kirkstaller wrote:What exactly is wrong about that?
That for it to be true, it is predicated on an assumption that Jesus, in human form, could have spoken to and communicated with world leaders throughout history, through common and widely understood methods of communication and been systematically and consistantly and completely ignored. every time. It is wrong that this is a reasonable conclusion.
Quote:I have saving faith.
you dont have any faith. You have what is a logical conclusion to evidence presented to you. Your problem is that you expect everyone else to have faith in your experience.
Quote:Yes, Jesus spoke to me. Well done, you got there in the end.
You might be interested to know that I'm not just typing this; my fingertips are touching the keyboard very fast and the keys are sending electronic impulses through a computer to make text appear on screen.
Yes, and we can prove that this is what is happening. It is provable, understood and repeatable. It is the complete opposite of your argument. The point i was making was that what you are claiming happened is that Jesus spoke to you, not through the holy spirit or any of that nonsense, not through some code or hidden message only you could see, not through any vague nonsense you have interpreted as Jesus, Not even directly as a message straight inside your head, but by a Human, talking to you Which if true means that you dont have faith in jesus, you have a conclusion based on evidentiary reasoning, something you seem to be arguing other people shouldnt do. They should have faith. But not you, because for some reason you are special, you and an infinitesimal percentage of the billions of people alive now and the billions who have ever lived, didnt need faith. They, for reasons you cant explain, were given proof
Quote:What isn't a matter of faith? Did I ever tout it as something that you have to believe in order for it to happen?
your religion isnt faith. Your beliefs arent beliefs. They are, according to you, the logical conclusion of reasoning. It requires less faith and belief than gravity does.
Quote:BTW the biblical definition of faith is not the atheistic 'belief without evidence'. It means trust and believing what has been promised to you from God.
distinction without a difference. For me to believe and trust in what has been promised to me from god would be a belief without evidence. Something you didnt have the faith for.
//www.pngnrlbid.com
bUsTiNyAbALLs wrote:Do not converse with me you filthy minded deviant.
vastman wrote:My rage isn't impotent luv, I'm frothing at the mouth actually.
Joined: Jan 30 2005 Posts: 7152 Location: one day closer to death
kirkstaller wrote:Not too dissimilar, although his facial hair was shorter. The encounter happened in my back garden when I returned home from work one day. I went out to check on my brother's rabbit (he was on holiday, I was looking after it) and Jesus was just standing right in the middle of the garden. I walked up to him and we spoke for about 10 minutes. He then said he had to leave. I walked back to my conservatory and turned around. He was no longer there.
Don't you find it odd there is absolutely no record of what Jesus looked like, yet he happened to almost match our typical Western portrayal? When actually in Galilee in those times he's much more likely to have had a thick head of black hair, a thick black beard and be generally much more thick-set in general.
Quote:Firstly, may I say that many believers such as I are striving to spread the good news to every single person on the planet. The work undertaken by the TBS and those who translate scripture into every known language is vastly under-appreciated. One of the main reasons I am so patient with people on here is because I genuinely want as many people as possible to come to God.
Why? What's the point if god has already chosen who he will save? Is it simply that you want them to glorify your god when in fact they're doomed to hell? You want the masses to dedicate their lives to glorifying your god when you know most of them won't be saved. Rather devious, is it not?
Quote:The Bible tells us that imposters are very convincing and persuasive,
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves Matthew 7:15
You know there's only one real difference between you and I in this discussion. Let's say there are approximately 3,700 major gods that have been or are currently worshipped on Earth. I don't believe in 3,700 of them; you don't believe in 3,699.
And you realise believers many of those gods also truly, honestly believe they met their gods and spoke with them? In their minds they probably believed they did, and they went forth and spread the good word. Just as you're doing. You're nothing more than the latest in thousands of years of similar claims.
Quote:I don't what basis the decision is made on.
Do you know you're saved or not? If you are, what makes you special?
