Search results

That was your mistaken point I already addressed. But the fur of the animal is always needed for survival. If man didn't use clothes then he would not survive. It goes against the supposed progression of evolution. Stranger

You take 'God is love' as literal. Don't you? The same Book (The Bible) that says that, says God can hate also. I can see with you that it is a hyperbole if you don't want to believe it. That makes interpretation easy. Whatever you agree with is literal. What you don't, is explained away...

That Scripture is considered mythology by some is not your idea. It's as old as Satan himself. "yea hath God said?" I told you how Mose knew the generations back to Adam. God revealed it to him. Do you want me to say it again? When you call what is stated in the Bible as myth, then...

The point made was the fur and hide of the animal being superior to that of the skin of man. Which contradicts evolution. We are not talking about the brain. Stranger

Evolution is not a possibility. And, what you write is not clear at all. Your rambling does nothing to support what you say. You are trying to make up in volume what you lack in knowledge. Stranger

I don't remember where you showed me I was wrong. My mindset is as I said in my reply which is that God loves, hates, feels and grieves. I did not say as you said I did that God is hateful and vindictive. "Vengeance is mine saith the Lord", remember. Yes God so loved the world. And...

From Websters dictionary: "impassible"--- 1a) incapable of suffering or of experiencing pain, 1b.)inaccessible to injury, 2.) incapable of feeling As I said, this is impossible with God. God who loves, hates, feels, and grieves cannot be impassible. If you disagree then show me where I am...

Adam and Eve really existed. All of mankind comes from Adam and Eve. Just as the Bible says. If that is not true, if it is just a story, then there is no value in it. It would all be a lie. I believe you're on your 5th. Stranger

If the 'story' is evolution, then it is not truthful. There is no truth in it. I think we disagree more than you realize. A woman with long hair is no parallel to an animals fur and hide. Iv'e raised animals. There is no comparison. Put a person with long hair tied outside with no...

You're mistaken. It does matter that much. The writing was kept in tact because God revealed to Moses and other prophets that which was to be written. It was miraculous. No you don't. You don't believe the Bible is God-breathed. Because if you did you wouldn't use the term of 'mythology'...

No, mythology was not how truth was passed down. It was how mythology was passed down. The Bible comes by way of the inspiration of God. Stranger

I'm looking at a fact as though it were a fact. How does Eskimos, who you say don't eat vegetables and are healthy, disprove that we don't need to eat vegetables to be healthy? If what you say about the Eskimos is true, then they are getting the nutrition somewhere else in their diet. It...

Not hardly. No matter how much hair man may have, it does not protect from the elements as the animals do. Do you believe evolution is true and shows us anything? Stranger

Your'e definitely dating yourself. As I am also. Stranger

bbyrd Why wouldn't facts lead to a valid conclusion? And why would mythology lead to truth? Stranger

Evolution teaches that there is a change when there is a need. But there is nothing more better to endure the climate it is under than the animals fur or feathers. And nothing is more dependent on clothes to protect from heat and cold then the skin of man. Which begs the question why? Why...

StanJ It is impossible that God is impassible. How could He love or hate? Stranger

I would say no. When Eve had Abel and Seth the term 'again' was used. (Gen. 4:2) "And she again bare his brother Abel." (Gen. 4:25) "And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth:" But when Cain was born the term 'again' was not used. (Gen.4:1) "And Adam knew...

And at times of the year it's too hot. I don't think Rome was concerned over the elements. The Shepherds didn't give gifts, but they were there. The wisemen were not there at the birth, but they were coming with gifts. And they apparently started their journey at the time of His birth...

So you don't know when Christ's birthday was, but you know it wasn't Dec. 25th. Why wouldn't it happen in December? Why wouldn't Shepherds be in the fields. The shepherds and wisemen came to acknowledge the birth of the King. They gave gifts. How is this not celebrating the birth of...