As in the days of Noah.....

[Xaquin44]

boy were you misinformed.

seriously though, you started it.

random loosely pertaining bible quotes mean nothing. It's not even a discussion when you pop in a random quote and say nothing.

edit: let's look closer at your first few posts.

1: Statement claiming something, and supplying no evidence or sources to back it up.

2: Random bible quote with no explanation or context.

3: Thinly veiled jab at me for my posts poking fun at you.

your posts aren't (as of yet) exactly discussion worthy, in that there is nothing to discuss about them. Add your own opinions or at least put them in some kind of context and we'll get this show on the road.

 

[marv1]

Wow, am I impressed. I guess I am in the right place. You guys are hilarious. The reason I quoted Matthew 7 was because I initially thought that you (after reading several of your comments prior to this) could care less about Christ or His word. Your use of derogatory terms when you don't like what is written led me to believe as such. Therefore, Matthew 7 was my way of saying that there are only two choices regarding Christ; either you believe or you don't. You appeared to be in the don't category. A person, such as Baydoll can only do so much to convince you of Christ, his existence, the truth of the God inspired word, his fulfillment of prophecy, and on and on and on. I, believing that you are in the "don't" category, wanted you to ponder the words of Matthew 7. Apparently you did but only for a moment before you attacked me. Hmmm...is it me you are attacking? That is also debatable. Do I care if you are in the "don't" category? Of course, however the word says in Matthew 13:13, "...because seeing they do not see and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand." You can beat some people over the head with the bible and no matter what evidence you share with them, or the testimonies, they still choose to not believe. I hope that is not you. But if it is, I will share this last thought with you. Christ died for you so that you could have everlasting life. He loved you and me that much.

 

[Xaquin44]

But if it is, I will share this last thought with you. Christ died for you so that you could have everlasting life. He loved you and me that much.

actually, I believe Christ died nearly 2,000 years before I was born.

If he died for the people way back when, that's between them and him.

 

[This_person]

I must have made a mistake. I thought this was a religious forum where mature discussions would take place regarding...ugh religion.

People that try and use the religion forum for fellowship are quickly inundated with unsolicited critical comments.

Though they ask for proof, they've yet to provide any proof, by the same standards, for any of their positions. They like to poke meaningless holes instead of join in the spirit of the conversation, or simply mind their own business. Read any thread, even many of the "please pray for...." threads, and they quickly turn nasty against people of faith.

 

[baydoll]

I like your positions.

Thanks, foodcritic!

Just keep in mind the old saying, you can't reason with a drunk person.

And I'm beginning to see just how 'drunk' they are, too, sadly. Seems as if old 'Screwtape' has them firmly entrenced in his camp, doesn't it.

You are trying to convince them of the details. They have rejected the whole context. :buddies

Yes I'm beginning to realize that as well, unfortunetly.

Reminds me of the hardheaded and stubborn Pharasees who STILL rejected Jesus EVEN after He showed them miracle after miracle...

They still would not believe.

 

[baydoll]

I must have made a mistake. I thought this was a religious forum where mature discussions would take place regarding...ugh religion.

Ignore them, Marv.

 

[Xaquin44]

Reminds me of the hardheaded and stubborn Pharasees who STILL rejected Jesus EVEN after He showed them miracle after miracle...

They still would not believe.

you making poorly backed up and/or completely false statements hardly qualifies as a miracle. In fact, there is hardly a comparison, unless it went like: jesus performed many miracles. It would be a miracle if baydoll would read an actual history book or garner some common sense.

 

[Xaquin44]

Ignore them, Marv.

much like many people here ignore fact.

(note: I am not one of these)

 

[baydoll]

Are Bats really birds? (Leviticus 11:13)

Rabbits chew a Cud? (Deuteronomy 14:7-8)

Is the Mustard seed the smallest seed? (Mathew 13:32)

Does the Mustard seed grow into a tree? (Mathew 13:32)

Does the Earth Move ? (Hebrews 1:10)
__________________

Are bats really birds? I'll start with that one.

The book of Leviticus was written for the Israelites. It was also written in plain language that THEY would understand. It lists rules for them to follow such as what animals were 'clean' or 'not clean' to eat. With that in mind, let me ask you a question: how would those people back then KNOW that the bat was not a bird?

 

[baydoll]

I'll be back later....I have some work that needs to be done this morning but will try and answer the remaining questions later, God willing.

Have a good morning, everyone.

 

[Xaquin44]

Are Bats really birds? (Leviticus 11:13)

Rabbits chew a Cud? (Deuteronomy 14:7-8)

Is the Mustard seed the smallest seed? (Mathew 13:32)

Does the Mustard seed grow into a tree? (Mathew 13:32)

Does the Earth Move ? (Hebrews 1:10)
__________________

Are bats really birds? I'll start with that one.

The book of Leviticus was written for the Israelites. It was also written in plain language that THEY would understand. It lists rules for them to follow such as what animals were 'clean' or 'not clean' to eat. With that in mind, let me ask you a question: how would those people back then KNOW that the bat was not a bird?

....

hair would be a pretty good indication ....

 

[baydoll]

you making poorly backed up and/or completely false statements hardly qualifies as a miracle. In fact, there is hardly a comparison, unless it went like: jesus performed many miracles. It would be a miracle if baydoll would read an actual history book or garner some common sense.

And I love you too, sweetie!

 

[Xaquin44]

I'll be back later....I have some work that needs to be done this morning but will try and answer the remaining questions later, God willing.

Have a good morning, everyone.

why bother? you're always wrong, and when it's pointed out with factual evidence to back it up you just ignore it.

 

[Xaquin44]

And I love you too, sweetie!