Quote:We make the decision to believe but it is God who orchestrates that decision.
No, if God wants you to be a Christian then you will be a Christian. You can kick, you can scream, but eventually you will become a Christian.
Well that's not a decision then, is it? That's your god using his supernatural powers to steer people's minds.
Quote:Double predestination is where God selected who would be saved in the beginning.
So he selected the saved in the beginning. Again, what was the point of Jesus? Or the flood? Why not just let the sinners crack on having fun if he's chosen his saved from the start?
Quote:He is not my God, he is everyone's God.
Nope, a god who acts in the manner you describe is not my god. Nor is he the god of two thirds of the planet, probably rather more given your particular beliefs.
Quote:It's all to bring glory to God. That is the point of life, after all.
That's the point of life? To glorify a being who will probably be sending me to hell unless I happen to be chosen to be saved based on an unknown criteria?
Quote:That's a harsh way of summarising it.
But absolutely correct.
Quote:It is an explanation, the elect are sinners too, and those sins need paying for. The punishment I was due to receive was instead received by Christ, suffering and dying on the cross. As a direct result of this I no longer have a penalty to pay. If God had not delivered justice on his Son then I would have to go to Hell.
You see, this is what I don't quite get. Jesus died on the cross 2,000 years ago to allow those who will be saved to sin without penalty? Isn't that handy for those that deem themselves saved.
Quote:A contradiction is only a contradiction if there is absolutely no way both statements could be true. I've yet to find any scriptures that meet this criteria.
The KJV by my bedside is the uncorrupted word of God.
Of course it is. The King James Bible Online site even admits to a whole host of contradictions and admits they must either be contradictions or misinterpreted. And here's a decent reference for some of the translation errors and other issues with the KJV.
And I suggest you look at how Erasmus produced the Textus Resmus. Wasn't exactly translated directly from the very earliest Greek texts, was it now? Right old hodge-podge of Greek manuscripts and the Vulgate, wasn't it? Plus he was rushed to complete it.
Hardly the uncorrupted word.
Quote:Well no, seeing as two words can have the same meaning and convey the same message.
Similarly, two words can convey completely different meanings and a different message. Just as misplaced punctuation and a minor error in translation can convey different meanings.
Quote:Tekton has never meant solely working with stone, it was an overarching term for a whole range of industries, including carpentry which many early Christian writers associated with Jesus.
Erm, that's exactly what I said. I also pointed out that carpentry would have been a rare profession in 1st-century Galilee due to the dry, arid climate and scarcity of wood, whereas stone-working/labouring would have been an enormous market. It's widely accepted that the carpenter translation is probably incorrect.
Quote:How do you know that it was a demonstration of free will? How do you know that God did not preconfigure her brain to be rebellious? This is what scripture teaches.
Sorry, that's utterly ridiculous. God commanded one of the only two humans in existence not to do something, yet she demonstrated free will by defying his command. And your argument is that he "preconfigured" her to do so! Come on, get a grip.
You're saying that every decision we make is predestined by god. We're just a game of Sims to him, aren't we?
Quote:Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of GodJohn 1:12
How does that show that we have free will? How does it refute predestination?
The phrase "all who did receive him" indicates there are those who DIDN'T receive him, presumably because they chose not to. But you'll just tell me it was all predestined anyway.
Quote:but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. Romans 2:10
How does that support your argument?
Those who CHOOSE not to do good won't receive glory, honour and peace. Their choice. But you'll just tell me it was all predestined anyway.
Quote:Admittedly, a couple on your list can potentially be difficult for 5 point Calvinists who believe in limited atonement. I myself subscribe a more balanced 4 point view of limited/unlimited atonement. But seeing as you have demonstrated that you have no idea what you're talking about, I won't bore you with my theological musings.
Whereas you're repeatedly demonstrating your lack of solid argument with circular reasoning.
