Originally posted by stupidissmart:
BTW I used to have higher opinions of u. I never know u will resort to personal attack, attacking on my character rather than the things I had written.
Originally posted by Chin Eng:One more thing, I did not attack on your character, only the style of your writing. Here is what I meant when I said that you are incoherent by your failure to understand a simple statement.
I never said you are a theological scholar, and by your arguments I would have never imagine you to be one. Neither can I imagine you to be a graduate by your inability to write and spell coherently.
You already have your preconceived idea of the topic at hand and for each explanation given, you come back guns ablazingI did agree with the fact I return with "guns ablazing". But then again, wat actions will u expect me to do ? For almost every point I bring out, there will be people coming out "throwing grenades" over.
You are obviously entitled to your opinion of whether Jesus is a swindler or not. What would you say if we make the same pronouncement on someone your love? Perhaps, your parents....I need to express the word tat even if he exists he never manage to perform any miracles and wat he really perform is... well trickery... to make people believe him... The word to express tis meaning is well... cheat, rougue, fraud, lier, swindler... etc etc. I do not really have much a choice as all these options doesn't sound... good. If u want to convey the idea of a cheat, how will u phrase it ?
Please, don't get me wrong here. Just trying to illustrate a point. By your definition, calling someone a swindler is NOT name calling? Do bear in mind that the name Jesus is very dear to the people in Eternal Hope. If you do not agree to the faith that the Christians, here in Eternal Hope and elsewhere is professing, than stay out.
Herein you are again mistaken. Asking people to go to church, watching the Passion, knocking on doors IS NOT CONVERSION. It is merely allowing the non-believers to have an opportunity to experience Christian fellowship and teaching. The commandment given to Christians by Jesus is to "go forth and tell the world" NOT CONVERT the world. We are to spread the good news. Whether, you as an individual, believe in this good news is another matter.YAH RIGHT ! Tat is not conversion ?!?! Well, then watever I am doing is also "go forth and spread the truth" , not converting people. Tat makes us both innocent in our cause
It becomes pointlless when a discussion turns into an argument. Here is not to say that I do not value comments to, say, forumites like Marlboro and Ventin. I believe all will agree that the postings of these individuals are more enquiring than argumentative in nature. Even within the Christian community, there are differing opinions on evolution, creation etc. But the moment any posting becomes relentless argumentative than it becomes pointless.relentless argumentative ? Do u expect me not to bring about any defense and let things end after u guys bring out your proof ? I still have doubts about it thus shows it out. Wat do u want me to do if I am not satisfied with the answer yet ?
Please, may I advice that if you wish to pursue this topic further, do not ever, ever make derogatory remarks about Jesus.I will keep tat in mind. If I had caused any hurt to people because of this, I apologise
eh.. abit blur on this point liao.. If a christian acknowledges evolution, isnt it gng against his beliefs? that would mean that God did not create all things? A funny thought just came to my mind, maybe God created apes which in turn evolve into humans? does that statisfy all partiesOriginally posted by warrior_84:If you haven't realise there are Christians that acknowledge evolution.
You must remember that it all started with an enquiring question: Religion x3.. has it become an obsession, which in turn was triggered by a thread that you had started "Is religion still relevant after science". In the latter topic, already there is a huge debate on why the focus on Christianity wherein the real issue is "Religion". You had relentlessly hunted down Christian beliefs by you quotations and sources. You had taken an extremely strong stand in a domain that was originally conceived to be a domain of peace for people who love God. Do you expect less than the "grenade throwing" reception that you have been getting. I am sure if the same topic is posted in, say, Chit Chat, there will be less of a rebuttal.Originally posted by stupidissmart:I did agree with the fact I return with "guns ablazing". But then again, wat actions will u expect me to do ? For almost every point I bring out, there will be people coming out "throwing grenades" over.
This obviously is your personal opinion, which to you is your ultimate truth. However this opinion has very little to do with the real standing of Jesus even with other faith, eg Islam and Hindus who reverred Jesus, at least, as a great prophet and teacher. Unless of course you profess to be wiser that all the wise people ever lived, I am certain that your opinions and objections do not hold too much water.Originally posted by stupidissmart:I need to express the word tat even if he exists he never manage to perform any miracles and wat he really perform is... well trickery... to make people believe him... The word to express tis meaning is well... cheat, rougue, fraud, lier, swindler... etc etc. I do not really have much a choice as all these options doesn't sound... good. If u want to convey the idea of a cheat, how will u phrase it ?
