[Krsqk]

You need to stop editing once I start replying.

I'm not referring to their contention that the Bible contains prophetic material. That's another matter entirely.

What I'm referring to is your assertion that the prophetic material in the Bible was written after the fact. You never backed that assertion, although your argument that the Bible cannot be prophetic was based (at least in part) on it. As such, it must be treated as an assumption, and not fact, until such time as you present your evidence (which has obviously convinced you).

"Proving" the prophetic nature of the Bible is a matter of determining the date of its writing and comparing the written account to the actual event. As such, it is dependent on the timeline debate. My observation is that you have not presented proof for your argument regarding the timeline aspect of this debate.

Is that all clear?

Again, my point was that some people keep posting that stuff about my Posts that don't cite evidence, while ignoring any Posts made by anyone else that do the same thing mine do.

I think that's because you do such an adequate job of pointing out their Posts yourself.

[ March 11, 2003, 00:44: Message edited by: Krsqk ]