20
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 227:
Line 227: + + + + + +
no edit summary
:"''Everything else I said is just what had to have happened for it to be true''". Which is an admission that I was right, that you did NOT get that from "just readin' the Bible". Furthermore, at least one thing you said was ''contrary'' to the biblical account, so you have not simply added to the account, but ignored (or rejected) some of what it said. By the way, [[koala]]s are not bears. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:48, 16 May 2007 (EDT)
:"''Everything else I said is just what had to have happened for it to be true''". Which is an admission that I was right, that you did NOT get that from "just readin' the Bible". Furthermore, at least one thing you said was ''contrary'' to the biblical account, so you have not simply added to the account, but ignored (or rejected) some of what it said. By the way, [[koala]]s are not bears. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:48, 16 May 2007 (EDT)
Wow. You did your research. Everybody knows they're marsupials (and most closely related to the wombat). You see, "koala bears" is what us non-believers call slang. Kind of how a gila monster is not a "monster" and a bat is not a bird (like in the Bible). See the problems taking everything word-for-word causes?
You got me genius. I'm a fraud, and God is real based on the grounds that a koala is not a bear. Still, how do "koala's" exist?
I'm going to make a prophesy that you will avoid, or work around, my question in your next response. [[User:Muchodelcrazy|Muchodelcrazy]] 15:59, 17 May 2007 (EDT)