Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Sorry you are still confused. All I am asking is this: Who is the "Guiding Head" mentioned as being responsible for the video? What is the "Zion Colony" of which he is the guiding head?
Not really. It seems that you don't even know who made the video, let alone how trustworthy it is.Evidence enough.
No, because I cannot confirm or deny anything in the video. Without citations and references there is nothing to look at.Evidence enough.
I’ve been busy with other things, but I wanted to reply anyway. First of all, I believe that the Bible is inspired by God. However, different books have different levels of inspiration. Some are just eye-witness accounts inspired to the point that the authors wrote truthfully. Joshua, Kings and Chronicles are books of this sort. There was no reason for God to explain His miracles, but He did want the events recorded accurately. Many writings are from the human perspective in relation to what God did for them. That is the point, not explaining the workings of the creation.Jerry . Joshua wrote under the inspiration and guidance of God . As with all other authors of the Bible. So it’s from Gods perspective. Not merely man’s perspective. Joshua is mostly a historical account. And should be taken that way accordingly as a literal account. . Yu say ( how do yu know? Joshua just wrote what he saw) because we have the book of Joshua that testifies to that . And it says what it says . As I said at the beginning of Apples post. The Bible is an extremely geocentric book. What to do with that ? Does the Bible have to bow to the science of men as with old age earth theory, evolutionary theory and now heliocentric theory as well, and now to be interpreted another way to appease the Science of mere men ? View attachment 374569 I don’t find it as a mere coincidence that all 3 theories turned up around the same time in the 19th century. As if a 3 pronged attack to undermine the authority of the word of God. One thing is certain all three challenge the word of God . Whereas the geocentric view puts humanity and the earth in a very special place with the sun rotating around us being. And the us being Gods crowning achievement. All heliocentricity does is place humanity at the ass end of the universe as just a another meaningless speck amongst a vast array of galaxies as is attested well in the numerous publications of science today. Who knows perhaps geocentricity Reeked to much of God for a man centred ideology to prosper and so again the Bible must be brought into submission to man. Jerry My thoughts for today.. Kathleen
So was the theory of the four humors, and germ theory was rejected.Prodromos what be nonsense? what model held sway in those centuries you mention . It certainly wasn’t what Copernicus or Kepler promoted. Geocentricity was still the accepted model
Not really. It seems that you don't even know who made the video, let alone how trustworthy it is.
From what I could see, there was no context to the articles - nothing to show whether the Washington newspaper was publishing them as serious scientific articles or not. And saying that the person who made the video is called Odysee as well as the Guiding Head tells me nothing about his credentials or his trustworthiness.So you saying that all the articles in the video are not true just because I don't know who made the video (who BTW is Odysee) and who maybe untrustworthy ? The mind boggles.
From what I could see, there was no context to the articles - nothing to show whether the Washington newspaper was publishing them as serious scientific articles or not. And saying that the person who made the video is called Odysee as well as the Guiding Head tells me nothing about his credentials or his trustworthiness.
No, you have misread what I wrote. I wrote that with the information available, we have no way of assessing their trustworthiness. I didn't say that they were all untrustworthy.So you've decided this because there's nothing to show whether the Washington newspaper was publishing them as serious scientific articles or not.
There are 125 articles to stream through and your telling me that they are all untrustworthy ? Hmm -Okay.
No, you have misread what I wrote. I wrote that with the information available, we have no way of assessing their trustworthiness. I didn't say that they were all untrustworthy.
The thing that is hard to understand is that you reject creditable publications and videos of Christians for the last 400 years, and you accept information that doesn’t provide background information to allow the reader to check references and sources. It doesn’t make sense.So you've decided this because there's nothing to show whether the Washington newspaper was publishing them as serious scientific articles or not.
There are 125 articles to stream through and your telling me that they are all untrustworthy ? Hmm -Okay.
The thing that is hard to understand is that you reject creditable publications and videos of Christians for the last 400 years,
What about publications of Nicolaus Copernicus, Galileo Galilei, Johannes Kepler, Sir Isaac Newton, and Hugh Ross, and many others that have been presented to you. Videos about astronomy are in the hundreds. You reject all of these and believe only those who support flat earth who are not astronomers or astronauts.What videos have I rejected ? The only video I've ever rejected was that of Charles Duke & I have never rejected a video because of who posted it.
Don't you reject all evidence that the earth is a globe, whatever the source is, as being untrustworthy and untruthful? All products of an elaborate conspiracy to hide the truth and deceive?What videos have I rejected ? The only video I've ever rejected was that of Charles Duke & I have never rejected a video because of who posted it.
What about publications of Nicolaus Copernicus, Galileo Galilei, Johannes Kepler, Sir Isaac Newton, and Hugh Ross, and many others that have been presented to you. Videos about astronomy are in the hundreds. You reject all of these and believe only those who support flat earth who are not astronomers or astronauts.
Don't you reject all evidence that the earth is a globe,
So if you don’t like what they wrote you reject them without critical thinking. So you are still saying that they published false information. Here is Copernicus’s text in English: https://www.geo.utexas.edu/courses/...e Revolutionibus (On the Revolutions),_ 1.pdfI've not rejected them by whom posted them but by the subject.
But if the source was NASA, you'd say something along the lines of: "You can't trust anything from NASA. Even their name is the Hebrew for 'deception'". To save any misunderstanding, I am not claiming that you used those exact words.Yes, but I have never rejected a video because of who posted it.
Here is Copernicus’s text in English: https://www.geo.utexas.edu/courses/...e Revolutionibus (On the Revolutions),_ 1.pdf
But if the source was NASA, you'd say something along the lines of: "You can't trust anything from NASA.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?