And you used he plural "are" didn't you james. the whole construct of the sentence is referring to them in a blanket manner. You are just upset that I uncovered your little semantic game james. And as you've already found out - you question in not a valid construction based upon what the bible teaches.
If I have already invoked the individual in the beginning of this whole argument where I began with the ignorant tribal problem, and if you jumped into the thread sometime later and MADE YOUR OWN CONCLUSIONS about whether I was referring to the collection of individual "saved" tribals or whether I was referring to *ALL* tribals, on Earth, it is you who's at fault.
Your bleat would be far more respectable and substantiated if you hadn't continued to push the issues in the face of my MULTIPLE statements requesting and finally making the clarification for you. Your reluctance to accomplish this earlier only reinforces my observations james.
I have more than amply clarified my stance on this.
As mud james - only to switch to ad hominem against me :) (funny you are the one showing your frustration by way of heaped insults.
It was a counter-productive tactic that you employed to distract from the question at hand - as to how such tribals are "saved" without scriptural knowledge.
Nope, it served to clarify you bogus fill in the blank pseudoquestion. That issue has now been successfully addressed.
YOU suggested that I cannot prove that "angels" didn't exist to tell those tribals about your deity.
Or you could prove that they do exist - the choice is yours james. However, a "just so" answer from you won't cover the ground necessary either.
Your failure to recognise your attempt at making me prove a negative, is documented on this thread and any attempt to shy away from that will only bring you embarrassment. Why do you want that, Godzilla?
To which you've tried the same thing to me james - care to go for two out of three? You are the one making the greater claim of proving a negative james - you BELIEVE there is NO God - but then I can see that you are working through your frustration by way of heaped insults.
I have declared more than once that to prove your dogmatic theories wrong, all I need to do is raise a contradiction (the tribal case, the clone, the god-outside-time-ordering-sequenced-events, etc.).
Well that is all nice - when are you going to get around to it james? Every time you've tried, the only thing you end up with is falling back on your own authority - as what we haven't figure out - but it has something to do with that BELIEF of yours no doubt.
LOL, Godzilla, please think before you ink! I am not performing a comparison game here.
Lightbulb - you brought the subject into play james, or is that another one of those moments that you overlooked - go back and read what you said to me slowly this time.
Your fallacious "argument" basically comprises of claiming "look, my guys only killed 100,000+ people in deciding what comprises the Bible, 'your' guys killed much more, hence my guys are right!"
Not really, for anyone with common sense. You were trying to assert moral authority over the bible on the basis of sinful man's abuse of scriptures and the church. My simple point was that any moral authority is worse off for atheism. Run the numbers james, compare the deaths from the inquisition to those of the Lenin and Stalin and the gulag.
Do Bibles vary in content, Godzilla? Yes or no, Godzilla? LOL.
What do you mean by versions james? Are you referring to the english translations (kjv, niv, rsv, etc) or is it innate feature that you are incapable of answering in the specific?
Why that haste in making that idiotic judgment, then? Why are you so deceptive, Godzilla? Don't you think you should apologise for this?
Want some cheese to go with that whine james? The facts are you are expending orders of magnitude of effort and postings attacking Christianity than you do attacking islam in the same manner. If a whole three posts is a magnificent effort on you part, then I'll let you have your illusion.
Forcing me to prove a negative again, Godzilla? LOL! It is for you to prove God exists.
Yet you base you life on that one statement don't you james - you don't BELIEVE that God exists. Too gutless to support your own beliefs by producing direct evidence. I can say that I BELIEVE the moon is not made out of green cheese - and I can provide proofs james. Certainly for the all knowing atheist out there similar proofs are available.
Arguing with you is futile. You not only refuse to acknowledge your errors, you continue to commit them, even when you are shown why you are wrong (eg.: asking me to prove a negative).
You make false accusations and don’t have the humility to retract them when you’re shown to be wrong. You bear false witness, without shame.
Your incapacity to comprehend basic sentences, follow intent from prior comments, understand simple frameworks of logic, and other limitations show that you are incapable of arguing with. You are unwilling to recognise the gist of the arguments, and instead produce tangents as a deviation.
The comedy of your comments were enjoyable, nonetheless.
I hope that others perusing through this thread enjoy just as much!