Yo!

[Satt]

Welcome! If you want some good diversity in your life, I would highly recommend joining the military. I was able to get out of my little town at 19 and when I got out, I was able to get a 4-year degree on the G.I. Bill. Now I am 33, I have a great engineering job, and I have lived and traveled all over the world. I am only saying this because you sound like you don't really enjoy being trapped in your small town. Best of luck!  :)

Thanks for the suggestion, Satt. It's definitely something I've researched in the past. I wouldn't mind researching it again, but I would have to gain major upper body strength before I attempt to enlist. What branch where you in, and which branch would you recommend?

You don't need to worry about your upper body strenth. They will take care of that in basic training. I was in the US Navy for six years. I would highly recommend the Navy IF you are single and plan to stay that way for a while. Otherwise, I would recommend the Air Force.

[the_antithesis]

Yo yo

[mykcob4]

Hey, my name is Will. Just awkwardly introducing myself....

Things about me:

*I love road cycling
*I'm in the process of changing my degree to an associates in Communications (originally Business Administration - Hr management)
*I've lived in the same house (in the country) for my whole life (19 years).
*I'm a Christian

I'm in the awkward stage in life where all my friends from high school are going to colleges in other states (sometimes even different countries) so in real life I don't really have anyone to talk to anymore. And I live in the country in the middle of nowhere so it's not like I can go out and readily meet new people. So I'd love to make some new friends here!

So in your logical assessment you decide that the best way to make friends is, as a christian to join an Atheist website. Hmmm.....can't fault that logic.

[will power]

Are you a Young Earth Creationist?

I'm one of the few Christians who would say "I don't give a crap" about this aspect. It's not important to know how long ago the universe really was made or how long it took God to create it. What matters is if God did or did not create it. Arguing about this just becomes moaning and groaning over something pointless.

Is the Bible the inerrant word of God?

I would say the original manuscripts would be the inerrant word of God. We don't necessarily have the first documents written by the original authors, however, we have New Testament documents dating back to the early hundreds (p[sup:121jmvje]64[/sup:121jmvje] which is located at Magdalen College, Oxford). A few of the oldest surviving copies of Paul's letters are dated back to 200 AD (p[sup:121jmvje]46[/sup:121jmvje] which is located at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor). And there are hundreds of more documents in the following cities: Allentown, Ann Arbor, Athos, Barcelona, Basel, Berkeley, Berlin, Cario, Cambridge (england), Cambridge (Massachusetts), Colonge, Cologny, Dallas, Dubulin, Florence, Gent, Glasgow, etc etc etc, you get the picture. The main idea I'm trying to tell you is that we have pretty accurate manuscripts that are practically originals. Now that I've said that, there are minor edits in our current day Bibles, which is why I believe the original documents are in fact the 100% true inerrant word of God. But what we have today is pretty close to the manuscripts we have today, just minor edits that don't take away from the meaning of the big picture.

Do you believe in evolution?

Same as first answer. Also, if you're an Atheist, I'm surprised by the wording of this question.

So in your logical assessment you decide that the best way to make friends is, as a christian to join an Atheist website. Hmmm.....can't fault that logic.

So what you're saying is that I'm confined to my Christian bubble to make friends. Can't fault that logic. :p Also, I never said it was the best way to make friends. As I said in an earlier post, I frequent a Christian forum that I also moderate, so I have plenty of acquaintances. I'm just expanding my online social circle. Your first post to me seems to be a straw man argument. *makes mental note*

[Solitary]

I would say the original manuscripts would be the inerrant word of God.

That would be an example of a fallacy in logic called a Slothful Induction because the strong conclusion of your inductive argument is denied despite the evidence to the contrary. This would also hold true for every bible ever written, not just the original that actually leaves out a lot of the first manuscripts.

Examples of errors in the bible:


2 Samuel 23:8
These be the names of the mighty men whom David had: The Tachmonite that sat in the seat, chief among the captains; the same was Adino the Eznite: he lift up his spear against eight hundred, whom he slew at one time. (KJV)

These are the names of David's mighty men: Josheb-Basshebeth, a Tahkemonite, was chief of the Three; he raised his spear against eight hundred men, whom he killed in one encounter. (NIV)

These are the names of the mighty men whom David had: Josheb-basshe'beth a Tah-che'monite; he was chief of the three; he wielded his spear against eight hundred whom he slew at one time. (RSV)

1 Chronicles 11:11
And this is the number of the mighty men whom David had; Jashobeam, an Hachmonite, the chief of the captains: he lifted up his spear against three hundred slain by him at one time. (KJV)

this is the list of David's mighty men: Jashobeam, a Hacmonite, was chief of the officers; he raised his spear against three hundred men, whom he killed in one encounter. (NIV)

This is an account of David's mighty men: Jasho'be-am, a Hach'monite, was chief of the three; he wielded his spear against three hundred whom he slew at one time. (RSV)

Matthew 21:19-20
And when he saw a fig tree in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever. And presently the fig tree withered away. And when the disciples saw it, they marvelled, saying, How soon is the fig tree withered away!

Mark 11:13-14, 20-21
And seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he came, if haply he might find any thing thereon: and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves; for the time of figs was not yet. And Jesus answered and said unto it, No man eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever. And his disciples heard it. ... And in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots. And Peter calling to remembrance saith unto him, Master, behold, the fig tree which thou cursedst is withered away.
Solitary

[Plu]

So... the original bible is the inerrant word of god, and in the original bible in the very first chapter god created the universe in the wrong order (by creating the plants before the sun, which would be logically impossible) and you say that bickering about whether the earth is 6000 or 4.500.000.000 years old is pointless (that's quite a margin of error there; a factor of about 750.000) and the same for evolution (creating everything whole or creating everything from micro-organisms over the course of billions of years is also quite a difference)

So clearly we can't take anything in it literally and most of the stuff that happens is down-right impossible or illogical. What reason do you have to claim that despite all that, it's inerrant? And how do you know which parts to follow as true and which parts to ignore? The bible seems to condone slavery, for example. Most people clearly don't. The bible also says to kill people who work on sunday. Not being allowed to work on sunday is even in the ten commandments, so apparently even those can't be taken literally. I guess it's a good thing we have actual, rational reasons not to kill and steal, otherwise everyone would probably ignore those as well.

I'd love to hear how you determine for yourself which parts of the bible to follow, which to change, and which to ignore. And whether or not that brings you closer to the original manuscripts (unlikely) or takes you even further away from them. And what makes you think you know better than god, whose "inerrant word" you are clearly ignoring when you do so.

[WitchSabrina]

So... the original bible is the inerrant word of god, and in the original bible in the very first chapter god created the universe in the wrong order (by creating the plants before the sun, which would be logically impossible) and you say that bickering about whether the earth is 6000 or 4.500.000.000 years old is pointless (that's quite a margin of error there; a factor of about 750.000) and the same for evolution (creating everything whole or creating everything from micro-organisms over the course of billions of years is also quite a difference)

So clearly we can't take anything in it literally and most of the stuff that happens is down-right impossible or illogical. What reason do you have to claim that despite all that, it's inerrant? And how do you know which parts to follow as true and which parts to ignore? The bible seems to condone slavery, for example. Most people clearly don't. The bible also says to kill people who work on sunday. Not being allowed to work on sunday is even in the ten commandments, so apparently even those can't be taken literally. I guess it's a good thing we have actual, rational reasons not to kill and steal, otherwise everyone would probably ignore those as well.

I'd love to hear how you determine for yourself which parts of the bible to follow, which to change, and which to ignore. And whether or not that brings you closer to the original manuscripts (unlikely) or takes you even further away from them. And what makes you think you know better than god, whose "inerrant word" you are clearly ignoring when you do so.

