Christianity is False and Immoral.

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
it is not heresay, it was a well documented form of killing, I believe josephus mentions the crucifxion of Jesus...

Yes it is hearsay on whether he would know this in advance.
You are doing this off hindsight after the event again of writers also who wrote after the event.
Josephus certainly states that jesus was cruicified, again this states the event, not that he would have known. Also Josephus account is clearly later also doctored.

I think it was more than likely he knew especially at the trial with pilate when the jews cried criucify him yet he did not defend himself..

he defied the Jewish leaders, they in turn declared he defied ceasar, I think by that alone he knew what his fate was, so did his followers..

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

Yes it is hearsay on whether he would know this in advance.
You are doing this off hindsight after the event again of writers also who wrote after the event.
Josephus certainly states that jesus was cruicified, again this states the event, not that he would have known. Also Josephus account is clearly later also doctored.

I think it was more than likely he knew especially at the trial with pilate when the jews cried criucify him yet he did not defend himself..

he defied the Jewish leaders, they in turn declared he defied ceasar, I think by that alone he knew what his fate was, so did his followers..

I am sure you do think he knew HF
That is again hearsay

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
I think it was more than likely he knew especially at the trial with pilate when the jews cried criucify him yet he did not defend himself..

he defied the Jewish leaders, they in turn declared he defied ceasar, I think by that alone he knew what his fate was, so did his followers..

I am sure you do think he knew HF
That is again hearsay

if you discard all supporting evidence i guess it would look like heresay yes...lol

the bible shows he knew, his followers would definitely have known their fate..

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

I am sure you do think he knew HF
That is again hearsay

if you discard all supporting evidence i guess it would look like heresay yes...lol

the bible shows he knew, his followers would definitely have known their fate..

The only supporting evidence you have is that he was cruucified.
That is not much to go on.

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
if you discard all supporting evidence i guess it would look like heresay yes...lol

the bible shows he knew, his followers would definitely have known their fate..

The only supporting evidence you have is that he was cruucified.
That is not much to go on.

the bible says all about it... besides that anyone would know what was coming for standing against the jewish leaders ... do you realy think he did not know what was coming and why would his closest followers continue knowing their fate if it was a lie..

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

The only supporting evidence you have is that he was cruucified.
That is not much to go on.

the bible says all about it... besides that anyone would know what was coming for standing against the jewish leaders ... do you realy think he did not know what was coming and why would his closest followers continue knowing their fate if it was a lie..

Again you are going off the bible as your source, can you not see that?

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
the bible says all about it... besides that anyone would know what was coming for standing against the jewish leaders ... do you realy think he did not know what was coming and why would his closest followers continue knowing their fate if it was a lie..

Again you are going off the bible as your source, can you not see that?

it is a bible thing, don't you use scienist to porve science or do yu go to a creation website...?
tacitus and josephus say it happened , it appears it happened which is what the bible said, so is it fair to assume other parts of the bible would be correct, yeah i think so...

the bible says the earth is suspended in the heavens on nothing, the bible states that the oceans are fed by springs at the ocean bed , it took us till the 1970's i think it was to find that out, so I think the bible can support itself.

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

Again you are going off the bible as your source, can you not see that?

it is a bible thing, don't you use scienist to porve science or do yu go to a creation website...?
tacitus and josephus say it happened , it appears it happened which is what the bible said, so is it fair to assume other parts of the bible would be correct, yeah i think so...

the bible says the earth is suspended in the heavens on nothing, the bible states that the oceans are fed by springs at the ocean bed , it took us till the 1970's i think it was to find that out, so I think the bible can support itself.

Do you understand how historicity works?
Yes we know Jesus was crucified, the point we know happened for sure.
So its no its not fair to assume other parts of the bible are correct, in fact we know parts of the bible are indeed incrrect, because they conflict.
We know for a fact the authors of the Gospels conflcit over many claims to Jesus, which proves clearly how it is very unreliable because then which author is to be believed?

A good example of this:

MAT 27:46,50: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ...Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost."
LUK 23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."
JOH 19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."

---

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
it is a bible thing, don't you use scienist to porve science or do yu go to a creation website...?
tacitus and josephus say it happened , it appears it happened which is what the bible said, so is it fair to assume other parts of the bible would be correct, yeah i think so...

the bible says the earth is suspended in the heavens on nothing, the bible states that the oceans are fed by springs at the ocean bed , it took us till the 1970's i think it was to find that out, so I think the bible can support itself.

Do you understand how historicity works?
Yes we know Jesus was crucified, the point we know happened for sure.
So its no its not fair to assume other parts of the bible are correct, in fact we know parts of the bible are indeed incrrect, because they conflict.
We know for a fact the authors of the Gospels conflcit over many claims to Jesus, which proves clearly how it is very unreliable because then which author is to be believed?

the bible does not conflict if you understand it and keep it in context...we know Jesus was crucified, I think it is more than fair even without him being the son of God that he would know what would happen to him and as i said his followers would know exactly what to expect yet the continued.

you get four witnesses today and they will all see or say something different...

do we then assume none of them saw the incident or they are lying or the incident never actually occurred...

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

Do you understand how historicity works?
Yes we know Jesus was crucified, the point we know happened for sure.
So its no its not fair to assume other parts of the bible are correct, in fact we know parts of the bible are indeed incrrect, because they conflict.
We know for a fact the authors of the Gospels conflcit over many claims to Jesus, which proves clearly how it is very unreliable because then which author is to be believed?

the bible does not conflict if you understand it and keep it in context...we know Jesus was crucified, I think it is more than fair even without him being the son of God that he would know what would happen to him and as i said his followers would know exactly what to expect yet the continued.

you get four witnesses today and they will all see or say something different...

do we then assume none of them saw the incident or they are lying or the incident never actually occurred...

I just proved it does, as you have 3 authors have different claims to Jesus's last words before he died. Again a person if we take as a historical character claiming to be the Messiah would believe they would not die or be executed. As the bible is very clear as to what the Messiah will do.  It never happened, so to say he would see himself as going to die, would be self defeating from the start. No Messiah would die before accomplishing anything.

The following would need to happen, based on the claims of the Bible when Jesus first came:

• Isaiah 1:26: "And I will restore your judges as at first and your counsellors as in the beginning; afterwards you shall be called City of Righteousness, Faithful City." Some Jews^[9] interpret this to mean that the Sanhedrin will be re-established."(Isaiah 1:26)
  
• Once he is King, leaders of other nations will look to him for guidance. (Isaiah 2:4)
  
• The whole world will worship the One God of Israel (Isaiah 2:11-17)
  
• He will be descended from King David (Isaiah 11:1) via Solomon (1 Chronicles 22:8-10, 2 Chronicles 7:18)
  
• The "spirit of the Lord" will be upon him, and he will have a "fear of God" (Isaiah 11:2)
  
• Evil and tyranny will not be able to stand before his leadership (Isaiah 11:4)
  
• Knowledge of God will fill the world (Isaiah 11:9)
  
• He will include and attract people from all cultures and nations (Isaiah 11:10)
  
• All Israelites will be returned to their homeland (Isaiah 11:12)
  
• Death will be swallowed up forever (Isaiah 25:8)
  
• There will be no more hunger or illness, and death will cease (Isaiah 25:8)
  
• All of the dead will rise again (Isaiah 26:19)
  
• The Jewish people will experience eternal joy and gladness (Isaiah 51:11)
  
• He will be a messenger of peace (Isaiah 52:7)
  
• Nations will recognize the wrongs they did to Israel (Isaiah 52:13-53:5)
  
• The peoples of the world will turn to the Jews for spiritual guidance (Zechariah 8:23)
  
• The ruined cities of Israel will be restored (Ezekiel 16:55)
  
• Weapons of war will be destroyed (Ezekiel 39:9)
  
• The people of Israel will have direct access to the Torah through their minds and Torah study will become the study of the wisdom of the heart (Jeremiah 31:33)^[10]
  
• He will give you all the worthy desires of your heart (Psalms 37:4)
  
• He will take the barren land and make it abundant and fruitful (Isaiah 51:3, Amos 9:13-15, Ezekiel 36:29-30, Isaiah 11:6-9)
  

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
the bible does not conflict if you understand it and keep it in context...we know Jesus was crucified, I think it is more than fair even without him being the son of God that he would know what would happen to him and as i said his followers would know exactly what to expect yet the continued.

you get four witnesses today and they will all see or say something different...

do we then assume none of them saw the incident or they are lying or the incident never actually occurred...

