Absolute truth and human understanding

[Tiberius]

Just digressing slightly from the thread, Daystar makes a similar statement on another forum:

'The Bible isn't a science book but when it touches on subjects related to science it is correct.'

It is his inability to realise that if you are to make such a statement without backing it up with evidence, or proof, you will not be y aken seriously.

He only has that view because he picks and chooses his science, and has reinterpreted the Bible into his own version that he reckons is perfect. I don't doubt that his version is more accurate in some parts, but to claim that it is a perfect translation is to assume that there were no changes made to the oldest original copy we have got, and also that his translating is spot on (which it may or may not be seeing as he doesn't have any academic status in ancient languages).