Van Tillian/Clarkian Presuppositional Apologetics.

[Statler Waldorf]

You didn't look very hard. The NIV is a popular edition.
NIV GEN 2:5 Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground

The NIV is not a literal Bible translation.

Also, I note the lack of rain. That would also indicate the verse meant a lack of plant life, since ancient people surely knew rain was essential to plant growth.

Where in the text does it say the plants on the 3rd day grew any before the 6th day? All I see is that they were created.

KJV GEN 2:9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food;
Are trees that are pleasant to the sight considered "plants of the field"?

The term “Plants of the field” is used in verse 5, these in verse 9 are food bearing trees specifically designed for Adam, I see no problem here.

and what did Yahweh create on Day 3 again?

KJV GEN 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

"Tree yielding fruit" sounds like something farmers might cultivate.

So now the onus is on you to please demonstrate how God creating fruit trees on day 3 and causing fruit trees to grow from the ground for Adam on day 6 is an actual logical contradiction (x and not x in the same relationship and at the same time). I am not seeing any contradiction there.

Now what was lacking before Yahweh created man?

So herbs yielding seed and trees yielding fruit were growing on day 3 (chapter 1), except that they weren't yet on day 6 (chapter 2)?

Huh? Where does it say in verse 9 of Chapter 2 that there were no fruit bearing trees on Earth before man?

Does this satisfy your definition of a "contradiction"?

It does not satisfy the real definition of a contradiction (x and not x at the same time and in the same relationship).

Seems pretty clear to me. "First, I'll make animals. I made the animals. And I'll make humans. I made the humans."

KJV GEN 2:18-19 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air;

Also seems clear. "I made the man, but he's alone. I think I'll make animals."

Let me look at the verses and let me see if I see the same problems you seems to see…

24And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds—livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds." And it was so. 25And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
26Then God said, "Let us make man[h] in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."
27So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;

Ok, so God made animals, and then Man, it also says that God made the birds on day 3 which I didn’t quote, I am with you so far…

18Then the LORD God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for[e] him." 19 Now out of the ground the LORD God had formed[f] every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. 20The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field. But for Adam[g] there was not found a helper fit for him.

So it is clear that this verse says that even though God had created animals (before Adam) and birds (before Adam) and had brought them to Adam to be named there were none there suitable to be Adam’s companion, so God created woman. Oh shucks, it looks like this verse matches up with Chapter 1! I guess you will have to do better.

Any of these contradictions count as contradictions in your book?

They wouldn’t count as contradictions in any textbook on logic either.

Argument from silence, you have any evidence to support this claim?

You are the one claiming that the Bible is inerrant. When you find translation and copying errors today, you have cause to suspect translation and copying errors in ancient times.

Still an argument from silence, you are appealing to the existence of errors you have no evidence of ever occurring.

At the very least, your interpretation isn't "clear" to me.

I have plenty of commentaries on the book of Peter, and they are far better than your “interpretation” of the book thank you. Romans 1 will tell you why it is not clear to you. When Peter is talking to the elect and uses the word “all” it pertains to the elect because it is a word that’s scope is defined by context. You will have to do better.

Read the whole chapter and the one before that. Paul describes himself as the worst of sinners and yet Jesus showed him mercy and called him to preach to others. After my quoted verse, he goes on to say that Jesus died for ALL men.

Again, I have commentaries on the book that explain it in greater detail than you understand it.

Nope, Paul’s letter is to the elect, since all is a word whose scope is determined by context Jesus died for all of the elect who are taken from all types of men.

What contributions? Aside from being the worst disaster humanity has ever suffered, from the destruction of classical civilization to the thousand years of ignorance to the road blocks to progress today.

Yeah because modern science and democracy are terrible things aren’t they? Lay off the Kool Aid for once.

You are quick to call me a liar. I've found people who make spurious accusations are often projecting but perhaps you have reasons you'd like to articulate.

More of just an intellectual liar, you purposely ignoring the definition of “contradiction” gives me more than enough evidence.

See above for starters.

I didn’t see it there.

Can you prove that the disciples and apostles were persecuted?

It is a historically accepted fact that they were.

Can you prove that these people knew it was a forgery as they were being persecuted?

No, they knew it was true because they witnessed Christ’s miracles and Him walking the earth after His death, burial, and resurrection.

You are the one asserting that they made it all up and would therefore know it was all a lie as they were being executed for claiming to believe in it. Pretty farfetched really.

No it doesn't.

Yes it does. If you keep just appealing to your own opinion I will keep just throwing mine back at you.

Strange how science has done just fine in examining and proving things for the last few hundred years without any assumptions about God.

That’s because scientists live in a world created and governed by the God of scripture and hold assumptions that could only be true in such a world. You don’t have to believe in the existence of air in order to breathe, but air has to exist in order to breathe.