I just proved it does, as you have 3 authors have different claims to Jesus's last words before he died. Again a person if we take as a historical character claiming to be the Messiah would believe they would not die or be executed. As the bible is very clear as to what the Messiah will do.  It never happened, so to say he would see himself as going to die, would be self defeating from the start. No Messiah would die before accomplishing anything.

The following would need to happen, based on the claims of the Bible when Jesus first came:

• Isaiah 1:26: "And I will restore your judges as at first and your counsellors as in the beginning; afterwards you shall be called City of Righteousness, Faithful City." Some Jews^[9] interpret this to mean that the Sanhedrin will be re-established."(Isaiah 1:26)
  
• Once he is King, leaders of other nations will look to him for guidance. (Isaiah 2:4)
  
• The whole world will worship the One God of Israel (Isaiah 2:11-17)
  
• He will be descended from King David (Isaiah 11:1) via Solomon (1 Chronicles 22:8-10, 2 Chronicles 7:18)
  
• The "spirit of the Lord" will be upon him, and he will have a "fear of God" (Isaiah 11:2)
  
• Evil and tyranny will not be able to stand before his leadership (Isaiah 11:4)
  
• Knowledge of God will fill the world (Isaiah 11:9)
  
• He will include and attract people from all cultures and nations (Isaiah 11:10)
  
• All Israelites will be returned to their homeland (Isaiah 11:12)
  
• Death will be swallowed up forever (Isaiah 25:8)
  
• There will be no more hunger or illness, and death will cease (Isaiah 25:8)
  
• All of the dead will rise again (Isaiah 26:19)
  
• The Jewish people will experience eternal joy and gladness (Isaiah 51:11)
  
• He will be a messenger of peace (Isaiah 52:7)
  
• Nations will recognize the wrongs they did to Israel (Isaiah 52:13-53:5)
  
• The peoples of the world will turn to the Jews for spiritual guidance (Zechariah 8:23)
  
• The ruined cities of Israel will be restored (Ezekiel 16:55)
  
• Weapons of war will be destroyed (Ezekiel 39:9)
  
• The people of Israel will have direct access to the Torah through their minds and Torah study will become the study of the wisdom of the heart (Jeremiah 31:33)^[10]
  
• He will give you all the worthy desires of your heart (Psalms 37:4)
  
• He will take the barren land and make it abundant and fruitful (Isaiah 51:3, Amos 9:13-15, Ezekiel 36:29-30, Isaiah 11:6-9)
  

you proved three different people saw and heard different things, it does not mean they didn't all hear everything thye just reported the thing they said, it also depends on their interests and understanding..

I do not understand the second part of your copy and paste...

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

I just proved it does, as you have 3 authors have different claims to Jesus's last words before he died. Again a person if we take as a historical character claiming to be the Messiah would believe they would not die or be executed. As the bible is very clear as to what the Messiah will do.  It never happened, so to say he would see himself as going to die, would be self defeating from the start. No Messiah would die before accomplishing anything.

The following would need to happen, based on the claims of the Bible when Jesus first came:

• Isaiah 1:26: "And I will restore your judges as at first and your counsellors as in the beginning; afterwards you shall be called City of Righteousness, Faithful City." Some Jews^[9] interpret this to mean that the Sanhedrin will be re-established."(Isaiah 1:26)
  
• Once he is King, leaders of other nations will look to him for guidance. (Isaiah 2:4)
  
• The whole world will worship the One God of Israel (Isaiah 2:11-17)
  
• He will be descended from King David (Isaiah 11:1) via Solomon (1 Chronicles 22:8-10, 2 Chronicles 7:18)
  
• The "spirit of the Lord" will be upon him, and he will have a "fear of God" (Isaiah 11:2)
  
• Evil and tyranny will not be able to stand before his leadership (Isaiah 11:4)
  
• Knowledge of God will fill the world (Isaiah 11:9)
  
• He will include and attract people from all cultures and nations (Isaiah 11:10)
  
• All Israelites will be returned to their homeland (Isaiah 11:12)
  
