|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 15,680 Likes: 3
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 15,680 Likes: 3 |
It is simple good folks. Like Saul, you need to see the Light. I could post an image, but the non believers would find fault with that also. The gospels have several contradictory accounts of Saul's conversion experience....which was probably an epileptic seizure. Funny, I don't recall Saul's conversion being mentioned in the Gospels.
![[Linked Image from i.pinimg.com]](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/98/b6/d8/98b6d863a5f722b551cd8e1440bd2bd4.jpg) Z
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 95,696
Campfire Oracle
|
|
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 95,696 |
Real science means nothing to those minions, Jhars. Science to them means to show them a picture.,
Ecc 10:2
The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but that of a fool to the left.
A Nation which leaves God behind is soon left behind.
"The Lord never asked anyone to be a tax collector, lowyer, or Redskins fan".
I Dindo Nuffin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 30,971
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 30,971 |
Ancient writings are the witnesses because this is when the books were written. No one has problems with all the other ancient documents of the world such as Homer's Iliad and Odyssey. Yet there are far less manuscript evidence for those documents than the Bible. It's a matter of having faith that is based on fact or evidence or on your own opinions and preferences.
We have already covered that all religions cannot be equally credible because they disagree and I or you could simply make up our own.
These leaves us with which one. There is only one book that began with the inception of alphabetic writing and has been in continuous usage ever since. There is only one that has a such a large volume of fulfilled prophecies.
God has present testimony to His truth today each timeives are changed from selfishness to selflessness by Jesus Christ.
Homer's Iliad not a historical account of events either. There are multiple conflicting versions of the Iliad that evolved over time. It may have been written and re-written over a 300 year period. As for your claims the bible began with the inception of alphabetic writing, that's just silly. Egypt has a 24 character alphabetic system that predated the earliest hebrew text by 500+ years.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,640
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,640 |
Double post.
Last edited by DBT; 07/07/19.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,640
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,640 |
Outlawing Creation science was not based on science but rather upon previous liberal interpretations of the constitution. The Declaration of Independence says our rights come from our Creator who made all men equal. When Creation science is outlawed we are attacking both science and the foundation of equal rights. Our Founders were creationists.[/quote] The point of the trial was not to 'ban creation science' but determine whether creationism in the form of intelligent design is science. The defenders of intelligent design could not prove the proposition, and in fact their claim of irreducible complexity was show to be false.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,640
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,640 |
It is simple good folks. Like Saul, you need to see the Light. I could post an image, but the non believers would find fault with that also. The gospels have several contradictory accounts of Saul's conversion experience....which was probably an epileptic seizure. Funny, I don't recall Saul's conversion being mentioned in the Gospels. Brain glitch. I was thinking about contradictions in the new testament and wrote 'gospels' Acts 9: men with Saul hear a voice, but see no one. Acts 22:6-9: men with Saul saw the light but did not hear the voice.
Last edited by DBT; 07/08/19.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,994
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,994 |
However most of the others you did not respond, but you claim to have proven they do not exist. You have not done that.
You have yet to even respond to my first example about the contradictions between God in the Old and God in the New Testament. Below quoted from evidence demands a reason by Josh McDowell I sn’t the Old Testament God a God of Hate and the New Testament God a God of Love?Another of the frequent accusations against the Bible is that it contains two different conceptions of God. The Old Testament allegedly presents only a God of wrath, while the New Testament allegedly depicts only a God of love. The Old Testament contains stories of God’s commanding the destruction ofSodom, the annihilation of the Canaanites, and many other stories of God’s judgment and wrath. The accusers claim this demonstrates a primitive, warlike deity in contradistinction to the advanced teachings of Jesus to love one another and to turn the other cheek, as contained in the Sermon on the Mount. These ideas about God seem to be in direct conflict, but a moment’s reflection will show otherwise. Jesus Himself declared that the Old Testament may be summed up by the commandments to love God and love your neighbor (Matthew 22:37). He also observed that God in the Old Testament had continually desired love and mercy rather than sacrifice (Matthew 9:13; 12:7). This attitude can be seen with statements such as, “Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked… and not rather that he should turn from his way and live?” (Ezekiel 18:23, RSV). God would not have destroyed certain nations except that He is a God of justice and their evil could not go unchecked and condoned. He did intend and desire to punish them as a part of His plan, in consistency with His holy nature and jealousy for His wayfaring people. What He desires in consistency with His pure character, He does in justice, in their case, providing they have not repented and come into harmony with His nature (Jeremiah 18). In the case of the Amorites, God gave them hundreds of years to repent, yet they did not (Genesis 15:16). Noah preached 120 years to his generation before the great flood (Genesis 6:3). The proper Old Testament picture is one of a very patient God who gives these people untold opportunities to repent and come into harmony with Him, and only when they continually refuse does He judge and punish them for their evil deeds.