[will power]

So... the original bible is the inerrant word of god, and in the original bible in the very first chapter god created the universe in the wrong order (by creating the plants before the sun, which would be logically impossible) and you say that bickering about whether the earth is 6000 or 4.500.000.000 years old is pointless

It is pointless. Knowing the order of things made has no effect on your life. Does it feed the poor? Does knowledge of the order of the beginning of the universe help the homeless? Then why dwell on it if it's not beneficial? We can't truly know the order unless you were there. You have to have some faith while listening to scientists, too. They can formulate hypothesis and theories, (yes, I've heard it over and over that "A Scientific theory is different from an ignorant man's theory") but in the end they can't know for certainty. Also, as you've all heard before and reject time and time again, nothing is impossible with God (unless it contradicts his nature). So, the plant argument is nonsensical.

and the same for evolution (creating everything whole or creating everything from micro-organisms over the course of billions of years is also quite a difference)

Of course that's a big difference in years. However, I still fail to see your logic that it's beneficial to argue about.

So clearly we can't take anything in it literally and most of the stuff that happens is down-right impossible or illogical.

"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD." Isaiah 55:8

What reason do you have to claim that despite all that, it's inerrant?

Those arguments are poor and overused, so I fail to see how you "disproved" its inerrantsy.

And how do you know which parts to follow as true and which parts to ignore?

Old testament = Old Covenant. Old = No longer followed. New testament = Our current covenant. We follow what was set before us to follow in today's world.

The bible seems to condone slavery, for example.

Again, poor argument. And a little bit of a straw man. It doesn't condone slavery at all. It says how slaves should be treated, and it tells us if you can gain your freedom, do so (1 Corinthains 7:21) Plus you have to look at slavery in Biblical terms. Slaves in the Bible days weren't as the slaves in the United States while slavery was going on. This article explains it better than I can. http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html

The bible also says to kill people who work on sunday.

Another poor argument. First off, The old testament was aimed at the holy city only (Israel). Second, the Sabbath isn't Sunday (surprised you didn't know that). The Sabbath is Saturday. We worship God on Sunday because that's the day when most Christians believe Christ was risen. Once again, "Old" means that it no longer has command over our lives, the New Testament does.

And what makes you think you know better than god, whose "inerrant word" you are clearly ignoring when you do so.

Straw man argument. Seems to be a common theme here so far in this forum. :p

Quote me where I say "I know better than God whose word is Inerrant".

Sorry, but I wouldn't classify this as the best post of the thread. Too many holes and easily explainable overused arguments.

[WitchSabrina]

Oh. My. Goodness.

 :shock:

[Plu]

Does it feed the poor?

Uh... yes. Science accounts for probably 95% of the world's food production, and it's based entirely on knowing stuff. It's incredibly vital to know and understand the order of things. If we didn't do that, we'd still be living in caves.


EDIT: here's a simple test. Look around you. Find 1 object in your room that hasn't been made or improved somehow by people applying science.
(If you have one, you might end up at "this plant", and you'd still be wrong because pretty much all plants have been grown by humans to be prettier or smell better)

So yeah; "bickering" about the big questions of the universe is definately having an impact on your life. It's just that science simply works, so you don't have to understand how it's doing what it does for it to do what it does, which leads some people to believe that science matters less than it does.

[mykcob4]

So in your logical assessment you decide that the best way to make friends is, as a christian to join an Atheist website. Hmmm.....can't fault that logic.

