Atheists and Agnostics risk infinite loss for no gain.

You have no understanding of how to understand the Bible.
You are not understanding the Bible, you are understanding Joe Price posting on the internet. As Abraham Lincoln said: "Don't trust everything you see on the internet."

I have never been reincarnated and billions would say the same.
That might explain a few things. You are saying that you are no different to the day you were born, not having changed at all, and are still the same person as you were then.

I suggest that you read up on Heraclitus and crossing a river.
 
You are not understanding the Bible, you are understanding Joe Price posting on the internet. As Abraham Lincoln said: "Don't trust everything you see on the internet."


That might explain a few things. You are saying that you are no different to the day you were born, not having changed at all, and are still the same person as you were then.

I suggest that you read up on Heraclitus and crossing a river.
What??????
 
False accusations are against the rules
Really? I've just consulted the rules, and there's nothing which supports your claim. Here they are:


Care to show us where the rules say "false accusations are against the rules"?

Or are you simply making another false accusation...
 
I already have.

You're conceding that I know more about the bible than you do.

Why are you demanding exact details from people and then refusing to supply even the most basic details of biblical knowledge?
How many times have you read the whole Bible?
Give 4 passages that are very important to know to understand the Bible.
 
What??????
I am sorry I surprised you. Joe Price's webpage is not the Bible. The Bible does not say either "X is the father of Mary" or "Mary is the daughter of X" in either genealogy.

Those genealogies in Matthew and Luke are another contradiction in the Bible.
 
I am sorry I surprised you. Joe Price's webpage is not the Bible. The Bible does not say either "X is the father of Mary" or "Mary is the daughter of X" in either genealogy.

Those genealogies in Matthew and Luke are another contradiction in the Bible.
Already refuted this as have many.
 
More than you. Enough to know that the bible provides multiple genealogies for Jesus, which is a contradiction.

It proves the Bible is false - at least to some degree.
How many times have you read the whole Bible? the whole OT, the whole NT, all of Paul's letters beginning with Paul?
 
The Bible is the truth, 100% true.
Is it 100% true that trees have hands and hills can sing? No, and you agree that it is not true, but poetic. You are overclaiming here. Do you think that Jesus' parables are actually true, or was He telling a story with a moral?

You need to look at the Bible more flexibly.
 
Is it 100% true that trees have hands and hills can sing? No, and you agree that it is not true, but poetic. You are overclaiming here. Do you think that Jesus' parables are actually true, or was He telling a story with a moral?

You need to look at the Bible more flexibly.
Just poetic language
 
Which is what I said. Poetic language is not "100% true". You are overclaiming here. That is a mistake with the current unbelieving audience. You are not preaching to the choir now.
Sure. Poetic language is not necsearrily true. Also prophecy in the Bible uses figurative language. The beast does no have 7 heads in Rev 13.
But most of the Bible is narrative and records real historical events.
 
But most of the Bible is narrative and records real historical events.
Agreed. However there is much disagreement about whether Genesis is in the historical part or in the poetic part. You are treating it as historical, while we are treating it as a poetic creation myth.

Similarly with the Flood. There probably was a large flood, as mentioned in both Genesis and the Epic of Gilgamesh. However, the scientific evidence shows that the flood was not worldwide. That is poetic/mythical. Hence that part of Genesis is a mix of history and myth/poetry.

The ages of the early patriarchs is another indication that Genesis contains a lot of myth/poetry. When the Sumerian King List says that before the flood (yes, it gets mentioned there as well) king En-men-lu-ana rules for over 43,000 years then we know this is mythology, not accurate history. We are not treating Genesis differently, we are treating it like any other ancient document from that time and place. Men do not live for either 800 years or for 43,000 years.
 
Agreed. However there is much disagreement about whether Genesis is in the historical part or in the poetic part. You are treating it as historical, while we are treating it as a poetic creation myth.

Similarly with the Flood. There probably was a large flood, as mentioned in both Genesis and the Epic of Gilgamesh. However, the scientific evidence shows that the flood was not worldwide. That is poetic/mythical. Hence that part of Genesis is a mix of history and myth/poetry.

The ages of the early patriarchs is another indication that Genesis contains a lot of myth/poetry. When the Sumerian King List says that before the flood (yes, it gets mentioned there as well) king En-men-lu-ana rules for over 43,000 years then we know this is mythology, not accurate history. We are not treating Genesis differently, we are treating it like any other ancient document from that time and place. Men do not live for either 800 years or for 43,000 years.
Genesis is absolutely historical.

And the rock layers are from that flood dated to about 4500 year ago.
 
You have evidence that serpents can talk? You have evidence of magic trees? You have evidence of an angel with a sword blocking entry to a garden?

Really?

I have this bridge I can sell you...
Satan was the serpent who speaks through all evolutionists and billons of years people.
You must have bought the bridge because you have it.
 
Sure. Poetic language is not necsearrily true. Also prophecy in the Bible uses figurative language. The beast does no have 7 heads in Rev 13.
But most of the Bible is narrative and records real historical events.
How do you tell the difference? The Bible contains much poetic language that you claim is "scientific knowledge".
 
Back
Top