also bears witness to such a gospel via the appearances of ID (think Honda-Civic), a manifest multi-tiered ‘curse’, and observed ‘redemptive’/’restoring’ events.
Care to hear more, anyone?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024