Summations Only

Three commentaries I checked (Matthew Henry, JF&B, and David Guzik) all agree that the two refers to unclean animals and the seven refers to three pairs plus one for sacrificing of clean animals, so that the clean would be able to reproduce in greater numbers than the unclean but also have enough for sacrifice.I understood that it had to do with sacrificing the clean animals but hadn't taken into account that it was also so they would be able to reproduce in greater numbers, which makes sense because they were for food. Anyway, I think this should answer your question about the oddness of the numbers.ABE: When you trust the Bible to be true, when you encounter something you don't understand, which has to happen in a text written in such a different age in a culture of different ways of thinking, when you simply trust it and wait without jumping to conclusions you often do get an answer that makes sense and resolves your problem. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

There was one and only one Biblical Flood, according to the reasonable and sensible and GROWN-UP reading, and God called Noah to take a male and female pair of every unclean animal and three male and female pairs of every clean animal plus one more for sacrifice, according to the reasonable and sensible and GROWN-UP reading.As a general rule I'm through with trying to prove things to people who have their minds made up against the orthodox understanding of the text. I'll tell you the orthodox understanding and you take it or leave it.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

No, trusting it IS testing it. The more you trust it and the more it comes through for you the more you trust it.

Not for me, but for all those from Noah to me, and for me to know what God required, what the mind of God is on such things.They aren't two traditions, they are one writing. They were written down by Moses around 1500 B.C.Yes you can use the Bible to prove the Bible. It's not "a book" but a collection of writings over 1500 years that bear a fascinating relationship to one another.

Too bad about other translations, they do make a mess of things, which is why I stick to the KJV. Sorry you don't accept the explanation of the two and the seven, we try.Yes you can learn a lot by starting from the position of trusting the Bible. It does bear such trust and build on such trust. If it weren't true it wouldn't.

22:9 means they didn't hear what the voice SAID. You do have to read in context.

"The twelve" is likely a generic term for the disciples as Paul uses it, but we can assume such small discrepancies can be explained whether we see the explanation or not. They aren't important. They are just an excuse for you to ignore what IS important.

The entire Old Testament as collected by the Jews is to be found almost complete in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Books of Moses were always treated by them as written by Moses in Moses' own time. (Orthodox) Christians accept their timing of the writings. The fragmenting done by the modern scholars, made up completely out of their subjective impressions without any historical warrant whatever, is evil and will be judged by God in due time. I can hardly wait. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

It can't mean that because the Bible doesn't contradict itself.

YOU need to get a three year old to explain the difference between hearing the sound of a voice and hearing what the voice SAID.

What YOU don't get is that if you fully understood the context the numbers would make sense, AND that inerrancy doesn't refer to such things or those who came up with the concept WOULD HAVE NOTICED fer crying out loud. They aren't deaf and blind and needing YOU to come along and point out the obvious. What a bunch of arrogant knowitalls you debunkers are.You misuse the term "inerrancy" to mean something it doesn't mean. It means only that we can trust the MESSAGE to be the truth. It's the same thing as saying it's God's Word, God's communication to us. You are all swallowing camels while straining out gnats, tripping over inconsequentials trying to avoid the Truth.And we certainly DO know who wrote the writings of John and Matthew: John and Matthew did.

That's a bunch of revisionist hogwash. You know no such thing. The "two different portraits" are the product of an overactive imagination that DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO READ IN CONTEXT. Good grief!! Get off "likely" this that and the other. WHO is saying what's "likely" here, some self-appointed mindtwisters who sit around making stuff up out of their own subjective ditherings. Jesus acknowledged Noah and the Flood as real. Why are you believing the liars and debunkers?

The Bible does not contradict itself because it is the Word of God. That is where you start. If you don't start there you go off into deep darkness, which is where you and jar and others are going to end up.

He was born in the manger but He didn't stay there. When the wise men arrived they lived in a house. In fact putting time factors together leads to the strong possibility that this was a couple years later. It took them that long to get there from the East.

Two different events, not a contradiction/