If Jesus couldn't keep HIMSELF out of trouble...

[logical4u]

That's just another variation of "Well, a bunch of people jumped off a bridge, so I should do it, too!"

Says the darwinist.

Got a better explanation for those weird underground skeletons? Did God forget to clean up his lab?

There is no "accurate" documentation on them (no one was there to write it down), so according to you, that makes it "unbelievable". Funny, funny man

 

[Wonky Pundit]

Wonkers wants to tell other people that they believe wrong without the comprehension of what they believe. It appears petty and small. If he had comprehension, then eventually, we would get into the mysteries that are beyond the understanding of men. Those are fun to try to discuss, because we really have nothing in the physical universe to compare. Wonkers has said he read the Bible, but goes right back to his talking points without considering the depths of the Bible. It is sad. Maybe he is just predjudiced against Christians.

The OP clearly stated that this was a theological question. Theology is the systematic and rational study of religion. (source) That includes the inconsistencies among a religion's writings.

Merely claiming that I don't comprehend, or haven't "considered the depths" of the Bible, or am simply prejudiced is neither a systematic nor a rational conclusion. It just makes you another whiny flamer, just slightly less crass.

 

[Wonky Pundit]

Says the darwinist.

Got a better explanation for those weird underground skeletons? Did God forget to clean up his lab?

There is no "accurate" documentation on them (no one was there to write it down), so according to you, that makes it "unbelievable". Funny, funny man

I said no such thing, and I suspect you know it.

 

[logical4u]

Wonkers wants to tell other people that they believe wrong without the comprehension of what they believe. It appears petty and small. If he had comprehension, then eventually, we would get into the mysteries that are beyond the understanding of men. Those are fun to try to discuss, because we really have nothing in the physical universe to compare. Wonkers has said he read the Bible, but goes right back to his talking points without considering the depths of the Bible. It is sad. Maybe he is just predjudiced against Christians.

The OP clearly stated that this was a theological question. Theology is the systematic and rational study of religion. (source) That includes the inconsistencies among a religion's writings.

Merely claiming that I don't comprehend, or haven't "considered the depths" of the Bible, or am simply prejudiced is neither a systematic nor a rational conclusion. It just makes you another whiny flamer, just slightly less crass.

Yet, you have used neither "systemic" or "rational" thought to present your ideas/questions. It is just a cover for you to "bash" Christians.

 

[Sky Dancer]

I re-read the OP, and one could get the idea that you want to be saved, Wonky.

 

[Wonky Pundit]

I re-read the OP, and one could get the idea that you want to be saved, Wonky.

Actually, I very much doubt that there is anything after death besides total oblivion. I prefer to avoid the hells on earth and do my best to create my own heaven in this life.

 

[logical4u]

Got a better explanation for those weird underground skeletons? Did God forget to clean up his lab?

There is no "accurate" documentation on them (no one was there to write it down), so according to you, that makes it "unbelievable". Funny, funny man

I said no such thing, and I suspect you know it.

Oh, its okay to say something similar as an excuse to disregard the entire Bible, but by all means, don't use those same standards for the religion: Darwinism. Still funny.

 

[Wonky Pundit]

There is no "accurate" documentation on them (no one was there to write it down), so according to you, that makes it "unbelievable". Funny, funny man

I said no such thing, and I suspect you know it.

Oh, its okay to say something similar as an excuse to disregard the entire Bible, but by all means, don't use those same standards for the religion: Darwinism. Still funny.

You really should ask the admins to change your screen name to hyperbole4u.

At worst the statement I made could be interpreted to discount the New Testament, but certainly not the Bible.

And for the second time now, Darwin's theory is just that: a theory. When and if somebody finds a better explanation for the evidence, Darwin will become just another footnote.

 

[logical4u]

I said no such thing, and I suspect you know it.

Oh, its okay to say something similar as an excuse to disregard the entire Bible, but by all means, don't use those same standards for the religion: Darwinism. Still funny.

You really should ask the admins to change your screen name to hyperbole4u.

At worst the statement I made could be interpreted to discount the New Testament, but certainly not the Bible.

And for the second time now, Darwin's theory is just that: a theory. When and if somebody finds a better explanation for the evidence, Darwin will become just another footnote.

Better yet. The NT with four versions of the same story written with additional witnesses written letters, and you are saying, that is not enough. But I have this skeleton, and this guy had a great story, I BELIEVE!

 

[Wonky Pundit]

Oh, its okay to say something similar as an excuse to disregard the entire Bible, but by all means, don't use those same standards for the religion: Darwinism. Still funny.

You really should ask the admins to change your screen name to hyperbole4u.

