22 Mar 05
Originally posted by lilnicky123Wrong answer.
no
http://www.thecityline.com/html/city/city.htm
Scholars also wanted to say that the Israelites never fought with the kingdom of Edom, but archeological finds have put those lies to rest as well.
Tell me, why is it that even though archeology has never proven the Bible wrong, you all don't respect it?
22 Mar 05
Originally posted by DarfiusYou ask a question.
Wrong answer.
http://www.thecityline.com/html/city/city.htm
Scholars also wanted to say that the Israelites never fought with the kingdom of Edom, but archeological finds have put those lies to rest as well.
Tell me, why is it that even though archeology has never proven the Bible wrong, you all don't respect it?
You get an answer.
You then reveal that you already have a solid opinion (nothing wrong with that ), AND that you hold no notion of entertaining anything to the contrary.
Bad form sir. Bad form. 😉
22 Mar 05
Originally posted by OmnislashThe point was that no one does research, they simply parrot what they hear.
You ask a question.
You get an answer.
You then reveal that you already have a solid opinion (nothing wrong with that ), AND that you hold no notion of entertaining anything to the contrary.
Bad form sir. Bad form. 😉
Now if King David was real, what else was real?
22 Mar 05
Originally posted by DarfiusAgenda? Try the truth. I am a seeker of the truth, nothing more. If that is not Gods agenda, then I do not speak for him. If it is his agenda, then I am a part of it.
Not concerning the veracity of the Bible, no. Who's agenda are you attempting to further, Omni? God's or your own?
Back on topic, if that was not the point of the thread, why is that the focus of your attention? Again, the premise by title of this thread is to discuss a posibility. You, however, have no intention of actually discussing anything. As usual, as is unveiled by your response to the very first post, you desire nothing but to plug your own opinions, judge others as unworthy/unrighteous/etc., and preach you own personal brand of scriptures.
While I may have found great truth in the scriptures my friend, my search is never ending. It is my purpose to expand my understanding untill the day I die. You stopped your search. When or where I have no idea, but the ramifications of this is your inability to respectfully entertain notions which flaw your own interpretations, be they academic or otherwise.
That is the truth, nothing more, to the best of my honest and open perception. If I am incorrect, you are welcome to elaborate and show me the error in my thought process. Otherwise, by all means, continue this adventure in asinity.
Pax Vobiscum
22 Mar 05
Originally posted by OmnislashIf you do not believe Jesus Christ is the Truth, then I need not question your salvation, as you do not have it.
Agenda? Try the truth. I am a seeker of the truth, nothing more. If that is not Gods agenda, then I do not speak for him. If it is his agenda, then I am a part of it.
Back on topic, if that was not the point of the thread, why is that the focus of your attention? Again, the premise by title of this thread is to discuss a posibility. You, however, have ...[text shortened]... y thought process. Otherwise, by all means, continue this adventure in asinity.
Pax Vobiscum
I am more than willing to discuss King David. It served a double purpose of pointing out to people that they call the Bible false, but where is it false? Archeology has only proven it true, where do we begin to doubt it? Why would authors be 100% accurate concerning people, places, and events, and then lie about areas concerning the supernatural?
You present me as some type of dogmatic idiot, but it just so happens that the Bible IS right on everything it discusses. I am open to anything, but I am not open to hearing that God isn't real because I know from evidence, observations and my personal relationship with Him that He is.
22 Mar 05
1 edit
Originally posted by DarfiusI have yet to meet anybody who expresses reasonable doubts about the existence of King David. But as to your question: The Bible makes all sorts of claims. Some are historical claims, some are spiritual claims. There is no reason to think that the accuracy or innaccuracy of the former entail anything about the latter, or the latter about the former. If Joshua did commit genocide in Canaan, that doesn't entail that we ought love our neighbor (and vice-versa) If Noah did not build an ark, that does not entail that we ought love our neighbor (and vice-versa). The reason I do not respect much of the Bible is that I take the Bible to be flat wrong on any number of spiritual and moral matters.
Wrong answer.
http://www.thecityline.com/html/city/city.htm
Scholars also wanted to say that the Israelites never fought with the kingdom of Edom, but archeological finds have put those lies to rest as well.
Tell me, why is it that ...[text shortened]... ology has never proven the Bible wrong, you all don't respect it?
22 Mar 05
Originally posted by bbarrWhy would men record truth so carefully and then boldly lie about God, bbarr? Does that make sense?
I have yet to meet anybody who expresses reasonable doubts about the existence of King David. But as to your question: The Bible makes all sorts of claims. Some are historical claims, some are spiritual claims. There is no reason to think that the accuracy or innaccuracy of the former entail anything about the latter, or the latter about the former. If Jo ...[text shortened]... he Bible is that I take the Bible to be flat wrong on any number of spiritual and moral matters.
22 Mar 05
1 edit
Originally posted by DarfiusOkay lad, lets clarify the obvious.
If you do not believe Jesus Christ is the Truth, then I need not question your salvation, as you do not have it.
I am more than willing to discuss King David. It served a double purpose of pointing out to people that they call the Bible ...[text shortened]... observations and my personal relationship with Him that He is.
Formost. Where did I question the truth of Christ? I highly question the truth of Darfius, but please, show me where I have said I question the truth of Christ. Please, show me.
On that note, I just want to be clear about this. Your statment infers that you created this thread as a trap for people who simply dismiss the Bible as false without cause? So, your means of revealing the truth is by deception. That is really very sad, if you think about it.
Further more, I have yet to mention anything of dogma in the thread, as such I fail to see where you derive your analysis of my presentation. I present you as you are lad, with an open mouth and closed ears. So you are not open to the notion that God may not exist. So? What does that have to do with you presenting a thread under a pretense of intelligent banter, while the true intent is simply to preach? Not that I am suprised mind you. I was pretty sure what was going to happen in here when I came, but that does not excuse it.
I reinerate sir. Bad form.
Pax Vobiscum
22 Mar 05
Originally posted by OmnislashPresenting King David as a historical figure is preaching?
Okay lad, lets clarify the obvious.
Formost. Where did I question the truth of Christ? I highly question the truth of Darfius, but please, show me where I have said I question the truth of Christ. Please, show me.
On that note, I just want to be clear about this. Your statment infers that you created this thread as a trap for people who simply dism ...[text shortened]... n here when I came, but that does not excuse it.
I reinerate sir. Bad form.
Pax Vobiscum
Well, when you say you doubt the veracity of the Bible enough to search for truth elsewhere, it's a logical inference to say that you doubt Jesus to some degree.
Let's be up front, Omni, are you a Christian in your heart and soul as well, or just your mind?
22 Mar 05
Originally posted by DarfiusFirst, I didn't claim that anybody was lying (much less boldly lying). Second, I don't agree with you the the Bible contains a careful rendering of historical truth. My point above is that one can fail to respect the Bible despite any archeological evidence consistent with the historical claims of the Bible. For instance, one can fail to respect the Bible because they find its portrayal of the character of God repugnant, or because they think its portrayal of humanity as fallen is silly and demeaning, or because they think its take on human sexuality is outdated and absurd, or...
Why would men record truth so carefully and then boldly lie about God, bbarr? Does that make sense?