Flappie

BEREA Admin Team
  • Content count

    1,110
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

Flappie last won the day on May 5

Flappie had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

196 Excellent

About Flappie

  • Rank
    Forum Veteran
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

592 profile views
  1. http://www.christadelphia.org/pamphlet/p_lazarus.htm
  2. Leen Ritmeyer was/is involved in excavations which may be the site of Sodom, he wasn't the one that found it though. Those excavations started over a decade ago, and they're still going. That's why most reputable archaeologists only have a few major finds against their name, because it takes time to process everything properly. Ron Wyatt just looked at some geological layers, went "Oooh, that just like ash", found some sulphur balls and declared it the site of Sodom without any excavations or dating or anything; not exactly reliable.
  3. No idea, but leafy background is way more likely, or a weird pangolin.
  4. For the record, I don't know if that one has made it in the book, since I don't have it. He mentioned it in a video I saw that I now can't find. It's just an easy example of something loosely based on something real, but clearly not, being interpreted as a dinosaur.
  5. Of all the images in the entire book? No idea; you'll have to find them individually. Here's the one I was talking about: Link
  6. Even if the imagination is based on something, it could be loosely based on a depiction or description provided by someone else. Any likeness to a dinosaur is much more likely to be coincidental. That dude uses an Egyptian depiction of what he claims are dinosaurs (because of the long necks), but when you look at the feet/head/tail, you quickly realise it's just a cat with a really long neck (and not a real animal).
  7. I think you need to look a bit closer, and you'll realise that all of them are either unknown creates that aren't dinosaurs, a bit iffy, or simply figments of someone's imagination. I saw a vase once with Heracles fighting the Hydra, am I to believe that was a real creature?
  8. That book you put up as evidence for humans and dinosaurs living together mostly has stuff from the middle ages, a long time after the flood. So did more than an exceptional few survive, or is that book dodgy?
  9. Quite. So not everyone can necessarily understand what is said when someone speaks in tongues... Do you still think the gift is on the side of the hearer?
  10. Sorry, I meant 1 Cor 14:9-11, also 1 Cor 14:27 Could everyone understand the tongue? If so, why the need for an interpreter? If not, what side is the gift of tongues on if the hearer couldn't always understand without an interpretation?
  11. If that's the case, why does 1 Cor 12 mention a gift of the interpretation of tongues? And what does 1 Cor 13:9-11 say about it?
  12. I don't know if they committed an unforgivable sin. They did essentially deny the power of the Holy Spirit, but as for what will happen to them eventually, I don't know... They probably didn't go around telling everyone, but it was a public event, and word would have gotten around. It's also unlikely that what they laid at the Apostles' feet was a closed envelope... Ananias doesn't say anything in that passage, but it's fairly obvious he would have done, some of the events are inferred. Their intent was to receive praise and honour for their generosity. Verse 4 makes clear that they could have kept some of the money, the giving was entirely voluntary, so it's their pretence that they donated the entire proceeds of the sale that is the problem. The fact that Sapphira tells the same story a few hours later suggest they colluded in this, and that this act was therefore deliberate and premeditated.
  13. The other way around. Other denominations are coming around to hold positions that are the same or similar to ours.