The definition of mentality is "the characteristic attitude or way of thinking"
If you took it as an insult then I'd have to ask why. Unless you think your characteristic attitude is insulting? Anyway , it's deleted now so I'll have to take your word for why it was deleted.

We're so close to having 10 Comman ... er, pages.

C'mon! Get to discussin' lusty 6,000-year-old dinosaurtdactyls ridden by Noah's offspring on the Ark!

Triceratops

Nailed it.

Leviathan

Triceratops may have simply been a juvenile torosaurus, but that's debatable.

http://www.earnestlycontendingforthefait...gTheWord02.html

Here is a good link for you to look at dealing with the pre-adamite world. I hopeyou guys choose to read Clarence larkin and his thoughts/revelations on what possibly was
I happen to believe he's right

There was no pre adamite people

Scripture says "in the beginning " and then Goes on to tell about 7 literal days

Boom.

OK

Does the Bible validate science or does science validate the Bible?

Alright, I said I would avoid this fray, but I can't control my compulsion

First, just some philosophical points about cherry-picking singular verses, then I'll (as briefly as I can) explain how that verse in no way denies the election of saints.

I am adamantly against the practice of pulling out singular verses as some "end all / be all" to any given debate. My primary opinion about Arminian theology is that it is nothing but eisegesis to begin with (you imputing YOUR preheld bias into the meaning), and you are basically certain to do that when using singular verses. Who was the audience? What was the topic? What was the authoritorial intent of the larger passage? Was it for all people at all times, or a specific group? Was it even referencing the topic you're using as ammunition for? Nothing concerns me more than the incessant "Oh yeah, what about XXX verse???" I know your motive is pure, to use scripture to defend your belief, but it's so dangerous to be uncontextual like that. I never use single verses, you'll almost always hear me speak in terms of "overall narratives" or "broader passages". You just can't form your whole doctrine from one verse!

Now, about 1 John 2:2 - Let's remember, the foremost battle that "most" of scripture always dealt with was that the Gentiles now have access to God. God wasn't just the God of the Jews. That Jesus' atoning work was for "every tribe, and tongue, and nation" (not for everybody in every tribe, tongue, and nation). That's the "overall narrative" I spoke about above. I could stop there, point is made. This is always a problem of lazy (or nasty) hermeneutics. But look at all of John's writings, his "shtick" seemed to predominantly be the nature of Christ's work being for all people groups (not just the Jews). And that's specifically what was being talked about in the broader passage surrounding 1 John 2:2. This is certainly how John's audience would have understood it. Now I don't want to be argumentative, I understand that when you read that verse alone, your view is logical (I don't disagree). But if you start waaaay before that and read waaaay past it, your view doesn't fit what's even being taught there. That's the "broader passage" I spoke about. If your view of a single verse is seemingly out of place compared the meta-narrative of all scripture, and surely from the more immediate surrounding passage, please reconsider and study that view.

One more "foremost battle" that most of scripture dealt with was Jesus' constant contrast between Christianity and Judaism. Remember, it wasn't the unchurched who demanded Jesus' death (they frankly didn't know or care), it was the church!!! And what they really didn't like wasn't Jesus' claim to be God (that's what they said, but it was a smokescreen), it was because Jesus removed their control and autonomy from their religion. The basest notion of sin is "self", it's the purest form of sin. I am my own god, I do the work, I am good, I am etc. Yes, Jesus is my savior, but I always attend church, I read my bible for an hour each morning, I am a deacon, I cut the grass at church, I don't cuss or drink, I, I, I. I owe Jesus, I perform, I accept Him or not, I. Jesus + my white-knuckle grip on obedience. This was the constant battle of the new Testament (heck, read Galatians!!!). And this Arminian notion of "I have free will" is nothing more than that age-old practice of Judaism. It stirs man's deepest idol to take away his "will" to accept or refuse Christ. THAT is your beef with my view, you certainly don't have a theological point.

This was just a quick thread about the ARK, it's turned into a monster!

SBS, There is proof, they just disregard it in university's and schools

All shucks gets blown out of proportion when folks don't understand.

Why do we teach evolution in public schools when there is absolutely no scientific evidence of it? It's the THEORY of evolution, and basically all "evidence" is just forced to fit. Any creationist can simply flip the script. The answer to your question is because to teach the opposite is unthinkable to a world who is scandalously opposed to God. Said another way, creation isn't taught not for a lack of evidence, hell there's no evidence for evolution (but they teach it). You fill in the blanks. They are teaching what they WANT to teach.

So there's no evidence for evolution, but you don't believe it... and there's no evidence for men roaming with dinosaurs, yet you believe that one? I'm confused here. Don't think that I'm an evolutionist, because I'm not at all.

Scrape, there is no evidence. I've had plenty of Christian teachers throughout my science classes in higher education, and that's one topic that pretty much every geologist/archaeologist agrees on, religion thrown aside.

What kind of evidence would you need for you to consider evolution to be plausible? The 6,000 some-odd fossil skeletons are pretty compelling, in my opinion.

What skeletons are you referring to?

In this case, all of the "homo" genus.

Men are generally taller now and live longer than even just 150 years ago. It's still happening, and will continue to happen.

Seriously, y'all have gotten me almost to the point of not being able to follow along in the debate. No one knows the answer definitively, so just adopt my philosophy on this. Don't let it shake your faith if you are a Christian. Don't let it prevent you from being a Christian if you aren't. I firmly believe that The Bible doesn't tell us everything we would like to know, but it does tell us everything we need to know. The rest we'll just have to take on faith and accept that it will be revealed to us one day, when it will be so insignificant it won't matter anymore.

I find that I am a better Christian when I don't overthink it and follow the KISS method.