Quote:I see you are getting personal now
Not at all, nothing wrong with modelling yourself on your idol. Just don't go driving nails through your hands.
kirkstaller wrote:Not too dissimilar, although his facial hair was shorter. The encounter happened in my back garden when I returned home from work one day. I went out to check on my brother's rabbit (he was on holiday, I was looking after it) and Jesus was just standing right in the middle of the garden. I walked up to him and we spoke for about 10 minutes. He then said he had to leave. I walked back to my conservatory and turned around. He was no longer there.
Don't you find it odd there is absolutely no record of what Jesus looked like, yet he happened to almost match our typical Western portrayal? When actually in Galilee in those times he's much more likely to have had a thick head of black hair, a thick black beard and be generally much more thick-set in general.
Quote:Firstly, may I say that many believers such as I are striving to spread the good news to every single person on the planet. The work undertaken by the TBS and those who translate scripture into every known language is vastly under-appreciated. One of the main reasons I am so patient with people on here is because I genuinely want as many people as possible to come to God.
Why? What's the point if god has already chosen who he will save? Is it simply that you want them to glorify your god when in fact they're doomed to hell? You want the masses to dedicate their lives to glorifying your god when you know most of them won't be saved. Rather devious, is it not?
Quote:The Bible tells us that imposters are very convincing and persuasive,
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves Matthew 7:15
You know there's only one real difference between you and I in this discussion. Let's say there are approximately 3,700 major gods that have been or are currently worshipped on Earth. I don't believe in 3,700 of them; you don't believe in 3,699.
And you realise believers many of those gods also truly, honestly believe they met their gods and spoke with them? In their minds they probably believed they did, and they went forth and spread the good word. Just as you're doing. You're nothing more than the latest in thousands of years of similar claims.
Quote:I don't what basis the decision is made on.
Do you know you're saved or not? If you are, what makes you special?
Quote:We make the decision to believe but it is God who orchestrates that decision.
No, if God wants you to be a Christian then you will be a Christian. You can kick, you can scream, but eventually you will become a Christian.
Well that's not a decision then, is it? That's your god using his supernatural powers to steer people's minds.
Quote:Double predestination is where God selected who would be saved in the beginning.
So he selected the saved in the beginning. Again, what was the point of Jesus? Or the flood? Why not just let the sinners crack on having fun if he's chosen his saved from the start?
Quote:He is not my God, he is everyone's God.
Nope, a god who acts in the manner you describe is not my god. Nor is he the god of two thirds of the planet, probably rather more given your particular beliefs.
Quote:It's all to bring glory to God. That is the point of life, after all.
That's the point of life? To glorify a being who will probably be sending me to hell unless I happen to be chosen to be saved based on an unknown criteria?
Quote:That's a harsh way of summarising it.
But absolutely correct.
Quote:It is an explanation, the elect are sinners too, and those sins need paying for. The punishment I was due to receive was instead received by Christ, suffering and dying on the cross. As a direct result of this I no longer have a penalty to pay. If God had not delivered justice on his Son then I would have to go to Hell.
You see, this is what I don't quite get. Jesus died on the cross 2,000 years ago to allow those who will be saved to sin without penalty? Isn't that handy for those that deem themselves saved.
Quote:A contradiction is only a contradiction if there is absolutely no way both statements could be true. I've yet to find any scriptures that meet this criteria.
The KJV by my bedside is the uncorrupted word of God.
Of course it is. The King James Bible Online site even admits to a whole host of contradictions and admits they must either be contradictions or misinterpreted. And here's a decent reference for some of the translation errors and other issues with the KJV.
And I suggest you look at how Erasmus produced the Textus Resmus. Wasn't exactly translated directly from the very earliest Greek texts, was it now? Right old hodge-podge of Greek manuscripts and the Vulgate, wasn't it? Plus he was rushed to complete it.
Hardly the uncorrupted word.
Quote:Well no, seeing as two words can have the same meaning and convey the same message.
