German mass grave records prehistoric warfare

  • 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.
didymos said:
You STILL don't get it, now do you? :p
Click to expand...
with comment like that nor do you get it.
for example

did or can you get a retracktion from the bbc web site regarding this topic.

did you or can you prove the bible to being 6000 year old. (perfectly)

again i said put up or shut up. so either you can read or you have a problem with what i am saying.

and that simple answer would be no.

your one line comment only prove ,that your the one that has a problem.
 
Bottom line: What is more authoritative? The Bible, or the BBC? I've made my choice, apparently you also have made yours. So be it.

I offered my shorthand version of facts, you reject them. So be it.

In this life, it makes little different. In the next? Deal with it at the Bema Seat. And again, so be it.
 
Viligant_Warrior said:
Bottom line: What is more authoritative? The Bible, or the BBC? I've made my choice, apparently you also have made yours. ( you were asked for proof)

I offered my shorthand version of facts, you reject them. . (what was rubbish, and had flaw in it, so deal with it)

In this life, it makes little different.( i already said this so you deal with it, i said prove it perfectly).
Click to expand...

i already know the facts about the bible, thats why i asked prove it. and you never proved it.

even talking logically , we can say around 6000 bc. not as fact.

for example
if adam is 100 years and 5 months old. when he died;
if eve is 100 years and 4 months old when she died.
if abram is 1000 year old and 5 months old.

we now could have 6001, and 2 months old the bible start.

so if you did that with all the whole family tree, then there is no way you would get 6000.



i also wrote this.

bearing in mind i said science, has said them bone are 7000 year old.
how are you going to refute this ,if your going to prove to me the bible is 6000 year old.


when did i become an expert to science, take your proof to them and get a retraction. and i will gladly post that retrecktion.
again i told you this. to prove it, i will wait till you get that retraction , and then we can go more into the age of the bible.
 
Viligant_Warrior said:
Bottom line: What is more authoritative? The Bible, or the BBC? I've made my choice, apparently you also have made yours. So be it.

I offered my shorthand version of facts, you reject them. So be it.

In this life, it makes little different. In the next? Deal with it at the Bema Seat. And again, so be it.
Click to expand...
sorry when were we talking about authority. or the bible v the bbc.

6000 v 7000

. ie who would want to refute, there findings, who has the equipment to want to refute there findings.

already post by me.


hence ,prove it, to science.


to them that missed this quote it came from post 3.


 
royalscot said:
sorry when were we talking about authority. or the bible v the bbc.
Click to expand...
By your question as to whether I think the BBC should retract their story.

I don't care whether they do or not. I'm not a believer in the BBC, I'm a believer in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and trust in His word above all else.

That, apparently, is what you don't get.
 
royalscot said:
with comment like that nor do you get it...

your one line comment only prove ,that your the one that has a problem.
Click to expand...
To paraphrase what I said earlier: you just don't get the irony of my comments, instead you ramble on about all kinds of 'proof.' Maybe you got a problem yourself, stop overreacting man.
 
didymos said:
To paraphrase what I said earlier: you just don't get the irony of my comments, instead you ramble on about all kinds of 'proof.' Maybe you got a problem yourself, stop overreacting man.
Click to expand...
how many prongs has a salad fork.
 
Viligant_Warrior said:
By your question as to whether I think the BBC should retract their story.

I don't care whether they do or not. I'm not a believer in the BBC, I'm a believer in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and trust in His word above all else.

That, apparently, is what you don't get.
Click to expand...
if you cant follow, just say so. if your blindness has missed what i said . not my problem. yet comes back with i thought you ment, etc even when it has been hinted to you.your just being an other snake in the grass. did you get that retraction. evidently not. so bye bye with an other missed opportunity to show your perfectness.

its a news topic, and they are trying to make it a bible topic. lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back