Rip Ravi

[Theland]

https://youtu.be/XXjxtY3ZEOI

Dr Ravi Zacharias has died from cancer.
He will be very much missed by those hungering for solid Christian teaching.
Rest in peace Ravi.

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - // H, I’ve told you - but if that isn’t enough allow me to put it this way. I have no desire to compete with anyone but if I did and I offered advice in, say, the technology section, it would be abundantly clear to anyone who knows anything about technology that I don’t know what I’m talking about - which is why I don’t. They don’t have to ‘prove’ my ignorance in that particular area - in posting inaccurate information in that section I would be doing the job for them. //

This is the fourth time on this thread that you have attempted to back up your claim that you 'know' I have not read the bible, so let me try and address this one final time -

If you offered advice on the technology section, you may indeed be found to be in error, or indeed in ignorance by someone who knows more about the subject than you do.

But technology is a vast subject, and hundreds of thousands of books exist about it, so you would not realistically claim a knowledge of all of them, nor would that be expected.

But Christianity is different, there is just one definitive book - The Bible, and anyone will know if they have read it or not, including me.

I have read it, more than once, and I getting tired of your repeated assertions that you 'know I have not read it' - and as I say, you have repeated this baseless nonsense four times on this thread alone.

You are entirely welcome to say that my interpretations of what I have read go against perceived wisdom, you are equally welcome to argue my view or opinion on Christian doctrine - that is the essence of this site after all.

What you are not entitled to do is to state that you 'know' I have not read the bible, simply because you perceive my knowledge of it to be incorrect in some way that you have decided on.

That is unacceptable - not only because you are adopting a response of undeserved superiority - again - but you are stating a complete falsehood.

I know which books I have and have not read. You do not know which books I have and have not read. I will thank you therefore to desist from stating this untruth, simply because you disagree with what I may say and deduce from what I have read.

You can argue with me about points in the bible from now until the earth spins into the sun, but please do not repeat your utterly baseless falsehood about my reading history about which you have no evidence whatsoever - your interpretation that you think my posts lack substance does not equate with your assertion that I have not read the book we are discussing.

I really hope this last strangely irrelevant example of your 'knowledge' will be an end to the matter of your persistent baseless untruths. Please drop it, so we can all move on.

Thank you.

[andy-hughes]

douglas - // Somebody needs to have a word. //

I entirely agree - my post that precedes this one does just that - hope you approve.

[ladybirder]

Naomi has said on here how she has studied very many religions from around the world as the subject fascinated her from a very young age and I remember you saying you did not believe her on more than one occasion. So tit for tat.

[andy-hughes]

ladybirder - // aomi has said on here how she has studied very many religions from around the world as the subject fascinated her from a very young age and I remember you saying you did not believe her on more than one occasion. So tit for tat. //

I have argued in general terms that I do not believe that Naomi's self-advertised 'studies' make her the expert she purports to be on matters religious.

But I have never ever stated that I 'know' she has not read a specific tome, such as the Koran or the Bible - how could I? I have no idea what she has or has not read.

I am simply asking that the same courtesy be extended to me - I don't think that is unreasonable.

[naomi24]

Sigh ...

Thanks LB.

[Peter Pedant]

// and I can read - why would I need someone else's interpretation which is no more or less valid than mine?/

sometimes I wonder - BUT - does this mean 'Thou shalt not kill' is not a valid expression because you didnt read it ?

validity could be attached to a statement and not to the wisdom - nay great wisdom - of one reader.

I know this is AB

[Peter Pedant]

// I have no idea what she has or has not read.//
yes we know she has read the Koran ( in translation ) because she told us.

[andy-hughes]

Peter - // // I have no idea what she has or has not read.//
yes we know she has read the Koran ( in translation ) because she told us. //

And she told us I haven't read the bible, so we know I haven't.

Er …

[andy-hughes]

naomi - // Sigh ... //

Slide away - I'm used to that, just please remember not to write untrue things about me.

Thank you.

[naomi24]

You're welcome.

[Mozz71]

Well, this has been an eye opener.

[ladybirder]

Really Mozz? I thought it was just more of the same from he who is always right.

[jennyjoan]

I am not into frenetic religion like the above - but perhaps all of yous should give your heads peace and sleep .

[Mozz71]

Maybe LB, but I feel new depths of pomposity and hypocrisy have been plummeted here.

I think JJ makes a sound case for retiring for the day.