[oldcats]

cracker, if I may.....
Pietro...What part of "without citing the Bible?" do you not understand. With your first line, you begin using it as a reference.....
"The Bible is chock full of prophesies that have come to be" Have you ever heard of a self-fulfilling prophesy? Can you give an example of a prophesy made in the Bible, where the evidence can be supported OUTSIDE the Bible?
"The simple truth of its own existence, virtually unpolluted for 3,000 years is testament to its value."
Which version are you speaking of" King James, New king James Version, or even the Textus Receptus? Not to mention contemporary writtings that were deemed not worthy to be part of the Bible at the Council of Trent.
"My God, man, the existence of the state of Isreal in and of itself bears witness to the book's divinety."
Does that mean the Bible wasn't valid before 1948?
Oldcats

[Pietro]

How else am I to discuss the Bible unless I reference it? The prophecies cited are varifiable in secular history and are known to have been written down prior to the event.

Your referencing differing translations of the same original is even more spurious, it's like asking which Bible is more accurate, the French or the English.

And frankly, I have no idea what the 1948 comment is about. Do you mean to say that re-establishment of Isreal was not prophesied? Or that its rebirth is merely a fluke of history unconnected w/ the book that defines its existence?