At worst the statement I made could be interpreted to discount the New Testament, but certainly not the Bible.

And for the second time now, Darwin's theory is just that: a theory. When and if somebody finds a better explanation for the evidence, Darwin will become just another footnote.

Better yet. The NT with four versions of the same story written with additional witnesses written letters, and you are saying, that is not enough. But I have this skeleton, and this guy had a great story, I BELIEVE!

Now you're just posting to waste everyone's screen space.

 

[logical4u]

You really should ask the admins to change your screen name to hyperbole4u.

At worst the statement I made could be interpreted to discount the New Testament, but certainly not the Bible.

And for the second time now, Darwin's theory is just that: a theory. When and if somebody finds a better explanation for the evidence, Darwin will become just another footnote.

Better yet. The NT with four versions of the same story written with additional witnesses written letters, and you are saying, that is not enough. But I have this skeleton, and this guy had a great story, I BELIEVE!

Now you're just posting to waste everyone's screen space.

"systemic" or "rational" thoughts?????

 

[daveman]

It figures you'd try to put 2 and 2 together and end up with Wednesday.

If you'd read the Bible, you'd know why Jesus would have had a different a relationship with God than most other people.

But you don't know that. So you couldn't have read the Bible.

That's some of that "logic" stuff you claim to value but don't really understand.

Wrong again. It's a logical fallacy - which is your stock in trade.

Sure. You just keep stamping your feet and insisting you know more about Christianity than Christians do.

You don't look like an arrogant prick at all. No, really.

 

[Wonky Pundit]

If you'd read the Bible, you'd know why Jesus would have had a different a relationship with God than most other people.

But you don't know that. So you couldn't have read the Bible.

That's some of that "logic" stuff you claim to value but don't really understand.

Wrong again. It's a logical fallacy - which is your stock in trade.

Sure. You just keep stamping your feet and insisting you know more about Christianity than Christians do.

You don't look like an arrogant prick at all. No, really.

No matter how much you say I'm arrogant, you'll always be wrong.

 

[daveman]

I've had many, all of which you missed.

No, I got them, all right. You've done nothing but prove you don't understand a single thing about Christianity, but feel qualified to speak authoritatively on it.

Leftists and atheists do that a lot.

(And atheism isn't even necessary in a communist nation to begin with. There's no corrleation.)

Really? Name me a religious Communist society.

An Israeli kibbutz.

And yet they're still subject to national laws. They're not self-sustaining, nor are they independent.

 

[Wonky Pundit]

No, I got them, all right. You've done nothing but prove you don't understand a single thing about Christianity, but feel qualified to speak authoritatively on it.

Leftists and atheists do that a lot.

Really? Name me a religious Communist society.

An Israeli kibbutz.

And yet they're still subject to national laws. They're not self-sustaining, nor are they independent.

Exactly. We both know that genuine Communism doesn't work for an independent, self-sustaining society.

 

[daveman]

One had His followers murdered for their belief in him. Following the years of His "rising", thousands were tortured and murdered (in muslims countries that is still happening). They did not renounce their belief.

That's just another variation of "Well, a bunch of people jumped off a bridge, so I should do it, too!"

So, Darwin explained the origin of life?

 

[Wonky Pundit]

One had His followers murdered for their belief in him. Following the years of His "rising", thousands were tortured and murdered (in muslims countries that is still happening). They did not renounce their belief.

That's just another variation of "Well, a bunch of people jumped off a bridge, so I should do it, too!"

So, Darwin explained the origin of life?

He explained why life isn't all a bunch of amoebas swimming around the oceans. The primordial spark was someone else's theory.

 

[daveman]

Wrong again. It's a logical fallacy - which is your stock in trade.

Sure. You just keep stamping your feet and insisting you know more about Christianity than Christians do.

You don't look like an arrogant prick at all. No, really.

No matter how much you say I'm arrogant, you'll always be wrong.

Thanks for proving I'm right.

You just lack the intelligence to see it.

 

[daveman]

That's just another variation of "Well, a bunch of people jumped off a bridge, so I should do it, too!"

So, Darwin explained the origin of life?

He explained why life isn't all a bunch of amoebas swimming around the oceans. The primordial spark was someone else's theory.

So where did the amoebas come from?

 

[Wonky Pundit]

Sure. You just keep stamping your feet and insisting you know more about Christianity than Christians do.

You don't look like an arrogant prick at all. No, really.

No matter how much you say I'm arrogant, you'll always be wrong.

Thanks for proving I'm right.

You just lack the intelligence to see it.

It was a joke, Davey. And obviously too subtle for you, at that.