bong_0000007

We never lie because if I lie God will hate me.God will define by the whole bible.Also his believer defines from it.

spin

If you don't know you lie then is it a lie? If you change the truth but you don't know that you change it, is it a lie?

You are no different from the hindu or the muslim or the buddhist or the parsee. You all believe. You all believe that what you believe is right and all others are wrong. You believe this although most of you are certainly wrong. You just hope it's not you, because you can't be wrong. Can you? You can't live a lie, can you?


spin

Perm

First:
Next:
So if I'm reading this properly... no believers can understand the prophecies, and it's confusing for unbelievers. I'd say you were accurate on this one point anyway.

Amaleq13

This is a discussion board not a venue for you to preach and attempt to gain converts. If you are not able or willing to discuss the subjects in this forum, you should be spending your time somewhere else.


Thanks in advance for following the rules to which you agreed upon joining,


Amaleq13, BC&H moderator

PS Do not respond to this except by Private Message

makerowner

At least you got something right!

chrisengland

Hello
Thought I would ask about Psalms 22:16.
Apparently the dead sea scrolls says Kaaru wich is an unknown word' some Christians have suggested it meens karu wich they say meens peirced but apparently it actually meens to dig. They say that the words karu and kaaru are written very simularly (wich if I remember rightly is right' theres only a punctuation mark that seperates them) and that it could have been a mistake by a scribe or it got scratched of or something.
The mesoretic text says kaari wich meens like a lion but Chistians say that wouldn't make any sence and so prefere the later translation wich say peirced I,m not sure whether or not they debate whether or not thats deffiantely what it says or not in the Mesoreretic text or just that it it wouldn't make any sence. But apparently Robert Price said that the word pirced was talking about being bitten by animals and so he thought it ment peirced but that it wasn't talking about the Messiah.
The source I just read said that the septuagint said dug but in The NIV its got a footnote at the botttom wich says that the Septuagint says peirced along with the Syriac but that most say like a lion.
I'm unsure whetheror not there are any versions that say peirces written before Christianity had spread I will have to check.
Anyway if it isn't clear if its talking about the Messiah I suppose a skeptic could say that even if it does meen peirced its not enough to convince them because its not beyond possiblilty that it could be a coincidence.
I should let you know that my sources for this was an article written by Paul N Tobin on geocities he was an atheist but I have looked at some Christian websites aswell but that was the last one I looked at.
Chris

Dogfish

Been there, wised up. I'm sure it's a good ego-stroke to feel you can "save" so many people. Probably why religion is so popular. You can claim all sorts of stuff you never have to prove.

Dogfish

One lies when one states one's beliefs as fact.

Mageth

You need to fix your quote, dogfish, so that it's clear that bong said what you quoted and not spin.

Dogfish

Thanx