Posted on 11/24/2014 1:07:14 PM PST by NYer
They were gay Scotsmen:
Patrick Fitzgerald and Gerald Fitzpatrick
The three friends sat at the top of the Grand Canyon's South Kaibab Trail at about 8:30 a.m. last Friday. Covered in sweat and dirt, they gazed across to the North Rim and admired their feat. Jared Scott, Jason Wolfe and Rob Krar had each just broken the rim-to-rim speed record, coming in under the previous time of 3 hours, 6 minutes, 10 seconds.I did it in two days.
Had a nice overnight stay in a Phantom ranch cabin.
Another time, getting ready to go up the Bright Angel from staying at the campground overnight; I met an 83 yo fella who had just descended. A few minutes later, he passed me going up, and I never did see him again on the trail!
There's goes your self proclaimed rationality out the window!
OH??
Then God said, "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."
Sounds like a safe bet to me!
Neither did it forbid being a homo. (Genesis 13:13), yet it was a sin BEFORE the 'law' was given.
RSZ; if YOU were drowning; you'd grab any straw as well!
“That’s right, other wise why don`t it say that God made Adam on the sixth day? but it don`t.”
Well, the Bible certainly says God created man and woman on the sixth day. Your argument is fallacious, because absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Just because the verse doesn’t say that the man God created on the sixth day was named Adam, does not mean that we can safely conclude that it was someone other than Adam.
“If we take the Bible literally we can see that Adam was made after the six day creation because there was no man to till the ground even though every thing including man was already made.”
You are citing a verse from Genesis 2, while the days of creation are detailed in Genesis 1. Instead of reading the Bible literally, you simply assume that Genesis 2 is a continuation of the narrative of Genesis 1, but the Bible nowhere says that. It is simply your interpretation which causes these apparent conflicts.
Neat trick; since it came out in '68!
That’s an English dictionary. Genesis is written in Hebrew, not English, so an English dictionary is useless to tell us what the words mean.
And then there is Moab; which is blessed with some quite beautiful land!
They DID??
You must have a KJV bible; as the NIV says:
Genesis 19:30-38
30 Lot and his two daughters left Zoar and settled in the mountains, for he was afraid to stay in Zoar. He and his two daughters lived in a cave. 31 One day the older daughter said to the younger, “Our father is old, and there is no man around here to give us children—as is the custom all over the earth. 32 Let’s get our father to drink wine and then sleep with him and preserve our family line through our father.”
KJV=
31 And the firstborn said unto the younger, “Our father is old, and there is not a man on the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth.
bottom line...
And if so; were they innies or outies?
Did they collect lint or moss?
Was there a HEMP plant in Eden?
Peyote?
smirk!
Nice working with you Dave...
.
Thems wuz sum mighty ugly dotters!
.
That’s an English dictionary. Genesis is written in Hebrew, not English, so an English dictionary is useless to tell us what the words mean.
We can see by the genealogy’s in the N.T that generations were years and not days.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.