05 Oct '12 16:02>1 edit
Robbie Carrobie, over to you explain :]
Originally posted by VoidSpiritI thought about it, but I didn't want to make things too difficult for Robbie at this stage - he's a bit shy you see when it comes to defending his Bible properly! Just going to give him one thing to think about at a time for now.
you should also include the tree/fruit that gives eternal life.
Originally posted by Agergare you aware of the concept of pearls before swine?
I thought about it, but I didn't want to make things too difficult for Robbie at this stage - he's a bit shy you see when it comes to defending his Bible properly! Just going to give him one thing to think about at a time
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou can tell us all about pearls and swine after you tell us all about how trees of knowledge don't involve magic. You don't seriously want people to think you're just making stuff up again to deflect challenges towards your pseudo-literalReveal Hidden Content
are you aware of the concept of pearls before swine?
Originally posted by Agergah, i see you've taken the pearls before swine literally by keeping the pearls of your statement hidden before the swine!!
You can tell us all about pearls and swine after you tell us all about how trees of knowledge don't involve magic. You don't seriously want people to think you're just making stuff up again to deflect challenges towards your pseudo-literal[hidden]i.e. literal in most parts, but with some random \"interpretation\" when it takes your fancy, and an added dose of crazy for good measure[/hidden]interpretation of the Bible do you!??
Originally posted by AgergI did not introduce magic, you did, i did not introduce apples, you did, I did not
You can tell us all about pearls and swine after you tell us all about how trees of knowledge don't involve magic. You don't seriously want people to think you're just making stuff up again to deflect challenges towards your pseudo-literal[hidden]i.e. literal in most parts, but with some random \"interpretation\" when it takes your fancy, and an added dose of crazy for good measure[/hidden]interpretation of the Bible do you!??
Originally posted by robbie carrobiePrecisely, sir.
I did not introduce magic, you did, i did not introduce apples, you did, I did not
introduce talking snakes, you did, just saying and unless you are willing to make
room for a supernatural element, which you are not, then nothing in scripture will
make much sense to you
Originally posted by sumydidMy only regret sir is that we are not living in the South, whereupon, I would slap the
Precisely, sir.
This apple/intelligence garbage is a self-contradictory and self-defeating argument. The unbeliever first--for the sake of argument--declares the bible literal and true by suggesting that an apple from a tree gives instant knowledge of good and evil. Then, the unbeliever discards all the rest of the bible as untrue, declaring miracles as ment, then you also have to allow for a all-powerful Creator who can make *ANYTHING* happen.
Originally posted by twhiteheadAre you sure he did; I think he would be quite aware that the 'tree of life' and of the 'tree of the knowledge of good and evil', are symbolic.
It appears you are not following the discussion. It was Robbie who declared the tree (and the garden it was in) to be entirely natural.