Similarly, two words can convey completely different meanings and a different message. Just as misplaced punctuation and a minor error in translation can convey different meanings.
Quote:Tekton has never meant solely working with stone, it was an overarching term for a whole range of industries, including carpentry which many early Christian writers associated with Jesus.
Erm, that's exactly what I said. I also pointed out that carpentry would have been a rare profession in 1st-century Galilee due to the dry, arid climate and scarcity of wood, whereas stone-working/labouring would have been an enormous market. It's widely accepted that the carpenter translation is probably incorrect.
Quote:How do you know that it was a demonstration of free will? How do you know that God did not preconfigure her brain to be rebellious? This is what scripture teaches.
Sorry, that's utterly ridiculous. God commanded one of the only two humans in existence not to do something, yet she demonstrated free will by defying his command. And your argument is that he "preconfigured" her to do so! Come on, get a grip.
You're saying that every decision we make is predestined by god. We're just a game of Sims to him, aren't we?
Quote:Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of GodJohn 1:12
How does that show that we have free will? How does it refute predestination?
The phrase "all who did receive him" indicates there are those who DIDN'T receive him, presumably because they chose not to. But you'll just tell me it was all predestined anyway.
Quote:but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. Romans 2:10
How does that support your argument?
Those who CHOOSE not to do good won't receive glory, honour and peace. Their choice. But you'll just tell me it was all predestined anyway.
Quote:Admittedly, a couple on your list can potentially be difficult for 5 point Calvinists who believe in limited atonement. I myself subscribe a more balanced 4 point view of limited/unlimited atonement. But seeing as you have demonstrated that you have no idea what you're talking about, I won't bore you with my theological musings.
Whereas you're repeatedly demonstrating your lack of solid argument with circular reasoning.
Quote:I see you are getting personal now
Not at all, nothing wrong with modelling yourself on your idol. Just don't go driving nails through your hands.
Joined: Feb 17 2002 Posts: 28357 Location: MACS0647-JD
I have briefly glances through some of the rubbish on various Calvinist and hyper-Calvinist four and five pointers and the thing that strikes me is how these guys can tie any simple subject in endless knots and contortions, ludicrously trying to square circles, so that they can madly ultimately "support" their own particular barking hypothesis, and make their pet theory fit,at any cost.
The inability to apply Occam's razor seems to be a common defect. The shiite about atonement alone is worth peals of laughter indeed. It does remind me a lot of the similar sort of barking claptrap from time to time insisted upon by the Catholic church, in fact so blinded were otherwise highly intelligent folk by the diktat that the Earth was the centre of the universe, that they invented fantastical celestial spheres within spheres, with ludicrous gears and cogs and axes, anything to fit Earth being at the centre, yet none would countenance the simple explanation that in fact the Earth was not. Hence the need for improbable convoluted alternative "explanations".
So these types all simply have to tortuously invent what would to any logical person be dismissed as sophistry and rubbish of the highest order, in an attempt to bolster the mad claim that there is actually truth within the utter nonsense and contradictions of the various holy books, as they seem to be hard-wired with an incapacity to see the blindingly obvious: that all you have to do is to simply accept that, yes, what appears to be rubbish is not in fact 'explained' by several pages of disingenuous tosh, twisted logic, ever more absurd claims and theories and 'interpretation', but that it appears to be rubbish simply because it IS rubbish.
I think one day for amusement though I shall get some Galilean fancy dress and turn up in some Calvinist's garden. Clearly some guy who looks like their idea of Jesus by definition must be Jesus (I presume that they don't ask for ID, much like kids sitting on "Santa"'s knee in the Arndale grotto). But actually no. The truth is, if some bearded long haired guy in a frock wandered into these people's garden, they'd be off hiding upstairs, and on the phone to the police saying there's some nutter on the loose.
Last edited by Ferocious Aardvark on stardate Jun 26, 3013 11:27 am, edited 48,562,867,458,300,023 times in total
I accept it's an ommission, but by no means a fatal one. Particularly if Matthew's Gospel was already in circulation.
I am not concerned by this as Luke says Jesus was placed in a manger after his birth. Matthew says that the Magi came to visit the Messiah at a house. There is no inconsistency here.
So your argument has now been reduced to "erm, the odds are the Bible is wrong"?
Jesus had never been there though. The prophecy applies to him, not Mary and Joseph.
Actually the synoptic Gospels tell a very different story. You only have to look at Jesus' wandering ministry to see that freedom of movement was permitted within Galilee, Judea, Samaria etc. It was only Jesus' miracles and wisdom which caused him grief at the hands of the religious Jews.
No, the only holes you have picked are founded on a hazy memory of the scriptures and a bizarre assessment of probability.
Emmanuel, Christ, the Word, the Son of Man, the Light of the World......there are many more names for the Jewish Messiah than Yeshua.
John 10:30 John 8:38
Most of the New Testament was compiled and written by Romans or Greeks at the behest of Romans. It is intended to defame the Jews while promoting the idea that Jesus taught Love and peace to his fellow man. It is Roman propaganda, nothing more nothing less. Of course it's not going to say the Romans were bad. It even absolves Pilate of sole responsibility for the death of Jesus even though Crucifixion was a Roman punishment exclusively preserved for the execution of traitors and enemies of the state. Had Jesus been accused of blasphemy Pilate wouldn't have even been involved it would have been left to the Jews to handle it themselves. The purpose or the Gospels is to fit the Roman idea of Jesus into the Judaic prophecies of the Messiah to control a particularly troublesome sect in Rome that was a thorn in the side of many Emperors particularly Nero. Throw in some Eastern mysticism and you have the current Bible.
These aren't my arguments they are the arguments of most of the scholastic world. They are just a few of the major discrepencies between the gospels of Matthew and Luke. Discrepencies that the church has failed to come to terms with. You can't just paper over them by saying "Well it's mentioned in Luke so it doesn't have to be mentioned in Matthew" because they are not concurrent.
ATEOTD you can believe what you wish. However since you are not Roman Catholic I'm astonished at your slavish devotion to a book that was produced solely to steal a god from another people and crush all other Christian sects.
Edit: Again apologies I meant to put Yeshua not Yehwah in the previous post.
Somewhere in the dust of time rest the bones of the Galilean He who was spat upon. He whose face was marred beyond all human likeness Somewhere buried among the lies of the past rests the tomb of Yeshua Of he who was made God in a world without Hope. And when this son of Joseph is found. What then will the Church of Rome say? Prepare yourself for the day is coming. And men will say "Blessed are the wasted lives who perished in the flames of the holy war"
Joined: Feb 17 2002 Posts: 28357 Location: MACS0647-JD
I am idly trying to follow some of the tortured logic but am stuck. Can somebody help? I thought Jesus wasn't going to return until Armageddon. I have scoured the Bible and can find no indication that before Armageddon, he would be on tour, playing a lot of small venues to audiences of 1. Where does it say that?
The other bit where I'm stuck is that as apparently Jesus has of late made it clear - though only to very select members of his highly exclusive club - he's a three point turn, double cream Calvinist (or something), and gigs only to selected individuals of only precisely that sub-sect, doesn't it follow that all Jesus's followers, including the entirety of religionists prior to three point turn, double cream Calvinists, were deceived by Satan and therefore anything they say or write can't be relied on?
Does this mean that the Second Coming will, in fact be a rather disappointingly mundane 138th coming, or whatever?
I tell you what, though. If he'd come to see me, I'm damn sure I'd have got the missus out and we'd have taken a photo and got it framed.
Last edited by Ferocious Aardvark on stardate Jun 26, 3013 11:27 am, edited 48,562,867,458,300,023 times in total
McClennan wrote:I didn't say it wasn't but unless you're a stand-up comedian doing some sort of satire what purpose does it serve to ridicule what can be a very personal belief?