So what you're saying is that I'm confined to my Christian bubble to make friends. Can't fault that logic. :p Also, I never said it was the best way to make friends. As I said in an earlier post, I frequent a Christian forum that I also moderate, so I have plenty of acquaintances. I'm just expanding my online social circle. Your first post to me seems to be a straw man argument. *makes mental note*[/quote]Straw man? Not really. I question christians that come on this forum and forums like this. They tend to spam a great deal. Then they tend to proslytize. At any rate they won't conform to logic, instead they quote scripture and deny facts. I am suspicious of that with all new posters, especially the christian ones whether they reveal their christian belief or not.
As far as being advised to join the military. I am a retired vet, and I would not recommend joining the military for purely monitary reasons. It's called the service for a reason. I joined because I felt the need to serve my nation. I wasn't ultra patriotic or extremely macho. I didn't join to be a hero or become macho. I heeded the call of President Kennedy to serve others and the best way for me to do that was to join the service. I found myself many times in situations that compromised my principles (Reagan, Bush I & II), but overall I was happy that I served this nation. I believe that college is the gateway to success. I wished I had finish college before I had joined but I was able to finish during and after I retired. My favorite pathway is to finish school get a worthwhile degree and join the Peace Corps. It is very difficult but having the Peace Corps on your resume is like graduating from an Ivy League school. Plus the experience is invaluable. Don't think you can achieve that with a communication degree. Your degree plan is suited for sales, maybe HR.
I have, believe it or not, a few christian friends. They understand that freedom of religion is an individual right not a community or social right. They understand the bible quote " render under Ceaser that which is Ceasers." They also hold the bible tenet Mathew 6:6, which explains that praying publicly god will not hear you, that prayer is a private conversation. Not to pray for things, but to pray for forgiveness and understanding. My favorite christians are my neighbors that graduated from Baylor. They seem to be well adjusted, well rounded, well grounded, well educated people. My SMU, OU, A&M, and TCU neighbors are flat out batshit crazy. Especially the OU crowd.
So if you think my OP was a strawman, sobeit. I can't help paranoia, or insecurity in your own belief.

[mykcob4]

BTW Yo just how have christians fed the poor and taken care of the homeless without charging them for it? There is always a cost and in the case of christianity it is usually your obedience, your freedom of thought, and sometimes the threat of death and or slavery.

[Hijiri Byakuren]

It is pointless. Knowing the order of things made has no effect on your life.

Best get rid of your computer, your television, your smartphone, the lock on your door... your door... see where I'm going with this?

Does it feed the poor? Does knowledge of the order of the beginning of the universe help the homeless?

So runaway capitalism is stupid, and according to you this is somehow science's fault. Brilliant logic there.

Then why dwell on it if it's not beneficial?

Because it is. You're just too blind to see that without science, being "poor and homeless" would be the state of all human beings on the planet. Science can't solve every problem on its own, but it's a damn sight better than living in caves!

We can't truly know the order unless you were there. You have to have some faith while listening to scientists, too. They can formulate hypothesis and theories, (yes, I've heard it over and over that "A Scientific theory is different from an ignorant man's theory") but in the end they can't know for certainty.

You and I have very different definitions of faith:

faith  
/f?TH/
Noun
1. Complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
2. Strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
Synonyms
belief - trust - confidence - credence - credit

I hold no degree beyond my AA currently, but I have enough faith in the scientific community to think that most scientists know what they're talking about, absolute certainty or no. It has also taught me that anyone claiming absolute certainty tends to know very little, if anything at all.

Also, as you've all heard before and reject time and time again, nothing is impossible with God (unless it contradicts his nature). So, the plant argument is nonsensical.

lol. "Nothing is impossible with God, except when it is." Pure gold right there. Also, you have said absolutely nothing to contradict the plant argument.

Of course that's a big difference in years. However, I still fail to see your logic that it's beneficial to argue about.

I once read a book about how to apply the theory of evolution to medical science. It really is amazing how much doctors try to fight the body instead of working with it, simply because many of them don't think to understand why the body has the systems it has (or in the US, because many of them were not educated in evolution theory at all).

"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD." Isaiah 55:8

A supreme being would know how to make itself understood to us mere mortals, especially if it created us and presumably knows what makes us tick. The quote is therefore meaningless, and only helps to show that your religion is bullshit.

Those arguments are poor and overused, so I fail to see how you "disproved" its inerrantsy.

Translation: I know it's bullshit and won't try to tell you otherwise, olololololololololololoolololololololololololol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Old testament = Old Covenant. Old = No longer followed. New testament = Our current covenant. We follow what was set before us to follow in today's world.

Funny how most of you can't even agree on that. As if I needed more evidence that this shit is made up.

Again, poor argument. And a little bit of a straw man. It doesn't condone slavery at all. It says how slaves should be treated, and it tells us if you can gain your freedom, do so (1 Corinthains 7:21) Plus you have to look at slavery in Biblical terms. Slaves in the Bible days weren't as the slaves in the United States while slavery was going on. This article explains it better than I can. http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html.

