How’s that ark coming along? Are they nearly finished?
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
Yup. The jews, muslims and christians all worship the same god…[/quote]
No, no, no.
Key word: extent[/quote]
Yes they do. No no no is not an intelligent reply. Please just retort. I’m not getting into the issues of jesus, muhammad, etc. I’m talking God. The God of the jews, christians and muslims is one in the same.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
…I say your bible is corrupted. Terribly corrupted. And that’s a fact.[/quote]
It’s an opinion. One that has been shared by many for centuries. All of 'em fling their little petty, brittle arguments at the Scripture and then die. The Word goes on.
You too are tossing your tired and worn out reasons at the brick wall. You too will utter your last breath some day and the Word will go on. Buenos noches.[/quote]
Well, the arguments are hardly brittle at all. But know this…a bunch of people believe a man from Vermont and his Book of Mormon. And after my death, that Word too will continue…along with Scientology, Islam, Christianity, etc. Bones and Nachos to you too sir.
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
all versions of god are the same god in the end? no - can’t agree with that. The god’s described and worshipped by all of the various faiths and non-faiths csannot be reconciled into being the same entity.[/quote]
Well, for instance, Allah and the Christian God are absolutely one in the same. As well as the Hebrew God. Right there we have covered Christianity/Catholicism, Judaism and Islam. That aside, and putting aside a literal anthropomorphic God, what is it you think everyone is worshipping? If you would concur that no one is literally worshipping a white bearded man on a throne somewhere, does it matter by what name or names a people call him? Either you believe in a personal jealous God, or you believe in a higher power that cannot be expressed with our understanding. If it is the latter, what matters by what name or identity it is? If it is the former, you are in the orthodox camp.
[/quote]
Absolutely not - once again - a diety with a distinct set of character traits cannot be another diety with a completely different set of character traits - the distinct personalities of Allah and God are not descriptive of the same individual. The truth revealed by each is different as well. So we have a different personality revealing a different truth - this cannot be reconciled into being the same individual since the character traits preclude any mutability on the part of the revealed diety.
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
all versions of god are the same god in the end? no - can’t agree with that. The god’s described and worshipped by all of the various faiths and non-faiths csannot be reconciled into being the same entity.[/quote]
Well, for instance, Allah and the Christian God are absolutely one in the same. As well as the Hebrew God. Right there we have covered Christianity/Catholicism, Judaism and Islam. That aside, and putting aside a literal anthropomorphic God, what is it you think everyone is worshipping? If you would concur that no one is literally worshipping a white bearded man on a throne somewhere, does it matter by what name or names a people call him? Either you believe in a personal jealous God, or you believe in a higher power that cannot be expressed with our understanding. If it is the latter, what matters by what name or identity it is? If it is the former, you are in the orthodox camp.
[/quote]
Absolutely not - once again - a diety with a distinct set of character traits cannot be another diety with a completely different set of character traits - the distinct personalities of Allah and God are not descriptive of the same individual. The truth revealed by each is different as well. So we have a different personality revealing a different truth - this cannot be reconciled into being the same individual since the character traits preclude any mutability on the part of the revealed diety.
[/quote]
There can only be one truth, not “the truth revealed by each”. Your argument is weak. Push is closer to accurate although you’re both saying pretty much the same thing. And have you ever thought for a moment that an all powerful, divine, eternal, ineffable God does not need a human literary agent or a publisher?
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
all versions of god are the same god in the end? no - can’t agree with that. The god’s described and worshipped by all of the various faiths and non-faiths csannot be reconciled into being the same entity.[/quote]
Well, for instance, Allah and the Christian God are absolutely one in the same. As well as the Hebrew God. Right there we have covered Christianity/Catholicism, Judaism and Islam. That aside, and putting aside a literal anthropomorphic God, what is it you think everyone is worshipping? If you would concur that no one is literally worshipping a white bearded man on a throne somewhere, does it matter by what name or names a people call him? Either you believe in a personal jealous God, or you believe in a higher power that cannot be expressed with our understanding. If it is the latter, what matters by what name or identity it is? If it is the former, you are in the orthodox camp.
