U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
Old 06-03-2009, 10:46 PM
1,932 posts, read 4,464,556 times
Reputation: 1240


Originally Posted by Dusty Rhodes View Post
Certainly sounds like Sophistry to me!
My, my, such a diverse vocabulary. I don't believe it is at all.

Originally Posted by talbet View Post
This is total BS...<snip>
This is more the verbage I'm used to when I answer a question regarding biblical text. Again, I don't believe it is at all.

A reasonable and logical answer is provided, by a believer, and it is dismissed out of hand. No further inquiry as to how I arrived at my answer. No further polite discussion just an automatic disregard. Atheists have an entire thread about how believers don't like to hear logic. When one uses logic, it's brushed aside. Because, of course, we all know if it's in the bible it cannot possibly be true and believers are illogical . That's fine by me. I am confident in my reply. I'll let my answer stand and say no more about it .

Let me just say, in general, that if an apparent contradiction is pointed out and a reasonable and logical response is provided that resolves the apparent contradiction, then the contradiction can be no more, whether or not the answer is "acceptable". The answer provided does not go against scripture or reason and is a sound answer. Just because one doesn't like it has no bearing on its veracity.

Originally Posted by alanMolstad View Post
This is correct!

You have a good understanding of the text.

(and your good manners show you have allowed the teachings of the Bible to sink into your heart)
I'm glad you agree. Thank you. I try my best to be respectful.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Old 06-07-2009, 11:05 PM
22 posts, read 29,114 times
Reputation: 13
I have a different idea. In Genesis 1, animals are created before man. In Genesis 2, beasts of the field are created after man. Science does say that there were some animals (and plants created after man) it also says these (esp. plants) can't exist without man to tend them. The Bible says that they didn't exist because there was no man to tend them. They are domesticated plants and domesticated animals. If you follow the four rivers and the region where wild wheat and wild figs grew, it is only a small area in southern Turkey. There is a mountain there with four rivers. It is the mountain where scientists say wheat was domesticated. The Bible and science agree that there were two creations of animals, the wild and the domesticated, and they agree where they were domesticated. Sheep, Goats, Cattle, and Pigs were all domesticated near to the mountain. See: Home ‎(gardenofeden)‎
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:19 PM.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top