Contrary to some popular belief, the strongest statements of judgment and wrath in the Bible were made by the Lord Jesus Himself.In Matthew 23, for example, He lashed out at the religious leaders of His day, calling them hypocrites and false leaders, and informing them that their destiny was eternal banishment from God’s presence. In Matthew 10:34 (KJV), Jesus says that the purpose of His mission is not to unite but to divide. “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.” He goes on to say that His word will cause a father to be against his son, a mother against her daughter, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law (Matthew 10:35). We find judgment as well as love scattered very pervasively throughout the New Testament, and love and mercy as well as judgment throughout the Old Testament. God is consistent and unchanging, but different situations call for different emphases. Therefore, when the two testaments are read the way they were intended, they reveal the same holy God who is rich in mercy, but who will not let sin go unpunished. Thank you for responding and bringing your thoughts to the conversation. I still can not agree. A God of justice would not have killed innocent people including kids. Jesus never condoned anything that evil. Moses: DEUTERONOMY 2:34 At that time we took all his towns and completely destroyed them – men, women and children. We left no survivors. DEUTERONOMY 3:6 We completely destroyed them, as we had done with Sihon king of Heshbon, destroying every city – men, women and children. There sits the heart of the matter. Like a festering boil. This is the most difficult question in the Bible to answer. I’m not going to pretend to have an answer for it because I don’t know. I struggle with it as well. Your struggle has been an honest one. I am sure you have figured out that my struggle is with those who claim they have all the answers. "It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known.” ― Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space
Leo of the Land of Dyr
NRA FOR LIFE
I MISS SARAH
“In Trump We Trust.” Right????
SOMEBODY please tell TRH that Netanyahu NEVER said "Once we squeeze all we can out of the United States, it can dry up and blow away."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 15,680 Likes: 3
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 15,680 Likes: 3 |
It is simple good folks. Like Saul, you need to see the Light. I could post an image, but the non believers would find fault with that also. The gospels have several contradictory accounts of Saul's conversion experience....which was probably an epileptic seizure. Funny, I don't recall Saul's conversion being mentioned in the Gospels. Brain glitch. I was thinking about contradictions in the new testament and wrote 'gospels' Acts 9: men with Saul hear a voice, but see no one. Acts 22:6-9: men with Saul saw the light but did not hear the voice. Fair enough. Now for your 'contradictions'. The New Testament was written over a long period of time long after Christ ascended into Heaven approximately thirty years after the fact. The Epistles and Acts of the Apostles were written over time up until about the 90's AD. By the 60s AD a lot of the original eye-witnesses were dying off and those who followed The Way were getting whacked on a regular basis. The Gospel Mark is most likely the first gospel written and it was primarily directed to the the Romans. St. Mark is the patron St. of Rome today BTW. The rest of the synoptic gospels were written after Mark and it's believed that they used each others notes. St. John The Theologian wrote his gospel last. It differs from the synoptic gospels as St. John is demonstrating and making the case of Christ's divinity. The New Testament as we know it wasn't compiled until the late 300s to early 400s AD. So yes there may be some errors in detail due to copying and recopying of Epistles and notes, but that doesn't disprove the revelation of Jesus Christ and who He is. Rather it's fallible men writing down events as they remembered them. You can find the same sort of errors or perceptions of details in a modern day police report about an incident occurring within the last few hours or even a "nooz" report if they are being honest and aren't purposely making schitt up.
