1. Joined
    05 Feb '11
    Moves
    2158
    30 Sep '11 04:152 edits
    Originally posted by sumydid

    My wife is Mexican Catholic. ....but, I still consider her a sister in the Body of Christ. A misguided one, in my opinion, but a sister nonetheless! 🙂
    Hi Sumydid,
    According to Mt 22:30,
    she is your wife on earth,
    but when you go toheaven she is your sister 😉
  2. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    01 Oct '11 07:412 edits
    Have we established that Yahshua was crucified on Wednesday and placed in a
    borrowed tomb of a rich man, wrapped in fine linen (Shroud of Turin), and
    covered with about 100 pounds of spices just before the high day Sabbath?
    I believe we have also established that on Friday after the high day Sabbath
    some of the women followers of Yahshua (Jesus) went to buy spices and then
    prepared the mixture with perfume so they would have it to anoint Yahshua
    after they rested on the weekly Saturday Sabbath. At dawn on the first day of
    the week the women came to the tomb bringing the spices they had prepared
    with them, but Yahshua had risen.

    P.S. Whether or not the Shroud of Turin is the linen cloth is not important
    here. However, I believe it is the burial cloth of Yahshua (Jesus).
  3. R
    Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    15 Sep '04
    Moves
    7051
    01 Oct '11 21:39
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Have we established that Yahshua was crucified on Wednesday and placed in a
    borrowed tomb of a rich man, wrapped in fine linen (Shroud of Turin), and
    covered with about 100 pounds of spices just before the high day Sabbath?
    I believe we have also established that on Friday after the high day Sabbath
    some of the women followers of Yahshua (Jesus) went to ...[text shortened]... nen cloth is not important
    here. However, I believe it is the burial cloth of Yahshua (Jesus).
    No, in fact, we have not. As I pointed out in my last post, nothing you have cited in the gospels explicitly indicates a sequence of four different days: Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday. Your reading depends entirely on a convenient interpretation that the buying of spices took a whole day. That is unlikely. The gospels do not say that they bought spice, observed the Sabbath and then went to Jesus' tomb. Probably they bought the spices in the early morning.

    I am not yet ready to respond to the parts of this argument. I am fairly busy over the next week. 🙂
  4. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    01 Oct '11 21:52
    Originally posted by Conrau K
    No, in fact, we have not. As I pointed out in my last post, nothing you have cited in the gospels explicitly indicates a sequence of four different days: Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday. Your reading depends entirely on a convenient interpretation that the buying of spices took a whole day. That is unlikely. The gospels do not say that they bought ...[text shortened]... not yet ready to respond to the parts of this argument. I am fairly busy over the next week. 🙂
    No, that can not be true. It is impossible to read it that way because that
    defies reason and logic.
  5. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    01 Oct '11 22:27
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    No, that can not be true. It is impossible to read it that way because that
    defies reason and logic.
    Does double take..... does it again... rubs eyes.... does dramatic chipmunk.....

    I'm sorry,

    I don't want to get in the way of you aptly demonstrating how vague and contradictory the bible is....

    But did you just say something in the bible couldn't be read in a certain way because it defied reason and logic????

    The whole damn thing defies reason and logic, reason and logic are not involved in any way.

    Reason left in a huff during the first draft, and logic never entered the building...
  6. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    01 Oct '11 22:35
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    Does double take..... does it again... rubs eyes.... does dramatic chipmunk.....

    I'm sorry,

    I don't want to get in the way of you aptly demonstrating how vague and contradictory the bible is....

    But did you just say something in the bible couldn't be read in a certain way because it defied reason and logic????

    The whole damn thing defies rea ...[text shortened]... way.

    Reason left in a huff during the first draft, and logic never entered the building...
    That just shows how ignorant of the Holy Bible you are again. You
    should stick to something you know something about. It certainly
    isn't the Holy Bible.
  7. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    01 Oct '11 23:57
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    That just shows how ignorant of the Holy Bible you are again. You
    should stick to something you know something about. It certainly
    isn't the Holy Bible.
    Well I admit I haven't read all of it.
    However all the bits I have read were vague and contradictory, among other things.

    Also others I have a level of trust in also make similar claims, claims that have thus far checked out.

    And also it's a bit rich for you to complain about me talking about the bible because I don't
    know enough about it when you wont stop wittering about how evolution is wrong despite
    demonstrating countless times that you don't know what it is.

    Double standards?
  8. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    02 Oct '11 00:33
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    Well I admit I haven't read all of it.
    However all the bits I have read were vague and contradictory, among other things.

