The Bible Claims...

[cvanwey]

By studying the Bible carefully and taking it seriously.

Who other than God Himself would know how this creation came into existence? And Jesus (who is also God) and the apostles upheld that creation account as valid, true, historical, reliable, trustworthy, and perfectly accurate.

I wish these assertions were true. However, I beg to differ. I've studied the Bible. It does not appear to align with reality. If this is my honest conclusion, I cannot lie to myself, by 'ignoring' the evidence to the contrary, can I?

 

[4x4toy]

Please list the best Bible prophecy fulfilled (chapter and verse), so I may compare. TY

2 Peter 3:3

 

[Kenny'sID]

Thank you. But if 'common sense' tells me that many supernatural claimed stories from the Bible are not factual (i.e) a speaking serpent, a flood, tower of babel, man living in a giant fish, a sea parting, a talking donkey, etc..., then how might I determine which parts are actual, verses fictional?

This is not mockery. This is me wrestling with the factual 'claimed' accounts from the Bible.

Nope, I don't see it as mockery at all.

On the supernatural, a native of a far off, back woods, away from civilization country would see a radio as supernatural....just to get some perspective on that.

 

[Tree of Life]

Thank you for your response. However, in all honesty, what I'm interpreting from this reply states that if I read the Bible, I may become convinced? How might this be any different that someone from Saudi Arabia continuing the read the Qur'an, whom eventually becomes 'convinced', by the same exact means of hearing and reading?

Existentially there may not be much of a difference. Both feel convinced of the truth of their own texts. But there will be an objective difference. One is convinced that God’s Word is truth and the other is deluded by lies. There will also be situational differences produced in the lives of the individuals. Between a consistent Christian who lives out the message of the Bible and a consistent Muslim who lives out the message of the Quran, which do you find more persuasive?

 

[cvanwey]

Nope, I don't see it as mockery at all.

On the supernatural, a native of a far off, back woods, away from civilization country would see a radio as supernatural....just to get some perspective on that.

I get your analogy. But a donkey either talks, or doesn't. A sea either parts, or continues not to. A flood either happens, or does not. Regardless of interpretation, there exists no rationale to such claims. They either happened, or not.

 

[cvanwey]

Existentially there may not be much of a difference. Both feel convinced of the truth of their own texts. But there will be an objective difference. One is convinced that God’s Word is truth and the other is deluded by lies. There will also be situational differences produced in the lives of the individuals. Between a consistent Christian who lives out the message of the Bible and a consistent Muslim who lives out the message of the Quran, which do you find more persuasive?

Honestly, neither. After studying the Bible, I have concluded that many claimed events either did not happen at all, or are in stark contrast to my 'known' reality. How might I reconcile this, if being honest with myself? I cannot make myself believe something, without my 'own' necessary evidence.

Even if I happen to misinterpret 'everything', belief is the pinnacle concern. Currently, I cannot make myself believe.

 

[cvanwey]

I believe logic is necessary to know the truth because if God gave us logic its necessary its used to find out about the truth of God!

Okay, but which God? As you know full well, there exists more than one claimed God, with differing moral objectives.

 

[Tree of Life]

Honestly, neither. After studying the Bible, I have concluded that many claimed events either did not happen at all, or are in stark contrast to my 'known' reality. How might I reconcile this, if being honest with myself? I cannot make myself believe something, without my 'own' necessary evidence.

Even if I happen to misinterpret 'everything', belief is the pinnacle concern. Currently, I cannot make myself believe.

I agree that you cannot make yourself believe. None can. Faith is a gift of God given only to the elect.

 

[Steve Petersen]

I agree that you cannot make yourself believe. None can. Faith is a gift of God given only to the elect.

If it is something that God gives to some, but not to others, how can he damn anybody?

 

[chevyontheriver]

Honestly, neither. After studying the Bible, I have concluded that many claimed events either did not happen at all, or are in stark contrast to my 'known' reality. How might I reconcile this, if being honest with myself? I cannot make myself believe something, without my 'own' necessary evidence.