Which is to say: The Bible doesn't condemn slavery and in fact tells you how to manage them. Ergo, the Bible condones slavery. What part of this is unclear to you?

Another poor argument. First off, The old testament was aimed at the holy city only (Israel). Second, the Sabbath isn't Sunday (surprised you didn't know that). The Sabbath is Saturday. We worship God on Sunday because that's the day when most Christians believe Christ was risen. Once again, "Old" means that it no longer has command over our lives, the New Testament does.

And once again, most of you can't even agree on that. You revile science for not having all the answers, yet you can't even get your own collective act together! And you wonder why we trust empirical evidence over bronze age myths.(!?)

Straw man argument. Seems to be a common theme here so far in this forum. :p

A straw man argument is when someone sets up an inaccurate presentation of the opposing argument and attacks that presentation. Nothing said about your religion so far constitutes a straw man attack. You've made plenty yourself against science, though.

Quote me where I say "I know better than God whose word is Inerrant".

He wasn't quoting you, he said this is what your argument boils down to. You deny that the Bible says something (like condoning slavery), when often those are the exact words of the text. Apparently, you know better than your own god if his printed word is somehow inaccurate.

Sorry, but I wouldn't classify this as the best post of the thread. Too many holes and easily explainable overused arguments.

You didn't answer a single argument with anything approaching a satisfactory answer. You trotted out the same tired apologetic arguments that have been debunked again and again and again. You people just never learn, it seems. We're mulling over extra-solar planetary discoveries by the world's best astronomers and equipment, and you're still here trying to convince us of a book that states, in the opening passages, that the Earth is contained within an impenetrable celestial firmament that separates us from a flying ocean containing some glowing pixie dust called stars. Yet we're somehow the ones defending a ridiculous position. Unbelievable.

[WitchSabrina]

It is pointless. Knowing the order of things made has no effect on your life.

Best get rid of your computer, your television, your smartphone, the lock on your door... your door... see where I'm going with this?

Does it feed the poor? Does knowledge of the order of the beginning of the universe help the homeless?

So runaway capitalism is stupid, and according to you this is somehow science's fault. Brilliant logic there.

Then why dwell on it if it's not beneficial?

Because it is. You're just too blind to see that without science, being "poor and homeless" would be the state of all human beings on the planet. Science can't solve every problem on its own, but it's a damn sight better than living in caves!

We can't truly know the order unless you were there. You have to have some faith while listening to scientists, too. They can formulate hypothesis and theories, (yes, I've heard it over and over that "A Scientific theory is different from an ignorant man's theory") but in the end they can't know for certainty.

You and I have very different definitions of faith:

faith  
/f?TH/
Noun
1. Complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
2. Strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
Synonyms
belief - trust - confidence - credence - credit

I hold no degree beyond my AA currently, but I have enough faith in the scientific community to think that most scientists know what they're talking about, absolute certainty or no. It has also taught me that anyone claiming absolute certainty tends to know very little, if anything at all.

Also, as you've all heard before and reject time and time again, nothing is impossible with God (unless it contradicts his nature). So, the plant argument is nonsensical.

lol. "Nothing is impossible with God, except when it is." Pure gold right there. Also, you have said absolutely nothing to contradict the plant argument.

Of course that's a big difference in years. However, I still fail to see your logic that it's beneficial to argue about.

I once read a book about how to apply the theory of evolution to medical science. It really is amazing how much doctors try to fight the body instead of working with it, simply because many of them don't think to understand why the body has the systems it has (or in the US, because many of them were not educated in evolution theory at all).

"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD." Isaiah 55:8

A supreme being would know how to make itself understood to us mere mortals, especially if it created us and presumably knows what makes us tick. The quote is therefore meaningless, and only helps to show that your religion is bullshit.

Those arguments are poor and overused, so I fail to see how you "disproved" its inerrantsy.

Translation: I know it's bullshit and won't try to tell you otherwise, olololololololololololoolololololololololololol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Old testament = Old Covenant. Old = No longer followed. New testament = Our current covenant. We follow what was set before us to follow in today's world.

Funny how most of you can't even agree on that. As if I needed more evidence that this shit is made up.

