Tiger: I am the winner

Mike: here’s a video of a man who is a shapeshifter. Look at his eyes when he blinks.

That is pretty much what has happened here.

Okay, then you ARE saying he is right.  Great.  Then please tell us what and where these waters above the heavens are.  Thanks.

Nope. I am reminding you that you need to be careful about establishing doctrine from such words. If we did that with all words in the bible, then we would need to craft a doctrine about Jesus having a demon. That is th…[Read more]

The sun, moon and stars are IN the raqia, and the waters above are ABOVE the entire raqia.

Nope. That raqia is the division created by the waters only.

God had already created the heavens and the earth in the beginning.

Sky is what we see when we look up. It is obvious that the clouds are in the sky and stars are in the sky. Speaking of the…[Read more]

Mike, the more you argue, the more I win.

You are making me more of a winner.

But I don’t take the credit myself because I have to admit that arguing for the truth is easy.

Telling lies and more lies to cover those lies is difficult.

This is why you are consistently losing mike.

I’ve explained my rules, right?  You refused to follow them, right?  The subject is closed UNTIL you follow those rules.  End of story.

Let me translate this for you. You cannot bring back the sun.

I wonder why? Maybe because the heliocentric model is true and you cannot bring back the biggest physical light in the cosmos from our point of view.

BOOMERANG!  More insults from a person who is literally speaking about HIMSELF!

Only a clown would think that the Bible recording what the Pharisees actually DID say is somehow the Bible being wrong.

Once again you are making false assumptions. Read my post again. I am stating that men say things in the bible that are not true, but historically…[Read more]

Notice how you’re speaking scripturally now.  You’re correctly calling it THE raqia, and distinguishing it FROM “the heavens” in general by acknowledging that it is a particular part OF “the heavens”.  That’s BIG progress!

Thank you. but I never denied such in the first place. I simply stated that God called the raqia – heavens. Accepting that…[Read more]

It proves deep down, you have no confidence in your own theory. If you did, you would bring back the sun and the whole world would be in wonder. But you would prefer not to win, but instead argue about a raqia that in itself is zero proof that the world is flat.

I’m not buying it. But I can clearly see the ramblings of a man who lost.

So then what you’re saying is that this particular line of the Bible is WRONG, right?

Recording what a person says does not make the bible wrong.

The Pharisees said, “Jesus uses the power of Beelzebul to force demons out of people.

However, I am not even saying that David was wrong. He says clouds cover the heavens. Thus the context of hea…[Read more]

I tend to steer clear of wild goose chases.

The important thing here is you cannot bring back the sun because it has set. Even scripture says the sun sets. You say it means something else, but refuse to bring back the sun and put this to bed. But you are happy to bring back small boats into view that never went over the horizon in the first…[Read more]

“Drip down, O heavens, from above,
And let the clouds pour down righteousness;
Let the earth open up and salvation bear fruit,
And righteousness spring up with it.
I, the Lord, have created it.

Hey, put your 12 year old son on the phone.  Let me talk to a reasonable person for a while.

As long as you don’t mind him laughing. You have provided my family free entertainment, so I guess he could thank you for that.

I see.  So “waters above the heavens” (PLURAL) could mean “waters above the first heaven” (SINGULAR)?  Is that your argument here?  It’s like I’m talking to a freaking idiot.  Hey, put your 12 year old son on the phone.  Let me talk to a reasonable person for a while.

Could be.

7 Sing to the Lord with thanksgiving;
Sing praises to our God on the…[Read more]

“The heavens declare the glory of God… AND… THE raqia shows His handiwork.” ?

If the raqia is called heaven, but lets say specifically a part of the heavens, then good. That doesn’t prove the earth is a floating pizza does it? It would only mean that the raqia was then the first and second heavens. So context would explain which one.

How many raqias are actually mentioned in the Bible?

As many as the contexts.

How many heavens?

As many as the contexts too.

And God called the raqia – heaven.

Boom!

Not at all.  I’ve already addressed this many times.  Find one of those posts, QUOTE what I said to you, and then respond to what I said.  You do it that way, and I’m happy to have a lengthy and respectable discussion about this issue.

Nope, neither you or any other flattie has a video of bringing back the sun after it has gone over the curve.…[Read more]

 Can you see that CLOUDS are explicitly mentioned as something OTHER THAN the “waters above heaven”?  YES or NO?

David or whoever is praising God and is speaking from his own understanding. Whether the clouds are above or in the midst is not really conclusive. According to the Psalmist, the clouds cover the heavens. So when you look up and see c…[Read more]

waters above the heavens

Could be first heaven. There are at least three.

I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know—God knows.

Scripture has debunked most of your ideas Mike.

Like what?  I debunked your “multiple raqias” argument.

Nope. Your being stupid again.

You have not debunked my multiple heavens idea and God called the raqia – heaven.

You have no answer. Cat got your tongue again?

Now, about that “water outside the universe”.  No go, Champ.  God opened the windows of the firmament and allowed some of the waters above to flood the earth.  Impossible in the “waters outside the universe” safety device that you just invented out of desperation.

Sounds like clouds to me.