From: user6340@newsgrouper.org.invalid   
      
   JTEM  posted:   
   > On 2/12/26 3:32 PM, Steven Douglas wrote:   
   >   
   > >> Again, no idea where your "Random" is coming from?   
   > >   
   > > I just explained it in the paragraph just above your   
   > > response. But if you need an example, how about your   
   > > recent reference to Aesop's Fables? Just another of   
   > > the random stories   
   >   
   > They're not random any more then the bible tales.   
      
   You recently cited Aesop's Fables as just another   
   set of stories just like the Bible. Except they're   
   not just like the Bible. The Bible is unique among   
   ALL books ever written.   
   >   
   > They're lessons. They teach a lesson.   
      
   There is a lot more to the Bible than just lessons.   
   Prophecy makes up almost one-third of the Bible's   
   writings.   
   >   
   > > Or how about all the times you compare Jesus to   
   > > ancient mythical characters, as if Jesus is just   
   > > another random "mythical" character?   
   >   
   > None of those other mythical characters are random, either.   
      
   You cite them randomly when you try (and fail) to make   
   a comparison to Jesus.   
   >   
   > They all persisted for a reason.   
      
   The only one who has persisted is Jesus.   
   >   
   > And as far as Jesus being mythical goes:  All I'm doing   
   > is applying the very same standards to Jesus as I do   
   > those mythical characters.   
      
   Yes, you try to diminish Jesus by pulling him down   
   to the level of those forgotten mythical characters.   
   But Jesus rises above them all, whether you want to   
   acknowledge that FACT or not.   
   >   
   > I do that with everything!   
      
   Trying to do that with the Bible just won't work,   
   since there is no other book in history that can   
   compare to the Bible.   
   >   
   > I apply the very same standards to the myth of Troy as,   
   > say, atheists/agnostics/secular scholars do to the bible,   
   > and when I do the one and *Only* conclusion is that   
   > Troy is made up. It's a myth.   
      
   And is has NOTHING to do with the Bible.   
   >   
   > It works both ways.   
      
   No, comparing a myth to the Bible doesn't make the   
   Bible a myth -- except in your mind because you (for   
   whatever reason) refuse to accept the FACT that the   
   Bible has proven itself to be true.   
   >   
   > The difference?  I'm consistent.   
      
   Yes, consistently wrong.   
   >   
   > > Any random story   
   >   
   > There's no "Random Story."   
   >   
   > Nothing is random.   
   >   
   > They all have meaning, they all serve a purpose,   
   > resonate for a reason.   
      
   The only one that resonates is the Bible.   
   >   
   > > Those Scriptures ARE my point.   
   >   
   > No. Your "Point" was that they were prophecies and that   
   > they were accurate. And THAT "Proves" the bible.   
      
   Exactly! I'm glad you noticed!   
   >   
   > >> You're claiming it's a prophecy, and an accurate one.   
   > >   
   > > Yes.   
   >   
   > So I need to see a cite to an old copy of that specific   
   > prophecy, predating whatever you're claiming it   
   > prophesied.   
      
   What part of my reference to the Dead Sea Scrolls   
   are you missing?   
   >   
   > >> So, cite a copy of THAT SPECIFIC PROPHECY which is   
   > >> older than any even you want to claim it predicts.   
   > >   
   > > How about the Book of Isaiah   
   >   
   > No. A copy which is older than whatever you claim it   
   > predicts.   
      
   Yes, the Dead Sea Scrolls, which has the entire   
   manuscript of the Book of Isaiah.   
   >   
   > Cite a specific manuscript where this   
   > prophecy appears that is older than whatever it is   
   > you claim it foretold.   
      
   The Book of Isaiah in the Dead Sea Scrolls.   
   >   
   > > which appears in the   
   > > Dead Sea Scrolls? One of the verses I cited is from   
   > > the Book of Isaiah, which was written well in advance   
   > > of 135 AD.   
   >   
   > 135 AD came very far AFTER the events you claim it   
   > predicted.   
      
   Wrong. The prophecy that is foretold mentions the   
   Jews being scattered off their land, and the land   
   then sitting empty and desolate for some period of   
   time; until the time God would regather His people   
   from MULTIPLD nations and bring them back into their   
   land, and the land that had sat empty and desolate   
   would be brought back to life with lush greenery   
   and food being produced -- and the reborn nation   
   of Israel would become prosperous.   
      
   You can delete what I just wrote all you want, but   
   it won't make it go away in the Bible. What that   
   prophecy foretold has only happened ONCE in all of   
   history -- and it began in 135 AD with the scattering   
   of the Jews by the Romans, and it continues to this   
   very day with the reborn Israel (in 1948) producing   
   food that feeds much of the Middle East, and Israel   
   is a prosperous nation -- just as the prophecy said   
   would happen.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)