<What do you think I have been referring to? I mean seriously. Are you reading these short little posts of mine?>
It would have been so much easier (and shorter) to simply type “Old Testament” or “New Testament” or “Both.” I wonder why you didn’t. You do know that the Christian Bible is comprised of the Old Testament and the New Testament (don’t you?)
Originally posted by @romans1009So you do not know what happened in the years 393, 397, 414, 419? That's interesting.
If you’re referring to the years when books of the New Testament were written, that’s not at all accurate.
<It's just as well I didn't spend any time indulging you by typing out stuff for you that is readily available on this very thread. One wonders why you fired off several questions then.>
I have little interest (actually no interest) in reading through 35 pages of posts in the hope that you may have addressed a point I raised or answered a question I posed. Doesn’t seem like much work to simply type out a few sentences, but whatever
Originally posted by @romans1009If you read what I am writing, it's blatantly obvious what I am referring to.
And are you referring to the Old Testament or the New Testament (or both?)
Originally posted by @romans1009Sounds a lot like one of dj2becker's punchlines.
I have little interest (actually no interest) in reading through 35 pages of posts in the hope that you may have addressed a point I raised or answered a question I posed. Doesn’t seem like much work to simply type out a few sentences, but whatever
Originally posted by @romans1009You suspect it? So do not know for sure what happened in the years 393, 397, 414, 419? You only have some suspicion about the significance of those years?
I suspect you’re referring to the canon or selection of which books would be in the Bible.
Originally posted by @romans1009Just read what I posted - addressed to you - on page 34. Stop pretending you don't know what I am referring to.
No offense, but it seems like you just want to argue rather than answer simple questions. Kind of a waste of time.
Originally posted by @fmfI have no idea who that is, but this conversation is rapidly becoming pointless. When your responses to sincere questions are “read the thread,” “it’s obvious what I’m referring to” and “you sound like so and so,” it’s not worth continuing.
Sounds a lot like one of dj2becker's punchlines.
Have a good evening!🙂
Originally posted by @fmfI’m not that interested in the subject. I’m interested in what was written in the books, not which ones were included in the Bible, though I remember reading the process by which books were selected (the criteria) and it seemed very rigorous and practical to my mind.
You suspect it? So do not know for sure what happened in the years 393, 397, 414, 419? You only have some suspicion about the significance of those years?
Originally posted by @romans1009None, of course, it's all conjecture.
If so, will be interesting to see what evidence he has to support that view (or those views.)
But he does excel at that.
Originally posted by @fmfDo you? Or are you simply 'certain' that what they wrote is untrue?
Obviously, you kind of need to answer "no" and/or say something like "that’s a question that can’t be answered", as indeed you did. Certainly, answering "yes" would be a bit inconvenient. Do you know anything for sure about the writers and the editors over the four centuries that the Bible was in the process of being 'finalized' or are you simply certain that what they wrote is 'true'.