Jeffjoe, I read the NIV, however, I find the NAS and the NKJ to be better literal translations in most cases. If I have a question, I crack open a reference and look at the literal translation.
Also, name one prominent Christian, before Darwin, who supported the theory that God didn't really make man in his own image.
Bobfett33, If you'll notice I said radioactive decay, I never mentioned carbon dating. But you bring up an interesting point. If carbon dating is accurate to within 500-1000 yrs then what's the point? We have no artifacts with documented evidence (i.e. no writing) of being more than 5000 yrs old so we have no way of verifying it's accuracy past that point. If we're 10-20% off then the dating method becomes little more than a marginally effective tool, which we cannot test. I took organic chemistry as an elective (got an A btw) and I know there are all sorts of ways to mess up radioactive decay.
Blunt, there is only one truth regardless of interpretation. These sects are not logically consistent with the Bible. They tend to do one or more of the following, deny the deity of Christ, deny the deity of the Holy Spirit, deny Christ died and rose again to pay the penalty for our sins, ignore or add to certain passages, or emphasize a few doctrines and ignore most others. Granted most churches have one emphasis or another, but as long as they stay basically sound they are not necessarily non-Christian.
The Bible was pretty much decided by several church councils within the first few centuries after Christ. The catholics weren't so full of errors at that time.
The Koran is quite contrary to the Bible, for instance, Jesus is not God in the Koran. If Jesus isn't God then Christianity is a lie.
You have a point, Trojan, but Christians don't go so far as to believe the Koran is from the same God, unless they've never studied it.