It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
And the idea of Jesus returning came about in the first century. There is just as much evidence to support King Arthur's return as their is for Jesus' return.
Glad all the new agers got upset and came to derail this thread because it points to the true and living God.
originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
And the idea of Jesus returning came about in the first century. There is just as much evidence to support King Arthur's return as their is for Jesus' return.
Are you just ignorant of history? Jesus lived in the first century. King Arthur, if he lived at all, lived around the 6th century. A good 600 years before the idea of his return . Glad all the new agers got upset and came to derail this thread because it points to the true and living God.
There's no "literary" difference between the stories in the Bible and the stories in Homer's Odyssey and Iliad.
historical fiction as a literary style didn't exist in the 1st century....
The stories of Jesus are told by people who NEVER MET HIM, who were elaborating on the legend, and they don't even agree with each other. NONE of the Bible is written by people who ACTUALLY knew Jesus.
Some of the tracks were fake, carved by locals to sell during the Great Depression.[3] These footprints do not represent the way human footprints would look in mud; they also do not accurately reflect the changes in the way giant humans would walk as a result of their size.[6] Other footprints were genuine tracks, but showed features inconsistent with human footprints.[who?] Supporters of the human footprint theory claimed that the tracks showed authentic mud “push-ups” and that the time period for the human and dinosaur trackways had to be the same as the trails intersected. In 1986, Glen Kuban conducted research on the trackways. He found that most tracks formed a wide “V” at the end and showed grooves in places that were not consistent with those in a human footprint. Kuban determined that the tracks were made by bipedal dinosaurs with three toes. These particular tracks showed the dinosaur walking on the soles of its feet rather than on its toes, as is usually found in tracks.[7] Evidence based in human anatomy also refutes the claim that the footprints are of human origin. The foot length measurements were used to calculate approximate heights of the humans; the pace and stride lengths do not match these calculated heights, making it highly unlikely that the tracks are human in origin. The measurements do fit the known values for bipedal dinosaurs.[6]
You already think you know everything so why should I bother trying to show you your wrong.
Your minds made up.
You are close minded.
I am open to hearing rebuttals against the Bible,
, what makes you think they haven't done the same to those children or you?