[freedumb2003]

There really is no need for a long drawn out debate, the foundations of what we are speaking of are clear as glass.

Yes, you have your lay opinions, I have my knowledge-based ones. I mean these as no harm to you my friend. It is simply fact. You feel that the literal interpretation of the Bible is a lie and a mistranslation.

I never said the Bible is a lie. You are now guilty of doing what you accused me of earlier(which I successfully countered) -- putting words in my mouth.

I feel it is the accurate and truthful account of creation recorded and presented to us by God so that we may know and not be deceived by people like Human Evolutionists.

But does your scholarship support your position? It is, indeed a truthful theological account of the relationship between God and Man.

In order to keep your beliefs, you must rewrite the Bible.

I need only read it in its source language and interpret it according to the language used to pen it.

In order to keep mine, I leave the Bible as it is.

I asked before -- you read and interpreted the Bible in its original language? That is "as it is." Anything beyond that (such as the King James version, as lovely as it is) is just you reading the interpretation of the interpreters.

Looking at those two sentences, I like my choice better.

But, my Friend, you again present a false dichotomy. Your English language Bible is 4 or maybe 5 times removed from the original language. Apparently simple words, such as "day" need to be viewed not only linguistically but anthropologically.

If you think I am being silly, look at the simple word "gay" -- if you read a missive in 1920: "he was a gay man" and read a missive in 1990: "he was a gay man" you know these would be quite different.

If you were reading these sentences in 3009, would you know the difference?

I learned enough Hebrew and Aramaic to slog through Genesis (I and II and am still waiting for you to explain the inconsistencies) -- not easy and I don't even have the subtleties (or not subtleties worked out yet).

I guess I am waiting for more than "'cause I said." You clearly have though a lot about this. I invite you to provide a bit of scholarship to explain your conclusions.

[Jaime2099]

My opinions are from the literal translation of the Bible by people 1 million times more qualified to translate it than you or I. If you think you are smarter and more adept at translation than them, then kid yourself all you want.

My reasons are not "because I said", they are because the Bible said it. Your beliefs are based on a translation of the Bible that isn't even accepted, if it were, it would have been placed in the Bible. Your arguments for your own beliefs are built on sand foundations and a whole lot of guessing.