I doubt that.

 

[tommyjones]

Are Bats really birds? (Leviticus 11:13)

Rabbits chew a Cud? (Deuteronomy 14:7-8)

Is the Mustard seed the smallest seed? (Mathew 13:32)

Does the Mustard seed grow into a tree? (Mathew 13:32)

Does the Earth Move ? (Hebrews 1:10)
__________________

Are bats really birds? I'll start with that one.

The book of Leviticus was written for the Israelites. It was also written in plain language that THEY would understand. It lists rules for them to follow such as what animals were 'clean' or 'not clean' to eat. With that in mind, let me ask you a question: how would those people back then KNOW that the bat was not a bird?

the same way they would have known a flying fish isn't a bird.

Besides, GOD KNEW, why would he give them false information?


and you promised to answer all the questions i had about your post last week, but i am still waiting.

 

[This_person]

That comment is beneath you, and not very Christian. The original Thread Creator asked questions, and were answered (link). Whenever theres been a call for fellowship, its been left alone. Its when the call is "Can you believe the idiocy of what/how (Insert other Belief/Faith/Religion here) believe", or when a poster makes a post against a different religion, while ignoring and excusing the violence in that exists in his own. Or, as in this case, when a Thread Poster issues a Solicitation about what a passage means.

Now, come on; you know that this thread was begun with the intent of like-minded fellowship, not

not much, as it's fiction ....

-or-​

Man on Man love is bad, but banging your daughters is good

(you still haven't answered where the passage is that even implies your statement here, by the way. This is what I mean by baseless attacks)

Thus, my comment was neither non-Christian-like, nor beneath me. It was simply a statement of fact.

The entire premise of your Belief is Faith in a 2000 year old book, created by Committee and translated/mistranslated numerous times. Your instruction manual wasnt even understood by the People at the time.

The entire premise of your belief, in the Bible requires you to look through rose colored glasses, when you point out errors you can expect :

Of course when you ask, "how can you emphatically trust the accuracy of a document when you KNOW it is replete with errors" or "what makes allows you to trust the trustworthiness of a book when even you can admit there are mistranslations in it. Should make you wonder about the infallabity of a document you KNOW is rife with errors".
That one is covered too

Belief/Faith gives comfort in the absence of Facts

That is your entire defense against Science, a 2000 year old, many times, mistranslated Book that requires you to have Faith in believing. If it was presented today, would be ridiculed for its idiocy (and why should that be? would it be any less holy today than 2000 years ago?).

You continue to ask or try to compare a Belief in Logic and Tests (to support Facts) versus a Belief in Faith. You fail to understand they are 2 disparate items and there isnt a comparison.

This is not true. The OT was a God inspired series of books on history (not complete history, just the stuff you need to know). The NT is a series of books from the point of view of people who were there, or the letters they wrote about it.

While it's good to see you write that there is an absence of any facts toward any other explaination, I think that was just a Freudian slip on your part. You write there there is a "defense against science".... where does that come from. Science and religion do not oppose one another. Indeed, every archeological exploration, every facet of scientific discovery has only gone to either prove the veracity of the Biblical stories, or, worst case, be meaningless to them. I'm not a young earther, and I don't understand that philosophy - you can't get there without the word "assume" somewhere in the explaination of how they come up with the dates, and that takes it right out of the water, for me.

 

[Kain99]

I'd like to teach the world to sing
In perfect harmony
I'd like to hold it in my arms and keep it company
I'd like to see the world for once
All standing hand in hand
And hear them echo through the hills "Ah, peace throughout the land"

Have Coke People!

 

[This_person]

While i'm glad that you arent a New Earther (its actually scary that the belief is still prevalant, and that those on here, who's job it is to Teach Children History do believe in it), it doesnt change the fact that you do try to Equate Science with Theology. You did it in the last couple of sentences in your above screed.

"Screed"?

I don't claim to NOT equate science with theology. In many cases, the similarities are quite astounding.

When it comes to how a hummingbird flies, or how an internal combustion engine works, theology is outclassed by science, because it's not even trying to figure those things out. But, when it comes to the origins of the universe, the origins of life, etc., theology and science are on even footing. No one knows for sure, no one CAN know for sure, and everyone claims to have the only possible answer. No one can prove their answer, mind you, without esoteric examples of things that don't really apply, but make the person believe what they believe. Evolution and creation both do not pass the common sense test, yet they're the two biggest competing answers. The Big Bang and Genesis say the same damned thing, but people argue over which one is correct. When held to the same standards of proof, testing, peer review, etc., neither one could possibly be held as a scientific study - but one is, because it doesn't assume (directly) a supreme being. That's really the only difference between the two competing thoughts.

 

[baydoll]

the same way they would have known a flying fish isn't a bird.

Besides, GOD KNEW, why would he give them false information?


.

You are missing the point.

Of course GOD KNEW bats are not birds but did the Israelites know this information about them?

Why write something to which they had no clue to what He was referring to? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose?

and you promised to answer all the questions i had about your post last week, but i am still waiting

I don't recall using the word Promise, dude. Even so, did you not read the part where I said I am going away for a few days and will try and get back to answering your questions when I get back?

I guess not.

If you noticed, I have more than a few questions to answer and I really don't have the time to get to them all today, sweetie.

I am trying my best, though. In the meantime, chill out, Impatient One!

 

[baydoll]

I'd like to teach the world to sing
In perfect harmony
I'd like to hold it in my arms and keep it company
I'd like to see the world for once
All standing hand in hand
And hear them echo through the hills "Ah, peace throughout the land"

Have Coke People!

Um that would be the EMERGENT Church, Hon.