shantonu Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 As for this vigin deal. How many times do you have to repeat the same old garbage? You have yet to give any evidence that the Jews had "virgin" there instead of young woman. Also, the prophecy in mention in Isaiah is regarding King Ahaz and the current situation at that time. There is screw all that says it was actually talking about the distant future. Furthermore, if they had virgin there then why didn't they believe in Christ when he was born of a virgin years later? Give evidence of what you are saying, give something. I have googled it again and again and cannot find anything that goes along with what you are saying. I mean nothing. I've busted LNC copying shit straight off of apologetics websites so many times it's ridiculous. I had sort of given up on even checking his bullshit. But I was a bit bored so I just googled some of his words. See above. Incidentally, here's where he is getting is latest round of fake knowledge. http://www.tektonics.org/TK-2KIN.html or go here http://www.tektonics.org/index.html They have all the "answers" right there. LNC has proven over and over again that he can't think for himself. Man, what a loser. He should just say "go to such and such a site." That would be more honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centauri Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 The Bible does not save a person, only Jesus can do that. This is a statement which the Bible itself contradicts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neon Genesis Posted March 26, 2009 Author Share Posted March 26, 2009 Good for long movies. (This thread is getting a bit too long... again... and no resolution in sight.) I'm not sure if I should be impressed or depressed that LNC has remained delusional this long. On the one hand, I'm impressed he doesn't run away like half of them do, but on the other hand, it's depressing to know somebody can still seriously believe in the Flood story after 18 pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centauri Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 The weight of Jesus statement rests on his death, burial and resurrection, for which there is solid evidence. That depends on what you consider "solid" evidence to be. It could just as easily be said that there is solid evidence for the "solid evidence" contradicting itself. We have eyewitness evidence of the death and him being seen alive post-resurrection. If you're referring to the Gospels, then you have no explicit firsthand eyewitness testimony. What you do have are stories about events and sayings pertaining to a cult leader. Other than Church tradition, what is the evidence that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, were firsthand eyewitness accounts by actual people? According to the New Testament cult writings, the resurrected Jesus only appeared to cult members, never appearing to the general public. That's rather convenient wouldn't you say? We have the disciples who were transformed from cowards to bold witnesses who gave their lives for their beliefs. In the New Testament, how many disciples are recorded as dying for Jesus? We have Paul who was a persecutor and became a bold witness and martyr for the faith. Paul never met Jesus except in visions and dreams. Are visions and dreams solid evidence? Those are just a few pieces of evidence. You don't have to assume that the Gospels are the word of God to come to these conclusions, just treat them like any other historic document and put them to the test as such. Many have done so and conclude that the evidence contained in the Gospels is reliable (even skeptics). But they aren't advertised as being just any other historical document. They're advertised as "solid" evidence for an all powerful God-man that can toss people into hell. Do you consider stories that conflict with each other to be reliable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shantonu Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 Good for long movies. (This thread is getting a bit too long... again... and no resolution in sight.) I'm not sure if I should be impressed or depressed that LNC has remained delusional this long. On the one hand, I'm impressed he doesn't run away like half of them do, but on the other hand, it's depressing to know somebody can still seriously believe in the Flood story after 18 pages. The only reason why he doesn't run away is because he shamelessly copies from apologetics websites. I've exposed him countless times as a fraud and a plaigarist (sp?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Looking4Answers Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 He doesn't run away because he was challenged early on in this thread, I believe. The challenge was that he was going to be a hit and run (make some posts for a while and then bow out). Since he was called on that, he apparently decided to keep up with the copy/paste routine and ignoring the answers given to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 Since I saw R.S. Martin's answer on the other thread that the Cragists believe it's a method to repeat and repeat the same old explanations, like robots, without questioning, without really thinking about their answers or contradictions they keep on doing, I think it's time to close this thread. It's over 15 pages, and 15 is the magical number Kevin and I use for threads. If the answer can't be said in 15 pages, then there probably isn't any. And if the topic is going sideways and new topics pop up, then they can go into a new thread instead. So, here it is (again), the latest LNC thread is closed (3:rd or 4:th time). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts