Key

Member
  • Posts

    1,552
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Key

  1. Yes, that has been pointed out numerous times just in this forum alone. Here, and everywhere else I've seen this presented has always been explained away as being "some words cannot be translated as they were originally conveyed, so it is as close to the meaning as it can get". But here, with the obvious editing being shown is quite different. Whether it was done to reconcile continuity or not, it still shows someone made a personal judgement to make changes. Therefore, it begs to question, if this is allowed, what else had been changed or added without the knowledge of the masses that followed the final results? Also brings legitimacy to questions of an agenda being made within the pages, no?
  2. No, he is clearly not stupid. I have neither seen you imply that, nor think I have ever done so. I don't think he would play mind games, either. Never got that impression. He is just stubbornly persistent with his own interpretations of what others believe, despite being told otherwise by those very people.
  3. Wow! Very interesting. I'll Have to watch the other part later.
  4. In truth, that's how he always seems to come across to me, as well. Sorry, Dan, but it's true.
  5. I kinda disagree there, Dan. I often view your responses as a twist of your own perspective relating to their's but not really embracing their definitions of what they believe. It's always antagonistic towards your beliefs, by your responses. Also, I kind of beg to differ on another response of yours. You said God doesn't have to prove himself to man, (maybe), but man must prove himself to God. (Not really.) If God already knows what's in our hearts, as stated in Scripture, then there is no need to prove anything. As others have pointed out, there are many details that seem to either contradict or seem to be overly schematic. That may be one of them.
  6. And that is what makes a person honest, admission that they could be wrong, rather than stubborn persistence that they are absolutely right. That is what drives me to learn more of whatever I can, because I know that at times I may discover something I thought was right, was quite the opposite. Knowledge changes, just as everything else does.
  7. Devil's advocate again: You have to remember, Dan, this was an age where people believed they were seeing prophets performing miracles. So, in all likelihood, much like Muslims today, they saw Jesus as only another prophet, and not God on Earth. The only witness testimony we have today that says He was God, are those given in the Bible. A mere fraction of the population that would have seen anything. Who can say how many believed Jesus was God, or just a prophet outside of those authors?
  8. I have seen them here before, but usually in the "Open Pulpit" section. As long as the post isn't in violation of forum rules, which admin would be sure to address.
  9. Dan, you just opened the floodgates with this comment against your stance. You may wish to restate differently.
  10. But that's just it, Dan. It doesn't just say, "I will remember". It specifically states, "I will see it and remember." Btw, I wouldn't say a forgetful anyone is a moron without them demonstrating the fact first.
  11. Now this is much more nicely said, and expresses your sentiment as more personal. For anyone to have such impact in one's life is truly to be blessed. Good for you.
  12. Defining words in that passage, Dan, "...I will see it and remember..." If it were for only the sake of men, why not say, "...man will see it and remember..."? As it stands in the book, it seems as much for His sake has it is man's.
  13. Now you got me thinking something I hadn't considered before. If Biblical God is all knowing, and His memory is long, why would He need a reminder for Himself?
  14. Yeah, saw it. Good quip. Maybe one of them would do it, too. 😉
  15. They aren't saying we are the sole cause of it, but we are a major contributor to it. And that isn't propaganda. Evidence of this was discovered by big oil's own scientific research and buried for many years until recently uncovered. Btw, not entirely true about Antarctica. But, sea plankton and other species are dying off there, as well, because of climate change.
  16. Sarcasm, friend. Used your usual whistling emoji for that as a hint.
  17. For the first, they have been saying that. The possibility does exist. just that they require proof to have conclusive belief. Second, they haven't said they accept life on other planets without proof. Just that they accept the possibility. No double standard that I can see there.
  18. Imagine that. Think all that ice melting from Greenland had something to do with it?
  19. To be honest, considering the altitude of mountain ranges in the region, for them to be covered by water, the effects would not just be limited to a "local" area, anyway. So, reasonable doubt does exist, simply because no corresponding incidences of it were felt elsewhere in the world worthy enough to be recorded, at least that I'm aware of.
  20. Or this one: https://www.airspacemag.com/daily-planet/debate-over-whether-weve-already-found-life-mars-continued-180973395/
  21. This article is more compelling than that one. But you may still doubt it. https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/15/us/nasa-life-on-mars-intl-hnk-scli/index.html
  22. Sorry, but if He is all knowing, what is there to change?
  23. Which contradicts your original statement in which you state there is life only on one. They never claimed life does or doesn't exist elsewhere, and are open to evidence of it. Which is what they've been saying, as well. That God could exist but there is no evidence for them to believe, but are open to it should evidence present itself. Not true. Scientist have discovered fossilized microbes on mars, which means there was once water there and there was some form of life, as well. They also theorize there is still an existing layer of water beneath it's surface somewhere.