RE: Can Christianity explain how animals are so locationally diverse
July 10, 2012 at 7:04 pm
(This post was last modified: July 10, 2012 at 7:08 pm by Drich.)
[quote='teaearlgreyhot' pid='308592' dateline='1341960282']
[quote]Really? Wow. Shame God allowed all those translators and interpreters to get it wrong all these thousands of years.[/quote]
seriously? You believe this descrepency existed for thousands of years? Or are you saying that God had the bible orginally recorded in the king James version?
[quote]You know, you may think you're serving God by trying to argue that almost every traditional interpretation of a passage that gets posted here is incorrect based upon some faulty translation of a single word or two, but you're really furthering the case against Christianity.[/quote]Noah's Ark has nothing to do with the day to day of Christianity. It is OT Judism. If you talk or study under someone who studies these passages in more than the King James English, you will quickly find little quarky things like, No one but the westernized 'church' has these problems with translation. For they do their own research and understand the fact that when text is translated that things are left out of a literal translation, for the sake contextual continuity. the problem lies with the culture who does not read their bibles, or they believe that the language they were born speaking is and always was the standard of the world. So their is no need to look any deeper than what is on the page of a literal translation. (No commentary or explaination)
[quote]Every time you discover some ingenious new interpretation of a passage, you're just uncovering more evidence of God's failure to communicate properly his own word.[/quote]
Or i am discovering the lazy efforts of people wanting to find or invent reasons not to believe in God. The fact that their is a deeper meaning that destroyes supposed contradictions, points to a God!
[quote='aleialoura' pid='308582' dateline='1341958249']
[quote]Let me get this straight... you're arguing that Australia wasn't inhabited during the time of the alleged global flood, and you'r also arguing that Australia didn't flood because there were no wicked men there?
Ummm.... [/quote]
Actually no. i simply point to a contextual defination that says the word "earth" does not mean global. It simply means occupied land.
then I gave two possiable reason why (It was an either/or example)
[quote]Really? Wow. Shame God allowed all those translators and interpreters to get it wrong all these thousands of years.[/quote]
seriously? You believe this descrepency existed for thousands of years? Or are you saying that God had the bible orginally recorded in the king James version?
[quote]You know, you may think you're serving God by trying to argue that almost every traditional interpretation of a passage that gets posted here is incorrect based upon some faulty translation of a single word or two, but you're really furthering the case against Christianity.[/quote]Noah's Ark has nothing to do with the day to day of Christianity. It is OT Judism. If you talk or study under someone who studies these passages in more than the King James English, you will quickly find little quarky things like, No one but the westernized 'church' has these problems with translation. For they do their own research and understand the fact that when text is translated that things are left out of a literal translation, for the sake contextual continuity. the problem lies with the culture who does not read their bibles, or they believe that the language they were born speaking is and always was the standard of the world. So their is no need to look any deeper than what is on the page of a literal translation. (No commentary or explaination)
[quote]Every time you discover some ingenious new interpretation of a passage, you're just uncovering more evidence of God's failure to communicate properly his own word.[/quote]
Or i am discovering the lazy efforts of people wanting to find or invent reasons not to believe in God. The fact that their is a deeper meaning that destroyes supposed contradictions, points to a God![quote='aleialoura' pid='308582' dateline='1341958249']
[quote]Let me get this straight... you're arguing that Australia wasn't inhabited during the time of the alleged global flood, and you'r also arguing that Australia didn't flood because there were no wicked men there?
Ummm.... [/quote]
Actually no. i simply point to a contextual defination that says the word "earth" does not mean global. It simply means occupied land.
then I gave two possiable reason why (It was an either/or example)
