[Coladam] Adam Bible programs

shonmccallum at juno.com shonmccallum at juno.com
Fri Nov 2 19:53:48 CET 2012

I forgot, how many third party Bible programs were made for the ADAM back in the 80’s? Was there a Coleco Bible Trivia flashback program for Flashback maker or was it just general history and it had a Bible category. I would have to look it up. One thing I liked about NIAD is that they had that Bible study at the beginning of their newsletter. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
There are many scientist with PH.D’s in several fields that believe in a young Universe. Around 5% of the scientist in the world are still young earth creationist that use both the historical evidence in the Bible and science to support their worldview. Both evolutionist and creationist have the same facts, however when it comes to historical science they interpret those facts differently. When it comes to observational science regarding technology that makes things like the space shuttle both creationist and evolutionist at  NASA have the same scientific view regarding modern technology, its just on what occurred in the past (historical science) is where the worldviews are different. 
Some modern scientists who have accepted the biblical account of creation can be found at the following link

---------- Original Message ----------
From: coladam-request at adamcon.org
To: coladam at adamcon.org
Subject: Coladam Digest, Vol 89, Issue 2
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2012 12:00:02 +0100

Send Coladam mailing list submissions to
coladam at adamcon.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
coladam-request at adamcon.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
coladam-owner at adamcon.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Coladam digest..."

Today's Topics:

  1. Re: between earthquakes and hurricanes... (Tommy Scott)
     (Rob Bairos)
  2. Happy Halloween! (Rich Drushel)
  3. Re: between earthquakes and hurricanes... (Tommy Scott)
     (Jim Notini)
  4. Re: between earthquakes and hurricanes... (Tommy Scott)
     (Frances and/or Richard Clee)
  5. Re: Happy Halloween! (tempest at tamcotec.com)


Message: 1
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 08:53:38 -0400
From: Rob Bairos <rbairos at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Coladam] between earthquakes and hurricanes... (Tommy
To: coladam at adamcon.org
<CAH80WYb4eyuQsum9kOjWRrBihqj6S-xBy5PP-AXsDPgEXVtZJw at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

"And that's where Earthly wisdom falls short. There is only one way to
eternal salvation. All other paths lead to death. Jesus is the way the
truth and the life. Repent and put your trust in Jesus and you will be
saved. Anything else leads to death. There are NOT multiple paths to get
to the same place in the end, unless that place you refer to is Hell."

Sadly we still live in a society where its okay to tell someone they're
worthy of hell, but not okay to tell them they're an idi*t.  Apparently one
of those two things is considered offensive.

"..I, like all human beings, are so easily deceived and misled. If I were
to trust in my own feelings and logic then I'd be lost."

Err... who wants to tell him? ;)

"One can believe the Bible is 100% historically accurate and at the time
believe in observational science that proofs the Bible is true.

How could it be that tens of thousands of hard working honest (even
Christian) geologists, mineralogists, palaeontologists have *not*
thought of the 'arguments' posted there?
Could it be the decades of investigative research they've done which seeks
to  find truth by working diligently to disprove ideas is actually one
big conspiracy?
Or could it be "Answers" In Genesis, is notoriously misleading and down
right fraudulent, and provably so?  Hmm..

Feel free to use it for your own purposes, but do not assume its scientific,
any more than one would assume an actor wearing a lab coat and stethoscope
on a TV commercial is proof their product is healthy.
If you want to accept ideas based on rigorous elimination of alternatives
and continuously developing new scenarios  to confirm them, use science.
If you want to believe notions based on what you want to be true, use your

Don't pretend one supports the other, because thats dishonest.
That's pretty much it.


Woman is 53 But Looks 25
Mom reveals 1 simple wrinkle trick that has angered doctors...

More information about the Coladam mailing list