What would you say?

@kellyjay said
You are a deceiver pure and simple.

Are you planning to go into a massive huff and stop talking to him because your beliefs differ from his?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Again, the Gospel of Thomas depicts a quite malevolent Jesus in his infancy. It's inclusion in the Bible would have affected the way the other books would have been perceived. This is one of the reasons it wasn't included, to remove the contradiction.

That said, the Bible is riddled with contradictions, whether you accept that or not. (Simply riddled with them).

Point to some.

@kellyjay said
Liar

Your admission is right there in the post I’ve linked to.

You yourself have acknowledged that the bible is NOT the inerrant, complete and exclusive word of god.

Here:
https://www.redhotpawn.com/forum/spirituality/attributes-of-god.195809/page-10#post_4617123

@fmf said
What is found at the link makes you the liar, not divegeester. You have become one of the most prominent low-integrity posters on this forum.

Indeed.

@kellyjay said
You are a liar and deceiver tell the truth.

This sort of low-brow abuse doesn’t paint your spirituality in a good light KellyJay.

@kellyjay said
Quote the source for that?

I’ve given you quotes for this dozens of times; you are being dishonest KellyJay.

@kellyjay said
Where in this quote does it say that our hearts are now more important than the written Word and can replace it? So according to you these are the words of man, so why trust it over the written Word?

Where does is it written that what’s in a book is more important than god stating “I will write my law on their hearts”?

@kellyjay said
You are a deceiver pure and simple.

These silly slurs are beneath you KellyJay.

@fmf said
Are you planning to go into a massive huff and stop talking to him because your beliefs differ from his?

It’s building up isn’t it.

@kellyjay said
Point to some.

What, again?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
What, again?

KellyJay does this frequently; he pretends previous conversations where facts, proofs and evidences were provided and which he discussed, haven’t happened.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Reason should be based on tangible and verifiable facts. Please provide those for life after death, or simply accept you have nothing more than faith. (AKA Pie in the sky).

Reason and science should be based on tangible and verifiable facts, yet there are many things science is totally blind to that exist nonetheless. So suggesting there is no evidence for something alone doesn't mean much when there are plenty of things we can see and experience and have knowledge about that science cannot prove with tangible and verifiable facts.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
What, again?

Frankly, I don't recall you proving any, you did state something you thought was but I didn't think they rise to that level.

@kellyjay said
Frankly, I don't recall you proving any, you did state something you thought was but I didn't think they rise to that level.

Ah, yes. You "don't recall".

That old chestnut.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
What, again?

If he persuades you to lay out a few examples for him, he will not "recall" it in six months from now.