Helpmabob

Your post reminds me of the Monty Python sketch - http://orangecow.org/pythonet/sketches/argument.htm Mr vibrating defends his non-existent point of view with unfounded contradiction. You repeating several times that my words are clichéd is in the same ballpark. Cliché can be correct. It is a cliché to say that we all die, but would you argue that it is untrue? You can do better than this spin.

Certainly if you read what Johnny Skeptic posts. The devil is obviously delighted with Johnny’s efforts in spreading the message that sin satisfies.

You are arguments are based on the Bible being false. You say that it is a pack of lies: made-up nonsense. Then corrupted. If it was made up, then what would be the point of corrupting it and yet still leaving all those ‘difficult’ passages?

This is the topic of another thread, but the Bible is a most authentic and authoritative account of the purpose and life of God and His world. It is no accident that it is the most translated and best selling book by a long way. My prophecy argument is founded on the knowledge and experience that the Bible is true and accurate.

What’s boggling about a billion followers of Christ appreciating prophecy? It’s a fact that the minority can sometimes be correct. Following the prevailing opinion is not always the answer. It’s the herd mentality, but the herd are rushing off in the wrong direction with their fingers in their ears.

Do you expect to be given it no a plate spin. If you want to deny God, then you can. If you want to look and understand and then decide, then consider the following in relation to prophecy:

Then I said, "Ah, Sovereign LORD! They are saying of me, 'Isn't he just telling parables?' " [Ezekiel 21:49]

Even Ezekiel, thousands of years ago was frustrated by the people’s lack of appreciation God’s prophecies. It takes time and effort. If you are not willing to apply that, then maybe you are not as qualified to write on the subject as one who has.

You are doing exactly as the devil would want. He will be delighted with your work, absolutley delighted.

What is your point in relation to prophecy? I can’t see what your point is.

Katastrophikus

No, that is not what is he is basing his arguments on at all. You misunderstand. The basis of his argument is that the Bible is a book (true), and that it was written by men (true). The reason that one can claim that it is false is that the source the claims of truth, in the first place, is the bloody book itself.

Notice how history books and any other book claiming to be the truth correlate to observable, objective evidence. The bible does not.

With that basis, his question is still valid and you are not answering it.

Johnny Skeptic

You must be unaware that there is no logical correlation that can be made between the ability to predict the future and good character. You would never worship any God solely because he could predict the future. Even if a supernatural being inspired the writing of the Bible, an excellent case can be made against Christianity. If I had the ability to do whatever I wanted to do, I would heal all of the sick people in the world, feed all of the hungry people in the world, and protect everyone from murderers, rapists, and terrorists. God refuses to do that, and yet you have attacked my character. What is the matter with you? God endorses unmerciful eternal punishment without parole. I would never do that. If mercy is anything, it is forgoing eternal punishment without parole even when justice, in this case, God's justice, demands it. Otherwise, mercy is meaningless. God is a much bigger threat to humanity than I could ever be.

The Bible is a hateful book. Consider the following Scriptures:

Revelation 14:9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,

10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:

11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

Revelation 9:1 And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit.

2 And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit.

3 And there came out of the smoke locusts upon the earth: and unto them was given power, as the scorpions of the earth have power.

4 And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads.

5 And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man.

6 And in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them.

Mark 14:21 The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had never been born.

Johnny: Such vicious hatred could only have come from the mind of man.

Consider the following post that I made in another thread at this forum:

Message to rhutchin: You have claimed that I have refused to do what God told me to do, but that is not true. The Bible writers told me what to do, not God. If God really wants everyone to know what he wants them to do, and if he loves everyone, and if he wants as many people as possible to avoid going to hell, he would show up in person, tangibly, and tell everyone what he wants them to do.

No loving God would ever do anything that he did not intend to benefit himself and/or someone else at present, or in the future. If the God of the Bible exists, he could not possibly have anything whatsoever to lose by clearly revealing his existence and his will to everyone, in person, tangibly, and the people who would accept him if they had additional information would have much to gain. That is the only kind of God that decent people are able to accept. You can’t convince anyone to love you by threatening them. That is why Pascal's Wager does not work.

You have claimed that God is fair, but you cannot reasonably prove that God is fair to everyone. As a Calvinist, you believe that God chooses who he will reveal himself to. That is favoritism. Favoritism is not fair, especially unexplained favoritism. It is not likely that a loving God would reveal himself to skeptics who he knows will not accept him, and refuse to reveal himself to some skeptics who he knows would accept him if they had additional information.

