I am only familiar with American courts and they have nothing to do with the BibleGoing to court must be very scary then
Ken
Upvote
0
I am only familiar with American courts and they have nothing to do with the BibleGoing to court must be very scary then
You might help me understand it better then. What do you think is deficient about the statement I made?I still don't believe equal rights is the issue
If you choose not to believe a statement of fact, then you are dismissing the fact. I don't know how your skepticism does that, you are best qualified to investigate that question.How does my skeptism dismis the facts?
If you witness it, you will generally believe that it is true. Do you think the witnesses were hallucinating every time they were with Jesus?Their faith may be sincere but IMO the problem with faith is there is no means of establishing the truth
I think he contested that in the first two sentences of #348.Because that is what he believes
Ken
I understand what you are saying, but when I look at the results of God allowing Adam to fail you gotta ask; what desire did God have in mind? It's been 6000 years already and we don't see nothing good yet.
Ken
I don't understand what this has to do with the conversation. Please explainBut they have accusers.
Equal rights may be an issue in a round-about way, but when someone punches another person in the face or shoplifts, or what-ever sin they might commit, I don't think denying equal rights is what is going through their heads.You might help me understand it better then. What do you think is deficient about the statement I made?
What fact have I dismissed?If you choose not to believe a statement of fact, then you are dismissing the fact. I don't know how your skepticism does that, you are best qualified to investigate that question.
I am not talking about the people who wrote about Jesus, I'm talking about those who choose to believe what was written about him.If you witness it, you will generally believe that it is true. Do you think the witnesses were hallucinating every time they were with Jesus?
you said that you didn't see a difference between an accuser and the personification of evilKen-1122 said:I don't understand what this has to do with the conversation. Please explain K
These are just examples of God putting out fires he allowed to start. If he hadn't allowed the fire to start in the first place; if he didn't allow Satan in the garden in the first place, the man would not have been a drug addict in the first place, the young couple would not have had any problems, and all the rest of the problems would not have existed for God to fix. I don't see the advantage of God allowing Satan in the garden; do you?I had to smile when I read "we don't see nothing good yet." My first response is "Speak only for yourself!"
In my tiny little slice of the world I have personally seen a shattered marriage rebuilt, a drug addled man find joy and satisfaction in knowing God, a young couple - having been only married for a few weeks and ready to quit - hold their marriage together until it was strong, a man dying slowly of an incurable disease facing death with hope, a woman horribly abused find healing, and the list goes on. Every one of these cases would disagree with your assessment. Personally, I have found the joy and pleasure of being fully known, fully accepted, and embraced by the Coolest Being of the universe.
The fact that Jesus lived a "sin free" life without being a robot means it is possible to live sinless and still have freewill. Would you agree? My question is, why didn't God make us with the ability and desire to live sinfree like Jesus.I don't think God did create us with the desire to sin. He created us with the potential to sin. We did. He made a way back to Himself to buy back what we have lost.
A robot can be programmed to do certain tasks exactly. God didn't want us to be robots. He has taken the suffering on Himself and suffers alongside us til that place in history when He will live with us.
What would we be if we didn't have freedom of choice?
Nice to meet you, Ken-1122.
No it probably doesn't occur to them at the time, but that is my point. If they were on the receiving end of their actions, they would probably feel that their rights had been disrespected.Equal rights may be an issue in a round-about way, but when someone punches another person in the face or shoplifts, or what-ever sin they might commit, I don't think denying equal rights is what is going through their heads.
You should probably tell me, because we haven't covered that yet. Why do you believe the witnesses were not truthful?What fact have I dismissed?
Who are you talking about then? I am talking about the witnesses that recorded their observations.I am not talking about the people who wrote about Jesus, I'm talking about those who choose to believe what was written about him.
Ken
No! I said I don't see the difference between the Devil of the Old Testament and the Devil of the New Testament. You are the one claiming accuser and personification of evil; I never agreed to that.you said that you didn't see a difference between an accuser and the personification of evil
Okay I will tell you. Thus far I have have not dismissed any facts.You should probably tell me, because we haven't covered that yet.
Because what they say doesn't sound realistic.Why do you believe the witnesses were not truthful?
Then you are talking about the wrong people. The witnesses did not need faith, they had proof of what Jesus said! This conversation is about the problem I have with faith.Who are you talking about then? I am talking about the witnesses that recorded their observations.
You just did it:Okay I will tell you. Thus far I have have not dismissed any facts.
If you were to tell someone 500 years ago that everyone in the world is capable of comminicating with each other in real time, that would have sounded unrealistic too. Only when it becomes conceivable can you understand how it can be so. As the world continues to grow in knowledge, understanding and technology, this keeps happening. Things that seemed improbable or impossible are becoming possible and understood. Once you understand that God really does know everything about His creation and has it under control, you will understand how easy it is for Him to do things that we might think are unrealistic. They are called miracles and a lot of people actually experience them.Because what they say doesn't sound realistic.
But you surely don't think that the disciples did not have faith? Go back to #356 and you will see why I have been talking about the witnesses. You have said that they were dishonest, and I have said that I don't accept that. I don't accept that because it is illogical. These people believe they are testifying about God and must answer to Him for everything they have said and done. Why would they go and lie about it?Then you are talking about the wrong people. The witnesses did not need faith, they had proof of what Jesus said! This conversation is about the problem I have with faith.
Ken
Accurate and personification were at the heart of my original comment. Check up on satan in the OT - he simply does not look like "the devil" of nt and subsequent thought. His role is one of accusing - that's what the word satan means.Ken-1122 said:No! I said I don't see the difference between the Devil of the Old Testament and the Devil of the New Testament. You are the one claiming accuser and personification of evil; I never agreed to that. Ken
Instead of telling me I am dismissing facts, why dont cha tell me which facts I am dismissing?You just did it:
Believing what might happen in the future is different than what is supposed to have happened in the past.If you were to tell someone 500 years ago that everyone in the world is capable of comminicating with each other in real time, that would have sounded unrealistic too. Only when it becomes conceivable can you understand how it can be so. As the world continues to grow in knowledge, understanding and technology, this keeps happening. Things that seemed improbable or impossible are becoming possible and understood.
They had proof of what Jesus said; not faith. The faith comes from those who believe what they said about JesusBut you surely don't think that the disciples did not have faith?
Do you know the difference between being dishonest (or lying) and not telling the truth? I never said they were dishonest.Go back to #356 and you will see why I have been talking about the witnesses. You have said that they were dishonest, and I have said that I don't accept that. I don't accept that because it is illogical. These people believe they are testifying about God and must answer to Him for everything they have said and done. Why would they go and lie about it?
The God of the Old Testament (Yawah) and the God of the New Testament (Jesus) appear to be different as well yet they are the same!Accurate and personification were at the heart of my original comment. Check up on satan in the OT - he simply does not look like "the devil" of nt and subsequent thought. His role is one of accusing - that's what the word satan means.
Jesus' resurrection.Instead of telling me I am dismissing facts, why dont cha tell me which facts I am dismissing?
Ok, I understand your point.Believing what might happen in the future is different than what is supposed to have happened in the past.
Also from believing what Jesus said to them. They did have faith.They had proof of what Jesus said; not faith. The faith comes from those who believe what they said about Jesus
Not in this context, can you explain it for me?Do you know the difference between being dishonest (or lying) and not telling the truth? I never said they were dishonest.
Ken
Jesus' resurrection.
If someone gives wrong information out of ignorance, that is not a lie, that is a mistake. If someone knows the truth but purposly gives wrong information, that is a lie. I believe many of those who made claims of Jesus were either tricked or convinced that it was the truth. I believe some lied; like those who claimed to see him resurrect from the dead; I believe they had an agenda and were willing to lie to foreward it.Not in this context, can you explain it for me?
I don't accept that, you can't say that it is a fact that there is no life on other planets because it hasn't been proven. Instead, the resurrection is a fact that has only been revealed to a selection of people, and we either accept it for what it is or we don't.The resurrection of Jesus has not been proven to have happened; thus it is not a fact.
Do you think the Christian witnesses were atheist, and do you think the two Roman guards really did fall asleep on duty?If someone gives wrong information out of ignorance, that is not a lie, that is a mistake. If someone knows the truth but purposly gives wrong information, that is a lie. I believe many of those who made claims of Jesus were either tricked or convinced that it was the truth. I believe some lied; like those who claimed to see him resurrect from the dead; I believe they had an agenda and were willing to lie to foreward it.
Ken