You are right, you can spread your version of the truth anyway you want, but please, at least assume poise of someone of gentle spirit,Originally posted by stupidissmart:YAH RIGHT ! Tat is not conversion ?!?! Well, then watever I am doing is also "go forth and spread the truth" , not converting people. Tat makes us both innocent in our cause
I will expect anyone to do nothing less that bring out the best of arguments in such threads. However there should be a spirit of non-confrontation. Modifing your language helps. If you disbelieve the acts of Jesus (which you are entitled to), you may use a phrase like: I have difficulty in accepting the miracles of Jesus. Here is where the focus is on yourself instead of calling Jesus a swindler (which you still can't prove), and run the risk of offending all Christians here. While my personal faith prevents me from accepting the deity of Buddha, I would never have called him stupid for sitting under a tree for many years.Originally posted by stupidissmart:relentless argumentative ? Do u expect me not to bring about any defense and let things end after u guys bring out your proof ? I still have doubts about it thus shows it out. Wat do u want me to do if I am not satisfied with the answer yet ?
Apologies accepted.Originally posted by stupidissmart:I will keep tat in mind. If I had caused any hurt to people because of this, I apologise
Generally, Christians will reject macro-evolution ie, evolution by jumping of species - reptiles become mammals, apes become man.Originally posted by marlboro:eh.. abit blur on this point liao.. If a christian acknowledges evolution, isnt it gng against his beliefs? that would mean that God did not create all things? A funny thought just came to my mind, maybe God created apes which in turn evolve into humans?
,,,
others defending ur religion causes also need to show a bit more magnaminity. think abt it 1st before blindly jumping to defense, some points do make sense if u would just stop to think....
don't you realise how weird your arguement is? Firstly, you said that more research doesn't meaan anything? Maybe. But this also proves that the topic has not been decided. If you haven't realise there are Christians that acknowledge evolution.I think u r not clear about wat I say. Before u claims tat when u search under Reuters, there will be more websites tat state macro evolution is not possible. Is more websites a proof of anything if they contains almost the same content ?
When did not believing in macro evolution become believing in religion. There is so much reseach going on, these reseach are funded by Universities. Its not some thesis written by a student. You need to have hard facts and not personal biasness. And here you are not keeping up to date with the latest findings and go on to insist that your sourcess are definately correct. Regarding the evolution of dogs, do take time to reseach from the anti-macro evolution point of view.I find out hard facts already. U failed to read them. U asked some questions from his report out to others, no answer. R u the one keeping up to date ? R u not biase ? How about issues regarding the fast shift of viruses and etc ? There r another 28 mre issues written in the report tat claims there r evidence of macro evolution. Why don't u attack points from tat report ? Why don't u attack points about the skulls found of humonids from the age of man becoming apes to man
Why do I say I am neutral? Because I myself am not sure of evolution. With all the debating going on in evolution, I really don't know what is right or wrong. But one point that I do agree with songs is that lately more information is pointing towards a non-macro evolution view. But do you bother to read this? I doubt it.Do u bother to read the report in the first place... I had read about the possibility of no macro evolution BECAUSE there r no hard evidence. However the report I found has said NOW there r many evidences tat support macro evo. SO who is the one tat refuses to read ? If u r so neutral, then u should have read tat report days ago.
Why then am I pitting myself against your stand? Because of the nature of your arguement. You insist that yours is correct. Like I said before, even reseachers that spent years and years on this topic are divided, who are you to say then that you are correct. Please take note again, I am swayed towards micro-evolution, I used to believe in macro evolution but in recent years with all the latest findings, i slowly changed my view. Not that my view is correct but there is so much diversity in reaseach findings. I remember asking my tutor in Bio about this topic once, even he told me that the scientific evidence from both school of thoughts is not concrete and conclusive. I think that thus, you are attacking this topic with a lot of biasness. This is not how science is carried out.I think almost everyone here admits there r micro evolution. It is always the attention to talk about macro evolution. And stop talking about JC life..... because JC syllabus r mainly many years behind ttimes... If u say I am talking with a lot of baisness, r u not doing tat too ? Is song guilty of tat too ? Why attack only me ? Is tat how debate is carried out ? Why keep dishing out the same points over and over again ?
no lah..evolution is also animals adapting to it's environment man.. certain christian groups believe in the world created but life evolved as environment changesOriginally posted by marlboro:eh.. abit blur on this point liao.. If a christian acknowledges evolution, isnt it gng against his beliefs? that would mean that God did not create all things? A funny thought just came to my mind, maybe God created apes which in turn evolve into humans? does that statisfy all parties
and a note to stupidissmart, I enjoy reading alot of the stuff u posted, there really is alot of contradictions that makes one think..(gives my brain a workout ) however, seems like fight is breaking out leh, think u need to be abit more friendly leh. others defending ur religion causes also need to show a bit more magnaminity. think abt it 1st before blindly jumping to defense, some points do make sense if u would just stop to think....
You must remember that it all started with an enquiring question: Religion x3.. has it become an obsession, which in turn was triggered by a thread that you had started "Is religion still relevant after science". In the latter topic, already there is a huge debate on why the focus on Christianity wherein the real issue is "Religion". You had relentlessly hunted down Christian beliefs by you quotations and sources. You had taken an extremely strong stand in a domain that was originally conceived to be a domain of peace for people who love God. Do you expect less than the "grenade throwing" reception that you have been getting. I am sure if the same topic is posted in, say, Chit Chat, there will be less of a rebuttal.Actually coming over to this thread is not wat I planned initially. The thread I had started was lock and while I shifted and halfway replying to this thread it was unlocked.
I will expect anyone to do nothing less that bring out the best of arguments in such threads. However there should be a spirit of non-confrontation. Modifing your language helps. If you disbelieve the acts of Jesus (which you are entitled to), you may use a phrase like: I have difficulty in accepting the miracles of Jesus. Here is where the focus is on yourself instead of calling Jesus a swindler (which you still can't prove), and run the risk of offending all Christians here. While my personal faith prevents me from accepting the deity of Buddha, I would never have called him stupid for sitting under a tree for many years.Tat pot is regarding Icemoon questions on existence of God. My point is not "I have difficulties in believing miracles performed by Jesus" My point is there is no Jesus, and even in the unlikely situtation he do, he DID not perform any miracles and how come people know him for the miracle she did, he just performed some "optical illusions" like wat david copperfield had done. So if u ask me, tat phrase do not express wat I mean thoroughly and may lead to confusion.
The Genesis record clearly states that God created man in His own image, ie mind, body and soul. Herein, it is not to state that the first man looked like Mr Universe. He might very well looked like all the archaelogical findings on human specie. Obviously, if anyone disbelieve the Genesis record, that this assumption is immaterial. Bear in mind too, that while in some experiments, some apes are able to learn some human behaviour, the extend of the skill-set is still way below what even a child can do.Actually tat seems a bit... strange... if Man is created in his image, i.e BODY MIND and soul and u suggest tat early man may look like 1/2 ape 1/2 human as the humonid found... I really don't know how to say tis well... I really don't know wat words to use... but doesn't tat means *something* look and think like a monkey....
Well for starters you SHOULD not expect a grenade throwing session if your questions are amicably posted. You don't see many grenades with the other genuine enquiries or concerns here. Had you asked properly and polite I guess most of us are willing to be amicable too, inspite of our differences.Originally posted by stupidissmart:Actually coming over to this thread is not wat I planned initially. The thread I had started was lock and while I shifted and halfway replying to this thread it was unlocked.
I expect a grenade throwing session. Tat is why I had prepared my guns before hand. Since all fair in love and war, why only hinder my action ?
Well, either you accept that He exists but you deem him as a charlatan or He does not exist. So which is which?Originally posted by stupidissmart:Tat pot is regarding Icemoon questions on existence of God. My point is not "I have difficulties in believing miracles performed by Jesus" My point is there is no Jesus, and even in the unlikely situtation he do, he DID not perform any miracles and how come people know him for the miracle she did, he just performed some "optical illusions" like wat david copperfield had done. So if u ask me, tat phrase do not express wat I mean thoroughly and may lead to confusion.
