Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 52 (9178 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Anig
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,102 Year: 5,359/9,624 Month: 384/323 Week: 24/204 Day: 0/24 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can a valid, supportable reason be offered for deconversion
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
Message 369 of 566 (597564)
12-22-2010 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 366 by jar
12-22-2010 12:39 PM


Re: How to test Dawn Bertot's writings.
We can tell that what Micah said was inspired by God because it all came true over 500 years before Jesus was even born.
Wait a minute, wait a minute, hold the presses. Are you now claiming inspiration of and by God for Micah, or am I misunderstanding what I clearly see?
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 366 by jar, posted 12-22-2010 12:39 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 371 by jar, posted 12-22-2010 12:59 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
Message 372 of 566 (597570)
12-22-2010 1:12 PM
Reply to: Message 371 by jar
12-22-2010 12:59 PM


Re: How to test Dawn Bertot's writings.
I have never said otherwise. I said that what Micah said did not refer to Jesus. That claim (that it was referring to Jesus) was simply quote mining and marketing by the authors of the New Testament.
What Micah and Isaiah and Daniel and Zechariah said was likely inspired by God and also fulfilled over 500 years before Jesus was born.
Great, I have got to take care of some RW things, but will return, thanks Dawn

This message is a reply to:
 Message 371 by jar, posted 12-22-2010 12:59 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 373 by arachnophilia, posted 12-22-2010 5:52 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
Message 375 of 566 (597682)
12-23-2010 10:12 AM
Reply to: Message 371 by jar
12-22-2010 12:59 PM


Re: How to test Dawn Bertot's writings.
What Micah and Isaiah and Daniel and Zechariah said was likely inspired by God and also fulfilled over 500 years before Jesus was born.
As I proceed with extreme caution here and given the fact that you have atleast indirectly admitted the existence of God and inspiration of those prophets, what would prevent the writers of the NT having the same inspiration, that was characteristic of the OT prophets, especially Christ?
As you have indicated the passage says nothing about Jesus directly, but then it also does not mention Cyrus by name.
If indeed the writers of the NT were inspired as well, what would prevent God from giving additional and expanded information about his overall plan in the lines of the OT prophets and explained by the NT prophets?
In the OT there were, priests, judges and kings. IOWs God does things differently as times passes, for the benigfit of man
Hebrews one, states that God in times and DIFFERENT WAYD has spoken the fathers by the prophets, but in these last days has spoken to us by his son Jesus Christ
In other words, do you have a reason for believing that the NT writers were any less inspired, than that which you attribute to the OT prophets?
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 371 by jar, posted 12-22-2010 12:59 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 377 by jar, posted 12-23-2010 10:36 AM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 379 by arachnophilia, posted 12-23-2010 9:42 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
Message 376 of 566 (597683)
12-23-2010 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 374 by Taq
12-22-2010 5:59 PM


Re: How to test Dawn Bertot's writings.
Either the prophecies were fulfilled or they weren't, claims of inspiration aside. If you cant twist and reword prophecies to fit any outcome then they aren't prophecies. If someone claims inspiration and then twist and reword prophecies to fit any and all outcomes then they are not prophecies.
They were fulfilled, "inspiration aside". If I can read the prophet of Old and understand his words, then view Christ as given in the NT gospels, can I not see the fulfillment. I dont need to start with an assumption, I just need to read the claims of the NT
Then I can decide if inspiration is involved, between the two and against all other available evidence
IOW, you have to believe it is true before you can accept it as true.
To some degree, yes. However, that does not mean that there is no evidence to support my beliefs before hand, it simply means that I have decided that the available evidence is suffiecient to hold on to such a belief
Actually we do this everyday in life
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by Taq, posted 12-22-2010 5:59 PM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 378 by arachnophilia, posted 12-23-2010 9:26 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 380 by ramoss, posted 12-25-2010 12:08 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
Message 381 of 566 (597934)
12-25-2010 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 377 by jar
12-23-2010 10:36 AM