Again, poor argument. And a little bit of a straw man. It doesn't condone slavery at all. It says how slaves should be treated, and it tells us if you can gain your freedom, do so (1 Corinthains 7:21) Plus you have to look at slavery in Biblical terms. Slaves in the Bible days weren't as the slaves in the United States while slavery was going on. This article explains it better than I can. http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html.

Which is to say: The Bible doesn't condemn slavery and in fact tells you how to manage them. Ergo, the Bible condones slavery. What part of this is unclear to you?

Another poor argument. First off, The old testament was aimed at the holy city only (Israel). Second, the Sabbath isn't Sunday (surprised you didn't know that). The Sabbath is Saturday. We worship God on Sunday because that's the day when most Christians believe Christ was risen. Once again, "Old" means that it no longer has command over our lives, the New Testament does.

And once again, most of you can't even agree on that. You revile science for not having all the answers, yet you can't even get your own collective act together! And you wonder why we trust empirical evidence over bronze age myths.(!?)

Straw man argument. Seems to be a common theme here so far in this forum. :p

A straw man argument is when someone sets up an inaccurate presentation of the opposing argument and attacks that presentation. Nothing said about your religion so far constitutes a straw man attack. You've made plenty yourself against science, though.

Quote me where I say "I know better than God whose word is Inerrant".

He wasn't quoting you, he said this is what your argument boils down to. You deny that the Bible says something (like condoning slavery), when often those are the exact words of the text. Apparently, you know better than your own god if his printed word is somehow inaccurate.

Sorry, but I wouldn't classify this as the best post of the thread. Too many holes and easily explainable overused arguments.

You didn't answer a single argument with anything approaching a satisfactory answer. You trotted out the same tired apologetic arguments that have been debunked again and again and again. You people just never learn, it seems. We're mulling over extra-solar planetary discoveries by the world's best astronomers and equipment, and you're still here trying to convince us of a book that states, in the opening passages, that the Earth is contained within an impenetrable celestial firmament that separates us from a flying ocean containing some glowing pixie dust called stars. Yet we're somehow the ones defending a ridiculous position. Unbelievable.

Damn.   Good.   Post !!!
Well done you!

[Solitary]

OK Willpower, how do you make sense out of this?

Genesis  
1.God creates light and separates light from darkness, and day from night, on the first day. Yet he didn't make the light producing objects (the sun and the stars) until the fourth day (1:14-19). And how could there be "the evening and the morning" on the first day if there was no sun to mark them? 1:3-5

2.God spends one-sixth of his entire creative effort (the second day) working on a solid firmament. This strange structure, which God calls heaven, is intended to separate the higher waters from the lower waters. 1:6-8

3.Plants are made on the third day before there was a sun to drive their photosynthetic processes (1:14-19). 1:11

4. In an apparent endorsement of astrology, God places the sun, moon, and stars in the firmament so that they can be used "for signs". This, of course, is exactly what astrologers do: read "the signs" in the Zodiac in an effort to predict what will happen on Earth. 1:14

5."He made the stars also." God spends a day making light (before making the stars) and separating light from darkness; then, at the end of a hard day's work, and almost as an afterthought, he makes the trillions of stars. 1:16

6."And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth." 1:17

7.God commands us to "be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over ... every living thing that moveth upon the earth."  1:28

8."I have given you every herb ... and every tree ... for meat."
 Since many plants have evolved poisons to protect against animals that would like to eat them, God's advice is more than a little reckless. Would you tell your children to go out in the garden and eat whatever plants they encounter? Of course not. But then, you are much nicer and smarter than God. 1:29

9."He rested."
 Even God gets tired sometimes. 2:2

10."The tree of life ... and the tree of knowledge of good and evil."
 God created two magic trees: the tree of life and the tree of knowledge. Eat from the first, and you live forever (3:22); eat from the second and you'll die the same day (2:17). (Or that's what God said, anyway. Adam ate from the tree of knowledge and lived for another 930 years or so (5:5). But he never got a chance to eat from the tree of life. God prevented him from eating from the tree of life before Adam could eat from the tree, become a god, and live forever.) 2:9