If you have children, if they were drowning, would you be willing that any of them perish, or would you try to save all of them?

Who do you hold accountable for the Irish Potato Famine? Is it your position that only perfect people deserve not to starve to death? If God allowed all of the imperfect people in the world to starve to death, no one would be left alive. Ever since Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, somehow, genetically or in some other way, God has ensured that everyone must commit sins at least some of the time. Otherwise some people would be perfect with no need of becoming saved.

It is an absurd notion that a loving God would tell Christians via James that if a man refuses to give food to a hungry person, he is vain, and his faith is dead, and refuse to feed hungry people himself. James told Christians to feed people, not righteous people. Obviously, God is a hypocrite. One of the best ways to convince an unrighteous man to become righteous is to give him food if he is hungry.

God created hurricanes and locusts, both of which destroy food supplies. No loving God would create hurricanes and destroy food supplies and kill people with them.

He who is best able to help people is most culpable of refusing to help people. Since God is much better able to help people than anyone else, he is much more culpable of refusing to help people than anyone else. True love will always provide help when those who ought to provide it refuse to provide it. Since God refuses to provide help when it is not available from any other source, rational minded and fair minded people have no chioce but to reject him.

Is it your position that hurricanes selectively seek out unrighteous people to injure and kill? What is your definition of a righteous man? Are you a righteous man? If bad things happen to a man, does that prove that he is unrighteous?

From a fundamentalist Christian perspective, after Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, somehow, by genetics or by some other process, God has passed a sinful nature on to all successive generations, thereby ensuring that everyone must commit sins some of the time. Otherwise, some people would be perfect, and the Bible most certainly does not say that it is possible for anyone to be perfect in this life. So, is it your position that God punishes people for committing sins when he has ensured that everyone must commit sins some of the time?

If God were mentally incompetent, how would he act any differently than he acts now? No mentally competent man helps AND kills people, including babies.

Luke 10:25-28 say "And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live."

Although Pascal tried to bait people into COMPARING Christianity to other worldviews, the verses that I quoted do not invite a COMPARISON between Christianity and other worldviews. Rather, they demand the assumption of a PROBABALITY and an EXPECTATION that God is who the Bible says he is. However, there is not any evidence at all that it is probable that God is who the Bible says he is. Do you deny this? Logically, it is not possible for a man to love a God with all of his heart, soul, and mind unless he has sufficient evidence that it is probable that God is who the Bible says he is. If God is evil, would you say that it is probable that he would not be able to deceive you? Of course you wouldn't. If a supernatural being inspired the writing of the Bible, he might always tell the truth, he might always tell lies, or he might sometimes tell the truth, and sometimes tell lies. Your task is to determine which is the case, which of course you cannot do.

Since the Bible cannot stand on its own merit without being compared with other worldviews, it is not worth accepting.

The best decisions are the best informed decisions. Science and education provide better informed decisions. Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in the part of the 1800's, advances in science and education have closely paralled a growing lack of interest in religion. Today, even some evangelical Christians geologists admit that a global flood did not occur. Young earth advocates have become increasingly scorned by leading scientific organizations. Historically, 100 years is a very short time. During the last 100 years, dramatic changes have taken place regarding how people feel about religion. If current trends continue, in another 100 years, there will be much less interest in religion than there is today. What I am getting at is that the jury is still out. There is a lot of information that we do not yet have that we need to have in order to make better informed decisions.

What are the chief factors that determine religious beliefs? Some of the answers can be found in Kosmin and Lachman's 'One Nation Under God'. The authors provide a lot of documented evidence that shows that in the U.S., the chief factors that determine religious beliefs are geography, family, race, ethnicity, gender, and age. Those factors are entirely secular, and do not indicate divine involvement of any kind. Now why in the world would a loving God go out of his way to make it appear to millions of people that the chief factors that determine religious beliefs are entirely secular?

If the God of the Bible exists, either he is never involved with the distribution of tangible benefits, or he is sometimes involved with the distribution of tangible benefits, in which case no one would be able to determine when he does that. If the former, then no particular person should ever expect to get a specific tangible benefit from God. If the latter, then God frequently distributes tangible benefits to people are not in greatest need, including some evil people who never become Christians, and frequently withholds tangible benefits from people who are in greatest need, including some of his most devout and faithful followers.

