Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder >"I'm curious. Do you believe in UFOs and life on other planets?" I don't know. Do you believe in the Book of Ezekiel Chapter 1? Creatures that float? Floating objects shaped like a wheel inside of a wheel?< I asked you a simple, direct question. Do you believe in UFOs, yes or no?
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn I agree about Fruit Brute. He was great! Anyway, I've said my peace. Someone stir up the next point...
Originally Posted By Dabob2 < the singular event Jesus Christ 1787 years prior> There are many logical problems with mrkthompsn's theory, of course, but one huge one stands out... Nearly all theologians now believe that Jesus was not born in what we would now call the year "0" (or the year 1); the separation line between BC and AD. Most now place his birth in 3 BC. That would make the "AD 1787" reference factually wrong - off by three years. Which would completely invalidate the argument and (if mrkthompsn is really that intent on granting such weight to this date) "inauthenticate" the Constitution. That is, if what he were saying made a lick of sense. Which it doesn't. But if it did, his whole argument goes down the tubes anyway.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 See, Dabob2, now that is interesting, and isn't it amazing how things change the more details about the Bible and history are uncovered? Like the fact that the "mark of the beast" is not 666 as has been thought for ages, but instead it's 616...a bit more mundane, isn't it? Although it's a reference to Caligula, and not really meant as the devil's number at all, but anyway...
Originally Posted By 999HAUNTS Topic: Atheist Soldier Sues Army for Discrimination Let's get back on point, shall we? Who cares if you are Christian, Athiest, Agnostic, polka-dotted, or striped...if you are fighting for our country you belong to a group of fine Americans who should band together in brotherhood and/or sisterhood, and leave all of that religious crap at home. Is a soldier willing to go into battle and not put 100% of his backbone into it to protect a fellow soldier just because that soldier didn't pray with him that morning? Sounds stupid to me. I'm just saying.
Originally Posted By u k fan <<<Is a soldier willing to go into battle and not put 100% of his backbone into it to protect a fellow soldier just because that soldier didn't pray with him that morning? Sounds stupid to me.>>> I agree, but it seems not everyone else does!!!
Originally Posted By X-san ***I've never even heard of Fruit Brute. Will I never know the truth?!!!*** Exactly, UKFan. You have my pity.
Originally Posted By X-san Heretic. Just a shadow copy of good old Fruit Brute, and lots of weird aspects too that Tony the Tiger doesn't like to talk about. Makes him seem more mainstream, you see.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <I follow the teachings of Tony the Tiger.> Ooh! Ooh! Disney link!! Tony's voice was Thurl Ravenscroft.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn It began in the first year that Jesus began to preach in the temple (in Luke 4): 18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, 19 To preach the acceptable ~ year of the Lord ~.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 mrk, you seem to be having trouble grasping the fact that most people on these boards aren't going to take bible quotes as proof of anything. Even most Christians (except fundamentalists) don't read the bible literally anymore. You might want to consider that before quoting any more.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <It began in the first year that Jesus began to preach in the temple (in Luke 4):> What began? Not the dating system of AD - that's supposed to date from Jesus' birth, not from the date of his first preaching. When they wrote "In the year of our Lord 1787" they meant from birth. They were just wrong.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn The Bible is exclusively testiments from people who have actually lived and who actually encountered real events. The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are all news stories from those real people. These people have sworn to their lives of the truths that they conveyed. The root word of testimony is "testis". These men have sworn upon their balls to the truths they have conveyed. If the Bible is not reliable, then neither is the NYC, the Washington Post, the AP, USA Today, CNN or Fox News. The problem is not that I am referencing the Bible to demonstrate truth. The problem is your disbelief and ignorance of the truth.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn Islam is an religion that believes in an false idol god who is uniquely exclusive. The real God is truthful, not an idol and is inclusive to all the world through acceptance of the acts of His Son Jesus Christ.
Originally Posted By ecdc Well I'm glad we cleared that up. Cause Islam of course doesn't say the same thing about Christianity. Still waiting on that evidence, mrkthompsn.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are all news stories from those real people. These people have sworn to their lives of the truths that they conveyed.>> You do realize that you don't actually have any proof of this, don't you? You're reading a translation of a translation of a translation -- it's not like we have a 2000 year old copy of the New Testament just lying around. It's perfectly fine that you believe them as the "gospel truth", but you can't really expect everyone else to. <<If the Bible is not reliable, then neither is the NYC, the Washington Post, the AP, USA Today, CNN or Fox News.>> I'm sorry, but this is just a ridiculous statement. <<Islam is an religion that believes in an false idol god who is uniquely exclusive.>> The god of Islam is the same as the one in the Jewish and Christian tradition.
