🚀 go-pugleaf

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 19:23:37 -0500, Antares 531
<gordonlrDELETE@swbell.net> wrote in alt.atheism:

>On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 00:14:35 +0100, The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c>
>wrote:
>
>>Antares 531 wrote:
>>> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 23:17:41 +0100, The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Antares 531 wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 07:15:08 -0700, ben_dolan_III@reet.com (Ben Dolan)
>>>>> wrote:
>>> (snip)
>>>>> Ben, there is an ABUNDANCE of evidence that God exists, 
>>>> Which God though?
>>>>
>>> The One whose prophecies are repeatedly and accurately fulfilled. 
>>
>>OH, you mean a SCIENTIST.
>>
>>I thought we were talking religion..
>>
>The Word of God is NOT in disagreement with any reliable scientific
>knowledge. The confusion on this is caused by the way The Word of God
>was given to humans. 

Then the Bible is not the Word of God.

>The Word of God had to be given to us such that those primitive people
>could grasp the basic meaning, and also pass the information along
>from generation to generation among illiterate people, with little
>drift. Allegories, parables, similes, etc., are the way this was
>achieved.

Tell that to the Christians today who worship the Bible.

>Also, The Word of God had to be given to those early humans such that
>they would have the same advantages that we have, today. That is, no
>favoritism was shown by presenting the information in a form that only
>a modern scientifically educated person could understand.   Gordon

Please point to anything in Genesis that is demonstrably correct.