A pit bull is not that big to start with. In the event that you are really ill-informed, a pit bull is specifically breed for it's ferocious nature by selective breeding. How about a St Bernard? Perhaps not over one generation, but over a couple. Like the children nowadays are intellectually smarter than when you were a child.Originally posted by stupidissmart:Actually tat seems a bit... strange... if Man is created in his image, i.e [b]BODY MIND and soul and u suggest tat early man may look like 1/2 ape 1/2 human as the humonid found... I really don't know how to say tis well... I really don't know wat words to use... but doesn't tat means *something* look and think like a monkey....
[/b][/quote]
Does it matter how God looked like? So are we now saying that God must look the way we think He looked? I would never be bold enough to dictate God in my terms.
[quote]Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Anyway talking about evolution, can a chihuahua ever grow to be the size of a pit bull ? Evolution is very powerful...
1 If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a miraculous sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder of which he has spoken takes place, and he says, "Let us follow other gods" (gods you have not known) "and let us worship them," 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the LORD your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. 5 That prophet or dreamer must be put to death, because he preached rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery; he has tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you.Now we know why the Jews don't recognize Jesus huh.
9Now for some time a man named Simon had practiced sorcery in the city and amazed all the people of Samaria. He boasted that he was someone great, 10and all the people, both high and low, gave him their attention and exclaimed, "This man is the divine power known as the Great Power." 11They followed him because he had amazed them for a long time with his magic.Boy, this Simon does have his fair share of audience and supporters huh ...
Well for starters you SHOULD not expect a grenade throwing session if your questions are amicably posted. You don't see many grenades with the other genuine enquiries or concerns here. Had you asked properly and polite I guess most of us are willing to be amicable too, inspite of our differencesFrom wat I see for those amicable posters, they get ignore but most people....
Well, either you accept that He exists but you deem him as a charlatan or He does not exist. So which is which?I think icemoon reply is nicely put
So now you are saying that possibly Jesus is a David Copperfield-type magician. Er.... even right now with the sophistry of our modern society it takes a magic show designer to come up with sets for good old Dave to perform. One of them is an evangelist call Andre Kole. And you are assuming that 2000 years ago, Jesus has the ability to perform similar tricks? Boy, are you deluded....
Does it matter how God looked like? So are we now saying that God must look the way we think He looked? I would never be bold enough to dictate God in my terms.Well... the mind is in the clause too, not just the look...
A pit bull is not that big to start with. In the event that you are really ill-informed, a pit bull is specifically breed for it's ferocious nature by selective breeding. How about a St Bernard? Perhaps not over one generation, but over a couple. Like the children nowadays are intellectually smarter than when you were a child.This is posted by u before...
At the end of the day, it is alright if you do not believe that God or Jesus exist. So if this is your stand, stop posting and let's get on with our life.
Bear in mind too, that while in some experiments, some apes are able to learn some human behaviour, the extend of the skill-set is still way below what even a child can do.So u just prove my point tat ape can be an ancestor for human. Even if ape ability is still way below a child, but after, maybe 100,000 decendents things will be different.
Originally posted by Icemoon:The passage in Deuteronomy talks about practitioners of the dark arts, ie black magic, supernatural powers. Stupidissmart is talking about slight of hand parlour tricks, ie Dave Copperfield. The Bible is very clear on the fact that there are people out there who practices dark arts, hence the passage in Deut. Ditto on Simon Magnus.
stupidissmart, I helping you to reply this time.
[b]So now you are saying that possibly Jesus is a David Copperfield-type magician. Er.... even right now with the sophistry of our modern society it takes a magic show designer to come up with sets for good old Dave to perform. One of them is an evangelist call Andre Kole. And you are assuming that 2000 years ago, Jesus has the ability to perform similar tricks? Boy, are you deluded....
He is not deluded, I must say.
Read Deuteronomy 13.....
Boy, this Simon does have his fair share of audience and supporters huh ...[/b]
Having said that, this verse will be totally irrelevant to stupidissmart 'cos he does not believe in the Bible in the first place.Ahhh... the problem is not whether I believes in bible or not but whether u believes in it or not. If u r a believer, then there wouldn't have any contradictions in the bible. From the things listed by icemoon, it seems to me there is a contradictions on wat Jesus should actually be. I read the bible and I bring out my doubts. Whether I believe or not is immaterial. Does tat means if I do not believe in the bible I cannot ask question about it ?
