Reply With Quote
The crowd is always wrong.
He was giving your ass a good kicking, tbf.
We should move along. This thread has strayed. The OP had his question more than answered by me. Over. Done.
Last edited by Skull-1; 09-29-2013 at 05:32 PM.
The crowd is always wrong.
You are a bleeping moron. How many times do I have to quote the same scriptures before you get it?
Of course He believed in the OT prophecies. They were about HIM! Stupid blind fool. Prophecies not histories! Testimony! Not history! It is ALL about Christ.
I laid this out quite clearly before. The Son only does what He has seen the Father doing. Thus Christ spoke in parables because He saw His Father do the same. Major clue that the OT is parable. Jesus seals the deal when He addresses the scriptures directly.
Go back to the Duncan Union thread and read my posts containing the direct quotes of Christ where He explicitly calls the Scriptures (which to that time contained ONLY the Law and the Prophets): Prophecy until John came, and a TESTIMONY of Christ ("it is these that TESTIFY OF ME").
(This one slipped by me. I had to respond for those who didn't see my original reply in another thread Blake has attempted to pretend he didn't read, or is too stupid to comprehend if he did.)
Last edited by Skull-1; 09-29-2013 at 06:17 PM.
Take the high road, people. Insults and accusations accomplish nothing except get you a foolish thread with your name in the le, take it from me and skull, I.e. Xmas skull feud.
Although it may be somewhat more satisfactory and momentarily funny to sling insults around like so many arrows and barbs, especially when you are frustrated, it gains you nothing in the end except being regarded as foolish and shallow.
However, with that having been said, this is after all "downstairs" so ..............
Fire away!
Jews make fun of you, dip Goy.
It was also a Jew who sold you the idea of letting black men sleep with your wife. Lol McDonalds.
More hubris. At best you are a hypocrite. If you are trying to minister the word, you are failing miserably.
And it's still multiple books written by who knows who and then translated from language to language to language. Then you have the historical situation that existed in the early church with leaders making fiefdoms out of city states and the various purges.
cross-checking
So just curious. Does anyone believe that anger management here speaks with Newton's chair and associates with astronauts? Or that he is a science fiction author?
And name dropping like the above because you know you have no credibility is just sad.
Paul said all manner of things. Jesus was still dead.
I call bull on "1000's of codex." You seem very long on assertion and very short on substance. Reference me 1000's of unique 'codex' that are related by author or purported book and translator. In order for a set to verify set there has to be a direct relationship somehow. You logic is just awful consistently but that is typical in faith based belief.
And I am not offended. You are an insecure, untrustworthy individual but that is typical amongst man.
Hate to be the one to tell you but Hawking is another media tool just like Einstein was, credited for theories he got from other more intelligent minds.
Now Tesla on the other hand ..............
This is horse of a very high order.
There is a difference between observing something over and over and over again and getting an independently verifiable result and still keeping skeptical mind versus blind faith on something not verifiable because of a book that comes in all manner of forms and a litany of proselytizers that have told you that it is true.
Do share...
Sorry but he is a bit more than that. Science today is all a collabortive effort especially when you start looking at what Hawkings does in cosmology. While I certainly agree that there are many others that deserve a lot more credit, the blanket dismissal is weak from any viewpoint.
Hubris my ass. I am right. You are wrong. That is just a fact.More hubris. At best you are a hypocrite. If you are trying to minister the word, you are failing miserably.
And it's still multiple books written by who knows who and then translated from language to language to language. Then you have the historical situation that existed in the early church with leaders making fiefdoms out of city states and the various purges.
All the rest is gnat straining. There are so many failsafes within scripture that a spiritual man can find the truth if God chooses Him. For idiots like you who can't even get kindergarten right (covenant of marriage) then of course cross checking is futile. You don't even know what words you are looking for.
Scripture is solid. It is you who is shaky.
As for ministry, I say what I say. Jesus was ignored, too, so I have no shame in being mocked by idiots like you and I know that few will listen. "That which has been is that which shall be."
okay genius. Whatever you say. We still can't fully explain lift, but airplanes fly. Laughing at "science".
Science is still barely in first grade. There is so much to be known and we have managed but a fraction, yet we can dismiss God just because we can't see Him. There's a WHOLE lot we can't see. And if the same scientists who foisted global warming on us a mere three decades after global cooling..... If these are the people I am to rely on to deny God's existence. Hahahaha. No thanks.
This is a subject that takes a great deal of time to go into, not just another thread, but many threads.
But allow me to at least point you in the proper directions so you can google them for yourself if you are truly interested.
I certainly wouldn't want to sidetrack this thread.
Check out:
Lorentz covariance and the inertia of energy
Maxwell
Voigt
Hilbert
Poincare
Minkowski
De Pretto
Ernst Mach
Lewis and Tolman
Planck
Harry Bateman
That should be enough to get you going.
I won't go into Hawking yet, too much already there to go through first.
Good luck and good reading.
Now back to our regularly scheduled program.
Last edited by xmas1997; 09-29-2013 at 08:55 PM.
I was being facetious for the sake of brevity, certainly you are correct in your assertion.
Maybe media tool was a bad selection, but I was going to say media darling.
What I should have said was media focus point.
Last edited by xmas1997; 09-29-2013 at 07:02 PM.
I am anything but untrustworthy. That slander/libel will cost you one day, mark my words.
Insecure? My confidence, accomplishments, and position crush that notion.
Unique was not a word I used regarding codexes, though, truth be told, they are all unique being essentially handwritten.
You can call it anything you wish. I certainly know more about this topic from any and every angle than you.
Scribes made errors but we--not you--can spot these pretty easily knowing what to look for. Go ask Dr. Leslie McFall for example. He is as good at it as anyone.
The scriptures are consistent, even with errors that are found in the TRANSLATIONS mostly (scribes erred in the copies, but again, these can be collated out, making the Byzantine Majority Text the best extant--and remarkably consistent...amazingly). It takes some effort to trace down the mistakes we see in the strays, but they are not a problem--and resolvable--at least every supposed inconsistency I have found so far.
Keep laughing, . It just proves the truth of prophecy. You exist only to show me I am on the right track, nothing more.
Last edited by Skull-1; 09-29-2013 at 07:08 PM.
tbf... ?? To Be ing?
RiiiiiiightWe should move along. This thread has strayed. The OP had his question more than answered by me. Over. Done.
To be frank, jerk. I don't use tbh because that is default.
Right? I didn't answer his stupid question about color? Lmao. Can't read?
So you're normally honest but not normally forthright?
Your default mode when encountering intelligent resistance is to verbally lose control. Did your god teach you that?
Microcosm is echoed in macrocosm and vice versa.
Frank implies less than tactful (unreserved, you stupid clown--don't act like you didn't know what it meant and twisted it any way). Idiot.
I am in complete control. Every word has a purpose.
We are done here. When you have a serious question feel free to ask. Otherwise, gfy.
So what
Ignore the bag. And Blake. And Lumnuts. They swallow a camel to strain a gnat.
That's not how the phrase goes. It's "ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat and swallow a camel". Same as penny wise and pound foolish.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions