Johnny Skeptic

Obviously not. There is not one single Bible prophecy that indicates that a God inspired it. Why in the world would a God inspire prophecies that needlessly invite dissent when he could easily inspire prophecies that are difficult to dispute? "Well, er, uh, I dunno." That is what I thought was the case.

At any rate, the General Religious Discussions Forum is the best place to discuss prophecy.

WVIncagold

What fundies running from a thread? I am shocked!

WVIncagold

bumped.

Toto

If a thread has run its course and no one has anything more to say, let it rest. One more bump and it is locked.

sschlichter

Not running, just busy.

I am basing morality on the word of God.

Jesus summarized... to love God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength and love your neighbor as yourself (in that order). the summary is based on the 10 commandments (first 4 in relationship to God, next 6 in relationship to your neighbors).

sschlichter

what's a bump?

sschlichter

It is my understanding that all Islamic scholars thiought it was a dream before 1930 when the Jews started immigrating to Palestine. After all, there was no Mosque in Byzantine Jerusalem in 632 for Mohammed to "visit".

Gob bless,

~Steve

WVIncagold

Okay so you base your morality on the bible is that correct? the n the bible is moral? So you agree that owning another human is moral.
I base my morality on the law.
it bans the onership of other human beings.
Judge the morality yourself. your okay with slavery im not as it is wrong to own another human in any way shape or form.
Todays law forbids its practrice in any form including the examples you have given.
Todays standard is more moral than the standards of bronze age sheep herders who condoned the owning of other people as did their god. this coincides it seams as all gods apear to have the exact same agenda as those who worship them, coincidence i think not.

You should pay good attention to number one no where does it include the caveate "and oh by the way also my son because i am my son clause."

You also hold to the ten commandments but then ignore the other 603 given so just by shear random chance i can without trying accidently adhere to 10 of the 613 total commandments given in the bible.

More importantly out of those 613 which include such trifels as the eating of shellfish and adding a parapet to the roof nowhere is the ownership of humans ever denounced. not once. Abscence means it is condoned.

In order to prove your point free men and apprenticeships would not of existed. Only owners the upper uber rich and those slaves they own. You seam to want to ignore the artisans who were paid for services. so they were well aware of paying for services they chose the more expediant and cost effective way of just owning a person in bondage.

You also have never adressed how do women escape the bondage set forth in the bible? You say men could buy thier freedom at least if your jewish you can you just cant do it if your not jewish you get to be handed down to the children of the owner. But thats men. Women could never escape since in the bible women are no more than mere property. They are forbidden from even teaching the word of god they are so low in the bible. :constern01:

By the way i commend you on coming back.

Johnny Skeptic

But there is not sufficient historical evidence that Jesus said anywhere near everything that the Gospels say that he said.

Do you know of any firsthand, eyewitness testimonies in Matthew, Mark, and Luke?

Do you believe that might makes right?

In your opinion, does the creator of the universe have to be good regardless of who he is?

Johnny Skeptic

Message to sschlicter: At the Evolution/Creation Forum, you said:

And yet inerrantists have done just that. If they were God, they would provide Christians with inerrant texts, hence, they dreamed up inerrancy in order to satisfy their emotional need to have a God who provided Christians with inerrant texts. Inerrantists have no problem believing in a God who kills people and innocent animals with hurricanes, who forces innocent animals to kill each other, who refuses to protect women from rapists, who inspired James to write that if a man refuses to give food to hungry people, he is vain and his faith is dead, but caused millions of people to die slow, painful deaths from starvation, and plans to send skeptics to hell for eternity without parole, but for some odd reason, they do have a problem with a God who won't provide Christians with inerrant texts.

If, as many Christians claim, God is not obligated to save anyone, then he certainly is not obligated to provide Christians with inerrant texts, which invites the question "Why do inerrantists believe that the Bible is inerrant?"

Are you an inerrantist?