[/quote]
Absolutely not - once again - a diety with a distinct set of character traits cannot be another diety with a completely different set of character traits - the distinct personalities of Allah and God are not descriptive of the same individual. The truth revealed by each is different as well. So we have a different personality revealing a different truth - this cannot be reconciled into being the same individual since the character traits preclude any mutability on the part of the revealed diety.
[/quote]
There can only be one truth, not “the truth revealed by each”. Your argument is weak. Push is closer to accurate although you’re both saying pretty much the same thing. And have you ever thought for a moment that an all powerful, divine, eternal, ineffable God does not need a human literary agent or a publisher?
[/quote]
And thank you for walking into that little ambush - you are exactly correct - there can only be one truth - so if the two messages are in direct conflict - only one can be true and thus the other false. if the other is false, then it cannot be the true God who gave it, thus making the other deity a false deity and NOT THE SAME. Thus endeth the lesson . . . .
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
all versions of god are the same god in the end? no - can’t agree with that. The god’s described and worshipped by all of the various faiths and non-faiths csannot be reconciled into being the same entity.[/quote]
Well, for instance, Allah and the Christian God are absolutely one in the same. As well as the Hebrew God. Right there we have covered Christianity/Catholicism, Judaism and Islam. That aside, and putting aside a literal anthropomorphic God, what is it you think everyone is worshipping? If you would concur that no one is literally worshipping a white bearded man on a throne somewhere, does it matter by what name or names a people call him? Either you believe in a personal jealous God, or you believe in a higher power that cannot be expressed with our understanding. If it is the latter, what matters by what name or identity it is? If it is the former, you are in the orthodox camp.
[/quote]
Absolutely not - once again - a diety with a distinct set of character traits cannot be another diety with a completely different set of character traits - the distinct personalities of Allah and God are not descriptive of the same individual. The truth revealed by each is different as well. So we have a different personality revealing a different truth - this cannot be reconciled into being the same individual since the character traits preclude any mutability on the part of the revealed diety.
[/quote]
There can only be one truth, not “the truth revealed by each”. Your argument is weak. Push is closer to accurate although you’re both saying pretty much the same thing. And have you ever thought for a moment that an all powerful, divine, eternal, ineffable God does not need a human literary agent or a publisher?
[/quote]
And thank you for walking into that little ambush - you are exactly correct - there can only be one truth - so if the two messages are in direct conflict - only one can be true and thus the other false. if the other is false, then it cannot be the true God who gave it, thus making the other deity a false deity and NOT THE SAME. Thus endeth the lesson . . . .[/quote]
Oh, thanks. So Islam IS the truth after all? I don’t believe that, but thanks for clarifying your beliefs. You should tackle setting your ambushes more effectively before you move onto comparative religion.
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
all versions of god are the same god in the end? no - can’t agree with that. The god’s described and worshipped by all of the various faiths and non-faiths csannot be reconciled into being the same entity.[/quote]
Well, for instance, Allah and the Christian God are absolutely one in the same. As well as the Hebrew God. Right there we have covered Christianity/Catholicism, Judaism and Islam. That aside, and putting aside a literal anthropomorphic God, what is it you think everyone is worshipping? If you would concur that no one is literally worshipping a white bearded man on a throne somewhere, does it matter by what name or names a people call him? Either you believe in a personal jealous God, or you believe in a higher power that cannot be expressed with our understanding. If it is the latter, what matters by what name or identity it is? If it is the former, you are in the orthodox camp.
[/quote]
Absolutely not - once again - a diety with a distinct set of character traits cannot be another diety with a completely different set of character traits - the distinct personalities of Allah and God are not descriptive of the same individual. The truth revealed by each is different as well. So we have a different personality revealing a different truth - this cannot be reconciled into being the same individual since the character traits preclude any mutability on the part of the revealed diety.