11.God makes the animals and parades them before Adam to see if any would strike his fancy. But none seem to have what it takes to please him. (Although he was tempted to go for the sheep.) After making the animals, God has Adam name them all. The naming of several million species must have kept Adam busy for a while. 2:18-20

12.God's clever, talking serpent.  3:1

13.God walks and talks (to himself?) in the garden, and plays a little hide and seek with Adam and Eve. 3:8-11

14.God curses the serpent. From now on the serpent will crawl on his belly and eat dust. One wonders how he got around before -- by hopping on his tail, perhaps? But snakes don't eat dust, do they? 3:14

15.God curses the ground and causes thorns and thistles to grow. 3:17-18

16.God kills some animals and makes some skin coats for Adam and Eve. 3:21

17."Behold, the man is become as one of us."
 God expels Adam and Eve from the garden before they get a chance to eat from that other tree -- the tree of life. God knows that if they do that, they well become "like one of us" and live forever. 3:22-24

18.Cain is worried after killing Abel and says, "Every one who finds me shall slay me." This is a strange concern since there were only two other humans alive at the time -- his parents! 4:14

19."And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD." 4:16

20. "And Cain knew his wife." That's nice, but where the hell did she come from? 4:17

21.Lamech kills a man and claims that since Cain's murderer would be punished sevenfold, whoever murders him will be punished seventy-seven fold. That sounds fair. 4:23-24

22."And to Seth ... was born a son." Where'd he find his wife? 4:26

23.God created a man and a woman, and he "called their name Adam." So the woman's name was Adam, too! 5:2

24.Adam finally dies -- 930 years after eating from the tree of knowledge, contrary to God's false prophecy that Adam would die the day that he ate the forbidden fruit (2:17). 5:5

25.Seth lived 912 years. 5:8

26.Enos lived 905 years. 5:11

27.Cainan lived 910 years. 5:14

28.Mahalaleel lived 895 years. 5:17

29.Jared lived 962 years. 5:20

30.Enoch doesn't die he just ascends into heaven. 5:21-24

31.Enoch lived 365 years before he was taken (alive?) by God. 5:23

32.When Lamech was born, nine generations were alive at once. Adam, Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah, and Lamech were all alive at the time of Lamech's birth. Adam lived to see his great-great-great-great-great-great-grandson. 5:25

33.Methuselah lived 969 years. (World record holder.) 5:27

34. Lamech lived 777 years. 5:31

35.When Noah was 500 years old, he had three sons.
[Three sons in one year? Was that with one (nameless) wife or several?] 5:32

36."The sons of God came in unto the daughters of men."
 The "sons of God" had sex with the "daughters of men," and had sons who became "the mighty men of old, men of renown." 6:2-4

37."The LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh."
 God shortened the human lifespan to 120 years because humans are "flesh" and he was tired of fighting with them. 6:3

38."There were giants in the earth in those days." 6:4

39.God decides to kill all living things because the human imagination is evil. Later (8:21), after he kills everything, he promises never to do it again because the human imagination is evil. Go figure. 6:5

40.God repents. 6:6-7

41."Noah was a just man and perfect."
 Noah is called a "just man and perfect," but he didn't seem so perfect when he was drunk and naked in front of his sons (9:20-21). 6:9, 7:1

42."Behold, I will destroy them with the earth."
 God was angry because "the earth was filled with violence." So he killed every living thing to make the world less violent. 6:11-13

43.God tells Noah to make one small window (18 inches square) in the 450 foot ark for ventilation. 6:14-16

44."And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten ... for thee, and for them." 6:21

45."Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens."
 How did Noah know which animals were "clean" and "unclean" to God? (It wasn't defined until Leviticus was written.) 7:2

46.Whether by twos or by sevens, Noah takes male and female representatives from each species of "every thing that creepeth upon the earth." 7:8

47.God opens the "windows of heaven." He does this every time it rains. 7:11

48.All of the animals boarded the ark "in the selfsame day." 7:13-14

49."And God remembered Noah."
 Yeah. He probably said something like, "Isn't Noah the guy who built the ark?" 8:1