Re: How to test Dawn Bertot's writings.
Prophecy is as I have said before, a Godly Dope Slap. It is God sending a message to the people that hear that message. It is immediate, meant for the audience of the time, not for those living hundreds or thousands of years later.
Ill overlook the fact that your above comment is as dogmatic as it sounds. Assuming or presuming what God has in mind, then indirectly suggesting that no one elses conclusions could be correct concerning prophecy, its meanings and its applications , is of course not sound or rational
For example, Peter claiming that he and the other Apostles "had a more sure word of Prophecy", because they were eyewitnesses to his majesty. Probably not refering exclusiely to the transfiguration, but to thier entire journey with the Christ
So How did YOU decide that prophecy, has a single meaning? Seeing that the listeners would at that time have no way of understanding whats or who it refered to, unless its interpretation was immediately given. It wasnt
How did you decide on your own that another probable inspired writer, could not give Gods meaning in another time or that another inspired writer could not explicate Gods overall intentions in the prophets/
Why wouldnt you use the same criteria that lets you believe the OT prophets were "probably inspired", to decide the same for the NT prophets
Prophecy is as I have said before, a Godly Dope Slap. It is God sending a message to the people that hear that message.
Never said it wasnt or couldnt be
It is immediate, meant for the audience of the time, not for those living hundreds or thousands of years later
Not if there was an overall plan in Gods purposes, for humanity
Not if there is reason to conclude that the NT writers, were as inspired as the Old
Not unless thier claim to being eyewitnesses can be overturned
Not unless there is any reason to doubt the NT
The answer is that we look at what was said. It is irrelevant whether or not someone was inspired.
If inspiration is irrelevant and we look at what was said, that would include all that was said, which would make most of the writers, insane, liars or conterfit. At best unreliable
[qs]When we look at what the writers (not prophets) of the books of the New Testament we examine what is written the same way that we do the Old Testament.[/s]
Without inspiration on either side, it just ramblings. Thier meanings and predictions are not testable at all on either side, without inspiration. It would be anybodys guess, without the WRITERS claim to inspiration
The second issue is that I do not believe God is as stupid as most Christians describe Her to be.
I can only DESRIBE what God HAS written
If you believe that what is written is from God, then you would know what he had in mind, on either side
If you do not believe it is from God, then your opinion is as good or bad as anyone elses, reguardless of how one describes God
Your indirect implication and presumtion that you have a monopoly on the 'description' of God, is as silly as you presumming to know what God had in mind for the prophets, prophecy and his overall plans in that connection
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 377 by jar, posted 12-23-2010 10:36 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 384 by jar, posted 12-25-2010 7:39 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
Message 382 of 566 (597935)
12-25-2010 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 379 by arachnophilia
12-23-2010 9:42 PM


Re: How to test Dawn Bertot's writings.
nothing, in principle. the real question is why should anyone assume that they are?
Because they said they were. we have to atleast ASSUME they were, because they make that claim, correct?
If after study we decide otherwise, it matters little correct?
Do you mean OLD and NEW or just the OLD?
well, when they falsely claim fulfillment of prophecies that have nothing to do with what they're talking about, and that were already fulfilled some 500-600 years earlier... that's a pretty good indication that they're less than honest.
Really? can you show me a fulfillment, exact in detail in historical events, that would cooroborate your claim, that they were fulfilled in THE FIRST PLACE, TO MAKE A CLAIM TO THE SECOND?
then explain how that "writer", new of such events to begin with or how they got it right
in fact, matthew in particular is so bad about this, there's a thought that he did it on purpose, so that the readers who were actually educated in messianic prophecy would have a laugh at jesus's expense, and come away with the impression that he was not the messiah.
First show me that Messianic prophecy has any merit to begin with. IOWs you would need to do that to substantiate your assertion concerning the NT writers
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 379 by arachnophilia, posted 12-23-2010 9:42 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 385 by arachnophilia, posted 12-26-2010 5:27 AM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 386 by Panda, posted 12-26-2010 6:54 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
Message 383 of 566 (597936)
12-25-2010 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 380 by ramoss
12-25-2010 12:08 AM


Re: How to test Dawn Bertot's writings.
1) Out of context quotes.
2) Passages that are written to that are not prophecies.
3) After the fact claims.
4) Passages that are written to.
5) Mistranslations.
More attempted argument by yourself in assuming that the above writers you refer to, were reliable at all, in thier attempts to be prophectic and factual in the first place, correct
Your making assumptions about the NT prophets, when you dont understand the OT ones
You would have to provide a specific example, of the above contentions for it to be taken serious, as an argument
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 380 by ramoss, posted 12-25-2010 12:08 AM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 424 by ramoss, posted 12-28-2010 8:41 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
Message 387 of 566 (598039)
12-27-2010 11:12 AM
Reply to: Message 385 by arachnophilia
12-26-2010 5:27 AM