[/quote]
There can only be one truth, not “the truth revealed by each”. Your argument is weak. Push is closer to accurate although you’re both saying pretty much the same thing. And have you ever thought for a moment that an all powerful, divine, eternal, ineffable God does not need a human literary agent or a publisher?
[/quote]
And thank you for walking into that little ambush - you are exactly correct - there can only be one truth - so if the two messages are in direct conflict - only one can be true and thus the other false. if the other is false, then it cannot be the true God who gave it, thus making the other deity a false deity and NOT THE SAME. Thus endeth the lesson . . . .[/quote]
Oh, thanks. So Islam IS the truth after all? I don’t believe that, but thanks for clarifying your beliefs. You should tackle setting your ambushes more effectively before you move onto comparative religion.
[/quote]
I think he was trying to prove that your assumption that all three religions worshipped the same God as false. I think he did a perfect job of that.
He never mentioned which one is correct or false. If you want to get into that discussion then you might want to set up a new thread for all to see.
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]BBriere wrote:
Ok, you both make valid points. Remember, I am a believer in Noah’s Ark. I just doubt it will ever be found or is still intact. It really doesn’t matter. Someone that says they need to see Noah’s Ark to believe in God or the Bible would doubtfully actually change their mind after seeing it.[/quote]
Oh poppeycock. You thumpers always thump to the same drum. You want the critical thinking among us to have blind faith in a book put together by imperfect humans, under a corrupted process, with a legion of verified corrupted transliterations that were translated with the aim of fitting dogma rather than accuracy, and that was predated by other older religions that told many of the same stories.
If the argument is always going to be, “don’t look too closely”, “don’t subject it to examination and question” - instead, accept it on “blind faith”, I think to many critical thinking people, this does’t pass muster. In fact, I find most of the religious among us, have never studied the history of the bible, how it was constructed, or have even heard let alone considered some of the scholarly criticisms against it.
In fact, I find that most religious people, accept their brand of dogma, whether it be Islam, Christianity, etc., on “blind faith”. I do however, respect those that have done a critical analysis and still come away believing. At least they did some critical thinking along the way.
However, if such an ark were indeed found, and it was dated to the proper time period, and it was of the same size described in the Bible, and it contained evidence of two of every animal, etc etc etc., it would only give veracity to a deluge story that already predated the bible. The ark is hardly a starting point to make converts.
“Blind faith” - don’t ask me to have it. Don’t ask me to believe that the Muslims are wrong in their equal faith. Don’t ask me to believe that the Buddhists are wrong in their faith. Don’t ask me to believe that the Jews have it wrong. Don’t ask me to believe, blindly, that EVERYONE EXCEPT the Christians of this world have God figured out. Don’t ask me to believe that a loving perfect God has condemned all those born in a different culture who were raised under an different but equal and perhaps a culturally inescapable dogma. I’m not buying it. So sell it somewhere else.[/quote]
I too felt a similiar way as far as the Bible being written by imperfect humants, the fact that it’s a historical fact that dishonest translators mistranslated parts of the Bible due cultural, theological and political reasons. So I too had a hard time putting faith in the Bible and I lost interest in religion. An event in my life caused me to have a renewed interest in religion but I had to get past the issues I mentioned above and lot of the issues Bodyguard brings up. So I decided to examine the Bible and see if I could find answers to many of the questions I had. After searching and doing research I came away with more faith in the Bible then I every had and a renewed zeal for religion.
