Part 18 of Post Your Tough Questions Regarding Christianity

This recent book by the Paleontologists tell the factual truths accepted by Science today and compare with the charts one-to-one.
Why ignore this amazing establishment of a factual basis for Genesis?

There were 22 'begots" in the genesis genealogy and now we read that there were actually 22 species of humans before Modern man who DID arrive as three races,... like Ham, Japheth, and Shem.

 

So now you're BACK to claiming "baby cannibalism" got rid of all the babies before the Flood?

A few days ago, you admitted that was silly and not Biblical?!?!?!?

- - - Updated - - -

Cupid, if a person can define words in the Bible any way he wishes....he can "prove" anything he wishes is "Biblical".

I could probably use your method of "Bible translation" to "prove" that God wants women in charge of the world and them all to be single mothers.

 

You have never explained how the townspeople were using babies as human shields, or how this even makes any sense given that people were using swords at the time and no mention of this is given in the Bible.

The fact is that you are making things up because you can not fact the truth. It is the father of lies has his adherents make up false stories to justify killing babies in the name of God. It is the anti-God that you worship.

Where does the Bible say that the children of the townspeople of King Sihon were the children of Satan. You are making up false stories once again to justify killing babies in the name of your God (The anti-God)


It was God that hardened the heart of King Sihon which led to the killing of babies. Why are you blaming Satan for the actions of God ?

 

At the highlighted text: That is a positive assertion. Show PROOF of your claim.

 

And with the finding of another fossilised skeleton we will have 23 species of humans 'before modern man' and a revised book.

Gorn is right. Even Christianity has adapted some Tanakh teaching to prove Jesus was the Messiah and Divine.

 

Prove that it is a positive assertion and not just your subjective opinion.

 

"prove (pruːv) vb (mainly tr) , proves, proving, proved, proved or proven1. (may take a clause as object or an infinitive) to establish or demonstrate the truth or validity of; verify, esp by using an established sequence of procedures or statements

2. to establish the quality of, esp by experiment or scientific analysis"

That would be rather difficult to accomplish on this forum, considering that there have been many attempts made at establishing what is "truth", but none have reached the status of being conclusive and irrefutable. Want to try another method of avoidance?

 

Then why do you keep asking people do what you know is impossible. Is this intentional trolling on your part ?

 

This statement bolded above, indicates there will be 'free will' in heaven. So that means one could get to heaven and then tossed out later if by 'free will' if one disobeys something of God?

 

Wan ren proves it with each and every post.

 

I can see where one might interpret what he says to be such as was described by the other poster, however, making a positive declaration requires PROOF of claim.

 

There is nothing to misrepresent on what has been presented. Your claim it is all fantasy is your own libel to yourself. The church has always been very tolerant that is why it allows all the libellous and false claims about the Bible to go on outside of secular courts such wild and false claims such as in Genesis 6:5 God killed innocent babies.

 

And you chose to be against God.
The free will to be in Heaven or Hell is the ultimate choice while on earth the price for choosing freely is either Heaven or Hell and once in Heaven one does not have to worry about free will anymore because one will always be free to enjoy everlasting life while the price for choosing to be in Hell is the forever to worried, regret and suffer the wrong choice one has made.

 

The discoveries of fossilized human remains proves that early humans did not evolved from apes.
Christianity has always recognized the Tanakh or the Old Testament that support Jesus Christ Divinity that is why Christians worship and accept Jesus Christ because of what is written in the Tanakh.

 

You got it.



- - - Updated - - -

Note...it slips out more and more....."To be against me is to be against God"--WR

 

Not trolling at all... just showing you and others how absurd it is for you and/or others to make a 'prove it' demand in regard to the many claims made on this forum regardless of whether the claim is coming from a Theist or a non-theist.

 

There was no "lie"....it was a QUESTION to you. One you likely never considered-

"Were their babies among the wicked people drowned in The Flood? And if so, doesn't that mean GOD DROWNED BABIES?"

You had previously stated that babies were "innocent"....and thus you were stuck attempting to "get rid" of the babies....rather than engage in a thoughtful explanation for why infanticide by God was "holy and justified".

Soooooo....you created FROM WHOLE CLOTH this idea of "baby cannibalization" by the wicked people to make it seem as if there were no babies or that those babies were "going to be killed anyway and eaten, so God 'spared' them that."

You debated and argued for this theory for MONTHS. Finally, quite recently, your Forum ally MittRyan said that that theory was silly...he politely said "a bit of a stretch"...but his meaning was clear.

You? To not put yourself at odds with your "friend" suddenly AGREED with him....that the arguemnt you had been making for months WAS "a bit of a stretch" and admitted that there was NO Biblical basis for it.

You are now attempt to move away from the subject to further try to "save face"....but still refuse to completely abandon your "baby cannibalization" theory...even though you this week did so openly....because it would involve you doing something even more anathema to you...

admitting you were wrong. For as we see in several posts, including a new one....you have distinctly indicated that to be against you is to "to be against God".

All that I have laid out is self-evident and historical....all can and have seen it. Including yourself

- - - Updated - - -

Incorporeal....before I start going through your old posts and re-post them (with links)....

have YOU ever "made a 'prove it' demand in regard to the many claims made on this forum "?

The thing you are criticizing Giftedone for supposedly doing???

 

I sure have. And, as stated in my last post, it was done so for the purpose of showing you and others how absurd such demands are on this forum. Tit for tat type of scenario.

 

So you have been "absurd"?

"how absurd it is for you and/or others to make a 'prove it' demand in regard to the many claims made on this forum "---Incorporeal

 

Excellent point. One of the tactics of mind control is to teach adherents a "with us or against us" Good vs Evil, God vs Satan, Black vs white paradigm.

Cult doctrine is good. Things that contradicts cult doctrine are "evil", from Satan and so on. There is a battle going on, a battle for our soul. If you lose that battle you will be punished by GOD.

This punishment will be the worst thing you can possibly imagine and will go on for an eternity .. for ever and ever and ever and ever and........

Anything is justified in the fight against EVIL and to avoid eternal punishment... even killing babies of need be. Killing pregnant women and children in front of their parents? ... No problem if it is in the name of God and fighting evil.

 

You are the one that does this. It is your modus operandi.

The only reason I did it to you was to show you the absurdity of your own actions. To do the same things as you do to others to you so that you might hopefully see how silly your actions are.

 

To do the ole religious thing. Prove he doesn't.

- - - Updated - - -

What, no 'free will'? How did Lucifer fall out of favor?

Choosing to be opposite you is not choosing against God. I am not against God. I don't lie about God. That is your job almost solely here.

 

YOU misrepresented what I said. But then you are unable to comprehend that. Sad.

 

If people 100,000 years from now look like the images depicted in this article would they deny that they evolved from us?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2013/06/07/how-the-human-face-might-look-in-100000-years/

 

God destroyed two cities, summarily, for the sake of the sinners within them. Apparently there must have been no children in these places when Abraham made his plea to God for mercy.

God also destroys all of mankind save for Noah and his family (all good people, I suppose). Apparently, there must have been no children or infants around and if there were, I guess they were all guilty.

God sends down a plague at Passover to kill the sons of Egypt. Are all these children evil or guilty of some crime?

Contradictions abound...