We're on a discussion forum. If the discussion was about, say, Rugby League and a poster was insisting that Hull KR would be the next SL and World Club Champions, he/she would be widely ridiculed. Belief in a supernatural being that hears our every thought, sees our every deed, created the universe etc etc is way more outlandish than the belief that Rovers will win the WCC, and would therefore be subject to an even greater degree of ridicule. In short, ridiculous religious beliefs, however personal, are deserving of no more respect than any other belief that is unsupported by evidence or sound reasoning.
Christianity: because you're so awful you made God kill himself.
Ferocious Aardvark wrote:I am idly trying to follow some of the tortured logic but am stuck. Can somebody help? I thought Jesus wasn't going to return until Armageddon. I have scoured the Bible and can find no indication that before Armageddon, he would be on tour, playing a lot of small venues to audiences of 1. Where does it say that?
The other bit where I'm stuck is that as apparently Jesus has of late made it clear - though only to very select members of his highly exclusive club - he's a three point turn, double cream Calvinist (or something), and gigs only to selected individuals of only precisely that sub-sect, doesn't it follow that all Jesus's followers, including the entirety of religionists prior to three point turn, double cream Calvinists, were deceived by Satan and therefore anything they say or write can't be relied on?
Does this mean that the Second Coming will, in fact be a rather disappointingly mundane 138th coming, or whatever?
I tell you what, though. If he'd come to see me, I'm damn sure I'd have got the missus out and we'd have taken a photo and got it framed.
A photo would have been useful for the police to help them identify the bloke who's been having it on his toes with the lawnmowers of Kirkstall's gullible religious nutjobs.
Christianity: because you're so awful you made God kill himself.
Joined: Mar 05 2007 Posts: 13190 Location: Hedon (sometimes), sometimes Premier Inn's
Rock God X wrote:We're on a discussion forum. If the discussion was about, say, Rugby League and a poster was insisting that Hull KR would be the next SL and World Club Champions, he/she would be widely ridiculed. Belief in a supernatural being that hears our every thought, sees our every deed, created the universe etc etc is way more outlandish than the belief that Rovers will win the WCC, and would therefore be subject to an even greater degree of ridicule. In short, ridiculous religious beliefs, however personal, are deserving of no more respect than any other belief that is unsupported by evidence or sound reasoning.
............... you might regret this observation
'when my life is over, the thing which will have given me greatest pride is that I was first to plunge into the sea, swimming freely underwater without any connection to the terrestrial world'
Rock God X wrote:We're on a discussion forum. If the discussion was about, say, Rugby League and a poster was insisting that Hull KR would be the next SL and World Club Champions, he/she would be widely ridiculed. Belief in a supernatural being that hears our every thought, sees our every deed, created the universe etc etc is way more outlandish than the belief that Rovers will win the WCC, and would therefore be subject to an even greater degree of ridicule. In short, ridiculous religious beliefs, however personal, are deserving of no more respect than any other belief that is unsupported by evidence or sound reasoning.
............... you might regret this observation
Perhaps, but I'm no more worried about it than I am about dying and finding out there is a hell after all. Both have a probability of close to 0.
Christianity: because you're so awful you made God kill himself.
Joined: Mar 05 2007 Posts: 13190 Location: Hedon (sometimes), sometimes Premier Inn's
Rock God X wrote:Perhaps, but I'm no more worried about it than I am about dying and finding out there is a hell after all. Both have a probability of close to 0.
If you are wrong, at least you'll be warm
'when my life is over, the thing which will have given me greatest pride is that I was first to plunge into the sea, swimming freely underwater without any connection to the terrestrial world'
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 136 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
Sorry, that's utterly ridiculous. God commanded one of the only two humans in existence not to do something, yet she demonstrated free will by defying his command. And your argument is that he "preconfigured" her to do so! Come on, get a grip.