Hi ya all....Originally posted by stupidissmart:I agree with Icemoon
For Deuteronomy 13, reading it from a literal point of view, icemoon is right. Everything written there can be used to described Jesus. If your interpretation is tat is is talking about practitioners of the dark arts, ie black magic, supernatural powers, then Jesus seems to be in this categories too.
Originally posted by stupidissmart:What makes you think that I do not believe in the existence of dark powers. I only question the origin of such powers.
To Eng Chin, why does people who perform dark arts have powers to create miracles ? If they naturally possess this power like healing or flying or resurrection, why don't u start believing in them ? Jesus is supposed to have performed these things too isn't it ? How does Magus gathered his fans ? Looking it at the science angle, it is due to simple "illusions". Do u really think the history of "illusion" only starts recently ? If u think the older generation r not as agile minded, the audience r also more naive and believes people easily. Why won't such an incident occurs ?
[/b]
Originally posted by stupidissmart:Again, I reiterate... I hope this is that last time I am doing it. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG IN ASKING QUESTION - BUT DO IT RESPECTFULLY. This is a very simple statement but you keep harping on the issue that people are not allowing you to ask. How many times do you want me to repeat this statement? Bear in mind that, to me, there are NO CONTRADICTIONS TO THE BIBLE. It does not matter what you think of me when I make this statement. I (AS WELL AS OTHER CHRISTIAN FORUMITES HERE) cannot answer ALL your concerns but it does not prove that you are always right and we are always wrong (or vice versa).
Ahhh... the problem is not whether I believes in bible or not but whether u believes in it or not. If u r a believer, then there wouldn't have any contradictions in the bible. From the things listed by icemoon, it seems to me there is a contradictions on wat Jesus should actually be. I read the bible and I bring out my doubts. Whether I believe or not is immaterial. Does tat means if I do not believe in the bible I cannot ask question about it ?
[/b]
Hi ya all....
The Bible's perspective on supernatural is that there are two opposing forces, one from God and the other from Satan. Hence the warning in Deut is to reject the powers of Satan.
If a person reads the Bible and rejects the Biblical claim that Jesus is God, it would be extremely inconsistent, then, to accept other parts of the Bible, just to suit your beliefs.
1 If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a miraculous sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder of which he has spoken takes place, and he says, "Let us follow other gods" (gods you have not known) "and let us worship them," 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the LORD your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. 5 That prophet or dreamer must be put to death, because he preached rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery; he has tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you.Well, from tat passage it seems clear for believers to be wary of people who performs miracles etc. It is a test from the god to u. Jesus did exactly as wat this passage suggested because he has tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. Then won't tis already be a sign tat believers of christ has fail god ?
What makes you think that I do not believe in the existence of dark powers. I only question the origin of such powers.Well, satan servant will certainly use deceit and etc to achieve its aim, why not it be the form of Jesus ? Tis is not meant as an insult but a real logical question which is incomprehensible to a believer like me.
Whether one thinks David Copperfield has mysterious power in person remains to be seen. Dave has never claimed to have powers. He has always stated that whatever we see on screen is a result of slight of hand and trick of the eye. The fact that there are "magic" designers out there building expensive props to enhance the performances underlines that fact that these individuals are entertainers with deft skills, nothing more.
So now you are saying that possibly Jesus is a David Copperfield-type magician. Er.... even right now with the sophistry of our modern society it takes a magic show designer to come up with sets for good old Dave to perform. One of them is an evangelist call Andre Kole. And you are assuming that 2000 years ago, Jesus has the ability to perform similar tricks? Boy, are you deluded....Boy r u deluded...
Again, I reiterate... I hope this is that last time I am doing it. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG IN ASKING QUESTION - BUT DO IT RESPECTFULLY. This is a very simple statement but you keep harping on the issue that people are not allowing you to ask. How many times do you want me to repeat this statement? Bear in mind that, to me, there are NO CONTRADICTIONS TO THE BIBLE. It does not matter what you think of me when I make this statement. I (AS WELL AS OTHER CHRISTIAN FORUMITES HERE) cannot answer ALL your concerns but it does not prove that you are always right and we are always wrong (or vice versa).Well, u do not have to reiterate. U just fail to read or I have to write the question properly.