Re: example of previously fulfilled prophecy: isaiah 7:14
now, what does any of this have to do with jesus, exactly? the child is the clock for the prophecy, which was fulfilled 720 years before christ was born. the child would have had to have been known to ahaz, for the sign to even make sense. there's nothing about virgin birth, nothing about the child being the messiah (indeed, the king of assyria saves the day, here), and no way it could apply to anything after the assyrian empire ceased to exist. so what exactly is matthew talking about when he says,
B.E.A utiful. I thouroughly enjoyed your post, loved reading it. I've just got back and will get to it as soon as possible
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 385 by arachnophilia, posted 12-26-2010 5:27 AM arachnophilia has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
Message 389 of 566 (598075)
12-27-2010 7:49 PM
Reply to: Message 385 by arachnophilia
12-26-2010 5:27 AM


Re: example of previously fulfilled prophecy: isaiah 7:14
no, absolutely incorrect. otherwise, we'd have to assume that everyone who claims divine inspiration is. that includes muhammad, joseph smith, and at least one person contributing to this thread.
I had made this comment under the assumption that you or Jar understood the OT prophets to have and possess inspiration, in thier prophecies. Further, the implication was that if the Old test prophets actually did predict the future by Gods direction, then it would be Gods plans that would be under consideration in either instance. In which case the NT prophets could simply be revealing Gods overall intentiions
This being the case, one would be remise and presumptuous in assuming that God could and did not have A greater meaning and purpose, not only in the prophets, but in his overall plan for humanity
One would also need to demonstrate, given the proposition of inspiration, why the criteria for inspiration in the OT prophets would be better or different and lacking in the NT
"behold, the young woman will conceive, and bear a son, and will call his name imanu-el." now, i understand this is going to be a sticking point here, so i'm going to spell this one out very carefully for you.
that's what hebrew looks like. isaiah was written in hebrew.
some of us here can read a bit of hebrew.
the word used doesn't have anything to do with any sexual status, it just means "young woman". had isaiah wanted to say "virgin" he would have used
further, it has a definite article in front of it, the young woman. which young woman? since she was not previously introduced, ahaz must have known the specific person isaiah was referring to. she was likely in the same room.
the name literally means "god is with us". not "a god that is with us" or "god with us" as if the person himself was god. this is a standard naming convention in the bible -- look at, well, israel. many, many names contain "-el" or even portions of the proper name of god. isaiah himself is actually named yeshayahu in hebrew, the "yahu" portion coming form "yahweh", the name of god.
the name itself, "god is with us", is meant to remind ahaz that the god is on their side. not with in a physical, personal, corporeal sense, but protecting judah from israel and aram. remember the prophecy?
further, as you go on reading the verse, it sets another clock. before the child can tell good from evil (ie: before he becomes a man), the prophecy will be fulfilled. this bumps the date up to about 13 years from the prophecy. okay, ready for the really fun part? here's how it's going to happen.
The problem that you are having here is one of extremism. Both sides want to argue for the definition of A word. It not necessary at all.
The OT stories and prophecies are shadows and types of Jesus Christ. I have no problem believing or accepting that the prophet or his predictions came true at a certain time in that time. I believe every word of it.
Wht you are missing Arch, is that there is a greater plan than Israel. The plan is the unity of mankind to God. The exodus is a shadow and a type to God delivering his people, even thought here is no mention of Christ. The snakes ont he pole are a shadow of Christ.
"Through thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed"
Overall however it is about God and God only as a deliverer. Hosea means God is my salvation. Check out a few of the other meanings of the prophets names and see what you come up with
Only inspiration and inspiration alone could let me know Gods overall purpose
If there were no NT, then I would, like you, leave the prophets where they are at with thier simple meanings and the surrounding current events
So your task is to demonstrate from credentials alone why the NT prophets were any less inspired than the Old
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 385 by arachnophilia, posted 12-26-2010 5:27 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 392 by arachnophilia, posted 12-27-2010 9:58 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
Message 390 of 566 (598076)
12-27-2010 8:00 PM
Reply to: Message 385 by arachnophilia
12-26-2010 5:27 AM


Re: example of previously fulfilled prophecy: isaiah 7:14
now, what does any of this have to do with jesus, exactly? the child is the clock for the prophecy, which was fulfilled 720 years before christ was born. the child would have had to have been known to ahaz, for the sign to even make sense. there's nothing about virgin birth, nothing about the child being the messiah (indeed, the king of assyria saves the day, here), and no way it could apply to anything after the assyrian empire ceased to exist. so what exactly is matthew talking about when he says,
Again, no disagreement in your interpretation
Heres the kicker. If you really believe this is what happened, then you have to ask yourself, could God not have an overall and expanded plan for humanity? Could God not have inspired the NT prophets to explain a deeper meaning in any of the NT prophets by quoting the old?
But thats the point isnt it, only God could make known what he wants known, correct?
What criteria by criteria that you use for the Old Test prophets, would you use to discredit the New
And if neither were inspired, who cares anyway correct
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 385 by arachnophilia, posted 12-26-2010 5:27 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 393 by arachnophilia, posted 12-27-2010 10:08 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
Message 391 of 566 (598077)
12-27-2010 8:07 PM
Reply to: Message 385 by arachnophilia
12-26-2010 5:27 AM


