[whispering out loud]

Well when you find my error, and expose it to me with viable evidence, then I might reconsider. Until then I choose to believe the teachings of the word of God. As far as its validity, or the lack there of, I look at it this way. If I am wrong then I've lost nothing, I've lived a good life, one that I've enjoyed tremendously due to, not in spite of my religious beliefs. But if I am right, then you have lost everything, because the word of God states that it's the "TRUTH" and Christ is the only way unto salvation. So go ahead and believe you came from a monkey, or a puddle of pond scum, what ever you like but look at there intelligence, and if thats what you want to liken yourself to, whatever cranks your tractor.

[Dimensio]

Well when you find my error, and expose it to me with viable evidence, then I might reconsider.

Your error is in claiming that the number of translations of a literary work have any bearing on its truth value. I already explained that. You are appealing to a logical fallacy and no amount of whining or ranting or raving will make your argument valid or logical.

As far as its validity, or the lack there of, I look at it this way. If I am wrong then I've lost nothing, I've lived a good life, one that I've enjoyed tremendously due to, not in spite of my religious beliefs. But if I am right, then you have lost everything,

Pascal's Wager. False dichotomy fallacy. What happens if we're both wrong? What happens if there is a deity, but it's not the one that you worship and this particular deity has no problem with non-believers like me but takes a dim view of followers of false religions like yours? In that case then I have lost nothing and you have lost everything.

because the word of God states that it's the "TRUTH" and Christ is the only way unto salvation.

Circular reasoning. Logical fallacy. That the Bible claims itself to be truth is not evidence that it is truth.

So go ahead and believe you came from a monkey, or a puddle of pond scum,

Strawman. Logical fallacy. This is a dishonest misrepresentation of the theory of evolution. You are also appealing to the false dichotomy fallacy in assuming that everyone who accepts evolution is an atheist. That is not true, and only the truly dishonest claim that it is true.

Do you have a rational argument, or is everything that you're going to offer up based upon fallacious reasoning?