Z
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,640
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,640 |
[quote=DBT]
Fair enough.
Now for your 'contradictions'. The New Testament was written over a long period of time long after Christ ascended into Heaven approximately thirty years after the fact. The Epistles and Acts of the Apostles were written over time up until about the 90's AD. By the 60s AD a lot of the original eye-witnesses were dying off and those who followed The Way were getting whacked on a regular basis. The Gospel Mark is most likely the first gospel written and it was primarily directed to the the Romans. St. Mark is the patron St. of Rome today BTW. The rest of the synoptic gospels were written after Mark and it's believed that they used each others notes. St. John The Theologian wrote his gospel last. It differs from the synoptic gospels as St. John is demonstrating and making the case of Christ's divinity.
The New Testament as we know it wasn't compiled until the late 300s to early 400s AD. So yes there may be some errors in detail due to copying and recopying of Epistles and notes, but that doesn't disprove the revelation of Jesus Christ and who He is. Rather it's fallible men writing down events as they remembered them. You can find the same sort of errors or perceptions of details in a modern day police report about an incident occurring within the last few hours or even a "nooz" report if they are being honest and aren't purposely making schitt up. Whoever wrote the books and letters and whenever it was all put together by various Church Councils, it still remains that both the OT and the NT have logical inconsistencies and contradictions....the Saul/Paul conversion event as it is written and presented is contradictory. Apologists put it down to human error and uncertainty associated with these events. But if we are talking about a set of books/woks claimed to be inspired by the Creator of the universe, why do we have these errors and contradictions. The errors and contradictions should not need to be explained, they should not be there in the first place. The conversion account appears more like a epileptic fit; Quote;''Rather than hearing God talking to him, scientists in Israel have suggested Saint Paul’s revelation could have been brought about by an epileptic seizure, The Times reports. Researchers at Hadassah Medical Centre, linked to the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, have scanned the brain of a man during a seizure, while he also had visions of God and noticed a surge of activity in the organ’s frontal lobe, which is linked to a belief people are interacting with a deity.''
Last edited by DBT; 07/08/19.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,097
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,097 |
You can find the same sort of errors or perceptions of details in a modern day police report about an incident occurring within
the last few hours...
If you were up on charges, a good defence attorney would question /call into doubt and argue tooth and nail against the veracity of police reports and eyewitness claims with serious indescrepencies. . the attorney would also have the ability to put police and witnesses on the stand for cross-examination to cast further doubts as to their reliability and worth in trying to get a convicton. You would be outraged if a conviction was made on the basis of such indescrepencies and without your attorney conducting thorough cross examination, ....yet when it comes to the indescrepencies/veracity of scripture and the lack of ability to cross examine writers and witnesses from thousands of years ago Christians are more than happy to accept such as largely irrelevant when presenting their argument. In others words the relatively weak questionable standards Christians apply to forming a personal conviction towards their faith or subjective belief are not standards they would be happy or willing to accept as sufficient for conviction in a modern courtroom when they find themselves on trial.
-Bulletproof and Waterproof don't mean Idiotproof.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,989
Campfire Tracker
|
|
OP
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,989 |
Language translation?
Question: "Why does Acts 9:7 say that those traveling with Paul heard a voice, but Acts 22:9 says that they heard no voice?"
Answer: As Paul relates his conversion experience to an audience in Jerusalem, he says, “They that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me” (Acts 22:9, KJV).
However, Luke, in relating the same event, says, “The men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man” (Acts 9:7, KJV).
So, which is it? Paul says “they heard not the voice,” and Luke says they were “hearing a voice.”
