The Garden of Eden

Originally posted by KellyJay
Do not know, but if it was important to God, I'm sure He could have
protected it from a little water. We have seen him do things like that
in scripture before.
Kelly

Let's presume for a moment you are correct and the tree of life is a real tree and it is still in existence somewhere in the world today. What do you think it's purpose is?

Originally posted by divegeester
Robbie carrobie brought in the "smoking cigarettes is biblically forbidden" argument to defend your still unsubstantiated claim that the tree of life was destroyed in the garden of Eden.

Robbie carrobie asserted that your claim did not need biblical scriptural support because is was completely obvious in scripture, the same way that "not being permit ...[text shortened]... wagon and pants down, throwing insults, is just magnifiying the ridiculousness of your postion.

For one who has no clue to much in the bible and certianly none about the trees in the garden or the principles in the bible that one is to take care of the life God gave us and that smoking is bad for you and something God would not aprove of, you sure spout off a lot and point your crooked little finger at everyone here that doesn't agree with you.
Don't you have employment or a family or something you should be doing then blowing off your empty nonsense here every ten minutes?

I know why don't you actually do something good for all of us here and share some good spiritual and upbuilding information with us to make our day enjoyable?
No? I didn't think so.......

Originally posted by galveston75
Hummm, I can't find where he said that.

It's easy to find and I gave you verbatim quotes above. Look at pages 64 to 69.

In fact I've never seen that scripture either.

robbie said: "Whether something is explicitly stated in scripture does not effect the veracity of its claim because as i pointed out, scripture does not explicitly forbid smoking cigarettes but one may deduce from what is written that its anti biblical." [page 64]

He went on to say: "...so you were telling us how, given the example that I cited of cigarettes why their not being explicitly mentioned in scripture has any bearing on the veracity of the claim that their use is forbidden in scripture the Christian being counselled to refrain from anything which defiles the spirit or flesh." [page 65]

Do you agree with robbie on this issue?

Originally posted by galveston75
For one who has no clue to much in the bible and certianly none about the trees in the garden or the principles in the bible that one is to take care of the life God gave us and that smoking is bad for you and something God would not aprove of, you sure spout off a lot and point your crooked little finger at everyone here that doesn't agree with you.
...[text shortened]... ual and upbuilding information with us to make our day enjoyable?
No? I didn't think so.......

Making your posts personal won't help you Galveston, it just makes you look mean-spirited.

Originally posted by galveston75
For one who has no clue to much in the bible and certianly none about the trees in the garden or the principles in the bible that one is to take care of the life God gave us and that smoking is bad for you and something God would not aprove of, you sure spout off a lot and point your crooked little finger at everyone here that doesn't agree with you.
...[text shortened]... ual and upbuilding information with us to make our day enjoyable?
No? I didn't think so.......

Is your claim that the tree of life was destroyed in the flood, aligned with JW teaching on the subject?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
fit so i don't die. My grandfather died in his fifties, my two uncles died in their thirties and the other had a triple by pass operation. All heart related. I see those poser boys at the gym with their skinny wee bodies and chocolate protein drinks, kissin their puny muscles in the gym mirrors. I just wanna be fit. I done manual labour for thirty years, i don't need muscles.

You're going to die, along with everybody else on the planet, I can't help you there. You believe you're going to be resurrected on an earthly paradise in the not too distant future right? What's the issue with dying then?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
I see. Are you claiming that everything contained within that Wikipedia page is 'empirical evidence', using your own definition, for the life and events of Jesus described in the Bible?

Rob you conveniently dodged the question.

'Are you claiming that everything contained within that Wikipedia page is 'empirical evidence', using your own definition, for the life and events of Jesus described in the Bible?'

Originally posted by Proper Knob
You're going to die, along with everybody else on the planet, I can't help you there. You believe you're going to be resurrected on an earthly paradise in the not too distant future right? What's the issue with dying then?

there is no problem, but as an existentialist I would like to complete a meaningful act before I go, it will take time.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Rob you conveniently dodged the question.

'Are you claiming that everything contained within that Wikipedia page is 'empirical evidence', using your own definition, for the life and events of Jesus described in the Bible?'

Whether it constitutes empirical evidence remains to be seen, its the evidence we have for Jesus historicity.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Whether it constitutes empirical evidence remains to be seen, its the evidence we have for Jesus historicity.

So are you saying you have no empirical evidence, using your own definition, for the life and deeds of Jesus? What exactly 'remains to be seen' you either do or you don't?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
So are you saying you have no empirical evidence, using your own definition, for the life and deeds of Jesus? What exactly 'remains to be seen' you either do or you don't?

they must be taken on a case by case basis, that is what I mean.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
they must be taken on a case by case basis, that is what I mean.

Okay. Let's pick a few cases and see what you have.

The raising of Lazarus as described in the Gospel of John. Any 'empirical evidence'?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Okay. Let's pick a few cases and see what you have.

The raising of Lazarus as described in the Gospel of John. Any 'empirical evidence'?

the Biblical account.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
the Biblical account.

This surely though fits into the 'religious belief' category and not the 'empirical evidence' category? Unless you have any empirical evidence someone can come back from the dead after 4 days?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
This surely though fits into the 'religious belief' category and not the 'empirical evidence' category? Unless you have any empirical evidence someone can come back from the dead after 4 days?

its an ancient document which I have no valid reason to dismiss the validity of its contents.