There are no mistakes or errors in the Bible. Every Science book that has ever been written confirms that the Bible is accurate and true. There is one book called an infidel Bible that disputes that. This is based on reprobate thinking. Infidels do not use sound reason or logic. This is why they have to reject Science.
Science confirms the Bible and the Bible confirms science. So you can not reject one without rejecting the other. The Bible is the word or the Expression of God.
15 comments
OK, shall we pass the hat and send John a bible? Or should we make it a science book instead? I have some of both of them available, free to a good home.
I guess we should first check to see if he can read.
That bit where the sky is solid and rain comes from windows in the sky that God opens to let the Water Above come down? That is, scientifically speaking, total BS.
The bit where God assures us that he's the only thing keeping clouds from falling apart from the weight of the water they carry? According to science, clouds are MADE of water, not holding it. More BS.
The bit where solid-color goats looking at striped sticks have striped babies? Pretty much BS.
Here's the key to this bullshit: "Every Science book that has ever been written confirms that the Bible is accurate and true."
There are no mistakes or errors in the Bible.
OK, what is the order of creation? Were Adam and Eve created simultaneously or separately? How do you reconcile Genesis 1 and Genesis 2?
Who visited Jesus' tomb on Easter morning and what did they find? The Resurrection is the central point of Christianity -- why can't the Gospels agree on this major point?
There are many contradictions and non-scientific things in the Bible. Every science book that has ever been written has more sound science than the Bible has.
Religion is not based on sound reason or logic, but science is.
Was man created first and then animals, or the other way around?
Why does God have three words? He "inspired" the Torah, then he "inspired" the Bible, then he "inspired" the Quran. Then he fell silent. Apparently he was most satisfied with the Quran...
It really gets annoying when they just keep parroting this crap their preacher tells them and never bother to even briefly think about if it's true or not. There's not one science book which confirms a story about a talking snake.
If science confirms the bible and the bible confirms science, why are so many Christians up in arms over evolution and the Big Bang theory? Why do they reject an old earth and insist upon a 6,000 year old universe? Why do some of them even claim the earth is flat because it says so in the bible?
@Doubting Thomas
C'mon, you've been here a while. You know that evolutionism isn't real science, it's all based on faith in the great prophet Darwin!
Basically, this guy is like so many other. If it disagrees with his bible, then it's not real science. Therefore, when you take the stuff that does agree with the bible as science, it turns out that science agrees with the bible.
This is unfortunately not a special kind of stupid. It's all too common.
@Thinking Allowed, as far as those, animals that "chew their cud" may be a translation and understanding error, and is simply supposed to refer to herbivores. I could be wrong. But even if I'm right . . . swine is referred to as "chewing their cud", and they are not herbivores, so it's wrong either way.
Although, in the case of rabbits, it could refer to them eating their soft feces, as well, who knows.
Other than that . . . yeah, bats are not birds, and there isn't one single four-legged insect in existence, nor do any fossils show the probability there ever was.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
