-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
7
let's try and translate this rather quizzical response from a flat earther who believes the sun is closer to earth then we have been told/taught and would then also be much smaller so that we did not all become crispy critters...perhaps the size of our moon?....
apparently using scripture as a basis for a response to questions from the op does not make sense to her
however the 180 trip and flip response from her, typical of those who have no idea where they are in the woods and cannot see the forest for the trees, is to say that giving the responder (in this case me, however others have earned the same response by giving biblical support for why she is wrong) verses is a waste of time
so this is what I understand from the above
even though conspiracy theories concerning cosmology, are rife with silly arguments about a flat earth, domes and hot pocket suns, those who believe in them usually continue to cling to them because the truth seems to knock them out of their personal orbit around a world they cannot control which results in them creating a world they can control because it is, after all, their world
apparently using scripture as a basis for a response to questions from the op does not make sense to her
however the 180 trip and flip response from her, typical of those who have no idea where they are in the woods and cannot see the forest for the trees, is to say that giving the responder (in this case me, however others have earned the same response by giving biblical support for why she is wrong) verses is a waste of time
so this is what I understand from the above
even though conspiracy theories concerning cosmology, are rife with silly arguments about a flat earth, domes and hot pocket suns, those who believe in them usually continue to cling to them because the truth seems to knock them out of their personal orbit around a world they cannot control which results in them creating a world they can control because it is, after all, their world
7
my conclusion from this educational romp through flat earth conspiracy theory thinking:
even though conspiracy theories concerning cosmology, are rife with silly arguments about a flat earth, domes and hot pocket suns, those who believe in them usually continue to cling to them because the truth seems to knock them out of their personal orbit around a world they cannot control which results in them creating a world they can control because it is, after all, their world
the entertainment is over
it isn't funny
even though conspiracy theories concerning cosmology, are rife with silly arguments about a flat earth, domes and hot pocket suns, those who believe in them usually continue to cling to them because the truth seems to knock them out of their personal orbit around a world they cannot control which results in them creating a world they can control because it is, after all, their world
the entertainment is over
it isn't funny
P
let's try and translate this rather quizzical response from a flat earther who believes the sun is closer to earth then we have been told/taught and would then also be much smaller so that we did not all become crispy critters...perhaps the size of our moon?....
apparently using scripture as a basis for a response to questions from the op does not make sense to her
however the 180 trip and flip response from her, typical of those who have no idea where they are in the woods and cannot see the forest for the trees, is to say that giving the responder (in this case me, however others have earned the same response by giving biblical support for why she is wrong) verses is a waste of time
so this is what I understand from the above
even though conspiracy theories concerning cosmology, are rife with silly arguments about a flat earth, domes and hot pocket suns, those who believe in them usually continue to cling to them because the truth seems to knock them out of their personal orbit around a world they cannot control which results in them creating a world they can control because it is, after all, their world
I'm tired of talking about flat Earth. You are hard to communicate with. It makes me crazy trying to understand what you are talking about. I'm sorry. I'm not trying to be ugly. It's the truth. But I love you anyway. We will just have to disagree. God bless.
apparently using scripture as a basis for a response to questions from the op does not make sense to her
however the 180 trip and flip response from her, typical of those who have no idea where they are in the woods and cannot see the forest for the trees, is to say that giving the responder (in this case me, however others have earned the same response by giving biblical support for why she is wrong) verses is a waste of time
so this is what I understand from the above
even though conspiracy theories concerning cosmology, are rife with silly arguments about a flat earth, domes and hot pocket suns, those who believe in them usually continue to cling to them because the truth seems to knock them out of their personal orbit around a world they cannot control which results in them creating a world they can control because it is, after all, their world
I'm tired of talking about flat Earth. You are hard to communicate with. It makes me crazy trying to understand what you are talking about. I'm sorry. I'm not trying to be ugly. It's the truth. But I love you anyway. We will just have to disagree. God bless.
P
Satan controls everything in this world, remember when satan tempted Jesus.
4 Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted[a] by the devil. 2 After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. 3 The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.”
4 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’[b]”
5 Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. 6 “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down. For it is written:
“‘He will command his angels concerning you,
and they will lift you up in their hands,
so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’[c]”
7 Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’[d]”
8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. 9 “All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.”
10 Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’[e]”
11 Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.
This is the same way we are controlled by him.
1,We worry about eating, clothing
2, We are scared to die, we worry about our health
3,We want to exalt ourselves above others, be something
This is the lust of the eyes the lust of the flesh and the pride of life.
