You began with searching the internet for random photos of Jesus being depicted in a white robe with red sash and now you're equating a scarlet robe to a white robe and red sash.
Bad taste? Maybe.
But you lost me when you searched the internet for images of Jesus wearing a white robe and red sash then proceeded to drop the link in your post to prove your point.
You do realize the bible is not a picture book right?
Did you find a reference to Jesus wearing a white robe and red sash within your reading?
Or is that why you relied on a modern day internet search of Jesus wearing a white robe and red sash in order to "prove" your point?
With regard to your question: why would it matter whether or not I have read the entire bible?
My having read the complete bible or lack thereof would still not prove your point.
Your line of questioning seems illogical at best. At-least with respect to the context of this conversation.
Besides. What good does it do to have read the complete bible, as you claim, if one does not implement a core, universal and always existent truth taught within?
Logic
Since logic is rooted in Logos and referenced hundreds of times within the bible.
And of course, when referenced, it is speaking of your creator. A core attribute of our creator since a creator of all cannnot be illogical. Since the I Am, the uncreated creator, is the root of logic, being that you have read the entire bible, how is it that you have missed this very basic and fundamental truth?
Proverbs 16:18
"Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall."
Proverbs 26:7 ESV
[7] Like a lame man’s legs, which hang useless, is a proverb in the mouth of fools.
Just continue to deny your own eyeballs in order to die on the dumbest hill. It's not even up for debate whether Jesus has historically been depicted wearing a red sash, and I showed you where the Romans clothed him with a scarlet robe. I don't think Trump is the antichrist, but you would accept the antichrist if he "owned the libs".
A red scarlet robe is not the same as white robe with a red sash.
But we've already covered that.
As previously mentioned. We wouldn't be denying our eyeballs since scripture does not contain images let alone color images.
We would have to rely on the Word within scripture.
Which should be a simple task since it's apparent that you pride yourself with reading the entire bible.
Seeing as though you are relying on illogical arguments, by extension deception, in order to prove a point, is it I who is at risk of following an anti-Christ or do you, yourself, run a greater risk of following the father of all lies?
John 8:44
"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."
You began with searching the internet for random photos of Jesus being depicted in a white robe with red sash and now you're equating a scarlet robe to a white robe and red sash.
Bad taste? Maybe.
But you lost me when you searched the internet for images of Jesus wearing a white robe and red sash then proceeded to drop the link in your post to prove your point.
You do realize the bible is not a picture book right?
I'm honestly speechless. The goalpost moving is so ridiculous. I've read all 66 books of the Bible, front to back. Have you?
Did you find a reference to Jesus wearing a white robe and red sash within your reading?
Or is that why you relied on a modern day internet search of Jesus wearing a white robe and red sash in order to "prove" your point?
With regard to your question: why would it matter whether or not I have read the entire bible?
My having read the complete bible or lack thereof would still not prove your point.
Your line of questioning seems illogical at best. At-least with respect to the context of this conversation.
Besides. What good does it do to have read the complete bible, as you claim, if one does not implement a core, universal and always existent truth taught within?
Logic
Since logic is rooted in Logos and referenced hundreds of times within the bible.
And of course, when referenced, it is speaking of your creator. A core attribute of our creator since a creator of all cannnot be illogical. Since the I Am, the uncreated creator, is the root of logic, being that you have read the entire bible, how is it that you have missed this very basic and fundamental truth?
Proverbs 16:18
"Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall."
Proverbs 26:7 ESV [7] Like a lame man’s legs, which hang useless, is a proverb in the mouth of fools.
Just continue to deny your own eyeballs in order to die on the dumbest hill. It's not even up for debate whether Jesus has historically been depicted wearing a red sash, and I showed you where the Romans clothed him with a scarlet robe. I don't think Trump is the antichrist, but you would accept the antichrist if he "owned the libs".
A red scarlet robe is not the same as white robe with a red sash.
But we've already covered that.
As previously mentioned. We wouldn't be denying our eyeballs since scripture does not contain images let alone color images.
We would have to rely on the Word within scripture.
Which should be a simple task since it's apparent that you pride yourself with reading the entire bible.
Seeing as though you are relying on illogical arguments, by extension deception, in order to prove a point, is it I who is at risk of following an anti-Christ or do you, yourself, run a greater risk of following the father of all lies?
John 8:44
"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."