Even if I happen to misinterpret 'everything', belief is the pinnacle concern. Currently, I cannot make myself believe.

Are you expecting that everything is to be literal, as in a literal six day creation? There are many sorts of literature in the Bible, and they all need to be understood based on the kind of literature they are. It does sound like you have had the expectation that the Bible is a Fundamentalist textbook of science, and now you see holes in that. Fundamentalism is only about 100 years old, while Christians have been loking at the Bible about 20 times longer than Fundamentalism existed. We have not always been so literal.

 

[cvanwey]

Ok, first question

Who owns your body?

No one, I'm not property. My conscious directs actions of my body, but that may not necessary mean 'I' own my body per say.... But since this may be a directed question, I'll leave it at this for now...

You or the earth?

I'm not following?? Me, or the earth what?

TYPE "demons" backwards into Google search " Snomed "

Okay, now what?

I already know where you're going with this... You are claiming universal health signifies the end times. I've tried to read Revelation. It is very convoluted and is up for multiple interpretations...

But thnx. We can all invent answers from many books, in many ways.

 

[Danielwright2311]

I wish these assertions were true. However, I beg to differ. I've studied the Bible. It does not appear to align with reality. If this is my honest conclusion, I cannot lie to myself, by 'ignoring' the evidence to the contrary, can I?

And this is why IM asking you to play along and I know you will.

Before we can prove anything we need to prove the devil first.

We can 100 percent prove the devil here on earth.

No one, I'm not property. My conscious directs actions of my body, but that may not necessary mean 'I' own my body per say.... But since this may be a directed question, I'll leave it at this for now...



I'm not following?? Me, or the earth what?



Okay, now what?

I already know where you're going with this... You are claiming universal health signifies the end times. I've tried to read Revelation. It is very convoluted and is up for multiple interpretations...

But thnx. We can all invent answers from many books, in many ways.

Your not playing, your debating.

Its not about Proving the Bible ok? Its about proving the devil first.

So please, if you want o learn, dont debate me ok?

You have no idea what or where I was going with this.

If we can prove the devil, then the rest is History.

 

[Tree of Life]

If it is something that God gives to some, but not to others, how can he damn anybody?

Based on their wicked works.

 

[cvanwey]

If all humans have flawed reason and logic how do you know all humans have flawed reason and logic? You make quite a lot of claims that require the very same epistemic grounding you are claiming doesn't work. Solipsism should be avoided for such reasons. It also raises the question of how can we ground our cognitive faculties in anything other than God for acquiring true knowledge about reality. What else could give us faculties for acquiring true knowledge about the world?

I get it, I know. I've already admitted all of this from the jump, in the OP. But none of this gets us any closer to a most plausible reality

No one seems to be reconciling that discovered evidence, does not seem to align with many Biblical claims. So I, in all honesty, have an apparent dichotomy confronting me... Discard everything, to instead favor of my indoctrinated upbringing. Or, follow the seemingly overwhelming evidence, which leads me away from many claimed events from the Bible. Following the evidence seems to work fairly 'well' in most other circumstances...

All one can do, is proportionately follow the evidence, in accordance with the asserted claim. Yes, I know, again, this is an 'objective' assertion. I fully get that... We must all assert, think, or believe something, at some point, and I'm being honest. And yes, I again get this is yet another assertion...

If I don't believe, what will change my mind? Especially if 'my' brain needs evidence which seems to align with the rest of my known reality????

So I hope this will be the last response attempting to demonstrate the possible failure of the claimed 'objective' epistemological assertion.

Thnx

 

[Danielwright2311]

I get it, I know. I've already admitted all of this from the jump, in the OP. But none of this gets us any closer to a most plausible reality

No one seems to be reconciling that discovered evidence, does not seem to align with many Biblical claims. So I, in all honesty, have an apparent dichotomy confronting me... Discard everything, to instead favor of my indoctrinated upbringing. Or, follow the seemingly overwhelming evidence, which leads me away from many claimed events from the Bible. Following the evidence seems to work fairly 'well' in most other circumstances...

All one can do, is proportionately follow the evidence, in accordance with the asserted claim. Yes, I know, again, this is an 'objective' assertion. I fully get that... We must all assert, think, or believe something, at some point, and I'm being honest. And yes, I again get this is yet another assertion...

If I don't believe, what will change my mind? Especially if 'my' brain needs evidence which seems to align with the rest of my known reality????

So I hope this will be the last response attempting to demonstrate the possible failure of the claimed 'objective' epistemological assertion.

Thnx

Did you start this thread to learn? or did you just start it to ask for proof and mock?

Because you first asked in the first post like you wanted to know and learn.

In order to learn, you need to be more open and perceptive, if not, you are only robbing your self.

 

[cvanwey]

And this is why IM asking you to play along and I know you will.

Before we can prove anything we need to prove the devil first.

We can 100 percent prove the devil here on earth.


Your not playing, your debating.

Its not about Proving the Bible ok? Its about proving the devil first.

So please, if you want o learn, dont debate me ok?

You have no idea what or where I was going with this.

If we can prove the devil, then the rest is History.

If you can 'prove' the devil, then you would be the most famous person in the world, and you would be known by everyone. You would win a Nobel prize, and MANY philosophical debates would seize to exist. Furthermore, it would be taught in schools as fact, no different than many other claimed subjects. It would be 'common' knowledge.

So please present your overly simplistic word game to the appropriate arena.

This is not a debate. I'm not interested. But thanks anyways.

 

[Danielwright2311]

If you can 'prove' the devil, then you would be the most famous person in the world, and you would be known by everyone. You would win a Nobel prize, and MANY philosophical debates would seize to exist. Furthermore, it would be taught in schools as fact, no different than many other claimed subjects. It would be 'common' knowledge.

So please present your overly simplistic word game to the appropriate arena.

This is not a debate. I'm not interested. But thanks anyways.

No, there are devil worshipers who are famous , very famous . But you miss my point here.

You dont want to learn, you want to fight, you love to argue and fight I see and I will not be a part of you rant or argument or debate or fight.

You have no intention to learn anything, so because of this I will go away.

I was going to teach you something, but, its to late.

 

[cvanwey]

Are you expecting that everything is to be literal, as in a literal six day creation? There are many sorts of literature in the Bible, and they all need to be understood based on the kind of literature they are. It does sound like you have had the expectation that the Bible is a Fundamentalist textbook of science, and now you see holes in that. Fundamentalism is only about 100 years old, while Christians have been loking at the Bible about 20 times longer than Fundamentalism existed. We have not always been so literal.

We now have NO choice but to look in it in a completely differing way, because of science and later discovery. The honest question remains... Does the Bible remain relevant, or, does one create special circumstances to 'keep' the Bible relevant?.?.?.?

 

[cvanwey]

No, there are devil worshipers who are famous , very famous . But you miss my point here.

You dont want to learn, you want to fight, you love to argue and fight I see and I will not be a part of you rant or argument or debate or fight.

You have no intention to learn anything, so because of this I will go away.

I was going to teach you something, but, its to late.

Dang it

 

[chevyontheriver]

We now have NO choice but to look in it in a completely differing way, because of science and later discovery. The honest question remains... Does the Bible remain relevant, or, does one create special circumstances to 'keep' the Bible relevant?.?.?.?

I would put it like this: Was the way you looked at it the way Christians have always looked at it, or only how Fundamentalists have looked at it for 100 years. There is a much longer long and more interesting history of Bible interpretation that does not depend on a flat earth, a six day creation, and a cosmology taken only from the Bible. For me, I don't have to look at it in a completely different way because I have never been subject to the Fundamentalist interpretation. I take my interpretations much older than that, and those old guys were more savvy than the Fundamentalists when it comes to the Bible and natural history. The Bible is relevant because it is God speaking to Man in human words and human literary forms. It is true but not in a six day creation flat earth sort of way.