First of all, the word for “voice” in these verses is the Greek word phone, which means “a sound, a tone, a speech, a voice, or a natural sound.” With such a wide-ranging definition, the context must determine the most accurate meaning of the word. Most commonly, phone is applied to a voice from God, a human, or an angel. However, phone can also refer to sounds in general. It is translated “sound” in John 3:8, “The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound. . . .” Paul uses the word to refer to the “sound” of a trumpet in 1 Corinthians 14:8.
The flexibility of phone is quite evident in Revelation 1:15, “His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice [phone] was like the sound [phone] of rushing waters.” Here, the identical Greek word is translated two different ways.
These examples illustrate how confusion can arise in the comparison of Acts 9 with Acts 22. Paul heard a voice as Jesus communicated directly with him. The men with Paul heard the voice speaking to Paul but, to them, it was just an unintelligible sound. Did they hear the voice? Yes, in the sense that they heard something. But, since they could not understand what the voice said, it was nothing more than a sound—in other words, they couldn’t really “hear” Jesus.
The ESV clears up the seeming contradiction nicely: “Those who were with me saw the light but did not understand the voice of the one who was speaking to me” (Acts 22:9). And, “They heard the sound but did not see anyone” (Acts 9:7). Not understanding the voice—but hearing the sound—is a good description of what happened.
Last edited by Jahrs; 07/08/19.
“No one in hell can ever say I went to Christ and He rejected me.
C.H. Spurgeon
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,280
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,280 |
It is simple good folks. Like Saul, you need to see the Light. I could post an image, but the non believers would find fault with that also. The gospels have several contradictory accounts of Saul's conversion experience....which was probably an epileptic seizure. Funny, I don't recall Saul's conversion being mentioned in the Gospels. Brain glitch. I was thinking about contradictions in the new testament and wrote 'gospels' Acts 9: men with Saul hear a voice, but see no one. Acts 22:6-9: men with Saul saw the light but did not hear the voice. Think about this for a bit. Can you see a way where both statements can be true? An automobile was involved in a traffic accident and the the driver took off. One witness said it was white with a blue interior. Another witness said it had a large dent on the right rear quarter panel. The first witness did not report that. Can both witnesses be telling the truth or is this an obvious contradiction?
The tax collector said: “Lord Jesus, have mercy on me, a sinner.” Jesus said he went home “justified.”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369 |
Ancient writings are the witnesses because this is when the books were written. No one has problems with all the other ancient documents of the world such as Homer's Iliad and Odyssey. Yet there are far less manuscript evidence for those documents than the Bible. It's a matter of having faith that is based on fact or evidence or on your own opinions and preferences.
We have already covered that all religions cannot be equally credible because they disagree and I or you could simply make up our own.
These leaves us with which one. There is only one book that began with the inception of alphabetic writing and has been in continuous usage ever since. There is only one that has a such a large volume of fulfilled prophecies.
God has present testimony to His truth today each timeives are changed from selfishness to selflessness by Jesus Christ.
Homer's Iliad not a historical account of events either. There are multiple conflicting versions of the Iliad that evolved over time. It may have been written and re-written over a 300 year period. As for your claims the bible began with the inception of alphabetic writing, that's just silly. Egypt has a 24 character alphabetic system that predated the earliest hebrew text by 500+ years. The point is simply whether or not a document can be verified as preserved similar to its original state. The same could be said of the annals of Tacitus. The point is that no reputable scholar disputes the original existence of these documents and they have far less manuscript evidence than the Bible--so my point remains that Bible stands above all other ancient documents in verification of authenticity. Now for the facts of alphabetic writing: Wikipedia - The history of alphabetic writing goes back to the consonantal writing system used for Semitic languages [descendants of Shem] in the Levant [eastern Mediterranean area] in the 2nd millennium BCE. Most or nearly all alphabetic scripts used throughout the world today ultimately go back to this Semitic proto-alphabet. Its first origins can be traced back to a Proto-Sinaitic script developed in Ancient Egypt to represent the language of Semitic-speaking workers in Egypt. This script was partly influenced by the older Egyptian hieratic, a cursive script related to Egyptian hieroglyphs.
Mainly through Phoenician and Aramaic, two closely related members of the Semitic family of scripts that were in use during the early first millennium BCE, the Semitic alphabet became the ancestor of multiple writing systems across the Middle East, Europe, northern Africa and South Asia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_alphabet
“Sometime during the second millennium B.C. (estimated between 1850 and 1700 B.C.), a group of Semitic-speaking people adapted a subset of Egyptian hieroglyphics to represent the sounds of their language. This Proto-Sinaitic script is often considered the first alphabetic writing system, where unique symbols stood for single consonants (vowels were omitted). Written from right to left and spread by Phoenician maritime merchants who occupied part of modern Lebanon, Syria and Israel, this consonantal alphabet—also known as an abjad—consisted of 22 symbols simple enough for ordinary traders to learn and draw, making its use much more accessible and widespread.
By the 8th century B.C., the Phoenician alphabet had spread to Greece, where it was refined and enhanced to record the Greek language.” https://www.history.com/news/who-created-the-first-alphabet
“… the modern Hebrew alphabet may be regarded as a continuation of the original alphabet created more than 3,500 years ago. The Hebrew order of the letters seems to be the oldest.” https://www.britannica.com/topic/alphabet-writing The conclusion of scholarship is that recent evidence indicates that the Hebrew Semitic alphabet is the fountain head of modern alphabetic writing--and that development occurred when the Hebrews were in Eqypt. The early proto-Sinaitic document of writing is found near Eqypt and Sinai -- so it verifies the Biblical account of the Hebrews being in Eqypt where Moses developed the Hebrew alphabetic writing which conveyed the Torah. That original Hebrew alphabet is the forerunner of the modern Hebrew. However the Egyptian hieroglyphic writing has passed into disuse.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369 |
Language translation?
Question: "Why does Acts 9:7 say that those traveling with Paul heard a voice, but Acts 22:9 says that they heard no voice?"
Answer: As Paul relates his conversion experience to an audience in Jerusalem, he says, “They that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me” (Acts 22:9, KJV).
However, Luke, in relating the same event, says, “The men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man” (Acts 9:7, KJV).
So, which is it? Paul says “they heard not the voice,” and Luke says they were “hearing a voice.”
First of all, the word for “voice” in these verses is the Greek word phone, which means “a sound, a tone, a speech, a voice, or a natural sound.” With such a wide-ranging definition, the context must determine the most accurate meaning of the word. Most commonly, phone is applied to a voice from God, a human, or an angel. However, phone can also refer to sounds in general. It is translated “sound” in John 3:8, “The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound. . . .” Paul uses the word to refer to the “sound” of a trumpet in 1 Corinthians 14:8.
The flexibility of phone is quite evident in Revelation 1:15, “His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice [phone] was like the sound [phone] of rushing waters.” Here, the identical Greek word is translated two different ways.
These examples illustrate how confusion can arise in the comparison of Acts 9 with Acts 22. Paul heard a voice as Jesus communicated directly with him. The men with Paul heard the voice speaking to Paul but, to them, it was just an unintelligible sound. Did they hear the voice? Yes, in the sense that they heard something. But, since they could not understand what the voice said, it was nothing more than a sound—in other words, they couldn’t really “hear” Jesus.
The ESV clears up the seeming contradiction nicely: “Those who were with me saw the light but did not understand the voice of the one who was speaking to me” (Acts 22:9). And, “They heard the sound but did not see anyone” (Acts 9:7). Not understanding the voice—but hearing the sound—is a good description of what happened.
Correct and we use this type of terminology all the time today. We say we heard something when we hear a noise, but when we hear a noise and cannot discern the speech we say we cannot hear the person. Again its the application of context and common sense.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369 |
Outlawing Creation science was not based on science but rather upon previous liberal interpretations of the constitution. The Declaration of Independence says our rights come from our Creator who made all men equal. When Creation science is outlawed we are attacking both science and the foundation of equal rights. Our Founders were creationists. The point of the trial was not to 'ban creation science' but determine whether creationism in the form of intelligent design is science. The defenders of intelligent design could not prove the proposition, and in fact their claim of irreducible complexity was show to be false. [/quote] Partially correct--it was disproved on the basis that science as defined by the government to be legally taught in public schools could not include religious connotations--which they said intelligent design does, because it is creation science and linked to religious connotations and hence not pure science. This is a great example where the modern court system was used by liberals to interpret law contrary to the beliefs of our founders who framed the constitution and to use an irreligious view of science to exclude anything as science that did not meet their irreligious definition. The only thing the prosecution needed to prove was that there was a link between intelligent design and creation science for it to be considered illegal to be taught in school. This was based on previous case law which declares evolutionary science pure science because it has no religious link. I knew the people on the school board and some of those who initiated the suit against the board and the school district. In a pure scientific debate without legal implications of previous liberal case law, irreducible complexity is clearly established as a fact--the most simple cell cannot exist without all its components. Even good lawyers arguing a bad case cannot disprove that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369 |
You can find the same sort of errors or perceptions of details in a modern day police report about an incident occurring within
the last few hours...
If you were up on charges, a good defence attorney would question /call into doubt and argue tooth and nail against the veracity of police reports and eyewitness claims with serious indescrepencies. . the attorney would also have the ability to put police and witnesses on the stand for cross-examination to cast further doubts as to their reliability and worth in trying to get a convicton. You would be outraged if a conviction was made on the basis of such indescrepencies and without your attorney conducting thorough cross examination, ....yet when it comes to the indescrepencies/veracity of scripture and the lack of ability to cross examine writers and witnesses from thousands of years ago Christians are more than happy to accept such as largely irrelevant when presenting their argument. In others words the relatively weak questionable standards Christians apply to forming a personal conviction towards their faith or subjective belief are not standards they would be happy or willing to accept as sufficient for conviction in a modern courtroom when they find themselves on trial. Another excellent example of skeptics trying to have it both ways: On one hand they say the evidence is dismissed unless it's contemporary to the event--hence the gospels are dismissed because they were not written in real time as the events were unfolding. Then out of the other side of their mouth they say because it is ancient information and we cannot cross examine the witnesses today so we can dismiss all the evidence. You can't have it logically both ways. You cannot ask for early evidence and then dismiss it as evidence because it is early. Allow a skeptic to argue long enough and they will invariably contradict themselves and void out the weight of their own arguments. They would fare better looking for their own contradictions rather than trying to find them in the Bible. Records of court cases are kept along with the evidence to support the judgment. We have the records of those who were hostile to the gospel accounts and who investigated those accounts and they conclusively show Jesus as a man of history. Again you cannot cross examine witnesses to the American Revolution can you ... ?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 60,833 Likes: 9
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 60,833 Likes: 9 |
It is faith for a reason.
These premises insured by a Sheltie in Training ,--- and Cooey.o
"May the Good Lord take a likin' to you"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,451
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,451 |
You can find the same sort of errors or perceptions of details in a modern day police report about an incident occurring within
the last few hours...
If you were up on charges, a good defence attorney would question /call into doubt and argue tooth and nail against the veracity of police reports and eyewitness claims with serious indescrepencies. . the attorney would also have the ability to put police and witnesses on the stand for cross-examination to cast further doubts as to their reliability and worth in trying to get a convicton. You would be outraged if a conviction was made on the basis of such indescrepencies and without your attorney conducting thorough cross examination, ....yet when it comes to the indescrepencies/veracity of scripture and the lack of ability to cross examine writers and witnesses from thousands of years ago Christians are more than happy to accept such as largely irrelevant when presenting their argument. In others words the relatively weak questionable standards Christians apply to forming a personal conviction towards their faith or subjective belief are not standards they would be happy or willing to accept as sufficient for conviction in a modern courtroom when they find themselves on trial. Another excellent example of skeptics trying to have it both ways: On one hand they say the evidence is dismissed unless it's contemporary to the event--hence the gospels are dismissed because they were not written in real time as the events were unfolding. Then out of the other side of their mouth they say because it is ancient information and we cannot cross examine the witnesses today so we can dismiss all the evidence. You can't have it logically both ways. You cannot ask for early evidence and then dismiss it as evidence because it is early. Allow a skeptic to argue long enough and they will invariably contradict themselves and void out the weight of their own arguments. They would fare better looking for their own contradictions rather than trying to find them in the Bible. Records of court cases are kept along with the evidence to support the judgment. We have the records of those who were hostile to the gospel accounts and who investigated those accounts and they conclusively show Jesus as a man of history. Again you cannot cross examine witnesses to the American Revolution can you ... ? No you can't cross examine them, but you can search for writings, manuscripts other hidden writings and piece it all together. The programming that has taken place concerning the American Revolution is just as real as the programming that has taken place concerning the Bible. The hidden writings not being accepted by Bible scholars and teachers is the same propaganda teaching as that concerning the American Revolution just to name some for instances. Deception by those who are trying to do good but have been deceived is still deception. You might want to give Lucifer more credit than you do. He didn't get the position he had while in Heaven by being stupid. And lest you think he was tossed out and dumbed down, the Bible accounts of his many times walking right in without an invite and talking to God. So not considering that Lucifer didn't deceive some of these human writers is absolute folly. 15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD OF TRUTH.
Last edited by K22; 07/08/19.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369 |
For those not on the short list to get into heaven, take heart that God is still with you in hell.
Psa 139: KJV -
7 Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?
8 If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.
This is another good example of the skeptics lack of Scriptural understanding: The word hell is used to mean grave or place of punishment. David is saying if he dies or takes his life and should he go to the grave or the abode of the wicked he will not escape the judgment of God. In the final judgment death and hell will give up their dead to stand before the Great White throne judgment to be tried for their deeds on earth. Rev.20:13 You say one is interimly punished [whilst waiting in the grave] before the white throne final judgment?- then following the white throne one is cast into the lake of fire as punishment? Why would God prematurely punish a person before his or her case was tried ? are not Both the saved and unsaved who have died , all in their graves “sleeping” until the resurrection day? and regarding the lake of Fire punishment,... thats not an eternal torture form of punishment, cause to be tortured and tormented for ever would mean one would have to be immortal...and scripture is clear that one shall suffer the 2nd Death...which to me means total annihilation. " And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death." (Revelation 20:14) "I turned you to ashes ...you shall.be no more for ever" ( Ezekiel 28) “The soul who sins shall die” (Ezekiel 18:20). “Rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matthew 10:28). John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.We are judged in this world already based on our acceptance or rejection of Christ and our eternal destiny is declared accordingly. The scriptures testify the souls of the saints leave this world to be with Christ and their bodies lie in the grave. The wicked souls go to hell and their bodies lie in the grave. In the general resurrection the souls of wicked dead are reunited with their bodies to stand before the final tribunal. The purpose of the final judgment is not to determine guilt but to show the evidence of guilt before the whole world and to execute the degree of their final sentence. All those whose names are not written in the book of life are cast into the lake of fire. The second death has never meant annihilation just like the first death never meant annihilation. The lake of fire is the second death and the wicked are cast into it where the beast and the false prophet ARE ... along with them the torment is forever. And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. 2Thess. 1:7And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, 8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; Destroyed equals an everlasting destruction of torment and separation from God.
Last edited by Thunderstick; 07/08/19.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 265
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 265 |
If the bible was truly "gods" word it wouldn't have evolved , 600 years ago the earth was flat today its round. A god would have known at the time the bible was written that it was round and not let the primitives (bible writers) believe it was flat.
|
|
|
|
|
352 members (12344mag, 160user, 10Glocks, 22250rem, 10ring1, 10gaugemag, 35 invisible),
1,727
guests, and
1,068
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,002
Posts18,481,280
Members73,959
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
