Just been reading Genesis

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
lol, not only is it scientifically accurate, but i can prove it!

Of course you cannot prove it! 🙂 How would you do that?

You mean, you're not joking? 😕

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
lol, not only is it scientifically accurate, but i can prove it!

Maybe you can prove it, but you wont. The moment someone questions anything you say you will find some excuse for why you no longer wish to continue the discussion.

Originally posted by jaywill
I would encourage you to keep reading. And I would say do not be concerned with not understanding everything the first time through.

Has anyone ever understood it even after multiple readings? If they understand it, are they able to explain it? I am yet to meet anyone willing to explain it to me. Those I have asked invariably fall back on "go read it yourself and pray for the Holy spirit to guide you".
It is just that I question the 'understanding' of someone who is unable to communicate what they understand.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
please ignore the rather boisterous and humorous tone of these jokers, its an excellent book which sets a precedent for the rest of the entire bible. it contains the first prophecy which finds fulfillment in the very last book of the bible, it outlines Gods original purpose for the earth, which incidentally has not changed, and so many other good an ...[text shortened]... forum could broaden their minds, they too may find it not only enjoyable but enriching as well!

why is the creation process chronologically accurate? why was there a night and a day before the sun was created? why where the plants created before the sun? did god realized that the weeds needed sunlight to grow and then made a sun?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Has anyone ever understood it even after multiple readings? If they understand it, are they able to explain it? I am yet to meet anyone willing to explain it to me. Those I have asked invariably fall back on "go read it yourself and pray for the Holy spirit to guide you".
It is just that I question the 'understanding' of someone who is unable to communicate what they understand.

look you muppets, read the post that i sent to the penguin dude and then get back to me, if you still have your faith in the 'god of science', by the end of it, dig, y'all 😛

Originally posted by Penguin
You may recall I mentioned considering stealing a bible from a hotel and was pondering the moral ramifications.

Well, I decided the ramifications would be minimal and easily waved away, so I 'alf-inched' it. I have now read Genesis up to 25-the death of Abraham and my initial thought is "Wow!".

Anyone care to discuss?

--- Penguin.

Almost all bibles in American hotels and motels are put there and stocked by a Christian group of men called the Gideon s. I know a few personally. They are very glad and happy if you take the bible.

They make semi regular rounds to the hotels and motels and always make sure they have enough bibles for all rooms with extras. And they have enough money donated to do so. If you feel guilty about it, the address to the Gideon s should be stamped inside the bible cover somewhere. You can always send them 5 or 10 bucks. So read on. 🙂

Originally posted by KingDavid403
Almost all bibles in American hotels and motels are put there and stocked by a Christian group of men called the Gideon s. I know a few personally. They are very glad and happy if you take the bible.

They make semi regular rounds to the hotels and motels and always make sure they have enough bibles for all rooms with extras. And they have enough ...[text shortened]... mped inside the bible cover somewhere. You can always send them 5 or 10 bucks. So read on. 🙂

I think they would do a far better service if they placed assorted and varied works of literature, science and philosophy.

But its probably much harder to get funding for that.

--- Penguin.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
dude what copy do you have, because there truly is quite a staggering difference as to accuracy of translation, i bet if its from a hotel that its a Gideons bible, no?

Yup, Gideons.

So I went to BibleGateway.com and looked at Genesis 2:19 on all 18 English translations of the OT.

7 of them said had in the past tense, the rest were in the present tense. Mine is clearly in the minority. However, this does beg a question: I looked at 1:24, where they all say that God created the animals. So he created them, and then in response to Man's loneliness, he creates them again. This makes no sense.

So which version is the universally recognised correct, unambiguous, error-free English translation pray tell?

--- Penguin.

KJ, I will continue to read.

Originally posted by Penguin
Yup, Gideons.

So I went to BibleGateway.com and looked at Genesis 2:19 on all 18 English translations of the OT.

7 of them said [b]had in the past tense, the rest were in the present tense. Mine is clearly in the minority. However, this does beg a question: I looked at 1:24, where they all say that God created the animals. So he created them uous, error-free English translation pray tell?

--- Penguin.

KJ, I will continue to read.[/b]

I would suggest reading the New King James version. Or NIV version, I find a couple problems with NIV, but nothing to major.
Also If you're really interested, I would suggest reading and studying the new testament first. Then go to the old testament.
It's like learning basic math first, then the algebra.

Originally posted by KingDavid403
I would suggest reading the New King James version. Or NIV version, But I find a couple problems with NIV, but nothing to major.
Also If you're really interested, I would suggest reading and studying the new testament first. Then go to the old testament.

how can you say this, man he was king of Scotland for goodness sake, he tried to ban soccer and make us play golf and drink tea instead of whiskey and all sorts of horrors. the Bible that bears his name has 329 archaic or obscure word and meanings (http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/kjvwords.html) and i am sure it has mythical creatures like unicorns etc and the problem with biblical versions like Gideons/goodnews Bibles etc is that they are not actual translations from the original Hebrew and Greek but mere free translations (paraprases), which seeks to convey the original flavour but are not always textually accurate, in my opinion the NIV is a very sterile, characterless and cold translation, probably you are best sticking with the KJ version while you gain experience until you hit on a translation that you deem to be accurate and readable.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
how can you say this, man he was king of Scotland for goodness sake, he tried to ban soccer and make us play golf and drink tea instead of whiskey and all sorts of horrors. the Bible that bears his name has 329 archaic or obscure word and meanings (http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/kjvwords.html) and i am sure it has mythical creatures like ...[text shortened]... le you gain experience until you hit on a translation that you deem to be accurate and readable.

lol, you're a nut. The new King James version is just a more modern English version of the old King James version.
The old King James version was written in 1611. And the English they used to write it then was the older dialect of English even for 1611.
It's Very accurate tho. King James hired the best scholars of that day from around the world to translate from the Greek and Hebrew texts to English.

Originally posted by KingDavid403
I would suggest reading the New King James version. Or NIV version, I find a couple problems with NIV, but nothing to major.
Also If you're really interested, I would suggest reading and studying the new testament first. Then go to the old testament.
It's like learning basic math first, then the algebra.

Go for it.

" ... varied works of literature, science and philosophy... ".

You could probably rip some off in some waiting rooms or lounges.

Wouldn't that be more profitable to you ?

Originally posted by KingDavid403
lol, you're a nut. The new King James version is just a more modern English version of the old King James version.
The old King James version was written in 1611. And the English they used to write it then was the older dialect of English even for 1611.
It's Very accurate tho. King James hired the best scholars of that day from around the world to translate from the Greek and Hebrew texts to English.

sorry my mistake, i never realized there was a new king james version - respect to you king David

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
sorry my mistake, i never realized there was a new king james version - respect to you king David

No problem. 😉🙂

Originally posted by KingDavid403
It's Very accurate tho. King James hired the best scholars of that day from around the world to translate from the Greek and Hebrew texts to English.

It's very accurate for the scholarship of that day, this is true. It was a monumental achievement.

However, it's woefully less accurate than most of the modern translations which utilize the newly-
discovered ancient authorities. The New King James edition fails to incorporate these new texts,
which makes it the worst modern translation available.

Nemesio