The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I know everyone is fed-up with FF on this forum and about how every topic appears to gravitate towards him and his beliefs, but I have a genuine question for him.
If the Bible is all fact, as you have repeatedly claimed, then how can their be two creation stories, Genesis 1 & 2?
If the Bible is all fact, as you have repeatedly claimed, then how can their be two creation stories, Genesis 1 & 2?
Page:
It's a very interesting debate and yes Archangel is right, but there was still (like Archangel says) an attempt to create religion at the Tower of Babel.
I cant believe this argument is still going on. Face it FF, you are wrong. Even your wrong interpretation doesnt explain the spread of religion. The people at the tower were all united with the same idea of making the tower. The had the same religion. If they were spread around the world they would all have the same religion.
And dont dare say God mixed that up too because the passage only says that languages were mixed.
And dont dare say God mixed that up too because the passage only says that languages were mixed.
Forest Fan wrote:
> It's a very interesting debate and yes Archangel is right, but there
> was still (like Archangel says) an attempt to create religion at the
> Tower of Babel.
Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. Even when proved 100% incorrect, you desperately try to cling onto being right. You show all the humility of a US soldier in Iraq.
Okay; AA states specifically that religion starts after Adam and Eve. NOT after the tower of Babel. AT NO POINT does he state that there was an attempt to create religion with the tower. Not once. The only person here who has said that is....you. No one else.
Now tell me; why are you so happy to use your own interpretations of the Bible when you insist everyone else take it literally? Would it be because you're a hypocrite, or just because you're stupid?
> It's a very interesting debate and yes Archangel is right, but there
> was still (like Archangel says) an attempt to create religion at the
> Tower of Babel.
Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. Even when proved 100% incorrect, you desperately try to cling onto being right. You show all the humility of a US soldier in Iraq.
Okay; AA states specifically that religion starts after Adam and Eve. NOT after the tower of Babel. AT NO POINT does he state that there was an attempt to create religion with the tower. Not once. The only person here who has said that is....you. No one else.
Now tell me; why are you so happy to use your own interpretations of the Bible when you insist everyone else take it literally? Would it be because you're a hypocrite, or just because you're stupid?
Archangel wrote:
>> "Without shedding of blood there is no remission (of
> sins)."
Oh, what a joyful precedent to set...
>> "Without shedding of blood there is no remission (of
> sins)."
Oh, what a joyful precedent to set...
Cyclone wrote:
> Oh, what a joyful precedent to set...
Heh. "I am a loving God who bringeth peace and love to all. But if you don't shed somebodies blood (your own or someone elses), then you're gonna be tortured for eternity."
Slight contradiction perhaps?
> Oh, what a joyful precedent to set...
Heh. "I am a loving God who bringeth peace and love to all. But if you don't shed somebodies blood (your own or someone elses), then you're gonna be tortured for eternity."
Slight contradiction perhaps?
Page: