- Joined
- 25 Nov 21
- Moves
- 1990
@fmf saidI think you should do an objective investigation of the reliability of the Gospels and of the author of Revelation.
I have no way of knowing. The Gospels were written decades after the supposed events in question.
Rather than remaining mired in “I have no reason to believe” and “I have no way of knowing” excuses, why don’t you do an investigation of those two subjects and become better informed?
You obviously like to debate. Wouldn’t you like to be able to debate more substantively?
@pb1022 saidI am not "mired" in anything. And I have no need for "excuses". My perspectives are well enough informed for my own satisfaction.
Rather than remaining mired in “I have no reason to believe” and “I have no way of knowing” excuses, why don’t you do an investigation of those two subjects and become better informed?
You obviously like to debate. Wouldn’t you like to be able to debate more substantively?
@pb1022 saidWell, it's just a discussion in this case. I am not asking anyone to believe or disbelieve the veracity of the Book of Revelation. I am just interested in the assertions that people like you and KellyJay make about such things.
Wouldn’t you like to be able to debate more substantively?
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117507
@kevin-eleven saidOh do shut up, you’re like a 5 year old trying to get attention in the adult conversation.
Am zam biyoko.
01 Feb 22
@kevin-eleven removed their quoted postYou sound like someone who doesn't like anyone being able to tell you what to do, and both of our opinions are just that, opinions.
01 Feb 22
@fmf saidBeing out of the norm does not discount them as real, so yes, if an eyewitness saw them. Every book written is literature, every scientific set of data has to be interpreted no different than scripture does when we ponder its meaning. The truth of data and the meaning behind scripture will remain truth accepted or not.
I disagree. I see the Bible as literature.
Are the things described in Matthew 27:52–53 historical facts?
01 Feb 22
@fmf saidWhen you read history, things that people say occurred, there are many things to consider. The NT has more going for it than any ancient text there in the realm of copies, copies written in the different languages, copies very close to the time of the events that they occurred in, little things only an eye witness would know versus someone who was making it up, witness that were tortured to recant and wouldn't on events they claimed they lived through which is different than believing a story they heard. So yes, historically, John's vision, I believe, actually occurred as written.
Is it a "historical fact" that John-somebody-or-other had a "vision" of the already-60-years-dead Jesus, while he was alone in is his house on the island-of-something-or-other, and that these are objective truths that form the basis of the "historically accurate" Book of Revelation