The first issue was why God used imperfect men to write the Bible? After looking into the matter I realized that God could not have done it any other way. The Bible says at Isaiah 45:18 that God made the earth for humans to inhabit. The Genesis account states that humans were created perfect: free from all sickness and death. Once Adam and Eve sinned two issues were raised as a result. The first was whether God was being fair and just in putting the restriction on Adam and Eve to not eat from the one tree. This then called into question God’s sovereignty and his rightfullness to rule or whether he has the right to say do or don’t do. The second issue was whether man could be like God and have self-determination and independence from God or whether man can rule themselves apart from God which is what Eve desired. All of this took place on earth with man so these issues that were raised had to be settled on earth with man. God also said that he was going to produce a seed that would undo the inherited affects of sin which results in death from Adam and kill the angel that became Satan. So through humans who were now imperfect God’s original plan for the earth and humans was going to be accomplished. Romans 15:4 states that “all the things that were written aforetime were written for our instruction, that through our endurance and through the comfort from the Scriptures we might have hope.” God wisely inspired imperfect humans to do the instructing to inspire hope and endurance. Since the Bible was written for imperfect humans only from an imperfect human perspective could man relate to other man. The Bible over and over again shows how the Bible writers and the people the Bible writers wrote about made mistakes and how God forgave them when they repented and how he punished them when they ignored repeated warnings.
When we read the Bible today we can see the dealing and history of someone like King David who was God’s chosen king but committed murder and adultltry, how God forgave him and the bad consequences that resulted from his actions. Or someone like the Apostle Paul who admits to having to struggle against sin and having physical ailments that slow him down. When we see examples such as these we can relate to the human side of these imperfect men. Angels can only observe humans they cannot properly relate to a human because they don’t have the same failings as humans so God wisely chose and inspired imperfect humans to write for other imperfect humans instead of spirit beings.
The other issue was the fact that dishonest Bible translators often times did not accurately translate the Bible. But copyist and translators who were careful and honest saw the mistakes and later corrected them. A good example is a passage in 1 John 5:7-8 which scholars call Johannine Comma, these verse read:
“7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit: and these three are one. 8And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.”
This rendering was in later Latin Vulgates in the 16th century and were the main verses used to support the Trininty doctrine because they are the only verses the explicitly delineates the doctrine. The Latin Vulgate of the 16th century is essentially the King James Bible. So for centuries this passage solidified the Trinity teaching in peoples mind as the main Christian doctine but the problem was that the passage was not in any of the Greek manuscripts before the 16th century. Page 81 in the book “Misquoting of Jesus” explains this well and no other translations except the King James translations has 1 John 5:7-8 rendered like above. Translators and copyist saw this and omitted that verse. The proper rendering from the NIV is:
“7For there are three that testify: 8 the[a] Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.”
My point is that translators who were honest and careful made sure that they copyied and translated the Bible accurately from the oldest available manuscripts. Throughout the centruries the Bible has been banned by governments and religious leaders and people who distributed or read the Bible were fined, imprisoned, tortured and often killed. So when people translated and copyied the Bible they risked their lives to do so. So I gained confidence in the fact that a lot of these people would not take the task of copying and translating the Bible lightly and they made sure that they copyied the Bible accurately.
The most compelling reason for me to put faith in the Bible is the accurate prophesy throughout the Bible. Being sort of a history buff I was able to appreciate how detailed some of the prophecy that history verfies happened just as the Bible states. For example, in the book of Isaiah and Jeremiah there is a prophecy written about 150 years in advance foretelling that a general named Cyrus would dry up the Euphrates enter into the city without any opposition and over throw Babylon in one night.(Is 44:27, 45:12 Jer 50:35-38, 51:30-32)
In Daniel chapter 8 there is a prophecy about the Medes and the Persian empire and how it would conquer like no other kingdom before it. At it’s might another King would conquer them along with the rest of the known world. At the height of his power this king would die and his kingdom would be divided into four. This of course is Alexander the Great who died at the height of his power and his kingdom was divided amongst his four generals (Daniel 8:3-12,20-25)
The prophecy even goes onto to state how from one of the four kingdom Rome would come about. This prophecy was written about 200 years before all of the above took place.
There is even a prophecy in Revelation about the United Nations!
So I truly believe that the Bible is inspired by God and God made sure that accurate copying and translating would occur so that the words in the Bible are God’s thoughts written down by men just like a secretary would write a letter her boss dictated to her.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
I think he was trying to prove that your assumption that all three religions worshipped the same God as false. I think he did a perfect job of that.
