Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I think the natural exceptions exposes how nonsensical this criteria is. Some of this stuff, such as what constitutes womens clothing, is subjectively dependent on culture. I mean in Rome Jesus wore clothing akin to wearing a womens dress. Now that is arbitrarily considered in western culture as not manly.
I gave you the link to Voddie Baucham who explains it all. It is not possible that multiple men on 3 different continents from different generations using 3 different languages conspired to provide thousands of virtually exact copies saying the same things. This is before we even get into the Biblical prophesies which have all come to pass (except those who's time has not yet come i.e Revelations). Maybe you can explain the description of Christs crucifixion in Psalm 22, written 900 years before the crucifixion, and hundreds of years before crucifixion existed as a punishment? You see you need to actually study and understand the Bible rather than repeating something you heard someone else say, or an argument with zero deductive reasoning applied.
Jesus never went to Rome, I think you mean Jerusalem.
I'll just wrap this particular claim up here. You appear to think that to be a Christian you need to apply all cultural norms and Old Testament civil and ceremonial law mentioned in the Bible. All you're displaying is a complete ignorance of what the Bible teaches and how Christ fulfilled the law on his death and resurrection. I have nothing further to add to you in particular on this point, you can of course have the last word, it doesn't change anything, especially the truth.
Yeah. Jerusalem. I confused him with Peter.
As I've said previously, most differences between the vast majority of Christians are minor and most of us agree on the big ticket items. Differences in Baptism and other such things really aren't important, what's most important is that we agree that Christ is our saviour and died on the cross for our sins and the only way to the father is through him, just as he said. I'm an ex-Anglican but now a Baptist, not through any ideological differences, just because that's the path God gave me.
Claimed by whom? every Christian that ever lived? or some random Christian you once spoke to?
No, that scripture says that the Holy Spirit gives different people different gifts, not everyone discernment etc.
See here for details, you're getting the wrong conclusion because you're starting from the wrong place. The rest we can discount because your premise is false from the beginning.
It is true there are some Christians that will denominationally dig in, but that is not the majority, if it was Christianity would not survive. You can also make the same claim for any faith you care to mention, though the difference between others and Christianity is clearly one of provenance and evidence. The point should also be made that, as the Bible says, we live in a fallen world, so there are always going to be disagreements at some level. However, Christians across the world accept the modern interpretations of the Bible such as the KJV and ESV etc (which are essentially the same) and due to the continuous review process are not in conflict about this. This is a myth based on a few dissenting voices stirring up trouble. Go into any Church in my country and you will find the same Bibles, we have Ukrainians coming here now, many of them Christians, there are no discussions about denominational differences, we pray and study with them (complete with their Bibles) and they pray with us, this is what true Christianity looks like, not your agenda driven hyperbole.
Of course it doesn't. That "random article" is scholarly research on what some real, live Christians do in practice living their traditions. You know, not just what some book says but what people actually do based in part on their interpretations of that book. It's surprising you would be so dismissive of what people are actually doing in reality and in practice.
Fair point, I shouldn't have dismissed it, but it just proves there are exceptions. What's described in that article is not the norm for Christians. However, we see the wreckage from a society with virtually no morals, ethics and taboos every day, it's not going well is it.
That's incredibly convenient, but ironically he's addressing this point to a hall full of students, so what's the difference between sitting with them in this hall or watching it on a screen? nothing apart from the fact you can't ask direct questions. Attacking the source based only on the format of that source is literally the definition of not critically thinking. Of course the real reason you're not interested is that you strongly suspect it will destroy your argument using pure logic and evidence, it would indeed.
Yes, we've established you're not interested in any actual facts, just repeating nonsense.
It could not have been created any other way, if you bothered to research it you would understand why.
You're not interested in proof, I gave you an excellent video which fully explains why the Bible has to be have been divinely inspired, so please spare me that nonsense, you couldn't even be bothered to watch it and educate yourself.
Dear oh dear...I rest my case.
Hall full of students or not. I don't particularly watch videos.
if you think so.
Oh brother. Research what, the Bible?
You can't summarize a video? Is it really that difficult?
About what? I was curious, hence the asking the questions? If I'm mistaken, feel free to correct, that's kind of the point of me asking.
Long hair on me is ridiculous. It looks ridiculous, feels ridiculous, etc. I have to get my hair thinned every month and would need it to be thinned often if it was long too. My late husband LOVED long hair and in fact, I was the only woman he ever dated who had short hair and when I finally cut it again after trying for nearly a year to grow it out, my husband said, "Thank goodness, I have my wife back."
I disagree. But it's like a precious vessel.
And that is why I do not accept dating concepts of how old an artifact or fossil is. Can't ask the investigators questions. And those here, when asked questions, etc. might say take a course in evolution, etc. or call others ignorant, but can't answer questions themselves but go by what others they seem as experts are saying. When I was in college I remember asking a professor a question or two and one of them was very kind to meet me after class but I had no big interest in science at the time. Later when I was looking for God, I spoke to priests and ministers alike and didn't get much beyond a brief conversation. Until God found me and helped me. Each must seek out.
It's not half full, and how could you even know?
I already gave you the key summary, so try reading what I wrote earlier.
Clearly you haven't, because you're asking for a summary and then even ignoring it.
I already have.
You're not interested, if you were you would have understood my summary earlier and watched a simple video, you did neither and there is no justification for not watching it other than simple gaslighting.
I said "HALL" full.
What you said was someone else said something in a video, and I should watch it. And that people on different continents wrote the Bible.