• Death will be swallowed up forever (Isaiah 25:8)
  
• There will be no more hunger or illness, and death will cease (Isaiah 25:8)
  
• All of the dead will rise again (Isaiah 26:19)
  
• The Jewish people will experience eternal joy and gladness (Isaiah 51:11)
  
• He will be a messenger of peace (Isaiah 52:7)
  
• Nations will recognize the wrongs they did to Israel (Isaiah 52:13-53:5)
  
• The peoples of the world will turn to the Jews for spiritual guidance (Zechariah 8:23)
  
• The ruined cities of Israel will be restored (Ezekiel 16:55)
  
• Weapons of war will be destroyed (Ezekiel 39:9)
  
• The people of Israel will have direct access to the Torah through their minds and Torah study will become the study of the wisdom of the heart (Jeremiah 31:33)^[10]
  
• He will give you all the worthy desires of your heart (Psalms 37:4)
  
• He will take the barren land and make it abundant and fruitful (Isaiah 51:3, Amos 9:13-15, Ezekiel 36:29-30, Isaiah 11:6-9)
  

you proved three different people saw and heard different things, it does not mean they didn't all hear everything thye just reported the thing they said, it also depends on their interests and understanding..

That just does not cut it.
It is clear these are the last words claim, and all differ.
I have shown you also that you are left with a conflcit over the Messiah itself, which would show either Jesus was meant to die and then the the views made about the messiah in the Old Testament are wrong. Or they are right and Jesus failed as the Messiah. Which would mean he would not come believeing he would die but to succeed as the Messiah. I could go off Matthew who claims Herod slaughtered all the children in Bethlehem of which Josephus makes no mention of something such an important event but certainly does of Herods other killings.
This is why you need to understand historicity. You used Josephus to back the bible on Jesus being crucified, now Josephus will work against the bible on this story of Herod, as such an event would have been recorded by Josephus.

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
you proved three different people saw and heard different things, it does not mean they didn't all hear everything thye just reported the thing they said, it also depends on their interests and understanding..

That just does not cut it.
It is clear these are the last words claim, and all differ.
I have shown you also that you are left with a conflcit over the Messiah itself, which would show either Jesus was meant to die and then the the views made about the messiah in the Old Testament are wrong. Or they are right and Jesus failed as the Messiah. Which would mean he would not come believeing he would die but to succeed as the Messiah. I could go off Matthew who claims Herod slaughtered all the children in Bethlehem of which Josephus makes no mention of something such an important event but certainly does of Herods other killings.
This is why you need to understand historicity. You used Josephus to back the bible on Jesus being crucified, now Josephus will work against the bible on this story of Herod, as such an event would have been recorded by Josephus.

of course it cuts it, background of each individual, interests, knowledge, education would have an influence on wht they heard and understood..

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

That just does not cut it.
It is clear these are the last words claim, and all differ.
I have shown you also that you are left with a conflcit over the Messiah itself, which would show either Jesus was meant to die and then the the views made about the messiah in the Old Testament are wrong. Or they are right and Jesus failed as the Messiah. Which would mean he would not come believeing he would die but to succeed as the Messiah. I could go off Matthew who claims Herod slaughtered all the children in Bethlehem of which Josephus makes no mention of something such an important event but certainly does of Herods other killings.
This is why you need to understand historicity. You used Josephus to back the bible on Jesus being crucified, now Josephus will work against the bible on this story of Herod, as such an event would have been recorded by Josephus.

of course it cuts it, background of each individual, interests, knowledge, education would have an influence on wht they heard and understood..

As seen it does not and you are now avoiding all my points.
Jesus could only have had the same last words, if they differ 2 of the authors are lying or going off third hand sources, where when second hand, you have further issues. It thus as seen becomes less reliable. He could not have said all 3 things as his last words. Agian, I have shown you also that you are left with a conflcit over the Messiah itself, which would show either Jesus was meant to die and then the the views made about the messiah in the Old Testament are wrong. Or they are right and Jesus failed as the Messiah. Which would mean he would not come believeing he would die but to succeed as the Messiah. I could go off Matthew who claims Herod slaughtered all the children in Bethlehem of which Josephus makes no mention of something such an important event but certainly does of Herods other killings. This is why you need to understand historicity. You used Josephus to back the bible on Jesus being crucified, now Josephus will work against the bible on this story of Herod, as such an event would have been recorded by Josephus.