He never mentioned which one is correct or false. If you want to get into that discussion then you might want to set up a new thread for all to see.[/quote]
Sarcasm…flying over your head at 30,000 feet. We will reach our destination when you deplane in the City of Literal.
[quote]mse2us wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]BBriere wrote:
Ok, you both make valid points. Remember, I am a believer in Noah’s Ark. I just doubt it will ever be found or is still intact. It really doesn’t matter. Someone that says they need to see Noah’s Ark to believe in God or the Bible would doubtfully actually change their mind after seeing it.[/quote]
Oh poppeycock. You thumpers always thump to the same drum. You want the critical thinking among us to have blind faith in a book put together by imperfect humans, under a corrupted process, with a legion of verified corrupted transliterations that were translated with the aim of fitting dogma rather than accuracy, and that was predated by other older religions that told many of the same stories.
If the argument is always going to be, “don’t look too closely”, “don’t subject it to examination and question” - instead, accept it on “blind faith”, I think to many critical thinking people, this does’t pass muster. In fact, I find most of the religious among us, have never studied the history of the bible, how it was constructed, or have even heard let alone considered some of the scholarly criticisms against it.
In fact, I find that most religious people, accept their brand of dogma, whether it be Islam, Christianity, etc., on “blind faith”. I do however, respect those that have done a critical analysis and still come away believing. At least they did some critical thinking along the way.
However, if such an ark were indeed found, and it was dated to the proper time period, and it was of the same size described in the Bible, and it contained evidence of two of every animal, etc etc etc., it would only give veracity to a deluge story that already predated the bible. The ark is hardly a starting point to make converts.
“Blind faith” - don’t ask me to have it. Don’t ask me to believe that the Muslims are wrong in their equal faith. Don’t ask me to believe that the Buddhists are wrong in their faith. Don’t ask me to believe that the Jews have it wrong. Don’t ask me to believe, blindly, that EVERYONE EXCEPT the Christians of this world have God figured out. Don’t ask me to believe that a loving perfect God has condemned all those born in a different culture who were raised under an different but equal and perhaps a culturally inescapable dogma. I’m not buying it. So sell it somewhere else.[/quote]
I too felt a similiar way as far as the Bible being written by imperfect humants, the fact that it’s a historical fact that dishonest translators mistranslated parts of the Bible due cultural, theological and political reasons. So I too had a hard time putting faith in the Bible and I lost interest in religion. An event in my life caused me to have a renewed interest in religion but I had to get past the issues I mentioned above and lot of the issues Bodyguard brings up. So I decided to examine the Bible and see if I could find answers to many of the questions I had. After searching and doing research I came away with more faith in the Bible then I every had and a renewed zeal for religion.
The first issue was why God used imperfect men to write the Bible? After looking into the matter I realized that God could not have done it any other way. The Bible says at Isaiah 45:18 that God made the earth for humans to inhabit. The Genesis account states that humans were created perfect: free from all sickness and death. Once Adam and Eve sinned two issues were raised as a result. The first was whether God was being fair and just in putting the restriction on Adam and Eve to not eat from the one tree. This then called into question God’s sovereignty and his rightfullness to rule or whether he has the right to say do or don’t do. The second issue was whether man could be like God and have self-determination and independence from God or whether man can rule themselves apart from God which is what Eve desired. All of this took place on earth with man so these issues that were raised had to be settled on earth with man. God also said that he was going to produce a seed that would undo the inherited affects of sin which results in death from Adam and kill the angel that became Satan. So through humans who were now imperfect God’s original plan for the earth and humans was going to be accomplished. Romans 15:4 states that “all the things that were written aforetime were written for our instruction, that through our endurance and through the comfort from the Scriptures we might have hope.” God wisely inspired imperfect humans to do the instructing to inspire hope and endurance. Since the Bible was written for imperfect humans only from an imperfect human perspective could man relate to other man. The Bible over and over again shows how the Bible writers and the people the Bible writers wrote about made mistakes and how God forgave them when they repented and how he punished them when they ignored repeated warnings.
