Noah's Ark

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Oh my! Well, if WIKIPEDIA says it I better stop being an atheist!

YEAH! YES ! HALLELUYAH !

IF, if, IF another soul gets saved all the angels in heaven REJOICE !

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

truth

seek

 

[Subduction Zone]

That is understandable. If not led by the Holy Spirit study isn't much good, from a spiritual point of view. God grants understanding to those he calls and those who study as a way to seek him. The true is hidden from unbelievers.

1 Corinthians 2:6-8 King James Version (KJV)

6 "Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:

7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:

8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory."

Defensive verses that attempt to explain the flaws in the Bible are not convincing at all. Either something is true or not.

 

[AV1611VET]

But I see that both are of the Jesus as myth school, and I agree.

Does this Egyptian school believe Jesus never existed, or only that His divinity is a myth?

"Jesus as myth" doesn't give enough information.

 

[Subduction Zone]

seek

I have, and it appears that I have found.

Does this Egyptian school believe Jesus never existed, or only that His divinity is a myth?

"Jesus as myth" doesn't give enough information.

Who cares? I don't take them very seriously at all. Why would you?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Typical scientist, aren't you?

Typo/ Clarification/ of inadvertant use common meaning understanding of "Typical"...

A couple decades ago, or more, YHWH showed (unexpectedly)

nothing is "Typical".

Even if the same thing happens the same way every day for ten years, or fifty years,
to think of it as "Typical" sort of presupposes NOT a LIVING BREATHING CREATOR in charge of all things all of the time as He Pleases --

like a stereotype, we think (or used to think) everyone of a certain height, or country, or religion,
(especially after meeting with/ knowing so many of them so many years)
thinks "THIS WAY",
or
IS "THIS WAY",
and
"WON't CHANGE" ......... so typical..... but then,
when YHWH intervenes,
when GRACE is poured out,
when MERCY is ABUNDANTLY POURED UPON THEM,
their eyes are opened,
their mind is granted understanding,
they are born again,
they are given a new heart !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

not typical. -------- ASTONISHING MIRACLE OF LIFE FROM YHWH!

Yes, it is still called typical (a lot of standard things in life) in society.

But, no, nothing is "typical" with a MIRACLE WORKING HOLY CREATOR SOVERIGN over all the univers and all mankind....
according to Him.

He changes people. Newness of life. NEW and FRESH LOVINGKINDNESSES every morning.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I have, and it appears that I have found.

Very clearly and truthfully, no.

 

[Obliquinaut]

LOL ... now we're gonna Arab phone 'modern scholars of antiquity' to 'New Testament scholars'?

Typical scientist, aren't you?

My apologies for not stating it perfectly. ANY SCHOLARS whatsoever.

Honestly it really doesn't matter to me. I apologize for even attempting to explain my position. Apparently this is really something that has your panties in a bunch. Geezly pete!

You WILL NOTE I gave you credit for raising a good point, just not necessarily important in this present discussion since I'm not really wedded one way or the other. I'll be OK with going with the concensus. It simply doesn't matter much to me either way.

 

[AV1611VET]

Who cares? I don't take them very seriously at all. Why would you?

Maybe they bow to consensus of opinion and think Jesus was just a man?

What's the consensus of opinion on Plu how we got our moon?

 

[AV1611VET]

It simply doesn't matter much to me either way.

Why?

Do you pick and choose what consenses matter?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Very clearly and truthfully, no.

Wrong again, but then what else is new?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Defensive verses that attempt to explain the flaws in the Bible are not convincing at all. Either something is true or not.

I guess one has to prove it one way or the other.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Maybe they bow to consensus of opinion and think Jesus was just a man?

What's the consensus of opinion on Plu how we got our moon?

When it comes to matters of faith I don't think anyone "bows to consensus of opinion".

And how many times do you need to be told that various hypotheses have been eliminated and the one that still exists is the collision model?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I guess one has to prove it one way or the other.

Perhaps, but there is no getting around the flaws in the Bible if one is honest with oneself.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

This is very interesting. I've heard variants of it so many times. It basically boils down to: If you believe before you study you will be able to make the study fit the belief.

I am saddened that God built some of us with the desire to LEARN and THEN understand or believe.

I wish that theists would drop this line of reasoning though because what it boils down to is: "I have the proper confirmation bias and you don't, ergo I did it right".

TRUTH shouldn't need you to believe it before you study it. But then, perhaps I hold truth to a higher standard than certain all-knowing beings.

I knew intuitively that lying, stealing, committing adultery, conspiracy, dishonoring parents, was wrong before I ever opened a bible. The rest I confirmed as I went along (and still confirmin").

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Perhaps, but there is no getting around the flaws in the Bible if one is honest with oneself.

Man put the flaws in there, but we can see through them. John has something to say about those who did.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Man put the flaws in there, but we can see through them. John has something to say about those who did.

Then why quibble about the flood that we know did not happen?

 

[Obliquinaut]

Why?

Do you pick and choose what consenses matter?

This is interesting I suppose. I am fascinated to learn that the majority of these scholars now take the historicity of Jesus to be accurate. As such I'm willing to change my view. Not sure why this is so problematic for you.

I'm open to considering.

I'm not particularly convinced but only because I really don't follow it that much. I've read more than just Wikipedia and will likely spend some time reading more on this topic. I'm willing to go with the majority consensus opinion, so long as it seems reasonable. And since I'm not a Christology scholar I'm open to reading more.

If I were debating against a person who had ZERO understanding of say, Global Climate Change, I would make the argument that barring any actual knowledge or understanding of the technical topic one would be wisest to go with the consensus of the professionals in that area.

As such in this case I'm going with what I read which questions the reality of Christ (or rather the lack of contemporary documentary evidence) which seems reasonable. But if the consensus is such that it is largely agreed among professional scholars in this area then I'm more than happy to read that information and until that time I will gladly default to their consensus. It would be irrational for me to do otherwise.

(I sense this really scares or bothers you. Your whole tone and demeanor has changed with this topic. And here I thought if anything was going to set you off it would be my general failure to believe that Jesus was all God/all Man and savior of the earth. But ironically it is the thing that really doesn't matter much either way to me.)

 

[Obliquinaut]

Defensive verses that attempt to explain the flaws in the Bible are not convincing at all. Either something is true or not.

Note how "the truth is hidden from unbelievers" caveat in there. It's a pretty snazzy set up for keeping those among us who kind of like the brains God gave us from coming to Him.

One would think that God, being all-knowing, would see the problem here for some of us. But perhaps we were created to be punished.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Note how "the truth is hidden from unbelievers" caveat in there. It's a pretty snazzy set up for keeping those among us who kind of like the brains God gave us from coming to Him.

One would think that God, being all-knowing, would see the problem here for some of us. But perhaps we were created to be punished.

And yet they will quote the Bible elsewhere to say that "they are without excuse". One cannot have it both ways.