• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

But, but where could God come from

TypicalRussian said:
No you have not, you just completely ignored my point about the verse
Click to expand...

No, I haven't. However, your point was incorrect, and in fact, a lie that you were told. I will note you were unable to support your claim. A circle is 2D , like a line drawn by a compass. It has no 3D qualities.

You are also talking about 'the vault of heaven', which is the terminology that was used by the Babalonians that viewed the earth as a huge dish, with a physical cover, not a globe. SO, in fact, you proved yourself wrong.
 
RAMOSS said:
No, I haven't. However, your point was incorrect, and in fact, a lie that you were told. I will note you were unable to support your claim. A circle is 2D , like a line drawn by a compass. It has no 3D qualities.

You are also talking about 'the vault of heaven', which is the terminology that was used by the Babalonians that viewed the earth as a huge dish, with a physical cover, not a globe. SO, in fact, you proved yourself wrong.
Click to expand...

A vault is not a babylonion term, it is clearly biblical when referring to the Heavens
 
TypicalRussian said:
A vault is not a babylonion term, it is clearly biblical when referring to the Heavens
Click to expand...

No, it's english. You have to realize you are dealing with translations, and translation is interpretation.
 
Omega Man said:
...according to those very same people who wrote the Bible. Circular logic.


OM
Click to expand...

That is where there "proof' comes from. Using the bible to prove the bible.
 
RAMOSS said:
No, it's english. You have to realize you are dealing with translations, and translation is interpretation.
Click to expand...

So it is up to interpretation, how can you prove that your interpretation is correct
 
Omega Man said:
There aren't any errors in the Lord of the Rings either. It's a perfect story.


OM
Click to expand...

The Lord of The Rings isn't the Bible or even remotely close to it's glory
 
TypicalRussian said:
So it is up to interpretation, how can you prove that your interpretation is correct
Click to expand...

Because I use the original Hebrew, rather than biased interpretations by people who have a theological axe to grind.
 
RAMOSS said:
Because I use the original Hebrew, rather than biased interpretations by people who have a theological axe to grind.
Click to expand...

yET YOUR SOURCE is also biased
 
RAMOSS said:
Because I use the original Hebrew, rather than biased interpretations by people who have a theological axe to grind.
Click to expand...

lol...big whoop, you're not the only one...anyone can do that...
 
Angel said:
And this isn't an argument, it's dismissal.
Click to expand...

A dismissal of handwaving. If you point out an actual argument for me to rebut, I'll do it.
 
TypicalRussian said:
How about this to solve your special pleading

A universe existing under theism is more probable than existing under Atheism
Click to expand...

How about, I can make unsupported bald statements too, highlighted in bold and underline:

A universe existing under theism is wishful thinking by brainwashed people who can't find their own meaning in life
 
TypicalRussian said:
really, just because there is a though question to answer, Atheim has no answer and result to nihilists ramblings
Click to expand...

Atheism doesn't purport to provide answers to any questions other than one: Do you believe that a god exists. It is the lack of a belief in one thing that is not supported by credible or relevant evidence.
 
RAMOSS said:
That Jesus came back from the dead.
Click to expand...

Hares chew their cud is a reference to a passage in the Old Testament:

"(6)And every beast that parteth the hoof, and cleaveth the cleft into two claws, and cheweth the cud among the beasts, that ye shall eat. (7)Nevertheless these ye shall not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the cloven hoof; as the camel, and the hare, and the coney: for they chew the cud, but divide not the hoof; therefore they are unclean unto you."
Deuteronomy 14:6-7 Bible-icon.png
Hares (rabbits), do not chew their cud and this is commonly used as an example of where the Bible contradicts science.

Hares chew their cud - Religions Wiki
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom