(September 15, 2012 at 11:27 am)Drich Wrote:(September 15, 2012 at 9:55 am)greneknight Wrote: Hi genkaus,
Actually, Drich is totally confused. He can't even explain why he chose the 66 books of the Bible as inspired. He can't name a single Church Council or a single Church Father or indeed anyone who decided on the 66 books as the Word of God. Just see this post:
http://atheistforums.org/thread-14712-po...#pid336877
He has refused to be clear how many books of the Bible are the Word of God because he knows he has no leg to stand on.
What puzzles me is how can fundies set so much store by the Bible when they don't even know a thing about the history of biblical canon and their knowledge of early church history is so poor.
Then great wise and knoweledge one please take the time and go line by lines and destroy this arguement as you say you destroyed the last one.. Or is your link your only shinning moment, and you must strive to avoid direct interaction with me and point to a perceived win from this thread??? Again, Show me line by line. Take the words I translated and Show me with reference material where I misrepersented these words or how I have misrepersented the bible.
I don't care what the Bible says because the Bible is a seriously flawed collection of ancient books. What I hope to show you in the other thread is simply this: there is no basis for you to say that the 66 books of the Bible are the inspired word of God. I've shown you there is no Early Church Father or any Church Council that decided on the 66 books. So I asked you in that thread this simple question: You set much store by the 66 books of the Bible as the word of God that nothing can countermand. WHAT IS YOUR BASIS for taking these 66 books to be the word of God?
