>
> "Robibnikoff"
broomstick.com> wrote in message
> news:64uqu1F2brs9vU1@mid.individual.net...>>>
>>> "Robibnikoff"
broomstick.com> wrote in message
>>> news:64pjraF2ahanfU1@mid.individual.net...>>>>
>>>> "Suzanne"
flash.net> wrote
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> People give you evidence. The Bible is part of the
>>>>> evidence. You deem it not evidence. You don't care
>>>>> that it's the writings of people who have testified with
>>>>> their lives. You pass it off with your man-made skeptic
>>>>> based ideas. You dismiss it. Then when someone
>>>>> bring evidences to you, you pronounce that they are
>>>>> not evidence.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe because it's not objective and veriable evidence.
>>>>
>>>> Tell, why do you reject the "evidence" of other religions?
>>>>
>>> Robyn, if you don't think the Bible is objective
>>> and doesn't have verifiable evidence, then you
>>> should go find out what archaeological finds
>>> have been brought to light which support the
>>> scriptures.
>>
>> Been there, done that.
>>
> Really, Robyn? What do you know about biblical
> archaeology? What do you know about what was
> not visible in the Holy Land in the not so distant
> past? I think you think that what is over there was
> always visible. It wasn't. You might want to look
> up Warren's shaft., and "the boring through." That
> was at one time doubted by the doubters. But then
> it was found and then proved to be exactly as the
> Bible says.
>>
>> Just because a place has been shown to exist, doesn't prove that your god
>> does, Suzanne. Do try to see the difference.
>>
> Your comment is a strange one. If the Bible claims that
> Jesus healed a man at a pool that had many porches,
> but they can't find the place, then doubters may not
> accept the verse. But since they fairly recently did
> find this place, and excavated it, that brings the verse
> into a prominent light and some will see that the verse
> was telling the truth, so the find of that place is
> evidence of what is written about it, when you find
> out that it does exist. Those of you that claim so
> loudly that you want evidence, jump over it when
> it is given to you. All the more reason why you
> should accept it on faith, rather than with what you
> claim that you want, which is evidence.
>>
> Philip was led by the Lord to speak to an Ethiopian
> eunuch who was in service to Candace the Queen.
> "Candace" is a term that is like the word "pharaoh."
> There were more than one pharaoh, and there were
> more than one Candace. Candace is spelled several
> different ways. Candace = Hendeke = Kandake.
> There is a Queen Gersamot Hendeke VII., who was
> the Queen of Ethiopia from the year 42 to 52 A.D.
> Christianity spread in Africa and by the 3rd century
> it was very prominent there, since that is when the
> Ethiopian church as the official religion was
> established there. There are an abundance of Christian
> archaeological finds in this area of Africa.
>>
>>> The subject has not been on other religions, Robyn.
>>
>> You're lying, Suzanne. Or you could just be plain ignorant.
>>
>> Kansas exists - Does that mean the Wizard of Oz exists too?
>>
> You are just heckling here, Robyn.
No, it is a valid point that you wish to ignore. Jerusalem existed at the
time; that is not evidence that Jesus rose from the dead or was even in
Jerusalem.
>>
> Suzanne
>
>