It is extremely important to know if you believe in the Bible or not. You either disbelieve in it totally or accept it totally. No buts or ifs. And please do not quote scripture to support your personal opinions and reject scripture because it does not conform to you mindset.
Should we kill?Good point ! Either believe in it totally or don't believe it at all.
Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill."
Leviticus 24:17 "And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death."
vs.
Exodus 32:27 "Thus sayeth the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, . . . and slay every man his brother, . . . companion, . . . neighbor."
I Samuel 6:19 " . . . and the people lamented because the Lord had smitten many of the people with a great slaughter."
I Samuel 15:2,3,7,8 "Thus saith the Lord . . . Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass. . . . And Saul smote the Amalekites . . . and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword."
Numbers 15:36 "And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses."
Hosea 13:16 "they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with children shall be ripped up."
Should we tell lies?
Exodus 20:16 "Thou shalt not bear false witness."
Proverbs 12:22 "Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord."
vs.
I Kings 22:23 "The Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee."
II Thessalonians 2:11 "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie."
Also, compare Joshua 2:4-6 with James 2:25.
Shall we make graven images?
Exodus 20:4 "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven . . . earth . . . water."
Leviticus 26:1 "Ye shall make ye no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone."
Deuteronomy 27:15 "Cursed be the man that maketh any graven or molten image."
vs.
Exodus 25:18 "And thou shalt make two cherubims of gold, of beaten work shalt thou make them."
I Kings 7:15,16,23,25 "For he [Solomon] cast two pillars of brass . . . and two chapiters of molten brass . . . And he made a molten sea . . . it stood upon twelve oxen . . . [and so on]"
Does God tempt people?
James 1:13 "Let no man say . . . I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man."
vs.
Genesis 22:1 "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham."
For starters, as you have given a site with the contradictions, allow me to point to you a site that attempts to address such contradictions: http://www.carm.org/index.html. While I harbour little hope of you going into this site to learn, I still need to point out to you that there is such a site. For most parts you have taken the verses quoted beyond the cultural and literal context it was intended to be read. While there are many parts of the scripture were written to teach, other parts of scripture (many you have quoted) were written as part of history and was meant not be misconstrued as a lesson of life. To go on any further for me here, is beyond what I capable, scholastically speaking, of going into.Originally posted by stupidissmart:Well, from tat passage it seems clear for believers to be wary of people who performs miracles etc. It is a test from the god to u. Jesus did exactly as wat this passage suggested because he has tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. Then won't tis already be a sign tat believers of christ has fail god ?
For your believer part, lets say someone propose something complex to u and ask u to verify whether it is true or not. Instead of doing much research on it, another way is to see if it is true is to check if there r any contradictions in it. I say "assume this section is corect, isn't tat a contradiction to this other chapter ?". I do not have to be a believer to ask questions like tis isn't it ? Why must I be a full believer to verify something in bible tat appears fishy to me ? I am not saying I believe Magus or Deuteronomy 13. I am saying tat if u believe in Bible, u must believe in these 2 which will contradict the claims of the New Testaments written on Jesus. How is tat achievable ? I am asking WHY do U believe in such blatant differences ?
Well, satan servant will certainly use deceit and etc to achieve its aim, why not it be the form of Jesus ? Tis is not meant as an insult but a real logical question which is incomprehensible to a believer like me.
I am not saying tat Dave has dark powers. I am saying he is using just a trick of the eye to achieve it illusion and I am asking, why doesn't people in the past also perform such tricks to bluff the people too ? My case is since Magus appears to have succeeded in using such low tricks, why can't it Jesus do tat too. This is to answer your queries on your reply that on 08 April 2004 ¡¤ 09:34 PM
Well, u do not have to reiterate. U just fail to read or I have to write the question properly.
No contradictions ?? then can u try answering these questions which I have posted aeons ago ? There are much more contradictions on tis webite
http://ffrf.org/lfif/?t=contra.txt
Good point ! Either believe in it totally or don't believe it at all.
If u believe in bible totally, then u have to believe tat our heart acts as the brain and bats is a bird, not a mammal and women who aren't virgins on their marriage have to be stoned to death. Is all written in the bible isn't it ?