Why the Bible Doesn't "Clearly Say" Anything (pastors, quote)

[Rafius]

Originally Posted by Vizio

Not just a vision, but Acts 9 records Jesus appearing to him, and we know that Paul also had direct revelation from Jesus after that.

Paul never actually 'met' your Jesus character. It was a vision.

[Freak80]

Originally Posted by Vizio

Except that his was actually true.

Obviously. Only a fool would say otherwise.

[Vizio]

Originally Posted by Rafius

Paul never actually 'met' your Jesus character. It was a vision.

It was more than a vision. His companions on the road heard Jesus' voice.

[maat55]

Originally Posted by Vizio

It was more than a vision. His companions on the road heard Jesus' voice.

Depends on which bible verse you believe.

[Tominftl]

No clear answers because neither God or Jesus had anything to do with the Bible. It's a man made creation just like religion. Originally conceived to keep the masses in line by using their sense of guilt for not obeying ..

[Arach Angle]

"lack belief' says a lot

[Vizio]

Originally Posted by maat55

Depends on which bible verse you believe.

Actually, in chapter 9 and 22 it says that the others heard him. The question is whether or not they could make out what he was saying.

[maat55]

Originally Posted by Vizio

Actually, in chapter 9 and 22 it says that the others heard him. The question is whether or not they could make out what he was saying.

Not so, it is the translation tampered apologetics excuse. Here's the other story.

https://ffrf.org/legacy/about/bybarker/voice.php

[Vizio]

Originally Posted by maat55

Not so, it is the translation tampered apologetics excuse. Here's the other story.

https://ffrf.org/legacy/about/bybarker/voice.php

I wouldn't put too much stock in anything Dan Barker says.

[mordant]

Originally Posted by Vizio

I wouldn't put too much stock in anything Dan Barker says.

I would put stock in anything anyone says if it's got a logical argument or some kind of substantiation behind it. I'm sure Dan is capable of making points and you're capable of addressing them rather than pursing an ad hominem against Dan himself. Not that you will. But you could.