Changes

"asswaged"?

"asswaged"?

:Yes. ''Asswaged'' is the proper Biblical spelling of the modern ''assuaged'', as it is in the original authorized English translation of the Holy Scriptures. Many modern "King James" Bibles actually alter the text, which can lead to confusion and errant exegesis (see [http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/king_james_glossary.htm "King James Glossary"] & [http://www.biblebelievers.com/believers-org/counterfeit-kjv.html "Believers Beware of Counterfeit King James Bibles"] for other spelling alterations).

:Yes. ''Asswaged'' is the proper Biblical spelling of the modern ''assuaged'', as it is in the original authorized English translation of the Holy Scriptures. Many modern "King James" Bibles actually alter the text, which can lead to confusion and errant exegesis (see [http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/king_james_glossary.htm "King James Glossary"] & [http://www.biblebelievers.com/believers-org/counterfeit-kjv.html "Believers Beware of Counterfeit King James Bibles"] for other spelling alterations).

::Scurvy can also be kept in check through the vitamins and minerals that are absorbed in the body through the consumption of various organs, such as:  eyes, hearts and livers.  Noah's family clearly ate some of the animals to provide necessary nutrition and disease prevention, although some animals unfortunately went the way of the Dodo.  I think this makes a lot more sense than salt-sensitive citrus.  --[[User:Huey gunna getcha|Huey gunna getcha]] 18:10, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

::Scurvy can also be kept in check through the vitamins and minerals that are absorbed in the body through the consumption of various organs, such as:  eyes, hearts and livers.  Noah's family clearly ate some of the animals to provide necessary nutrition and disease prevention, although some animals unfortunately went the way of the Dodo.  I think this makes a lot more sense than salt-sensitive citrus.  --[[User:Huey gunna getcha|Huey gunna getcha]] 18:10, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

::: That might explain why the unicorn didn't make it.  There's that story of it being late and missing the boat but perhaps they sacrificed it for the greater good.  A scapegoat of sorts.  [[User:GentlemanSun|GentlemanSun]]

::: That might explain why the unicorn didn't make it.  There's that story of it being late and missing the boat but perhaps they sacrificed it for the greater good.  A scapegoat of sorts.  [[User:GentlemanSun|GentlemanSun]]

::: See, that only sounds reasonable until you think about it. Think about the number of animals vs. deck space. Maybe that would work with hydroponics and full spectrum lamps, but the bible mysteriously fails to mention any of those. --[[User:Abrown|Abrown]] 21:48, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

::: See, that only sounds reasonable until you think about it. Think about the number of animals vs. deck space. Maybe that would work with             and full spectrum lamps, but the bible mysteriously fails to mention any of those. --[[User:Abrown|Abrown]] 21:48, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

ABrown, thank you for putting your questions in a fairly civil manner.  I couldn't count the number of times I've had sceptics be downright rude about such things.  However, I will chastise you a bit, for having such a negative attitude about creation ("my contempt for the biblical creationist point of view") when you obviously have little idea of the concept that you have so much contempt for.  Answers to your questions are readily available from creationist sources, so if you don't know them, you haven't looked for them, yet you seem to think you know enough about creationism to have contempt for it!  And I'll also chastise you for your putting the term "creationist scientist" in quotes, as though they are not scientists—that's not nice and not fair.

ABrown, thank you for putting your questions in a fairly civil manner.  I couldn't count the number of times I've had sceptics be downright rude about such things.  However, I will chastise you a bit, for having such a negative attitude about creation ("my contempt for the biblical creationist point of view") when you obviously have little idea of the concept that you have so much contempt for.  Answers to your questions are readily available from creationist sources, so if you don't know them, you haven't looked for them, yet you seem to think you know enough about creationism to have contempt for it!  And I'll also chastise you for your putting the term "creationist scientist" in quotes, as though they are not scientists—that's not nice and not fair.