Search results

You picked a doozie with which to fail: there are three implied "if" statements in Mark 16:16, and the passage is not considered Scripture by all readers of Scripture.

Ah... you just want to throw shade from the comfort of your La-Z-Boy. Whatever.

Show one promise of Scripture that is "absolute" rather than "iffy". An "if" in the context (even implied) renders the promise "iffy".

I don't "need" to adhere to the creeds at all; I adhere to Scripture.

You might think you have proven your case, but you haven't, because I'm not convinced. Again, if you aren't willing to point out a specific post with which I disagreed, don't blather on about your claims to proof.

That's what happens when you read 400-year-old English through 21st-century eyes. You assume that the meanings of words haven't changed over time, when in fact many have changed dramatically.

Actually, you made the claim, "All of my posts are biblical" which puts the onus on you to prove it. You have misunderstood Philippians 3:13 and gravely misapplied it. If you don't want to take the time to learn, why do you ask me to show you?

You can't make a biblical argument when you start with non-biblical terminology. "Thought" is not used in reference to God; "Word" is. Which is true. No, that does not follow. Again, that does not follow. Um, no. Look up the meanings of "distinct" and "separate". They are neither as distinct...

Read back to your relevant post, then re-read my post. Consider whether the grammar of "should" is actually less certain than that of "shall", or whether the problem is in your misunderstanding of tenses.

There's the rub: they aren't. Point out a specific post where I disagreed and I will explain why.

Will ~ would Shall ~ should You should be able to take it from there. I will not do your homework for you.

Putting an 'x' on your post is not "hating" you; it's disagreeing with your post, or part of it.

Fallacy: appeal to common sense.

This only demonstrates your lack of understanding of grammar.

My senses tell me that the sun appears from behind the horizon each morning, and disappears over the horizon each evening. It doesn't appear (already above the horizon) from the haze of the atmosphere, or disappear while still above the horizon into a haze of atmosphere. Your false theory...

Moronic stupidity. The tilt of the Earth is about 23 degrees, not 66.6. Curvature is not measured over area but over distance. The mean velocity of the Earth around the sun is 66670 mph, not 66600 mph. Your meme displays ignorance of Scripture as well, as the so-called 'number of the beast' is...

That might be valid if the only gravitational force acting on the water were located off the Earth. It isn't.

No... what they usually mean is don't limit God by your own understanding and experience. Typically, it is because people don't know the Bible that they "put God in a box".

I don't see "zygote" anywhere in there. The event was recorded by a human using a human perspective. Says you... with no supporting explanation. You presented your opinions... not scientific explanations. Being stubborn is not the same as being correct. Asinine snipe. Um, no. You clearly...

Since you understand so little about aircraft flight, you should keep silent on the subject. Displaying your ignorance does you no credit.