Yep. So once someone introduced an event or an idea in the Bible, there was no need for others to keep rewording it into their own versions. What that has done has resulted in the faithful listing all those instances as "proof" of each other.
Not if you want multiple prophecies about an event, even more important than that is splitting them up so no one prophet knew the whole story, same method was used when build 'the bomb' and information was on a need to know basis. Part of the reason for that is to keep some thing as a 'mystery'. Such as references in the OT that bless a people in a way that Israel thinks it means them when it was actually referencing the Gentiles after Act:10 was a past event. 40 writers that were each given a part of a story so your theory that they added to it 'correctly'. That would mean the writer of Revelation would realize that an ending was needed so Re:20-22 was 'dreamed up'.
That's a pretty sorry attempt at putting the ad hominem volley on me. Scroll back and you'll notice that you tossed out the first insult and I simply replied that I will RETURN them in kind. Basically, that means if you continue, I will. And if you stop, I will.
Point out the ones I posted after your post referencing where you got your 'inspiration' from because it certainly isn't from the Bible. Men do their best thinking when drinking, a hangover is part of drinking, if I wanted it to be an insult I would have said 'many hangovers'. I think you are just extra sensitive to criticism, let alone from me. (that is your bigotry showing it's colors) I'm also thinking you like tossing out insults and posting them to me stops others on the board from criticizing you. That you never win should be all you need to 'can the comedy' because you aren't very good at it.
No, you didn't. But no other person, scholar or not, has arbitrarily picked numbers as multiples and applied them to the Bible in order to make it line up with events that happened in real life.
You better start watching some programs about the '4 blood moons' then if you want to see some preachers who don't have a clue what the Bible is about. You can't get something that wrong
No-one else has claimed to have decoded the Bible in its entirety except you.
It isn't in a code any more difficult than a person needs to know how the world works today, including the things we know that they did not know back when it was written, such as the world is 4,000,000,000 years old rather than 4,000 years ane the 6 best steps top blend that info is to add 6 zeros and then Ge:1 fits todays version of science very nicely. I could supply more (and better) examples but why waste my time.
I admitted that before and I can do that again. So?
So you admit I know more about the Bible but then you call bull**** on everything I say, you want to have you being right no matter what. If you want me to respect that sort of behavior it isn't ever going to happen. I doubt you even know how 'my version' differs.
The OT; a fantasy tale about a grand wizard who can "see" everything including the future, is wise beyond count, and powerful enough to be able to do anything it wants including inventing a universe, filling it with life and stuff, then getting pissed at the life more times than you can count and destroying a lot of stuff.
What part of the last 3 chapters point to that? The rest of it just shows you should stay off the theology threads.
All of which belies the all-powerful, all-seeing, and all-wise nonsense.
Your version is the only version, ... right? It can't make sense to anybody if it doesn't make sense to you.
The NT; a bunch of tales serving to indicate the "Golden Rule" and accentuate the wisdom, omniscience, and omnipotence indicated in the OT.
Your version is the only version, ... right? It can't make sense to anybody if it doesn't make sense to you.
Why would anyone want to do that anyway?
You just did, what you know about the Bible put onto paper would be a blank page yet you somehow know my understanding is 4 sheets to the wind. You get no respect for that trait either.
Read some of it. Can't remember ever eating any of it, though.
Do you even understan that the easy stuff id milk and the more difficult parts are called meat?
1Co:3:2:
I have fed you with milk,
and not with meat:
for hitherto ye were not able to bear it,
neither yet now are ye able.
1Pe:2:2:
As newborn babes,
desire the sincere milk of the word,
that ye may grow thereby:
