Because people continue to lie, I must tell the TRUTH.........

[SL8Rok]

okay ille take this with the points you put down.

1. Yes you are correct about the council of nicaea... i Think you may have misread what i wrote or you just like to agree with what i said with quotes.

2. Typo my bad, i had meant to write conquests... and yes they took place... all around the time of Late Antiquity... The Eastern Roman Empire was sure as shit warring in the NAME OF GOD.

3. I did not say that it is gods wrong to have chosen man to pen his work. what i did say was that down the line the works were changed and its true there are accounts of monks who first started translating the bible from one language to another putting thier own emphasis in certain parts. We can use a couple more big names just like your Arius, King James, Joseph Smith, aaaannnd pretty much every other spin off religion from the Roman catholic church.

4.you are in no position to question my faith, as i dont question yours.

The simple point i was trying to make was that because man has in fact had opportunity to put his 2cents into the bible he has.

1. Conquests when? Early christians were rampaged by persecution from the Romans and Jews. Constantine may have legalized christianity but that surely didn't stop their persecution. And then when the roman empire fell and became the roman catholic church, the persecution of the christians was still as strong as ever. The eastern roman empire also tried to restore the old roman empire in the name of the pagan gods. What is you're point?

2. This is where understanding the different lines of biblical texts comes in the codex vaticanus and sinaiticus also known as the alexandrian texts (which is where the non-KJV line of bibles come from) and u have the textus receptus (or the majority texts) and that line of scripture was preserved and kept solid throughout the ages. Yes catholic monks did change parts of the bible, changed the latin vulgate, added books etc etc. Yes I kno that. However the recieved text was not in their hands. It would be a great topic of study should you decide to look into these things.

3. You yourself said you don't believe what you don't see, in plain terms you have no faith. Simple observation.

4. The bible has not been edited, there is absolutely no proof of that simple speculation and rhetoric.

 

[Chike]

I believe the burden of proof rest on you.

lol uh no... You can't write a book, claim it to be true, and then say the burden of proving you wrong is on us.... that's just.... no.

 

[SL8Rok]

lol uh no... You can't write a book, claim it to be true, and then say the burden of proving you wrong is on us.... that's just.... no.

I didn't write the book, however you are the one questioning the validity of said book however and in doing so you are supposed to make arguments with supporting facts. Now if you are incapable thats one thing but don't act brand new to the whole process.

 

[Chike]

I didn't write the book, however you are the one questioning the validity of said book however and in doing so you are supposed to make arguments with supporting facts. Now if you are incapable thats one thing but don't act brand new to the whole process.

But you believe it to be literal and true to the way the church interprets it.

 

[SL8Rok]

But you believe it to be literal and true to the way the church interprets it.

yes I do, but if you are going to say this or that is fake u have better have an argument to support that claim. And what is 'the church' and how do they "interpret it"?

 

[Poach]

yes I do, but if you are going to say this or that is fake u have better have an argument to support that claim. And what is 'the church' and how do they "interpret it"?

Lets look at it this way. The Bible is written by you(i know its not im not retarted) and you are handing it in as your assignment.

I want to see your works cited, your facts, and information to back up your claims.

All of this without me questioning what you actually wrote.

So now put it into reality

You have a Book that you believe to be fact and literal

without me knowing a damn thing about your book i would like to first see the credentials of the book.

 

[DoUwant2go2Heaven]

First of all, What say you about that Demonology book that your precious Kin James wrote?

And secondly...

That Roman Devil... the only damn guy in your whole post. You got short term memory loss or something? Stop smoking crack.

What does the book you posted have to do with the topic at hand? And I only posted 1 of dozens of secular accounts for the historicity of Jesus Christ. Again, did you even read the original post?

 

[DoUwant2go2Heaven]

so because an article you found on the internet says all thats truth, you believe it?

i could easily find a site that counters that which would be just as credible

You could look up the information on any of the historians who wrote in the early 1st and 2nd century and receive the same information I am posting. Maybe if you did your own research you would understand these things, but I guess that's asking to much.

 

[SL8Rok]

Lets look at it this way. The Bible is written by you(i know its not im not retarted) and you are handing it in as your assignment.

I want to see your works cited, your facts, and information to back up your claims.

All of this without me questioning what you actually wrote.

So now put it into reality

You have a Book that you believe to be fact and literal

without me knowing a damn thing about your book i would like to first see the credentials of the book.

You can go round and round all you want my friend, if you are going to attack the validity of the bible or anything for that matter you need to provide proof and or sound logical argumentation.

 

[Chike]

yes I do, but if you are going to say this or that is fake u have better have an argument to support that claim. And what is 'the church' and how do they "interpret it"?

Example, Talking snakes and 200 year old man building the titanic and putting 2 of every animal on board... that type of literal interpretations. MY arguement, prove that snakes can talk... you have not nor has anyone on the planet, therefore the burden is on you... not me. That's just one example. Before I move on to the next, let's just start with that one first.

 

[Chike]

What does the book you posted have to do with the topic at hand? And I only posted 1 of dozens of secular accounts for the historicity of Jesus Christ. Again, did you even read the original post?

I could post that reply in every single thread of your's where you post a verse from your King James Bible and it would apply. MY point is, the fact that King James wrote a book on Demonology along side the Bible just discredits any type of "holiness" you claim him to have, which in turn renders your interpretation of your bible verse pointless.

 

[Arya Tsaddiq]

Actually Chike, in the book, King James credited witches supernatural powers to demon possesion and used it as a mean to kill any known witch. Which was done back then and also is in the bible.

 

[SL8Rok]

Example, Talking snakes and 200 year old man building the titanic and putting 2 of every animal on board... that type of literal interpretations. MY arguement, prove that snakes can talk... you have not nor has anyone on the planet, therefore the burden is on you... not me. That's just one example. Before I move on to the next, let's just start with that one first.

And again you are the one attacking the claim and therefore are obligated to provide some sort of evidence or at least a sound argument, which you haven't done. Simply because nobody has ever seen this happen doesn't mean it never did happen. prove that when the devil possesses an animal it can't do things that it wouldn't normally do.

 

[Chike]

Actually Chike, in the book, King James credited witches supernatural powers to demon possesion and used it as a mean to kill any known witch. Which was done back then and also is in the bible.

That's blasphemy.

And again you are the one attacking the claim and therefore are obligated to provide some sort of evidence or at least a sound argument, which you haven't done. Simply because nobody has ever seen this happen doesn't mean it never did happen. prove that when the devil possesses an animal it can't do things that it wouldn't normally do.

hahahah gtfoh... Yo, I'm God in the Flesh. Prove me wrong, fool.