-Removed-I am not sure exactly what you were saying is irrefutable, but no one has actually tried to refute it. They have only said that it is not irrefutable and that does not really prove it is refutable. But on the other hand, you now say it is refutable. So I guess no evidence needs to be presented that it is refutable and not irrefutable. Is what I have said here irrefutable or is it refutable? Does this make any sense at all?
The Instructor
The Instructor
Originally posted by Agerghe is aiming this thread at jws and their belief that jesus is less important than god-yahve? at least i think that's what the jws are thinking.
[b]This piece of evidence is irrefutable and a wonderful revelation of the nature of God and the Godhead.
"Wonderful" is a matter of opinion, "irrefutable" is just plain wrong[/b]
anywhoo, it is not meant as a debate between atheists and non
-Removed-I could be wrong, but I am guessing Jesus' instruction was written in the Gospels which come after the act where I assume you are taking the bit about what the disciples did from. So no, they didn't get it wrong, but rather the gospel writers made up Jesus' instruction after most of the disciples were long dead.
1 edit
-Removed-I think it is standard practice when two verses disagree, to assume that you are interpreting one of them wrongly, and that one, is the one that disagrees with your theology.
Considering the amount of interpretation required to accept that the Gospels are in any way factual, I think it would be trivial to find some interpretation that resolves your dilemma.
You of course will not be satisfied with it because it doesn't fit your own theology.