God makes people blind, deaf, and dumb, reference Exodus 4:11. God punishes people for sins that their ancestors committed, reference Exodus 20:5. In the Old Testament, God ordered the death penalty for a Jew who killed a Jew, but not for a Jew who killed a slave. In the New Testament, God killed Ananias and Saphira over money. In the U.S. Civil War, God stood idly by and allowed Christian to kill Christian, and brother to kill brother. God allowed Christians to conquer the largest colonial empire in history by far under a single religion, an empire that was conquered by means of persecution, murder, and theft of property.

Many skeptics are loving, kind, and forgiving people. It would be out of character for them to reject a loving human, or a loving God. Human oversight is a good thing. Without it, there would be anarchy in society. Divine oversight would be much better than human oversight if it was fair. It is already well-established that God is not fair. If God’s chief desire is the save the elect, there is most certainly no need for him to beat up the elect with hurricanes, plagues, and starvation. Now rhutchin, in your opinion, what is God’s chief desire(s)?

The Bible says that God is loving. Since the best evidence indicates that that is not true, it is a virtual certainty that he does not exist. If he does exist, no decent person is able to love him.

spin

A dictionary will tell you that a cliche is a worn-out phrase whose meaning content has been eroded. If you don't like me pointing out your cliches try using more meaningful communication.

Nevertheless, by using this ploy you have simply not responded <...> to the content accusations I made against your earlier statements. Why <edit>??

You're just changing the subject. Your argument about popularity is a crock and you know it. Why bother?

I have never said that it was a pack of lies. I wouldn't do that. I have a much deeper appreciation of the book than you can, as you are not able to read it on its merits.

But the bible is not accurate. Let's look at a few brief examples.

1. It says for example that Jesus's father Joseph had two different fathers. An obvious inaccuracy.
2. It says that Jesus was born well before the death of Herod the Great (who died in 4 BCE), while Luke tells us he was born after Herod's successor was removed from power over 10 years later.
3. It says that Belshazzar was the son of Nebuchadnezzar, when he was in fact son of Nabonidas, who was not related to Nebuchadnezzar.
4. It tells us that there were Philistines in Canaan at the time of Abraham when we know that the Philistines arrived around 1170 BCE.
5. It gives a completely invented Davidic genealogy in Luke (from Solomon to Shealtiel).
6. Matthew puts Jesus on two animals because he misunderstood Jewish poetic parallelism in Zech 9:9, while the other gospels put him on one animal.
7. In Gethsemane Jesus prays three times and comes to find his companions sleeping three times, yet there was no-one awake to record the facts.
8. Jesus was supposed to be in the earth for three days and three nights (Mt 12:40), but in fact he was only there for one day and two nights.
9. Judas either hanged himself or fell and burst his guts, but not both.
10. Etc.

Just a short list of obvious one sentence inaccuracies. Only someone who doesn't read the book would claim that it was accurate.

Ancient books don't have the exactness that one wants today. This doesn't diminish the beauty, the culture and art of the literature. It means though that one needs to appreciate the text in its own context. You can't just pick it up ignorantly and hope to understand it. And you can't depend on someone else's potted version of what a text means. You need to be able to weigh up a text philologically in order to discern its content.

And you are still playing the numbers game about how popular the bible is and how much it's been published. As I said, the devil according to your lot is much more popular than your god, so there's no reason to be impressed about how popular the bible is.

More playing of the vacuous numbers game. It's a waste of time. That one person or one billion billion believes an error doesn't change the error.

One doesn't deny a god that hasn't been shown to exist.

You've now stopped communicating Helpmabob. You've left discourse and seem to be weakly attempting to proselytize.

EarlOfLade

You DO realize that we don't believe in your biblegod nor do we believe in your biblesatan????

Your statement above is ridiculous based on that fact.

Helpmabob

I understand okay Mr K. It is pure conjecture on your part to say that the Bible does not hold the truth of the purpose behind life on earth and the existence of the universe. Your claim of Biblical falsehood, in the first place, is 100% personal opinion. It doesn’t hold water.

What? Have you actually read the Bible? Do you have any idea the vast array of cross-referencing that is available between the Bible and a variety of contemporary documents?

It’s not a history book, but books like Kings in the OT give the best verifiable history of the kings of Israel from thousands of years ago. We can also visit the places where Jesus performed miracles and where Paul ministered.