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
of course it cuts it, background of each individual, interests, knowledge, education would have an influence on wht they heard and understood..

As seen it does not and you are now avoiding all my points.
Jesus could only have had the same last words, if they differ 2 of the authors are lying or going off third hand sources, where when second hand, you have further issues. It thus as seen becomes less reliable. He could not have said all 3 things as his last words. Agian, I have shown you also that you are left with a conflcit over the Messiah itself, which would show either Jesus was meant to die and then the the views made about the messiah in the Old Testament are wrong. Or they are right and Jesus failed as the Messiah. Which would mean he would not come believeing he would die but to succeed as the Messiah. I could go off Matthew who claims Herod slaughtered all the children in Bethlehem of which Josephus makes no mention of something such an important event but certainly does of Herods other killings. This is why you need to understand historicity. You used Josephus to back the bible on Jesus being crucified, now Josephus will work against the bible on this story of Herod, as such an event would have been recorded by Josephus.

so if i said say a five minute speech prior to my death, what are my last words???

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

As seen it does not and you are now avoiding all my points.
Jesus could only have had the same last words, if they differ 2 of the authors are lying or going off third hand sources, where when second hand, you have further issues. It thus as seen becomes less reliable. He could not have said all 3 things as his last words. Agian, I have shown you also that you are left with a conflcit over the Messiah itself, which would show either Jesus was meant to die and then the the views made about the messiah in the Old Testament are wrong. Or they are right and Jesus failed as the Messiah. Which would mean he would not come believeing he would die but to succeed as the Messiah. I could go off Matthew who claims Herod slaughtered all the children in Bethlehem of which Josephus makes no mention of something such an important event but certainly does of Herods other killings. This is why you need to understand historicity. You used Josephus to back the bible on Jesus being crucified, now Josephus will work against the bible on this story of Herod, as such an event would have been recorded by Josephus.

so if i said say a five minute speech prior to my death, what are my last words???

It was not a 5 minute speech though was it?
Its his last words. Do you understand what last words mean?
All 3 differ, that does not bode you well as on each what comes after the words?

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
so if i said say a five minute speech prior to my death, what are my last words???

It was not a 5 minute speech though was it?
Its his last words. Do you understand what last words mean?
All 3 differ, that does not bode you well as on each what comes after the words?

how do you know were you there, if he said four sentences are they his final words??

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

It was not a 5 minute speech though was it?
Its his last words. Do you understand what last words mean?
All 3 differ, that does not bode you well as on each what comes after the words?

how do you know were you there, if he said four sentences are they his final words??

Oh dear:


MAT 27:46,50: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ...Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost."

LUK 23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

JOH 19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."


The last words differ greatly and I do not need to be there to point out the Gospels conflict on the "last" words.

You have avodied the other points as well.

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
how do you know were you there, if he said four sentences are they his final words??

Oh dear:


MAT 27:46,50: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ...Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost."

LUK 23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

JOH 19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."


The last words differ greatly and I do not need to be there to point out the Gospels conflict on the "last" words.

You have avodied the other points as well.

the bible says his final command is to go to all the nations and preach the gospel, is that a contradiction??

you are assuming he said one final last line and they all heard that one final last line...

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

Oh dear:


MAT 27:46,50: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ...Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost."

LUK 23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

JOH 19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."


The last words differ greatly and I do not need to be there to point out the Gospels conflict on the "last" words.

You have avodied the other points as well.

the bible says his final command is to go to all the nations and preach the gospel, is that a contradiction??

you are assuming he said one final last line and they all heard that one final last line...

So you now concede on this point which shows the bible conflicts by asking about something else.

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
the bible says his final command is to go to all the nations and preach the gospel, is that a contradiction??

you are assuming he said one final last line and they all heard that one final last line...

So you now concede on this point which shows the bible conflicts by asking about something else.

ha ha ha are you declaring yourself the winner again...how unlike you...

no as I have clearly said the final words are what they heard or understood, as three seperate individuals according to their knowledge.

