Well I have decided to take my Friday afternoon to read through this thread and respond to a few comments. I know I am late but better late than ever....
Netslave, you and I have talked cosmology before you claimed to have great interest. Tell me how you reconcile what we know about the universe and the earth specifically to the third and fourth days of the creation (Gen 1: 9-20)? I choose to disregard them entirely... what do you do with them?
Just so you know the passage in 1st Timothy that says the scriptures are inspired is literally "God breathed". Kind of like when we speak we use breath, which describes God speaking it even though men are writing. There is also another passage in 2nd Peter which describes the authors as being carried along as a sail is by the wind. Men wrote it, but God Himself was behind it all determining what things were being written. The other point I was wanting to make netslave has made quite well. Scientific endeavor is more fraught with error than reading the Bible when you are trying to figure out history. You can't observe history after the fact, so science is pretty worhtless for determining history. We can observe what is going on right now very well. I think that is where science's utility lies.
The OP isn't offering a real line of inquiry- it's just a strawman followed by a rhetorical question designed to highlight a contradiction that isn't really a contradiction. And yet it generated 7 pages of this. It provides an interesting illustration of the difference between real life and the internet: imagine, for example, that a stranger came up to you and said the following:
