Search results

I think you need to just watch this:

You're not paying attention, Just read what the master of the feast said about the wine Jesus made! On the third day there was a wedding in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there.Now both Jesus and His disciples were invited to the wedding.And when they ran out of wine, the mother...

To begin with, an argument from incredulity is an informal logical fallacy. Also, I literally quoted scripture where Paul encouraged Timothy to have a little wine for his stomach's sake (pun not intended) and overall health. That you keep ignoring the verse shows your belligerence. Again...

Paul encouraged Timothy, a Christian, to help with his stomach and overall health. Someone's in denial. The contexts you describe are when the people drinking it are drunk. Again, it's DRUNKENNESS that God is displeased with, not drinking. There's nothing wrong with that. The problem...

No one is rewriting scripture. I was paraphrasing to emphasize certain aspects of what was said relevant to my points. I'm afraid I don't follow your argument here... The point is that the first "firmament" is called "Heaven" (for clarification purposes, I'm sticking to calling it "Heaven,"...

False. False.

No, it's correction of your wrong belief. No one said He favors them. What does the scripture say: Likewise deacons must be reverent, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy for money, - 1 Timothy 3:8 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1Timothy3:8&version=NKJV In...

You must think Jesus was an enabler then: On the third day there was a wedding in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there.Now both Jesus and His disciples were invited to the wedding.And when they ran out of wine, the mother of Jesus said to Him, “They have no wine.”Jesus said to...

He created a being capable of disobeying Him. Not the same as creating a sinner, or creating sin.

Answered in the very post you quoted. It's off topic to this thread. Yes, scientific theory. Not Conspiracy. And that's relevant, how? No, but he was trying to derail the thread.

Depends, are they talking about what's in the Pacific Ocean? Or in the Atlantic Ocean?

No. This thread doesn't belong there. If you want to start a thread on flat-earthism, we've been there, done that already: https://theologyonline.com/threads/the-earth-is-flat-and-we-never-went-to-the-moon.38074/. He wasn't interested in participating, only promoting flat-earthism and...

I am removing 1M1S from this thread, as he seems more intent on promoting flat-earthism and attacking modern science than he does discussing the Biblical Flood, which is what this thread is about. A reminder that this is the "Creation Science" section, not the "Conspiracy Theory" section, of...

Ignoring what I said won't make it go away. Words have a sphere of meanings, and some meanings only apply to certain time periods. When you force a meaning of a word from one context into another instance where it doesn't fit, it will only result in confusion. You are a prime example of this...

Says the one calling it a "spinning flying ball in the heliocentric model." Except that it does move, relative to the Sun, even in your position. Attraction isn't based on motion or lack thereof. Motion is just a result of attraction (for example, magnets will move because of their...

Such as? Saying it doesn't make it so.

And more importantly, "will it not fall in a predictable and easily repeatable, consistent manner?"

Saying it doesn't make it so, and Scripture says otherwise: Then God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.”Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the...

First you need to show that I am. What experiments? The earth is in motion, relative to the sun. Last I checked, Newton's theory hasn't been killed, nor does it require gravity to make things move. It simply says that gravity is what causes certain things to move in certain ways. You...

I conceded your point about the word used being singular or plural. Then I pointed out that it is a distinction without a difference, and pointed out that it doesn't change the fact that regardless of number, one firmament is called "heavens," the other firmament is "of the heavens." Except...