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

So you now concede on this point which shows the bible conflicts by asking about something else.

ha ha ha are you declaring yourself the winner again...how unlike you...

no as I have clearly said the final words are what they heard or understood, as three seperate individuals according to their knowledge.

No, just pointing out you are now conceding by deflecting onto another part of the bible. Also you have conceded on the Herod point and the Messiah point, being as you have no answer to all 3 points made showing the bible conflicts.

Case closed.

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
ha ha ha are you declaring yourself the winner again...how unlike you...

no as I have clearly said the final words are what they heard or understood, as three seperate individuals according to their knowledge.

No, just pointing out you are now conceding by deflecting onto another part of the bible. Also you have conceded on the Herod point and the Messiah point, being as you have no answer to all 3 points made showing the bible conflicts.

Case closed.

lol i was right you are declaring yourself the winner, surprise surprise...

I have conceeded no points to you at all, as you have no points to make as usual, you accept no eveidence but your own as usual so it is hardly surprising you think you know everything..lol

if Jesus said today is tuesday and today i leave you all, some might say his final words were today is tueasday how odd, others might say his last words were today I leave you, who is right and who is wrong..?

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

No, just pointing out you are now conceding by deflecting onto another part of the bible. Also you have conceded on the Herod point and the Messiah point, being as you have no answer to all 3 points made showing the bible conflicts.

Case closed.

lol i was right you are declaring yourself the winner, surprise surprise...

I have conceeded no points to you at all, as you have no points to make as usual, you accept no eveidence but your own as usual so it is hardly surprising you think you know everything..lol

if Jesus said today is tuesday and today i leave you all, some might say his final words were today is tueasday how odd, others might say his last words were today I leave you, who is right and who is wrong..?

You have conceeded:

I raised points on Herod:

You avoided:

I proved points on how the Jesus Messiah does not match the claims of the Messiah in the Old testament.

You avoided.

I showed that 3 Gospels writes conflict on the last words of Jesus, you came back with some poor excuses and then finally this:

the bible says his final command is to go to all the nations and preach the gospel, is that a contradiction??

Which has nothing to do with his last words on the cross. It was a very poor deflection and you conceeding. You can of course prove my points wrong, but so far all you have done is conceed.

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
lol i was right you are declaring yourself the winner, surprise surprise...

I have conceeded no points to you at all, as you have no points to make as usual, you accept no eveidence but your own as usual so it is hardly surprising you think you know everything..lol

if Jesus said today is tuesday and today i leave you all, some might say his final words were today is tueasday how odd, others might say his last words were today I leave you, who is right and who is wrong..?

You have conceeded:

I raised points on Herod:

You avoided:

I proved points on how the Jesus Messiah does not match the claims of the Messiah in the Old testament.

You avoided.

I showed that 3 Gospels writes conflict on the last words of Jesus, you came back with some poor excuses and then finally this:

the bible says his final command is to go to all the nations and preach the gospel, is that a contradiction??

Which has nothing to do with his last words on the cross. It was a very poor deflection and you conceeding. You can of course prove my points wrong, but so far all you have done is conceed.

you have proved nothing, your points as usaul are pointless, because i cannot be bothtered to answer your inane questions does not concede a point..
well only to you.

define final words , is it a sentence, a part sentence, a paragraph or even a wholl book.
remember he rose again so even using the term last words is a little odd..

Oh dear, let me know when you want to take on the 3 points made and stop wasting my time with poor deflections.

Thanks you

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:Oh dear, let me know when you want to take on the 3 points made and stop wasting my time with poor deflections.

Thanks you

Please let me know when you have a valid point...

infact email me  likeireallygiveashite@yahoo.co.uk  

Oh well, its a shame when a poster left with his arse utterly spanked on a debate shows his true age level of 3.

Thanks HF it was a decent debate untiil you knew for a fact you got stuck.
Better luck next time.

Cheers

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:Oh well, its a shame when a poster left with his arse utterly spanked on a debate shows his true age level of 3.

Thanks HF it was a decent debate untiil you knew for a fact you got stuck.
Better luck next time.

Cheers

you couldn't spank a corpse, you just bore people to death then declare yourself the winner....

I wonder how many trust evolution as their religion, will they all be wrong....

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:I wonder how many trust evolution as their religion, will they all be wrong....

