How old is mankind, let's see if we can get a rough date.

So, by so saying, you base it upon your own effort and mental capacity rather than upon God's word. Very dangerous.

I will answer you, if you answer my question correctly, What color is my shirt? Tell me please, be specific in your answer. Thank you. it is not that difficult of a question. Yes, I am most serious.

You think, 1 Kings 7:26 and 2 Chronicles 4:5 are in contradiction?

You do not seem to actually believe what God stated about His word then, John 10:35. God's word cannot be broken, and there are 0 contradictions in scripture. I have never seen one, in all the years of skepticism trying (and they sure do try, even unto the clinically hysterically sad).

You stated, "I base it on reading comprehension skills.", then either one of two things has happened:

[1] you either read a corrupt modern translation which absolutely butchered the two places, or

[2] your reading comprehension skills were put into play without asking God for direction, meaning you used fallen human logic, and didn't understand what you read.

Allow me to show you:

1Ki 7:26 And it was an hand breadth thick, and the brim thereof was wrought like the brim of a cup, with flowers of lilies: it contained two thousand baths.

2Ch 4:5 And the thickness of it was an handbreadth, and the brim of it like the work of the brim of a cup, with flowers of lilies; and it received and held three thousand baths.

The two are speaking about differing things. If your reading comprehension skills were anything close to accurate you should be able to carefully read, asking God in prayer first upon your knees in submission to God's wisdom (rather than your own foolishness, ignorance (not knowing), pride of intellect, and skepticism) and ask Him for understanding you would have had it and not been so careless.

There is a complete difference in:

[1] 1 Ki 7:26, in that the 'sea' then, not in its fullness of capacity, 'contained two thousand baths'

[2] 2 Chr 4:5, in that the fullness of the capacity was that it "received and held three thousand baths".

1 Ki 7:26 refers to time when it was 2/3's full. 2 Chr refers to a time, when it was all the way full. You can think of it as two snapshots of a bathtub at two moments of time. One with not full, and the other with full. Are they contradictory? No. Please, do yourself a favour (really), stop reading men's commentaries which are filled with skepticism. Read God's word, and ask Him for the answer to your concerns. This so-called 'contradiction' is nothing of the sort.

I am also going to recommend a book by Peter S Ruckman (though there are some things I disagree with in it, it is still a useful resource tool), The "ERRORS" of the King James Bible (PDF).

It is the same as Matthew, Mark and Luke's gospel of the possessed in the tombs. Matthew shows two men, and Mark and Luke speak of one of those two men. They are not in contradiction, but in harmony when all is laid out together.

It would be a waste of time. You have already been answered hundreds of times, in as many places by those who actually believe their Bible (KJB).

Really? You have no 'belief' in an event that is simply recorded 400 yearish after the event (Alexander III death, etc by Plutarch) and no present witness, of either yourself, or another directly to that event? Tell me another lie ...

Not at all. Belief is required in the historical, and most especially to any event that you were not directly present for. Your statement is silly.

The preserved word of God in English (KJB) has no errors in its words, as it so says, and is proven by itself having no errors. The word of the LORD is pure.

The Holy Ghost inspired every single word of the preserved word of God. You charge God with error. Beware, you are on very dangerous ground, for it is the same charge Lucifer gave, and the same charge the pharisees gave against Jesus.

If your present ability is any demonstration of the fullness of such 'skills', you would do better to cast all the nonsense aside and go to God upon your knees asking for true wisdom and knowledge. Paul did.

O man ... (you know all those meme's where there is a palm to the face?) This is that point of entry, however, I will spare us all from posting it.

Cute.

Based upon? Carbon, tree-ring, other? You trust that, but distrust the plain preserved words themselves? You do realize that in tree ring dating, that multiple rings per year occur, and sets of rings depending upon the climate, conditions, etc? Not exactly an exact science.

You mean you 'believe' based upon your standard rather than what God said.

And some biologists claim 'aliens'. Mixed bag - 'biologists'.

You just told me 'I think'. That is conjecture based upon what you believe to be true. You are in the same boat as they are. you need to give up that position, and consider the real position. God cannot lie.