Re: example of previously fulfilled prophecy: isaiah 7:14
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. (Matthew 1:22-23)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
this actually manages to cover almost all of ramoss's categories of misrepresented prophecy. it's out of context (quotemined), not the actual prophecy, after the fact, and a mistranslation (through greek). there's no way it can even remotely apply to christ, and yet here is matthew supporting jesus as the messiah with it. this is just dishonest. why should i believe what he wrote?
this is not dogma, nor is it religious, nor is it based on any particular belief in inspiration or non-inspiration. it's reading comprehension.
Wow your looking right at it and cant see it. The only important part in the above quote or the old testament prophets, is "God with Us" Thats how it applies to Christ. Matthew is not taking it out of context, BECAUSE THE ONLY CONTEXT IS, "GOD WITH US"
the prophecy may have had nothing to do with the ministry of and about Christ directly. but because he was and is God, it applies overall. that is and only will be the point of God or his word
Only God could reveal this by another prophet, and he did
the story about the prodigal son is not about the son, its about God waiting for his return. Its about God
The story of the burning bush is not about Israels freedom from bondage, but the God that provides the freedom
Read any story or line in the Bible and put the word God behind it. thats al its about
When you have this perspective, you will then see the overal meaning of the Word
Christ is the Logos (logic) of God
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 385 by arachnophilia, posted 12-26-2010 5:27 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 394 by arachnophilia, posted 12-27-2010 10:19 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
Message 395 of 566 (598089)
12-27-2010 11:31 PM
Reply to: Message 392 by arachnophilia
12-27-2010 9:58 PM


Re: example of previously fulfilled prophecy: isaiah 7:14
again, this is not a question of faith or belief. the inspiration of the OT prophets is not relevant to the debate: only the accuracy of the NT authors in representing their claims.
Only simplicity would argue for context and assume that the context of the prophecy you quote is limited to the prophecy area quoted
Only simplicity would argue for context and ignore that the context of the prophecy you quoted is actually the entirity of the book of Isa, which inspiration is clearly claimed
Then the conclusion by yourself is that inspiration is not relevant. Does that make sense to you? the fulfilled prophecy goes hand in hand with the inspiration. Or are you now going to assert that claimed inspiration is symbolism?
why should we hold this idea about the new testament, but not the book of mormon? or the quran?
Nothing in the BOM can be corroborated in any fashion. There are not even scholars information that can be debated or tested. It has nothing to offer in the area of evidence
The Koran, as I have demonstrated is nothing more than a collection of religious statements slung together with no continuity, themes or purposes. This is obvious to even the casual reader
Of course we have to go by the best evidence. If we are going to compare the NT w/ the Koran or BOM, its no real contest.
What other sources or writings have made claims to fulfilled prophecy that have had the impact and history as the NT and its writers. Where are the others that claimed ot be Messiahs, before and after the time of Christ
its no contest Arch
no, the point of the post above is that this prophecy has a very specific timeframe and topic.
What is the point and context of the book of Isa
no, this is nonsense. if the reader has to be divinely inspired -- especially if that inspiration runs contrary to the obvious and logical reading -- that negates the need for a text in the first place. why can't god just relate that overall purpose, and skip the stuff that says everything else?
You know better than this Arch. "Line upon line, Precept upon Precept, here alittle there alittle"
since the the obvious facts don't seem to phase you, perhaps, dawn, you simply have to inspired in order to see it. i think perhaps your task should be to demonstrate what makes the NT different from the book of mormon, or the quran -- why should we think they were any less inspired than the NT?
Its unfortunate that because I disagree with you and I have provided valid reason for that disagreement, you believe me to be unable to understand the facts. Its my belief that you have aquired numerous facts over the years, but I dont believe you are able to apply them in a logical fashion
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 392 by arachnophilia, posted 12-27-2010 9:58 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 396 by Panda, posted 12-28-2010 12:06 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 397 by arachnophilia, posted 12-28-2010 2:19 AM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 398 by arachnophilia, posted 12-28-2010 2:20 AM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 402 by arachnophilia, posted 12-28-2010 3:01 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
Message 399 of 566 (598094)
12-28-2010 2:44 AM
Reply to: Message 397 by arachnophilia
12-28-2010 2:19 AM