When we read the Bible today we can see the dealing and history of someone like King David who was God’s chosen king but committed murder and adultltry, how God forgave him and the bad consequences that resulted from his actions. Or someone like the Apostle Paul who admits to having to struggle against sin and having physical ailments that slow him down. When we see examples such as these we can relate to the human side of these imperfect men. Angels can only observe humans they cannot properly relate to a human because they don’t have the same failings as humans so God wisely chose and inspired imperfect humans to write for other imperfect humans instead of spirit beings.
The other issue was the fact that dishonest Bible translators often times did not accurately translate the Bible. But copyist and translators who were careful and honest saw the mistakes and later corrected them. A good example is a passage in 1 John 5:7-8 which scholars call Johannine Comma, these verse read:
“7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit: and these three are one. 8And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.”
This rendering was in later Latin Vulgates in the 16th century and were the main verses used to support the Trininty doctrine because they are the only verses the explicitly delineates the doctrine. The Latin Vulgate of the 16th century is essentially the King James Bible. So for centuries this passage solidified the Trinity teaching in peoples mind as the main Christian doctine but the problem was that the passage was not in any of the Greek manuscripts before the 16th century. Page 81 in the book “Misquoting of Jesus” explains this well and no other translations except the King James translations has 1 John 5:7-8 rendered like above. Translators and copyist saw this and omitted that verse. The proper rendering from the NIV is:
“7For there are three that testify: 8 the[a] Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.”
My point is that translators who were honest and careful made sure that they copyied and translated the Bible accurately from the oldest available manuscripts. Throughout the centruries the Bible has been banned by governments and religious leaders and people who distributed or read the Bible were fined, imprisoned, tortured and often killed. So when people translated and copyied the Bible they risked their lives to do so. So I gained confidence in the fact that a lot of these people would not take the task of copying and translating the Bible lightly and they made sure that they copyied the Bible accurately.
The most compelling reason for me to put faith in the Bible is the accurate prophesy throughout the Bible. Being sort of a history buff I was able to appreciate how detailed some of the prophecy that history verfies happened just as the Bible states. For example, in the book of Isaiah and Jeremiah there is a prophecy written about 150 years in advance foretelling that a general named Cyrus would dry up the Euphrates enter into the city without any opposition and over throw Babylon in one night.(Is 44:27, 45:12 Jer 50:35-38, 51:30-32)
In Daniel chapter 8 there is a prophecy about the Medes and the Persian empire and how it would conquer like no other kingdom before it. At it’s might another King would conquer them along with the rest of the known world. At the height of his power this king would die and his kingdom would be divided into four. This of course is Alexander the Great who died at the height of his power and his kingdom was divided amongst his four generals (Daniel 8:3-12,20-25)
The prophecy even goes onto to state how from one of the four kingdom Rome would come about. This prophecy was written about 200 years before all of the above took place.
There is even a prophecy in Revelation about the United Nations!
So I truly believe that the Bible is inspired by God and God made sure that accurate copying and translating would occur so that the words in the Bible are God’s thoughts written down by men just like a secretary would write a letter her boss dictated to her.[/quote]
To be absolutely honest with you, I think you’re a certifiable nut. I honestly did not read past the first paragraph or so where you started talking about Adam eating an apple from a tree. You write this tale as if you believe in it literally…and that’s when I knew I didn’t need to read your nonsense anymore. I don’t know what else you wrote, but you claimed ot have done “research”. It appears that your research did not extend beyond the Bible.
Furthermore, and again, I don’t know what else you wrote - I will not read it, you claim God had “no other choice” but to communicate his message thru imperfect humans. LOL. That does not deserve rebuttal. It is a ridiculous claim beyond the pale.
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
I think he was trying to prove that your assumption that all three religions worshipped the same God as false. I think he did a perfect job of that.