He set up all the systems in which we live. He have to pay for water, gas. lights, taxes. There is nothing free.
All the presidents he know ahead of time, he chooses the presidents. Nobody is rich, rich without going through satan.
That's why he is called the prince of the air. He is the god of this world.
4 Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted[a] by the devil. 2 After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. 3 The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.”
4 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’[b]”
5 Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. 6 “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down. For it is written:
“‘He will command his angels concerning you,
and they will lift you up in their hands,
so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’[c]”
7 Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’[d]”
8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. 9 “All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.”
10 Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’[e]”
11 Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.
This is the same way we are controlled by him.
1,We worry about eating, clothing
2, We are scared to die, we worry about our health
3,We want to exalt ourselves above others, be something
This is the lust of the eyes the lust of the flesh and the pride of life.
He set up all the systems in which we live. He have to pay for water, gas. lights, taxes. There is nothing free.
All the presidents he know ahead of time, he chooses the presidents. Nobody is rich, rich without going through satan.
That's why he is called the prince of the air. He is the god of this world.
Understandable, but that doesn't excuse your logical fallacy. If you make an assertion, it is your responsibility to prove it right. It is not anyone else's responsibility to prove it wrong.
By the way, the word is "sense", not "since" in this context. Perhaps Otto the Incorrect has taken up residence in your device.
By the way, the word is "sense", not "since" in this context. Perhaps Otto the Incorrect has taken up residence in your device.
P
Understandable, but that doesn't excuse your logical fallacy. If you make an assertion, it is your responsibility to prove it right. It is not anyone else's responsibility to prove it wrong.
By the way, the word is "sense", not "since" in this context. Perhaps Otto the Incorrect has taken up residence in your device.
By the way, the word is "sense", not "since" in this context. Perhaps Otto the Incorrect has taken up residence in your device.
L
IMO it's not in the celestial places above earth though indeed The spiritual hosts of evil are described as fighting in the region above the earth. But the meaning underlying this figure surely points to the power of evil as directly spiritual, not acting through physical and human agency, but attacking the spirit in that higher aspect, in which it contemplates heavenly things and ascends to the communion with God. As the former idea corresponds to the gross work of temptation on the high mountain, so this to the subtler spiritual temptation on the pinnacle of the temple.
No, but I do have a fairly good grasp of the basic technical aspects of the English language.
The issue is that others don't interpret the Scripture in the same way you do. Assuming that the plain reading of a 400-year-old translation of the Bible is going to lead to the correct interpretation is risky. The language has changed, and the manuscripts available then were limited. However, that's a discussion for another thread. It is enough to say that just because you read something in Scripture, it doesn't mean that you have an encompassing understanding of the subjects it addresses.
And the word is "accept", not "except".
The issue is that others don't interpret the Scripture in the same way you do. Assuming that the plain reading of a 400-year-old translation of the Bible is going to lead to the correct interpretation is risky. The language has changed, and the manuscripts available then were limited. However, that's a discussion for another thread. It is enough to say that just because you read something in Scripture, it doesn't mean that you have an encompassing understanding of the subjects it addresses.
And the word is "accept", not "except".
P
No, but I do have a fairly good grasp of the basic technical aspects of the English language.
The issue is that others don't interpret the Scripture in the same way you do. Assuming that the plain reading of a 400-year-old translation of the Bible is going to lead to the correct interpretation is risky. The language has changed, and the manuscripts available then were limited. However, that's a discussion for another thread. It is enough to say that just because you read something in Scripture, it doesn't mean that you have an encompassing understanding of the subjects it addresses.
And the word is "accept", not "except".
The issue is that others don't interpret the Scripture in the same way you do. Assuming that the plain reading of a 400-year-old translation of the Bible is going to lead to the correct interpretation is risky. The language has changed, and the manuscripts available then were limited. However, that's a discussion for another thread. It is enough to say that just because you read something in Scripture, it doesn't mean that you have an encompassing understanding of the subjects it addresses.
And the word is "accept", not "except".
This is another logical fallacy, called "tu quoque". The problem is that instead of dealing with one's own error or wrongdoing, they draw attention to the wrongdoing of others. I am not obligated to challenge everyone who also happens to do what you do.
I disagreed with Trof on a side issue earlier. He and I aren't likely to agree, and I see no point in pushing the matter in this thread. I don't see him doing what I see you doing though.
I disagreed with Trof on a side issue earlier. He and I aren't likely to agree, and I see no point in pushing the matter in this thread. I don't see him doing what I see you doing though.