The Garden of Eden

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Lets take a look at the situation, C Hess raises a point, the veracity of the Biblical text, he backs up his claims with references to that text, including what is extant and what is not, how it came to be preserved and to what extent, whether the original autographs exist etc etc He argues his case empirically, with reference and objectively and we ...[text shortened]... learning, assimilating ideas objectively and looking at empirical evidence to establish points.

You are trying too hard to be funny.

Originally posted by FMF
You are trying too hard to be funny.

I am not trying to be anything infact the post adequately demonstrates with reference the contrast between the meaningless slobber and drool that you post and a sincere seeker like C Hess who posts content. But if balloon fuel is all you have to offer then so be it. It may be of interest to other ballonists like Randolf and that Christian without a publuc ministry , the great aquarium keeper Divesgeester. I wish there was something but its just empty.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
you keep pandering these assertions without being able to substantiate a single claim of your own. Ill substantiate my claims you substantiate yours. Your question of course makes no sense, why? because the Bible contains, history, names of rulers, dates, cities, poetry, symbolic language, prophetic language, personalities, Kings, vine dressers, f ...[text shortened]... te is fictional and on what basis is it fictional.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilate_Stone

No one disputes that. When people talk about the Bible being 'factual', they talk about Jesus and his miracles for one thing. You have already accepted you have no empirical evidence for these miracles and they are a matter of faith. Or what others might call "mere-self-certified-opinion".

Originally posted by galveston75
Yep with satans help....

Run me through it. How did Satan, an angel, make a serpent talk?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I am not trying to be anything infact the post adequately demonstrates with reference the contrast between the meaningless slobber and drool that you post and a sincere seeker like C Hess who posts content. But if balloon fuel is all you have to offer then so be it. It may be of interest to other ballonists like Randolf and that Christian without a ...[text shortened]... nistry , the great aquarium keeper Divesgeester. I wish there was something but its just empty.

Doesn't this kind of stuff of yours belong on the Clans Forum, robbie?

We both share similar views on the potential drawbacks of taking certain things from the Bible "literally". With your incessant catch-phrasing and 'sad clown' stuff, as I said before, you sell yourself short. You propagate your personal opinions, I propagate my personal opinions, everyone does. In this instance our opinions are very similar.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie

Lets take a single instance, what about Pontious Pilate are you saying that he was fictional, that he was not a roman provincial governor of Judea? No then what part of the Bibles reference to Pilate is in dispute? That he did not exist? that he was not a prefect of Judea? that he was fictional? If its not fictional then its a fact.

Can what the Bible claims Pontious Pilate said or did with regard to Jesus be corroborated?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
No one disputes that. When people talk about the Bible being 'factual', they talk about Jesus and his miracles for one thing. You have already accepted you have no empirical evidence for these miracles and they are a matter of faith. Or what others might call "mere-self-certified-opinion".

How can something which I did not author or originate be my self certified opinion. Eh?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
How can something which I did not author or originate be my self certified opinion. Eh?

Your opinion that what the author wrote is "true" is your own personal opinion, isn't it?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
How can something which I did not author or originate be my self certified opinion. Eh?

No empirical data to back it up. Remember, this is your definition, not mine.

Originally posted by FMF
[b]Lets take a single instance, what about Pontious Pilate are you saying that he was fictional, that he was not a roman provincial governor of Judea? No then what part of the Bibles reference to Pilate is in dispute? That he did not exist? that he was not a prefect of Judea? that he was fictional? If its not fictional then its a fact.

Can what the Bible claims Pontious Pilate said or did with regard to Jesus be corroborated?[/b]

So is Pontious Pilate a fictional Biblical character, you have not said?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
No empirical data to back it up. Remember, this is your definition, not mine.

You have failed to adress the question if I did not originate the claim then how is it my opinion.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
So is Pontious Pilate a fictional Biblical character, you have not said?

Don't be daft, this is just deflection. Answer the question and quit being a berk.

Originally posted by FMF
Your opinion that what the author wrote is "true" is your own personal opinion, isn't it?

Sorry that fails to even adress the issue. If I did not originate the claim then it cannot be my opinion can it.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
So is Pontious Pilate a fictional Biblical character, you have not said?

I will try the question again worded in a way so that you cannot evade its obvious central point ~ Here it is: Can what the Bible claims that Pontious Pilate (indisputably a real historical figure) said or did with regard to Jesus be corroborated?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
You have failed to adress the question if I did not originate the claim then how is it my opinion.

Maybe you need to have a chat with yourself here, these are your own definitions I am using.