The reality is science is testable.
That means theories on science can be proven wrong
Religion is not testable.
Faith does not allow for a belief to be wrong, otherwise that person would have no faith in that belief.
Hence why you easily confuse yourself all the time.
Evolution is not a religion and to claim it is just backs up my signature.

Belatucadros wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:I wonder how many trust evolution as their religion, will they all be wrong....

The reality is science is testable.
That means theories on science can be proven wrong
Religion is not testable.
Faith does not allow for a belief to be wrong, otherwise that person would have no faith in that belief.
Hence why you easily confuse yourself all the time.
Evolution is not a religion and to claim it is just backs up my signature.

the fact some science can be tested is one thing, the idea that evolution has been seen or tested is quite something else and by far the majority of followers of evolution do so on blind faith, as they can only take the word of those who claim it.

evolution is a relgion, pure and simple.... it is followed by those who chose to do so ..

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:

The reality is science is testable.
That means theories on science can be proven wrong
Religion is not testable.
Faith does not allow for a belief to be wrong, otherwise that person would have no faith in that belief.
Hence why you easily confuse yourself all the time.
Evolution is not a religion and to claim it is just backs up my signature.

the fact some science can be tested is one thing, the idea that evolution has been seen or tested is quite something else and by far the majority of followers of evolution do so on blind faith, as they can only take the word of those who claim it.

evolution is a relgion, pure and simple.... it is followed by those who chose to do so ..

Is it something else or the fact you just fail to understand science and evidence?
Really how is peoples daily lives led according to evolution then?
It plays no part in my daily life or for a need that it does.
It shows you have no comprehension of what religion is, even though you follow a religion and cult of death.
Again what God is worshipped in evolution?

Belatucadros wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
the fact some science can be tested is one thing, the idea that evolution has been seen or tested is quite something else and by far the majority of followers of evolution do so on blind faith, as they can only take the word of those who claim it.

evolution is a relgion, pure and simple.... it is followed by those who chose to do so ..

Is it something else or the fact you just fail to understand science and evidence?
Really how is peoples daily lives led according to evolution then?
It plays no part in my daily life or for a need that it does.
It shows you have no comprehension of what religion is, even though you follow a religion and cult of death.
Again what God is worshipped in evolution?

why should I believe their evidence could you tell me how I could test their eveidence, where I could get the resources to test their evidence...??
they believe they are the result of a series of accidental mutations, I'm not surpriised they feel worthless...
evolution is followed on blind faith, the god of evolution is man's arrogance...

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:

Is it something else or the fact you just fail to understand science and evidence?
Really how is peoples daily lives led according to evolution then?
It plays no part in my daily life or for a need that it does.
It shows you have no comprehension of what religion is, even though you follow a religion and cult of death.
Again what God is worshipped in evolution?

why should I believe their evidence could you tell me how I could test their eveidence, where I could get the resources to test their evidence...??
they believe they are the result of a series of accidental mutations, I'm not surpriised they feel worthless...
evolution is followed on blind faith, the god of evolution is man's arrogance...

What do you understand about biology?
Evolution is not followed by blind faith, that again is an absurd misconception you use as the poorest deflection away from the fact your belief is blind faith. It shows all you are doing is trying to place testable science on a par with faith as your defense.
So now arrogance an emotion is now a God to you or God like?
PMSL

Belatucadros wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
why should I believe their evidence could you tell me how I could test their eveidence, where I could get the resources to test their evidence...??
they believe they are the result of a series of accidental mutations, I'm not surpriised they feel worthless...
evolution is followed on blind faith, the god of evolution is man's arrogance...

What do you understand about biology?
Evolution is not followed by blind faith, that again is an absurd misconception you use as the poorest deflection away from the fact your belief is blind faith. It shows all you are doing is trying to place testable science on a par with faith as your defense.
So now arrogance an emotion is now a God to you or God like?
PMSL

of course evolution ois followed by blind faith, 99% of it's followers have nothing to base their beliefs upon...
testable science, evolution has nothing to do with testable science, it is a long series of best guesses holding each other up...
arrogance of man is a huge problem, with live for the blink of an eye and think we cn know everything, for some reason if science says it does not exist we are supposed to forget it is there...