He never mentioned which one is correct or false. If you want to get into that discussion then you might want to set up a new thread for all to see.[/quote]
Sarcasm…flying over your head at 30,000 feet. We will reach our destination when you deplane in the City of Literal.[/quote]
Just to clarify, everyone should read all of your posts with Sarcasim? Got cha.
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
To be absolutely honest with you, I think you’re a certifiable nut. I honestly did not read past the first paragraph or so where you started talking about Adam eating an apple from a tree. You write this tale as if you believe in it literally…and that’s when I knew I didn’t need to read your nonsense anymore. I don’t know what else you wrote, but you claimed ot have done “research”. It appears that your research did not extend beyond the Bible.
Furthermore, and again, I don’t know what else you wrote - I will not read it, you claim God had “no other choice” but to communicate his message thru imperfect humans. LOL. That does not deserve rebuttal. It is a ridiculous claim beyond the pale.
[/quote]
Bodyguard why do you even post in these threads? You don’t want to debate, you don’t have time as you have said over and over again. Most of what you do are drive by quips with very little substance. You constantly appeal to authority, or some form of mass information out there “if we are willing to look”. It is obvious at this point you are doing nothing more than trolling in this thread. So either actually engage in a conversation and post counter points or lets this God forsaken thread die out. Please either make a point and argue that point or move along.
[quote]haney1 wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
To be absolutely honest with you, I think you’re a certifiable nut. I honestly did not read past the first paragraph or so where you started talking about Adam eating an apple from a tree. You write this tale as if you believe in it literally…and that’s when I knew I didn’t need to read your nonsense anymore. I don’t know what else you wrote, but you claimed ot have done “research”. It appears that your research did not extend beyond the Bible.
Furthermore, and again, I don’t know what else you wrote - I will not read it, you claim God had “no other choice” but to communicate his message thru imperfect humans. LOL. That does not deserve rebuttal. It is a ridiculous claim beyond the pale.
[/quote]
Bodyguard why do you even post in these threads? You don’t want to debate, you don’t have time as you have said over and over again. Most of what you do are drive by quips with very little substance. You constantly appeal to authority, or some form of mass information out there “if we are willing to look”. It is obvious at this point you are doing nothing more than trolling in this thread. So either actually engage in a conversation and post counter points or lets this God forsaken thread die out. Please either make a point and argue that point or move along.
[/quote]
I’m not trolling. And I’m not a librarian. I’m not going to run off and cite references that are there for anyone that wants to do a bit of digging. This VERY “DEBATE” has raged on for centuries. Do you think anyone here is going to bring a “eureka” moment to the thread? No. So, references or not, we’re all trolling? Unfortunately, this is not a math question with a solution, and even if it were, there are those of us here that would simply have “faith” that 2+2 = 5.
And I did make a point in my last post. You cannot “prove” the bible by referencing the bible.
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]haney1 wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
To be absolutely honest with you, I think you’re a certifiable nut. I honestly did not read past the first paragraph or so where you started talking about Adam eating an apple from a tree. You write this tale as if you believe in it literally…and that’s when I knew I didn’t need to read your nonsense anymore. I don’t know what else you wrote, but you claimed ot have done “research”. It appears that your research did not extend beyond the Bible.
Furthermore, and again, I don’t know what else you wrote - I will not read it, you claim God had “no other choice” but to communicate his message thru imperfect humans. LOL. That does not deserve rebuttal. It is a ridiculous claim beyond the pale.
[/quote]
Bodyguard why do you even post in these threads? You don’t want to debate, you don’t have time as you have said over and over again. Most of what you do are drive by quips with very little substance. You constantly appeal to authority, or some form of mass information out there “if we are willing to look”. It is obvious at this point you are doing nothing more than trolling in this thread. So either actually engage in a conversation and post counter points or lets this God forsaken thread die out. Please either make a point and argue that point or move along.