Why would no-one be able to determine when He gives us tangible benefits? I would be delighted if you would oblige and enlighten us all with your reasoning and logic on this matter Johnny, especially in how it relates to the current topic of biblical prophecy.

Although this needs to be dealt with on another thread and you omit chapter and verse references in almost all cases, I am going to answer some of your ‘Biblical contradictions’. Also, I would be interested to know how you know what happened so many years ago? If there is a discrepancy between a biblical account and another source, do you simply assume that the other source is correct? Without references it is impossible to tell what you are doing and if what you write is actually meaningful.

In either case, it’s obvious you’ve just copied them from another source onto here without actually troubling the services of your brain in the process.

Jesus was awake. Jesus was also a teacher. One of the main characteristics of a teacher is that they pass on knowledge. He talked and sometimes reprimanded His disciples for their lack of faith and He would have let them know that He had caught them sleeping thrice and in detail what it meant.

Buried on Good Friday; spending Friday, Saturday and Sunday night in the depths of the earth; before rising on Easter Monday. 1+1+1=3.

I say you are denying The God you deny says that you cannot sit on the fence.

But for you that obey me, my saving power will rise on you like the sun and bring healing like the sun’s rays. You will be as free and happy as calves let out of the stall. [Malachi 4:2] Have you ever seen the sun’s rays rise spin? Or a bunch of calves let out of the stall? This is just how it is now for christians in the New Covenant. We are elated, free to roam and God’s saving love rises on us like the sun. just exactly as Malachi prophesied it would. It has come true in my life, and the life of so many others.

As you pointed out, there are more that are even more that are seeking the temporary satisfactions provided by the world. You are right to say that, but the Bible got there before you: Go in through the narrow gate, because the gate to hell is wide and the road that leads to it is easy and there are many who travel it. [Matthew 7:13] You find the road easy as it says? And it is wide and difficult to miss. And as you say, there are many pilgrims journeying with you on that road (more than to the narrow gate that leads to life). You see how prophecy plays out and encompasses all, even yourself, spin.

You mean you claim it seems ridiculous. It depends totally on everything being just as you claim to believe it is. If you’re not 100% correct in your unfounded views on the non-existence of spiritual and divine characters, then your understanding of my statement becomes a misunderstanding.

Do you think sin satisfies? I mean a satisfaction and peace that endures? Do you get that from what the world advertises as being so sweet?

Johnny Skeptic

Please tell us how you have determined when God gives us tangible benefits. The simple truth is that that no particular Christian can ask God for any particular tangible benefit and expect to receive it. That is to be expected if the does not exist. The only kinds of blessings that anyone can expect to receive from non-existent Gods are subjective spiritual benefits. Your God exists only on paper. Please tell us if you have have determined when God gives animals tangible benefits. Why does God injure and kill innocent animals?

If you know why God frequently distributes tangible benefits to those who are not in greatest need, including to some evil people who never become Christians, and frequently withholds tangible benefits from those who are in greatest need, such as when he withheld food from the one million people who died in the Irish Potato Famine, most of whom were Christians, by all means, please tell us why God did that. While you are at it, please tell us why God sometimes kills some of his most devout and faithful followers with hurricanes, why he makes people blind, deaf, and dumb, reference Exodus 4:11, why God punishes people for sins that their ancestors committed, reference Exodus 20:5, why God ordered the death penalty for a Jew who killed a Jew, but not for a Jew who killed a slave, and why God provides information to some people who he knows will reject it, but refuses to provide information to some people who he knows would accept it if they were aware of it.

I would be delighted if you would tell us what in the world the ability to predict the future has to do with good character. Deuteronomy 13 says that evil people can predict the future. The ability to predict the future has to do with power, not character. It is impossible for a decent man to love a being like the God of the Bible. That is because he provably has poor character according to his own standards. For instance, James says that if a man refuses to provide a hungry man with food, he is vain, and his faith is dead. This makes God an uncompassionate hypocrite. God tells people to be merciful, but he endorses unmerciful eternal punishment without parole. If mercy is anything, it is forgoing eternal punishment without parole even when justice, in this case, God's justice, requires it. Otherwise, mercy is meaningless. 2 Peter 3:9 says that God is not willing that any will persish, but that is a lie. God could easily do much more than he has to help ensure that fewer people persish.

Consider the following Scriptures:

Revelation 14:9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,

10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:

11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

Revelation 9:1 And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit.

2 And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit.

3 And there came out of the smoke locusts upon the earth: and unto them was given power, as the scorpions of the earth have power.

4 And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads.

5 And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man.

6 And in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them.

Mark 14:21 The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had never been born.

Johnny: The writers who wrote those Scriptures most certainly were not inspired by a loving and merciful God. Such vicious hatred could only have come from the minds of evil men. Shame on you for being seduced by them.

spin

It would be nice if you had been honest with your responses, either honest or realistic.

Texts are liable to analysis. You are not analysing text, but trying to make it into something you can't, a representation of a reality unavailable to you. I don't necessarily need to know what happened in the past to be logical in the analysis of text.

You really do have problems about honesty.

Oh, I guess I should have realised you would take the bull approach to a red flag.

Actually, I know my bible.

The problem you are not confronting is that after the Gethsemane prayers, of which no-one but Jesus was a part of, he was taken by the band led by Judas and no-one communed with him until after the resurrection. No time for teaching, Helpmabob, but you want the text to be inerrant, so you have to fabricate some excuse to make it work no matter what the text indicates.

Very dishonest, Helpmabob. Buried Friday night after dark, risen on Sunday morning before light, ie the morning after the Sabbath. Please count what the bible indicates.

What god? You are playing with a false understanding still of the notion: the verb "deny" requires an object. If I don't know that a god or gods exist, I cannot deny something I don't know exists. Please stick to English.

What has that got to do with a god? Occam's Razor says that you must take the simplest explanation of something if it explains all the evidence. Is there any evidence about a star or the sun that is not explained in simple scientific analysis? If not, why do you need a god in the equation?

What has this got to do with gods?

Am I supposed to say wow or something, or note the fact that you are not communicating.

Uh-huh.

There is little new under the sun.

Tomorrow will be cool and cloudy with a slight chance of rain.

Here's what you ordered:

1. It says for example that Jesus's father Joseph had two different fathers. An obvious inaccuracy. Mt 1:16 and Lk 3:23, and before you come back with some crap about one really dealing with Mary, read the texts.
2. It says that Jesus was born well before the death of Herod the Great (who died in 4 BCE) Mt 2:1, while Luke tells us he was born after Herod's successor was removed from power over 10 years later. Lk 2:1-2, read in the light of Josephus A.J. 18.1.1 ("Quirinius also visited Judea, which had been annexed to Syria, in order to make an assessment of the property of the Jews and to liquidate the estate of Archelaus."), which shows when and why the census was taken, on the removal of Archelaus.
3. It says that Belshazzar was the son of Nebuchadnezzar (eg Dan 5:1), when he was in fact son of Nabonidas, who was not related to Nebuchadnezzar. This one actually asks you to read some ancient history. All you need is a book that deals with Babylon's last days before the Persian conquest to find out about Nabonidas and his son. (It was Nabonidas who was the model for Nebuchadnezzar's madness in Dan 4:28-33.)
4. It tells us that there were Philistines in Canaan at the time of Abraham (Gen 21:32) when we know that the Philistines arrived around 1170 BCE. This is in the first retelling of the Abram trying to palm off Sarai as his sister in Egypt story (Gen 12:10-20), though here it's Abraham and Sarah in Abimelech's Gerar (Gen 20:1-21:34) and there's a 3rd version with this time Isaac presenting Rebecca as his sister in Gerar to King Abimelech of the Philistines (Gen 26), each time the unsuspecting king fondles the "sister" and only to discover the truth and "pay" damages.
5. It gives a completely invented Davidic genealogy in Luke (from Solomon to Shealtiel). The Mt 1:6-13 genealogy is basically kosher, except that it omits three kings (compare 1 Chr 3:9-19), but Lk 3:27-31 goes into unchartered waters, giving a completely different line from David to Shealtiel and after Zerubbabel, they part company again, only to come back to Joseph nominal father of Jesus.
6. Matthew puts Jesus on two animals (Mt 21:1-7) because he misunderstood Jewish poetic parallelism in Zech 9:9, while the other gospels put him on one animal, eg Mk 11:1ff.
7. Judas either hanged himself or fell and burst his guts, but not both. Compare Mt 27:3ff with Acts 1:18.