Only if you disbelieve the Bible and come at it with skepticism, otherwise God told us plainly what happened, and not merely in the OT (and not just in Genesis, but in Psalms, Job, etc), but also in the NT.

Yes, you do seem to have a lot of that, and all of it based upon what 'you' think, based upon what you set as standard of criteria.

The Ark was just a giant barge. They did not need the things we use today. They had a much better memory capacity, near perfect minds, not degraded by all the thousands of years of genetic load. I will recommend a book - Link

Read it along with the Bible, prayerfully.

 

And truly, you gave no answers. Just avoided everything I asked.

If you cannot even personally take the time to answer my questions, why on earth would I spend time with a person on a video, who also will not respond to my questions?

I have heard all of the Jesuit (humanism, humanistic) nonsense before, and yes, what is in that video is their theology, make no mistake. Completely disregards God.

 

Indeed. No need to not call the enemy of souls by anything other than what he is. The enemy on the field is identified, and he is the most subtil beast of the field, but the scripture identifies him plainly and so he is called out.

 

I am not "pardner" with your crimes.

Amos 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?

Ephesians 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.

 

Yes, a Christian is a follower of Jesus the Christ:

Mat_19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,

Mar_10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

Mat_23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

Luk_11:51 From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.

Deny Abel as a person, you deny Zacharias as a person. The equation is simple.

Luk 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

...

Luk_3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

Rom_5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

1Co 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.

1Co_15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

Deny the first, and you deny the second. The equation is simple.

 

You can begin with the answer here - Link 1 and continue reading unto Link 2
or, you can simply get the whole thing here - Link 3

The only true answer is found in scripture. John 17:17. To all who deny this, rely on something else, and always get the wrong answer.

That would be 'private interpretation' which we are warned against. Thus was the OP given: "There are several ways to correlate data, first we can use the scriptural ages, given from Genesis, in the genealogies, ages of kings, etc, and combine with known dates in history, such as the 7th year of Artaxerxes I Longimanus/Machrocheir, being in the Fall of 457 BC (by astronomical sources, Ptolemy's Canon, Elephantine Papyri, - Artaxerxes I of Persia - Wikipedia"

Not interested in that. Thank you. In the name of Jesus Christ, you may leave now.

I do not know why you claim to be called 'ChurchofChristGuy' when your statement is a fundamental denial of Christ, his word and his church. It makes you a hypocrite and actually ignorant of the material of scripture.

Wasted time.

If the following is not clear to you, then you have a greater problem than your "question":

1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

1Co 15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

1Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.

The equation is simple. Deny Adam as a person, you deny Jesus (the Lord from Heaven) as a person.

Skepticism at its most foolish.

Gen 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

Gen 4:2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.

Gen 4:3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD.

Gen 4:16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

Gen 4:17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

Gen 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:

Gen 5:4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:

"Nod" means wandering. Nomadic, which was the wilderness beyond the gates of Eden (hence 'east of Eden').

Genesis 4:16-17, is not in a single moment in time. It is progressive in time, summing up the life of Cain. Genesis 5 expands upon that time. Cain married a daughter of Adam, after she was born and grew and left.

You have the "Iffffffff....." of the serpent.

You are no christian.

 

A typographical error in citation listing found.

"2 Kings 25:7" should read "2 Kings 25:27".

Another typographical error is found.

"Acts 7:6 And the nation ...", should read "Acts 7:7 And the nation ..."

Thank you for pointing out any other minor typographical issues. These have been updated on the main study.

 

Based upon Lyellian made-it-up-outta-thin-air-uniformitarian-geology? Based upon Darwinian pseudo-science? Based upon conflicting-uncalibrated-radio-metric-dating-theory? Based upon Lamarckian-jesuitically-trained-skull-duggery? Based upon Pierre-Teilhard-de-Chardinian-jesuitical-pilt-downian-and-other-hoaxes? Based upon Georges-le-Maitrian-jesuitically-inspired-big-bangism? (One can actually trace Jesuit influence through all of it, even Darwin) Seriously, based upon what?







You do know about the soft tissue, blood cells, even DNA, being found all over the world in dinosaur bones, yes?



You do know that the Ark of Noah is found right?