Genesis 1 Vs Big Bang/String/Inflation and Darwinism

[other one]

the Bible contradicts itself from one translation to another so I don't buy that argument...... 

 

I'm not saying that there is nothing in the books that might not be totally accurate, but there are things in many modern translations that don't add up either....   so we are left with accepting the overall story and letting small things go.

 

 

But this is not the environment nor all the people reading to go into detail about this.   but I can't just sit by and let people totally reject what is recorded in this set of books

[Guest shiloh357]

Differences in translations don't amount to contradictions.  What we are talking about is contradictions of fact,   Enoch contradicts the Bible in that it treats Noah as a historical character, but the Bible says that Enoch was taken up to heaven years before Noah was born.  That means that Enoch could not have written about Noah as if he were in the past.  

 

So you need to provide an actual, genuine contradiction between translations if you want that argument to hold up.

[other one]

John 3:16

 

 

 

edited to add::::

 

It is my personal belief that either Noah or Shem penned the book to carry on the teachings of Enoch.     He had only been translated about 70 years before Noah was born and  both Mathusala and Lamech were alive when Enoch was on earth, and both were alive for the first six hundred years of Noah's life, and a bit over a hundred for Shem's.

 

Noah was alive for 50+ years after Abraham was born and Shem outlived Abraham by about 35 years....

 

 

So there was plenty of opportunity for qualified people to have recorded the teachings.

 

I don't have a problem with who wrote the books, neither do I have a problem not knowing who wrote Hebrews...

Edited January 22, 2015 by other one

[Enoch2021]

Differences in translations don't amount to contradictions.  What we are talking about is contradictions of fact,   Enoch contradicts the Bible in that it treats Noah as a historical character, but the Bible says that Enoch was taken up to heaven years before Noah was born.  That means that Enoch could not have written about Noah as if he were in the past.  

 

So you need to provide an actual, genuine contradiction between translations if you want that argument to hold up.

 

 

 

Differences in translations don't amount to contradictions.  What we are talking about is contradictions of fact,   Enoch contradicts the Bible...

 

 

When I pulled up the thread this was the first post I saw LOL.  I said, wait a second...he must be talking about another Enoch 

[Enoch2021]

John 3:16

 

 

 

edited to add::::

 

It is my personal belief that either Noah or Shem penned the book to carry on the teachings of Enoch.     He had only been translated about 70 years before Noah was born and  both Mathusala and Lamech were alive when Enoch was on earth, and both were alive for the first six hundred years of Noah's life, and a bit over a hundred for Shem's.

 

Noah was alive for 50+ years after Abraham was born and Shem outlived Abraham by about 35 years....

 

 

So there was plenty of opportunity for qualified people to have recorded the teachings.

 

I don't have a problem with who wrote the books, neither do I have a problem not knowing who wrote Hebrews...

 

 

 

I don't have a problem with who wrote the books, neither do I have a problem not knowing who wrote Hebrews...

 

 

 

Paul wrote it...we all know it.  If it acts, squawks, walks like a duck...it's a Duck.  

[Guest shiloh357]

Other one....   John 3:16?   Is there a contradiction in that between versions?  

 

Your speculations on Enoch being redacted by Noah or Shem doesn't really qualify as reliable fact. 

[other one]

Other one....   John 3:16?   Is there a contradiction in that between versions?  

 

Your speculations on Enoch being redacted by Noah or Shem doesn't really qualify as reliable fact. 

yes there is a contradiction....

 

Me guessing at who might be the author of Enoch is no different than me guessing who wrote Hebrews....     not knowing for sure doesn't disqualify either....   and since some of the early christian fathers consider the book reliable, I think I'll go along with them....   regardless of not knowing for sure who put it to pen.

[Guest shiloh357]

The author of Hebrews is irrelevant.  Can you show me this contradiction concerning John 3:16?

 

The early Christian fathers had a lot of ideas that I bet you would not go along with.  But since they believed that Enoch was canonical, and you NEED Enoch to support you extra-terrestrial conspiracy theories then of course, you'll go along with them.   Your position hasn't got anything to do with truth, it's just convenient for you.  

 

The problem is that the Book of Enoch demonstrably contradicts Scripture on a level that precludes it from being inspired by an all-knowing God who doesn't make historical errors, but  evidently, unfounded conspiracies based on questionable sources an no evidence, is more important than actually standing on biblical truth, right?

[other one]

The author of Hebrews is irrelevant.  Can you show me this contradiction concerning John 3:16?

 

The early Christian fathers had a lot of ideas that I bet you would not go along with.  But since they believed that Enoch was canonical, and you NEED Enoch to support you extra-terrestrial conspiracy theories then of course, you'll go along with them.   Your position hasn't got anything to do with truth, it's just convenient for you.  

 

The problem is that the Book of Enoch demonstrably contradicts Scripture on a level that precludes it from being inspired by an all-knowing God who doesn't make historical errors, but  evidently, unfounded conspiracies based on questionable sources an no evidence, is more important than actually standing on biblical truth, right?

LoL   my et conspiracies came from the book of Enoch not the reverse

 

And if you don't see the contradiction between the KJV and NIV....    my goodness...

 

 

and I ask again.......   who are you that I should discard so many of the early Church Fathers.

[Guest shiloh357]

From the NIV: " For God so loved the world that he gave His one and only son that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life."

 

From the KJV:  "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosover believeth upon Him should not perish but have everlasting life."

 

So....   Where I the "contradiction" in those two versions?    Can you show it to me?  I genuinely cannot see where one says the opposite of the other.

 

Yes, your conspiracies came from Enoch which is why you NEED it  to be true and inspired Scripture. 

 

It's not my authority v. the authority of the early Church Fathers. It's not me versus them...    It is the fact that Enoch squarely contradicts Scripture and it is THAT fact that stands opposed to the claims of the early church fathers.  It is a matter of taking their claim and squaring it against the facts that stand in opposition to their claims.

 

Your problem is that you want to accept their claims without investigation, without any verification that their claim has merit?   On what basis do accept their claim as true, other than the fact that they are early church fathers?   What material evidence outside your appeal to their authority makes their claim true?