Why are contradictions so sweet to fundamentalists? If it were an ancient book, it would make the study of the bible more interesting because it helps you to understand its development, but if it were the word of some good god, it would have to be perfect. But then, as it is a translation, it can never be perfect, because meaning is lost in translation.

This explains why christians have the loony idea that Mary was a virgin: it was loose translation of Isa 7:14, which talks about a young woman (Hebr: almah), who is with child (Hebr: hareh), which is translated into Greek to say a virgin (parthenos = Hebr betulah), who will conceive. To understand that she is already with child, ie not a virgin, the same Hebrew word, hareh, is found in Gen 16:11 and Gen 38:24.

A number of christian tenets are based on loose or otherwise dubious translation, but I think you've got enough on your plate for the moment.

Remember that if it is just a book, the problems are useful for study and understanding, as it is an important part of our literary heritage. You can understand some of the conditions of writing, some of the thought, some of the historical context. If it's the work of a god, it suddenly looses its cultural significance and becomes a book of rules and regulations, of inviolate doctrines and truths that one cannot contradict, for if it can be contradicted, how can it be the work of a perfect being? By hook or by crook the believer has to force the book to be correct, against nature and logic. If we get to look at the creation accounts, you'll have fun as a contortionist.

We are away from the subject that I was dealing with with you, which regards your inability to know any of what you believe because you don't have the facilities to show it objectively to yourself or others. I have pointed out that you will believe that you have the truth as earnestly as a schizophrenic will believe that s/he has the truth in delusion. But I cannot get you to attempt to show to yourself or others in an objective manner the reality of that which you believe to be real. This is the sad part: you cannot show it to yourself. You know what I mean by objective, that what you do to show it to yourself is something that others can observe from outside of your personal experience.

You have stringently ignored my attempts to ask you to give an objective reality to your beliefs. You have stringently ignored my comparisons between you and the schizophrenic, apparently unable to show that your position is different. Apparently you are not a believer in the notion that the truth will set you free.


spin

Jack the Bodiless

I haven't seen this sort of error since the guy who insisted that "AD" stands for "After Death".

Helpmabob

It says that god can indeed give the ability to anyone, not necessarily a powerful person, for the purposes of promoting the Kingdom of God. Anyone can guess correctly. But when it comes to the crunch, the wise men, without God, could not give the meaning of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream even though Daniel, with God’s help, came up with the goods [Daniel 2: 10 & 36].

There was indeed time for Jesus to tell them that they were asleep and what it meant. That took me two seconds to write, Jesus could say it in the same time.

On reaching the place, he said to them, "Pray that you will not fall into temptation." [Luke 22:40]

"Why are you sleeping?" he asked them. "Get up and pray so that you will not fall into temptation." [Luke 22:46]

I’m afraid that constitutes teaching spin.

What has that got to do with a god? Occam's Razor says that you must take the simplest explanation of something if it explains all the evidence. Is there any evidence about a star or the sun that is not explained in simple scientific analysis? If not, why do you need a god in the equation?[/QUOTE]Only God satisfies Occam’s Razor. God made Occam anyway – who is Occam to question God? It doesn’t make sense for the created to call into question the Creator.

I have taken note of these. I suggest you pick your favourite contradiction and we discuss that alongside what we’re discussing with regards to prophecy. Otherwise it becomes too far off-topic – we cannot (perhaps you think you can) solve the world’s problems so easily. If you’re really that interested in hearing my responses then I will give them. And if you are not interested, then I see little advantage to anyone in us going over similar ground to others before us and suggest we stick to the thread topic.

Do you know the Bible as well as, or better than the Pharisees did?

The book is not God. The book points to God and explains His purpose. It can do this without being fully explicable and absolutely lexicographically perfect. It proclaims the glory of God, the need and means and nature of salvation (extremely important) as well as providing examples of prophecy fulfilled, as I have shown in this thread. That’s what it’s about.

Men wrote it, but it was God breathed. It’s something of collaboration. Prophecy is something of collaboration between man and God too.

Your inconsistencies do not explain away the prophecies, spin. Divine knowledge and guidance is necessary for these to work. Human fallibility may explain away some of the inaccuracies elsewhere, but not the prophecies. And where is this knowledge found? …Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. [Colossians 3:2]

To finish, a further prophecy which I testify that I have personally tested and verified: (Christ says), “Come to Me all you who labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.” [Matthew 11:28-30]