50."The windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained." This happens whenever it stops raining. 8:2

51.Noah sends a dove out to see if there was any dry land. But the dove returns without finding any. Then, just seven days later, the dove goes out again and returns with an olive leaf. But how could an olive tree survive the flood? And if any seeds happened to survive, they certainly wouldn't germinate and grow leaves within a seven day period. 8:8-11

52."And the Lord smelled a sweet savor."
 Noah kills the "clean beasts" and burns their dead bodies for God. According to 7:8 this would have caused the extinction of all "clean" animals since only two of each were taken onto the ark. "And the Lord smelled a sweet savor." After this God "said in his heart" that he'd never do it again because "man's heart is evil from his youth." So God killed all living things (6:5) because humans are evil, and then promises not to do it again (8:21) because humans are evil. The mind of God is a frightening thing. 8:20-21

53.According to this verse, all animals fear humans. Although it is true that many do, it is also true that some do not. Sharks and grizzly bears, for example, are generally much less afraid of us than we are of them. 9:2

54."Into your hand are they (the animals) delivered." God gave the animals to humans, and they can do whatever they please with them. This verse has been used by bible believers to justify all kinds of cruelty to animals and environmental destruction. 9:2

55."I do set my bow in the cloud."
 God is rightly filled with remorse for having killed his creatures. He makes a deal with the animals, promising never to drown them all again. He even puts the rainbow in the sky so that whenever he sees it, it will remind him of his promise so that he won't be tempted to do it again. (Every time God sees the rainbow he says to himself: "Oh, yeah.... That's right. I promised not to drown the animals again. I guess I'll have to find something else to do.").
But rainbows are caused by the nature of light, the refractive index of water, and the shape of raindrops. There were rainbows billions of years before humans existed. 9:13

56.The "just and righteous" Noah (6:9, 7:1) plants a vineyard, gets drunk, and lies around naked in his tent. His son, Ham, happens to see his father in this condition. When Noah sobers up and hears "what his young son had done unto him" (what did he do besides look at him?), he curses not Ham, who "saw the nakedness of his father," but Ham's son, Canaan. "A servant of servants shall he [Canaan] be unto his brethren." This is a typical case of biblical justice, and is one of many Bible passages that have been used to justify slavery. 9:20-25

57."All the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years." 9:29

58.The entire tenth chapter is the first of many boring genealogies (see Genesis 11:10-32, 1 Chronicles 1-9, Matthew 1:1-17, Luke.3:23-28 for other examples) that we are told to avoid in 1 Timothy 1:4 and Titus 3:9 ("Avoid foolish questions and genealogies.") 10:1-32

59."Now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do."
 God worries that the people will succeed in building a tower high enough to reach him (them?) in heaven, and that by so doing they will become omnipotent. 11:4-6

60.God says, "Let us go down ..." Maybe he hasn't been talking to himself; maybe there is more than one of them up there. Well, however many there may be, they all decide to come down to confuse the builders by confounding human language and scattering them [humans] abroad. 11:7

61.Another boring genealogy that we are told to avoid in 1 Timothy 1:4 and Titus 3:9. ("Avoid foolish questions and genealogies.") Also note the ridiculously long lives of the patriarchs. 11:10-32

62. Shem lived 600 years. 11:12-13

63.Salah lived 433 years. 11:14-15

64.Eber lived 464 years. 11:16-17

65.Peleg lived 239 years. 11:18-19

66.Reu lived 239 years. 11:20-21

67.Serug lived 229 years. 11:22-23

68.Nahor lived 148 years. 11:24-25

69.And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years. 11:32

70."I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee."
 God will bless you if you bless Abraham and curse you if you curse Abraham. Fuck Abraham. 12:3

71.The Amalekites were smitten before Amalek (from whom they descended) was born. Amalek was the grandson of Esau (Genesis 36:12). 14:7

72."They speedily took down every man his sack to the ground, and opened every man his sack ... and the cup was found in Benjamin's sack. Then they rent their clothes." 14:12-13
 :roll:  This should get interesting, if he actually will answer what I posted already, and then this. Solitary