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:

What do you understand about biology?
Evolution is not followed by blind faith, that again is an absurd misconception you use as the poorest deflection away from the fact your belief is blind faith. It shows all you are doing is trying to place testable science on a par with faith as your defense.
So now arrogance an emotion is now a God to you or God like?
PMSL

of course evolution ois followed by blind faith, 99% of it's followers have nothing to base their beliefs upon...
testable science, evolution has nothing to do with testable science, it is a long series of best guesses holding each other up...
arrogance of man is a huge problem, with live for the blink of an eye and think we cn know everything, for some reason if science says it does not exist we are supposed to forget it is there...

Oh dear you just keep repeating the same nonsense.
Again what do you understand about biology?

Belatucadros wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
of course evolution ois followed by blind faith, 99% of it's followers have nothing to base their beliefs upon...
testable science, evolution has nothing to do with testable science, it is a long series of best guesses holding each other up...
arrogance of man is a huge problem, with live for the blink of an eye and think we cn know everything, for some reason if science says it does not exist we are supposed to forget it is there...

Oh dear you just keep repeating the same nonsense.
Again what do you understand about biology?

the same nonesense that's very interesting..
roughly how many people who believe evolution have the means to properly test the theory???

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:

Oh dear you just keep repeating the same nonsense.
Again what do you understand about biology?

the same nonesense that's very interesting..
roughly how many people who believe evolution have the means to properly test the theory???

Poor deflection again.
Do you understand biology?

Belatucadros wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
the same nonesense that's very interesting..
roughly how many people who believe evolution have the means to properly test the theory???

Poor deflection again.
Do you understand biology?

I only got a b in o level biology I never took it any further...
so how many people who believe evolution can test the theory???

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:

Poor deflection again.
Do you understand biology?

I only got a b in o level biology I never took it any further...
so how many people who believe evolution can test the theory???

So you will understand then that you can test evolution through biology then you should understand then about Bacterial resistance to antibiotics?
I am giving you a test now.

Belatucadros wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
I only got a b in o level biology I never took it any further...
so how many people who believe evolution can test the theory???

So you will understand then that you can test evolution through biology then you should understand then about  Bacterial resistance to antibiotics?
I am giving you a test now.

it appears that throughout the human and animal kingdom there are set parameters that allow change within a species, that is adaption... we do not see pigs with wings, your bacteria was bacteria, it is now antibiotic resistant Bacteria, it is the same thing bacteria, the fact it changed through the intervention of man proves nothing except perhaps intelligent design...
do we have the list of positive mutations that have brought us this far, how far have we come, how much has changed from early humans to what we see now...

do the native indians now walking around represent evolution...?
Is dog breeding an example of evolution.

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:

So you will understand then that you can test evolution through biology then you should understand then about  Bacterial resistance to antibiotics?
I am giving you a test now.

it appears that throughout the human and animal kingdom there are set parameters that allow change within a species, that is adaption... we do not see pigs with wings, your bacteria was bacteria, it is now antibiotic resistant Bacteria, it is the same thing bacteria, the fact it changed through the intervention of man proves nothing except perhaps intelligent design...
do we have the list of positive mutations that have brought us this far, how far have we come, how much has changed from early humans to what we see now...

do the native indians now walking around represent evolution...?
Is dog breeding an example of evolution.

I sometimes see pigs with wings flying over this forum.

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:

So you will understand then that you can test evolution through biology then you should understand then about  Bacterial resistance to antibiotics?
I am giving you a test now.

it appears that throughout the human and animal kingdom there are set parameters that allow change within a species, that is adaption... we do not see pigs with wings, your bacteria was bacteria, it is now antibiotic resistant Bacteria, it is the same thing bacteria, the fact it changed through the intervention of man proves nothing except perhaps intelligent design...
do we have the list of positive mutations that have brought us this far, how far have we come, how much has changed from early humans to what we see now...

do the native indians now walking around represent evolution...?
Is dog breeding an example of evolution.

You just proved you know next to nothing about biology.

Thank you

So you have no understanding about Bacterial resistance to antibiotics?

One simple test and you could not even get that right

Hilarious and proof you must have gotten an F in biology.

Never mind you poor uneducated child

Thanks for the entertainment though