Re: context: still everything.
that's funny, dawn. you are, on the one hand, arguing that we can rip things entirely out of context whenever it suits us, but on the other, arguing that we should go look at the whole book? oh, that's too funny.
Your getting angry and that is not characteristic of you . I did not take anything out of context
Nor did I suggest any one should
As a matter of fact I said i agreed with your interpretation and that it would not affect the NT claims
have you read isaiah, dawn? have you understood isaiah? since i know you haven't read the book i appealed to for historical context, the book of kings, i'm relatively certain you haven't read the rest of isaiah for the literary context either. isaiah's pretty firmly situated in pre-exile times, prophesying largely about the coming exile -- for both israel in assyria, and judah in babylon. jeremiah and ezekiel (the other "major" prophets) more so, as isaiah's a bit earlier. none of this really has anything to do with christ -- it's all about that exile as god's punishment, and then the redemption and return to the homeland that will follow it. some of (especially ezekiel) uses very poetic symbolism. but it's all about the exile.
I have responded to this numerous times now. Does the book of Isa and Isa himself, have anything in its context about inspiration?
er, no. you're the one claiming symbolism where it doesn't fit. my statement was that inspiration of the OT prophets is not relevant to this discussion. it's simply about whether the NT authors represent the OT faithfully. this is a very simple question, and only relates to very basic literary analysis: the ability to read and comprehend. it has nothing to do with faith -- though the conclusions reached could cause that faith some problems. i, for one, refuse to believe that intellectual dishonesty, misrepresentation, and outright lies could be divinely inspired.
None of the symbolism in Isa or any prophet affects a larger plan in another time. Why should it?
Your assuming that God has to be limited to your exegesis and some lesson learned by the people of the time.
Here is an example.
What is the meaning of Gods statement to Abraham, "Through thy seed shall all the nations of the earth shall be Blessed"
Since mine is a bad representation of the prophet Moses, maybe you can give a provable explanation

This message is a reply to:
 Message 397 by arachnophilia, posted 12-28-2010 2:19 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 404 by arachnophilia, posted 12-28-2010 3:18 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
Message 401 of 566 (598096)
12-28-2010 2:56 AM
Reply to: Message 398 by arachnophilia
12-28-2010 2:20 AM


Re: other scriptures
oh ho ho, you'd better ask a mormon about that one. they'll tell you all kinds of stuff about archaeology -- all of about the same calibre as your claims of biblical verification.
hardly.
No place or person is even remotely verifiable. Nothing in that book has ever been verified by an INDEPENDANT source
Here is a simple illustration. Why does no on here on this site, discuss the details of that book?
Because you know instinctively it is not to be trusted or believed. In contrast we and them cannot stop discussing the Old and New Testaments
so you claim. but you have yet to show me why. i'd suggest posting passages from the book of mormon, or the quran, and comparing them to passages from the bible. you could start a new thread. i'll be happy to participate, and show you some of the absurdities.
Did you ever wonder why no one discuss its (BOM) content. There is a reason. There is nothing to discuss because one cannot even begin to verify anything to discuss
Why would someone translate or why would God give to a guy in the 1800s a king james language translation of a new revelation?
Immediately the problems start
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 398 by arachnophilia, posted 12-28-2010 2:20 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 407 by arachnophilia, posted 12-28-2010 3:35 AM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 418 by Theodoric, posted 12-28-2010 1:59 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


(1)
Message 403 of 566 (598098)
12-28-2010 3:07 AM
Reply to: Message 400 by dwise1
12-28-2010 2:55 AM


Re: example of previously fulfilled prophecy: isaiah 7:14
DB writes
And if neither were inspired, who cares anyway correct
Dewise1 writes
Just what the frak is that supposed to mean? Is there an English translation pending? I would think not, since Silly Millie's goal is to generate confusion. That has always been the goal of creationists and IDists alike, to generate as much confusion as possible, so that the truth might never be able to come to light.
You really keep enforcing the fact that you have no knowledge of any of these topics. A seventh grader would be able to understand the comment above, by myself, if he or she had knowledge of the topic and saw it in context of what had been discussed and written
really, Dewise1, if you have nothing to offer to the topic, you should bow out
Now 400 posts into it and you have not present anything that resembles an argument
Geeez
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 400 by dwise1, posted 12-28-2010 2:55 AM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 406 by dwise1, posted 12-28-2010 3:31 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024