[/quote]
I’m not trolling. And I’m not a librarian. I’m not going to run off and cite references that are there for anyone that wants to do a bit of digging. This VERY “DEBATE” has raged on for centuries. Do you think anyone here is going to bring a “eureka” moment to the thread? No. So, references or not, we’re all trolling? Unfortunately, this is not a math question with a solution, and even if it were, there are those of us here that would simply have “faith” that 2+2 = 5.
And I did make a point in my last post. You cannot “prove” the bible by referencing the bible.
[/quote]
You need to work on your Math. I can not believe that you honestly have faith that 2+2=5. All Christians have faith that 2+2=4.
[quote]haney1 wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
To be absolutely honest with you, I think you’re a certifiable nut. I honestly did not read past the first paragraph or so where you started talking about Adam eating an apple from a tree. You write this tale as if you believe in it literally…and that’s when I knew I didn’t need to read your nonsense anymore. I don’t know what else you wrote, but you claimed ot have done “research”. It appears that your research did not extend beyond the Bible.
Furthermore, and again, I don’t know what else you wrote - I will not read it, you claim God had “no other choice” but to communicate his message thru imperfect humans. LOL. That does not deserve rebuttal. It is a ridiculous claim beyond the pale.
[/quote]
Bodyguard why do you even post in these threads? You don’t want to debate, you don’t have time as you have said over and over again. Most of what you do are drive by quips with very little substance. You constantly appeal to authority, or some form of mass information out there “if we are willing to look”. It is obvious at this point you are doing nothing more than trolling in this thread. So either actually engage in a conversation and post counter points or lets this God forsaken thread die out. Please either make a point and argue that point or move along.
[/quote]
This is why I started a new thread trying to make it geared towards a logical discussion. If someone says “your God is fake,” and I say “God is real” then who wins. Nobody. I tried to cite a source on this thread and one person who argued against me said they weren’t my secretary and didn’t have to look anything else up. Fine, you don’t want to do the research. Debate over. Come over the my thread and discuss whatever you like.
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]haney1 wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
To be absolutely honest with you, I think you’re a certifiable nut. I honestly did not read past the first paragraph or so where you started talking about Adam eating an apple from a tree. You write this tale as if you believe in it literally…and that’s when I knew I didn’t need to read your nonsense anymore. I don’t know what else you wrote, but you claimed ot have done “research”. It appears that your research did not extend beyond the Bible.
Furthermore, and again, I don’t know what else you wrote - I will not read it, you claim God had “no other choice” but to communicate his message thru imperfect humans. LOL. That does not deserve rebuttal. It is a ridiculous claim beyond the pale.
[/quote]
Bodyguard why do you even post in these threads? You don’t want to debate, you don’t have time as you have said over and over again. Most of what you do are drive by quips with very little substance. You constantly appeal to authority, or some form of mass information out there “if we are willing to look”. It is obvious at this point you are doing nothing more than trolling in this thread. So either actually engage in a conversation and post counter points or lets this God forsaken thread die out. Please either make a point and argue that point or move along.
[/quote]
I’m not trolling. And I’m not a librarian. I’m not going to run off and cite references that are there for anyone that wants to do a bit of digging. This VERY “DEBATE” has raged on for centuries. Do you think anyone here is going to bring a “eureka” moment to the thread? No. So, references or not, we’re all trolling? Unfortunately, this is not a math question with a solution, and even if it were, there are those of us here that would simply have “faith” that 2+2 = 5.
And I did make a point in my last post. You cannot “prove” the bible by referencing the bible.
[/quote]
I fail to see where you have debated anything in this entire thread. You make a claim then walk away. You don’t articulate that point, and you don’t defend it. You just make a claim about it. If this is such a waste of your time, then why are you wasting your time posting at all?
Who ever said we would solve this? the whole point of these threads is for people to engage and challenge existing ideas. I have no problem with your view point, I don’t particularly care for your style of make a comment and then leave it with out defending it, or supporting it.
You claim there are volumes of data that affirm your position on the Bible. Great! provide one and then let someone debate it. Other wise stop saying you don’t want to debate it, and then turning around and making a similiar claim.