    Also others I have a level of trust in also make similar claims, claims that have thus far checked out.

    And also it's a bit rich for you to complain about me talking about the bible because I don't
    know enough about it when y ...[text shortened]... despite
    demonstrating countless times that you don't know what it is.

    Double standards?
    How did I demonstrate that I do not know what evolution is?
    I don't know all the details of evolution; but I do know what it is.

    The theory of evolution is a naturalistic theory of the history of life on earth.
    The theory states that the various types of animals and plants have their origin
    in a common ancestor and the distinguishable differences are due to
    modifications in successive generations.
  9. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    02 Oct '11 00:40
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    How did I demonstrate that I do not know what evolution is?
    I don't know all the details of evolution; but I do know what it is.

    The theory of evolution is a naturalistic theory of the history of life on earth.
    The theory states that the various types of animals and plants have their origin
    in a common ancestor and the distinguishable differences are due to
    modifications in successive generations.
    ok so far, but you are talking about what evolution explains, not what it is.

    Evolution is the name for the process by which what you explain happens.

    It is your understanding of the process I question, based on what you have said about it
    in the past.
    You have often and repeatedly made statements that you could only think true if you did
    not understand evolution.

    So the next question is how do you understand the process of evolution to work.
    Because that's the crucial bit.

    Evolution explains the diversity of life on earth, however what I am asking if you understand is
    how it explains the diversity of life on earth.
  10. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    02 Oct '11 00:53
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    ok so far, but you are talking about what evolution explains, not what it is.

    Evolution is the name for the process by which what you explain happens.

    It is your understanding of the process I question, based on what you have said about it
    in the past.
    You have often and repeatedly made statements that you could only think true if you did
    not u ...[text shortened]... however what I am asking if you understand is
    how it explains the diversity of life on earth.
    I don't know how it is suppose to work; but I do know the idea is
    flawed, since it rules out God's action in the process. This is in
    direct conflict with the words in the Holy Bible, in my opinion.
  11. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    02 Oct '11 01:02
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I don't know how it is suppose to work; but I do know the idea is
    flawed, since it rules out God's action in the process. This is in
    direct conflict with the words in the Holy Bible, in my opinion.
    Ahh there you see,
    you presuppose it to be wrong without actually understanding what the idea actually is.

    I can tell you that evolution happens all the time, whether it created all the diversity of
    life or not, we can see evolution happening all around us.

    In microbiology for example you can see viruses and bacteria evolving over very short periods.

    This is why HIV is so difficult to defeat.
    It evolves into different versions almost in front of your eyes.

    Have a look at this video and see what you think.

    YouTube&feature=channel_video_title
  12. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    02 Oct '11 01:15
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    Ahh there you see,
    you presuppose it to be wrong without actually understanding what the idea actually is.

    I can tell you that evolution happens all the time, whether it created all the diversity of
    life or not, we can see evolution happening all around us.

    In microbiology for example you can see viruses and bacteria evolving over very short per ...[text shortened]... nd see what you think.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afm3vjn0PuQ&feature=channel_video_title
    What you call evolution is not evolution. It is adaptation and sometimes
    mutations. That is not evolution, as some seem to think. A caterpillar
    turning into a butterfy is not evolution. God designed it to do that just
    like he designed organisms to adapt.
  13. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    02 Oct '11 01:34
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    What you call evolution is not evolution. It is adaptation and sometimes
    mutations. That is not evolution, as some seem to think. A caterpillar
    turning into a butterfy is not evolution. God designed it to do that just
    like he designed organisms to adapt.
    Yes you have said that before and again it is wrong.
    And nobody other than you claims scientists think a
    caterpillar turning into a butterfly is evolution.

    You have just made my point that you don't understand what the theory of evolution is.
    There is no point in discussing it further unless you are actually prepared to learn
    what the theory of evolution actually is, rather than the straw man you think it is.

    I don't mean start believing in evolution, although that would be sensible, but if
    we are ever going to have a meaningful discussion about it we need to both be
    talking about the same thing.
    You are talking about some half baked thing you have made up (or been taught
    by someone else who made it up) which renders the discussion pointless.
    We might as well be talking a different language.
  14. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    02 Oct '11 02:02
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    Yes you have said that before and again it is wrong.
    And nobody other than you claims scientists think a
    caterpillar turning into a butterfly is evolution.

    You have just made my point that you don't understand what the theory of evolution is.
    There is no point in discussing it further unless you are actually prepared to learn
    what the theory of e ...[text shortened]... up) which renders the discussion pointless.
    We might as well be talking a different language.
    Maybe we are.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree