Disobedience has consequences.

The Hebrew preist in Babylon, that's the time period of the OT writings and redactions. The preist class is a long line of Hebrews, generally they were the educated, literate members of the Israelite society.

LostMarbels said:

It doesn't matter if I'm ignored.

Click to expand...

So you're doing something akin to talking to yourself.

Odd... but if it comforts you in some way then go for it.

oi_antz said:

Ok, thanks, I had not seen that as a problem, but I will keep that in mind. All I know is I made about ten responses in a row this morning and it made me feel like I was overly dominant. I did this for my own comfort, but I did not know you would have a problem with it. I will consider your perspective, I think you are right, especially for those using touch screen devices.

Click to expand...

Indeed. Not all of us have three 30" displays on their desk.

Hang on, who is the promoter?

Click to expand...

At this moment, you.

Are you saying that Genesis and Acts are the same brochure? If so, I will want to argue about that. The writer of Acts should not be held accountable for the content that the writer of Genesis has produced.

Click to expand...

From where I am standing I see no delineation between them.

You have not explained why though, so at this point you seem to be trolling.

Click to expand...

I could say the same to you. I have yet to see from you reason to doubt the veracity of mainstream science.

I hope this gave you joy Please let me know if it was meant to serve another purpose too, I did not make that assumption.

Click to expand...

It made as much sense to me as the text on that link you provided. I do find mine to be funnier.

Well I will gladly shoulder the burden of proof for claims I make, if I am expecting someone to believe them, but I will not allow someone to be dishonest in order to deny that proof. However, you are actually speaking about me having to shoulder a burden of proof for claims that someone else has made, because I have chosen to believe those claims. Please explain why you think this is reasonable, because I don't yet think it is.

Click to expand...

Do you accept the claims of others without knowing how they are substantiated? All you need to do pass along that evidence. If it exists, of course.

.. plus, it is easier for me to respond to all posts if I do them in one post, because now I need to scroll through this page again to find the next post I need to refer to. The multi-quote thing, that is what it is designed for. Maybe you will just need to solve your own problems and I will mine, rather than you expect me to solve yours and still have mine.

Click to expand...

Let your conscience be your guide. Jiminy Cricket, and all that.

LostMarbels said:

The entire notion that you must accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior before he will reveal himself to you is utter nonsense. How could anyone at all that does not believe in him every come to him if that were true?

Click to expand...

From what I understand of how the brain works, it is a bypassing of the critical judgment process(es) of the brain.

Keep in mind that you are talking with someone that came to believe in Santa as an adult.

LostMarbels said:

Of course I could. I was once on your side of the debate.

You do realize this is what the devil did? He was right there with God, knew God, Jesus and all that was of God to be true. And he decided to rebel. Free will in the most extreme.

Click to expand...

Yet you cannot change this belief, or those regarding the flames I warned you of, freely.

LostMarbels said:

It doesn't matter if I'm ignored.

(Isa 55:11) So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

I'm just putting God's word out there.

Click to expand...

ToddNotTodd said:

So you're doing something akin to talking to yourself.

Odd... but if it comforts you in some way then go for it.

Click to expand...

No... actually allot of peeps like yourself are responding to me.

Davian said:

Yet you cannot change this belief, or those regarding the flames I warned you of, freely.

Click to expand...

Those flames are nothing more that false logic used to try to make your point.

Skavau said:

Assembling a deadly weapon is a specific action that, if in the wrong hands or assembled for malicious motives could cause carnage.

A belief is a conclusion of a thought or a series of thoughts. Belief is not a choice - it is a conclusion one comes to after being exposed to specific viewpoints, arguments and evidence for a position(s). Punishing someone for what they think is to punish people for something they cannot control.

Free expression is an important and mandatory aspect for a free society. The whole point of freedom of speech is to protect minority opinions. Popular opinions do not tend to require protection. Subjugating and forbidding esoteric, minority, taboo or reviled opinions causes societal stagnation, causes people to fear they may express an objectionable comment and worse than that - it decrees that the listener may not hear a certain viewpoint. That other people may decide for you what you may hear.

Click to expand...

Do you think that every opinion expressed does not cause harm? Do you think there is ever a good reason to suppress an opinion being expressed? (eg: Westboro picketing returned casualties of war).

Skavau said:

What is a "perfect government"? To me, if anything, it would be a government that succeeded in wealth creation for all its inhabitants. Everyone lives comfortably. That would represent a successful government but such a thing would not be worth it if there was no free expression or freedom of conscience.

Click to expand...

Right. Why do you believe this is not consistent with God's plan?

Skavau said:

Most of the Western World is composed of representative democracies.

Click to expand...

Can you name one? I know only of elected oligarchy.

Skavau said:

A consequence that God imposes upon non-believers. You cannot abdicate God's involvement in the existence of hell. I presume you believe him omniscient, omnipotent. He could reform it. He could remove it. He could just remove non-belief from causing hell.

Click to expand...

I believe that is His plan, but achieved by natural selection rather than force. If I believed hell was an everlasting condition, I might be responding differently to you. But the scriptures do indicate annihilation - gather the wheat and burn the chaff. I don't know how long you think chaff takes to burn, but I don't imagine it lasts forever. I do imagine that some varieties might burn longer, due to the density of stored energy in it. But I have never actually burned chaff.

Davian said:

Indeed. Not all of us have three 30" displays on their desk.

Click to expand...

I have a 19" laptop, but it is 1080p.

Davian said:

At this moment, you.

Click to expand...

Ok. Why are you interested in my presentation?

Davian said:

From where I am standing I see no delineation between them.

Click to expand...

You are not in a position then to view it correctly. Do you want help with that?

Davian said:

I could say the same to you. I have yet to see from you reason to doubt the veracity of mainstream science.

Click to expand...

I said it. It is possible that this information originated with Adam and Eve and transpired generations.

Davian said:

It made as much sense to me as the text on that link you provided. I do find mine to be funnier.

Click to expand...

Do you mean that you did not understand the purpose of the link I gave you? You asked why you need to continue hearing about Jesus in the meantime until He returns. I showed you prophecy that the time will not come until all who will condemn themselves by persecuting those who testify to the word of God have done so. That was meant to answer your question.

Davian said:

Do you accept the claims of others without knowing how they are substantiated? All you need to do pass along that evidence. If it exists, of course.

Click to expand...

The evidence is actually understanding, and I am offering that to you.

Davian said:

Let your conscience be your guide. Jiminy Cricket, and all that.

Click to expand...

Ah! You have been religious haven't you? A master of guilt!

You are assuming that I have an interest in knowing that you have wings, though this is not the case when translated to the real world. People who don't believe actually have more interest in not believing than they do in believing. You said so yourself. So, your analogies really are consistently strawmen, I will request of you again to please use real examples since we are discussing real things.

Click to expand...

...

And with this my patience has reached it's limit. I am out of this discussion.

GrimKingGrim said:

...

And with this my patience has reached it's limit. I am out of this discussion.

Click to expand...

Thank you. I think my patience in this thread has got to be a real life miracle.

LostMarbels said:

I understand completely. An accretion, an analogy, an explanation or what have you does not change the fact that I make none of the claims. I only am in agreement with the claims God has made.The bible as reviled by the holy spirit.

Click to expand...

Which bible ?

Kjv. Be right back to answer why

LostMarbels said:

No... actually allot of peeps like yourself are responding to me.

Click to expand...

We're responding that unless you can substantiate your statements they'll be ignored. Which ultimately is as fruitless as talking to yourself.

LostMarbels said:

Those flames are nothing more that false logic used to try to make your point.

Click to expand...

Your "hell" is nothing more than the "stick" in the carrot-and-stick concept of reward and punishment in generic religious terms. I see no reason to be concerned about it.

Davian said:

I see no reason to be concerned about it.

Click to expand...

.. Do you think this bit is reliable: "I see" because you said that to me before too, and you were wrong.

ToddNotTodd said:

We're responding that unless you can substantiate your statements they'll be ignored. Which ultimately is as fruitless as talking to yourself.

Click to expand...

** REPOST**

What if I told you an Atheist's idea of proving God exists is subjective?

When something is subjective, it is considered a matter of personal opinion. Truth is considered to be independent of personal opinion. That is to say, personal opinion cannot change the truth. Any position that is held that is not unchangeable, immutable, or eternal is opinion; it is not truth.

When someone says, “prove to me that Christianity is true.” They are not asking you proclaim, “In my opinion, Christianity is true.” Instead, they are asking you to prove to them that Christianity is true despite their opinion that Christianity isn’t true. The problem is, the atheist’s burden of proof is an opinion, and one should not test truths using opinions because truths are always true independently of individual opinion or personal conviction.

Now that a description of truth has been given, we should look at the implications of the following statement: “Christianity is true.” When we say Christianity is true, we mean that it is absolutely true. This, of course, means that Christianity is true independently of any individual’s opinion. This, of course, can be said of any true proposition.

When the atheists say, “prove to me that God exists” or “prove to me that Christianity is true,” many of them have a different burden of proof in mind. One might ask, “If God exists, why doesn’t he heal amputees?” Another will ask, “Why is it that God won’t just come down and show himself to me?” Another may say, “If God exists, he can prove himself to me by ridding the world of evil and suffering.” Perhaps another atheist will ignorantly say, “If God exists, he would be testable by the scientific method.” Different atheists will give different levels and conditions concerning what constitutes as meeting the burden of proof.

This is, unfortunately for the atheist, where their request to prove that Christianity is true falls apart. Truth is immutable, unchangeable, and absolute, but the burden of proof that each atheist says they require is completely subjective and nothing more than personal opinion. If we are to be justified in believing in any proposition, we must have a concrete way to test the truth of propositions. A subjective standard will not do. If the burden of proof for any truth is subjective, then anyone can be justified in believing in any proposition, including Christianity, as long as the burden of proof has been met for that individual. If the burden of proof is subjective, then a universal truth cannot be considered universal, rather, all “truths” are a matter of personal opinion.

If the atheist is to hold that we ought to test the truth of propositions in a subjective manner, then no proposition is ultimately provable. The epistemological implications on the atheist worldview is devastating. The obligation that the atheist sets forth for us to meet their own subjective burden of proof destroys their own epistemology. If their epistemology falls, then so too does their objection concerning their burden of proof not being met for Christianity. After all, if no proposition is provable beyond opinion, then all known propositions are opinions. If all propositions are opinions, then the only consistent conclusion concerning epistemology is that no one can know anything at all, thus, such a way of testing propositions leads to skepticism.

Any Christian that has had a discussion with an unbeliever concerning the truth of Christianity has probably been told that it is the Christian’s task to prove the truth of Christianity to an unbeliever. The atheists’ ideas concerning how Christianity might be validated or invalidated are utter nonsense.

First, setting out a Biblical foundation will be appropriate. 1 Peter 3:15 is often quoted, “but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect,”[acp footnote]1[/acp] Christians are to give a defense of their faith, but they are not obligated to prove to someone else that Christianity is true. Too often, Christians allow atheists to set the parameters concerning what the Christian’s task is in an apologetic situation. We should not base our apologetic on the atheist’s demands, rather, we should focus on the task that God has given us. We are to set scripture as our authority, and give a defense that is consistent with the scriptures.

We are also obligated to show the absurdity of any worldview that is to stand in opposition to God’s authority. 2 Corinthians 10:4-5 says, “For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ.” From these verses we have our justification of using logical arguments that show the absurdity of any worldview that stands in opposition to God’s authority.

None of the aforementioned verses, nor any other verses in The Bible, say that the Christian’s task is to convince or prove to someone that Christianity is true. In fact, The Bible clearly teaches that people only come to belief by the power of God himself. For instance, John 6:44 says, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.” Matthew 16:17 also says, And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.” There are numerous verses in scripture that teach that God is the one who causes belief in an individual but these two examples will suffice. If it is true that God directly causes belief, then it is not the Christian’s job to attempt to cause belief in Christianity within an unbelieving individual. Instead, our job is to proclaim the truth of Christianity and destroy any worldview that dares to raise its hand against God’s authority. The idea that we have to prove Christianity to an unbeliever assumes a false theology that is not found within scripture. It is God who has given us our task to proclaim the truth of the Gospel, we ought to follow the criteria that God has set forth instead of the criteria given by the unbeliever.

Davian said:

Your "hell" is nothing more than the "stick" in the carrot-and-stick concept of reward and punishment in generic religious terms. I see no reason to be concerned about it.

Click to expand...

I didn't create hell. We have been down this road. You can chose to believe what you wish.

GillDouglas said:

God is not a big fluffy teddy bear that is all sugar coated rainbows and hugs. There are some Christians that might preach this, but then they're changing the Bible to fit them instead of changing themselves to fit the Bible. God is just like an earthly parent who wants His children to obey. Just like a parent has a need for discipline when it comes to a child's obedience, the same applies to the big picture. We are children of God regardless of your belief, and you are not exempt from making mistakes regardless of how 'good' you think you are. If you screw up as a kid, do you not ask your parents for forgiveness? When they forgive you, do you then not except it? What causes you such heart hardheartedness that you are unwilling to treat your Heavenly Father the same?

God's wrath is real, and it will pour out on those who refuse to accept his forgiveness. God is a jealous God, and He does not want us worshiping anything over Him. If you do not believe in Him, than you believe in something else. A false idol. The new false idols of this world are money, property, self, food, celebrities, etc. When we love something worldly more than God we are living in sin. We must love God, each other, and put our faith in Him. He has chosen us, and we should be thankful. Follow the rules of the loving parent who created us, and remain obedient to the Word of God. "For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God." (1 Peter 2:15-16)

Click to expand...

If you are spending your energies to change yourself, as you say in the bolded statement, you are not living in the Spirit, but in the flesh. And, those who live by the flesh cannot please God. No doubt, it is somewhat pleasing to the individual in a general puffing up of the self. But, it's beyond worthless to God. I realize that isn't what most people believe. But it is what Paul teaches in Romans. The works we do to change ourselves are nothing more than filthy rags. We are changed not through strength of will, nor obedience to a list of dos and don'ts. But through faith. John doesn't say that our victory is in our ability to change ourselves to fit the Bible. Rather, he says, "This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith".