Are you a liar?

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

on the 3rd day, after Judah and Ephraim "acknowledge"/confess their guilt", after being crushed in judgment, such as 6 million Jews killed in the 2nd World War, they will be healed,

6 million Jews didn’t deserve Hitler because some supposed ancestors made God irritable.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Let's take this a step at a time. What do you and 2.2 Billions of other Christians in Christendom assert to be True in the Scriptures/Bible?

Well, l can only speak for myself. IMO, the scriptures, from Genesis to Revelation, were inspired by God, and are inerrant.

If you believe the same, then it should be possible to discuss our differences using scripture as our standard of truth.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Assuming the Gospels are true at face value, which is dubious given the many differences of detail and content. And there's reason to doubt given the supernatural goings on, which suggests myth.


Which is a rational idea to reject since it isn't consistent with what we know of reality, and the lack of facts that these ideas are true. No one can point to sin as a real thing outside of Christian lore.

Yet Christians have changed the meaning of the OT in many ways, from literal interpretations of Genesis to what salvation and sin means. I suggest we all accept how the Jews interpret the OT since it is their book, not Christians.


Yet sin still exists. So what was washed away, exactly? Why did God create the circumstance of sin in the first place only to try to eliminate it by impregnating a women and then having him executed?

And the resurrection seems to invalidate the sacrifice of Jesus. When you sacrifice life for something to redeem tit for tat, the sacrifice had better stick. If you sacrifice a virgin to the volcano god, but the virgin shows up at the party the next weekend, well the volcano god is going to feel cheated.

In an earlier post, l asked you about Psalms 22-24, but got no response.

If prophecy exists, then it will be hard to deny the existence of God. Do you agree?

 

[Redemptionsong]

God specifically said that He is punishing a man for whom He has found no fault. Jesus broke several. That he countered with smart mouth responses doesn’t change that.

Which laws do you think Jesus broke?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well, l can only speak for myself. IMO, the scriptures, from Genesis to Revelation, were inspired by God, and are inerrant.

If you believe the same, then it should be possible to discuss our differences using scripture as our standard of truth.

If by inerrant you mean "factual" then you are claiming that God is evil and incompetent. Are you sure that you want to do that? Meanwhile in the real world we know that the stores of Genesis are myth. Which leads to the question why would you believe that the Bible is all meant to be taken literally? It does not even make that claim.

 

[Subduction Zone]

In an earlier post, l asked you about Psalms 22-24, but got no response.

If prophecy exists, then it will be hard to deny the existence of God. Do you agree?

Ooh, poorly asked question. The Bible has quite a few examples of failed prophecies. It also has parts where history was written as prophecy. And then it has overly vague prophecies which are automatically failed prophecy.

Which of these do you think is evidence for God?

 

[Fallen Prophet]

I say this to believers who have invested heavily in their faith.

Aw I see - it's your idea. Got it.

It reminds me of people who claim that "the science" is on their "side".

They tend to self-validate their beliefs for no better reason than they believe in God, and they believe they have the truth.

So - basically like anyone with an opinion on anything?

If they do, and they can believe and justify any absurd thing they want (which many theists do) then we can surmise they believe god approves their thinking and is thus on their side of social and political issues.

Again - this can be said of anyone - not just theists.

I am again reminded of those with "the science" on their side who felt justified in harassing people who disagreed with them on masks - even to the point of assault and battery.

These same people would publicly shame or fire those who didn't want to put experimental "vaccines" in their bodies.

You remember that thing that didn't stop anyone from getting or spreading COVID?

What "absurd things" are you even talking about?

Things like waiting until marriage to have sex - defend the lives of the unborn - claim that there are biological differences between men and women - that everyone has the right to self-preservation - and believe that all people have inalienable rights granted to them by their Creator?

Even the KKK thinks God agrees with them, so God is on their side, according to their thinking.

The KKK? You mean that group of five people?

I'm sure the leader of every nation has - at one point or another - invoked the name of some god to justify what they are doing.

Of course no Gods are known to exist, and theists decide for themselves that God approves and agrees with their beliefs, even if the believers are nuts and immoral.

If there are no gods - then there are no absolutes - like morality.

All you would have are secular laws - and no law forbids from being "nuts" or "immoral" - as long as they operate within the confines of said secular laws.

There is no God test. The believer decides.

You mean to say that you don't believe that there is a God test.

You are choosing to believe that probably based on some system of observation by the five senses.

You are no different than anyone who believes that God is on their side.

I don't. I'm not convinced any Gods exist. I was being sarcastic and illustrating my point.

Your point being that no one is perfect and that people can be wrong and do bad/immoral things even if they claim to be good/moral?

That is a fact that most people learn very early on in life.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Aw I see - it's your idea. Got it.

It reminds me of people who claim that "the science" is on their "side".

So - basically like anyone with an opinion on anything?

Again - this can be said of anyone - not just theists.

I am again reminded of those with "the science" on their side who felt justified in harassing people who disagreed with them on masks - even to the point of assault and battery.

These same people would publicly shame or fire those who didn't want to put experimental "vaccines" in their bodies.

You remember that thing that didn't stop anyone from getting or spreading COVID?

What "absurd things" are you even talking about?

Things like waiting until marriage to have sex - defend the lives of the unborn - claim that there are biological differences between men and women - that everyone has the right to self-preservation - and believe that all people have inalienable rights granted to them by their Creator?

The KKK? You mean that group of five people?

I'm sure the leader of every nation has - at one point or another - invoked the name of some god to justify what they are doing.

If there are no gods - then there are no absolutes - like morality.

All you would have are secular laws - and no law forbids from being "nuts" or "immoral" - as long as they operate within the confines of said secular laws.

You mean to say that you don't believe that there is a God test.

You are choosing to believe that probably based on some system of observation by the five senses.

You are no different than anyone who believes that God is on their side.

Your point being that no one is perfect and that people can be wrong and do bad/immoral things even if they claim to be good/moral?

That is a fact that most people learn very early on in life.

Wow! You are still getting all of your facts about Covid wrong. And the only people I saw reacting violently about masks were those that were opposed to them. Perhaps everything in your post is wrong.

 

[F1fan]

In an earlier post, l asked you about Psalms 22-24, but got no response.

If prophecy exists, then it will be hard to deny the existence of God. Do you agree?

It had better be verifiable prophesy. It certainly can't be a second edition of texts being written long after the first edition was written, and the second edition is about some unverifiable stories that if true seem to verify the prophesies. The New Testament certainly doesn't convince any critical thinkers that is was showing OT prophesies came to pass. NT writers and editors had plenty of centuries to manufacture stories that seem to fit the narrative of how Christians wanted to interpret the OT. Jews reject these interpretations and the NT. That's very important evidence right there. That's reason to reject how Christians interpret the OT from the start. The OT does not belong to Christians, but they took it for their own purposes.

If the OT had verses that gave a date, and names, and circumstances that could in no way be predicted or manufactured (like the New Testament stories) then it would be truly miraculous and indicate some divine influence.

As it is the NT and Christian interpretations of it are highly manufactured and offer no way to verify there is any special influence. The story of Jesus is highly problematic factually, and just absurd at face value. The claim of salvation is not believable.

So, you offer no valid prophecies, thus no necessity to assume a God exists. So as a rational thinker I have no reason to assume any God exists including your version.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It had better be verifiable prophesy. It certainly can't be a second edition of texts being written long after the first edition was written, and the second edition is about some unverifiable stories that if true seem to verify the prophesies. The New Testament certainly doesn't convince any critical thinkers that is was showing OT prophesies came to pass. NT writers and editors had plenty of centuries to manufacture stories that seem to fit the narrative of how Christians wanted to interpret the OT. Jews reject these interpretations and the NT. That's very important evidence right there. That's reason to reject how Christians interpret the OT from the start. The OT does not belong to Christians, but they took it for their own purposes.

If the OT had verses that gave a date, and names, and circumstances that could in no way be predicted or manufactured (like the New Testament stories) then it would be truly miraculous and indicate some divine influence.

As it is the NT and Christian interpretations of it are highly manufactured and offer no way to verify there is any special influence. The story of Jesus is highly problematic factually, and just absurd at face value. The claim of salvation is not believable.

So, you offer no valid prophecies, thus no necessity to assume a God exists. So as a rational thinker I have no reason to assume any God exists including your version.

My favorite prophecy is the Tyre prophesy. It is so wrong that it affected scholarship for centuries after the fact.

 

[F1fan]

Aw I see - it's your idea. Got it.

It reminds me of people who claim that "the science" is on their "side".

Science is on everyone's side. Christian extremists don't like a lot of science because it interferes with their beliefs.

So - basically like anyone with an opinion on anything?

Well reasoned and fact-based opinions are valuable. Opinions based on feelings or tradition, or disinformation like Qanon are not only worthless, but toxic. This is why reason is important. Its why education is important. It's why a good reputation for being rational is important.

Again - this can be said of anyone - not just theists.

I am again reminded of those with "the science" on their side who felt justified in harassing people who disagreed with them on masks - even to the point of assault and battery.

These same people would publicly shame or fire those who didn't want to put experimental "vaccines" in their bodies.

You remember that thing that didn't stop anyone from getting or spreading COVID?

What "absurd things" are you even talking about?

Well you seem to be one of those people who think Fauci is evil, and that masks infringe on person freedom, and that vaccines aren't safe or effective. Am I wrong?

If I am correct then you are a victim of right wing disinformation.

Things like waiting until marriage to have sex - defend the lives of the unborn - claim that there are biological differences between men and women - that everyone has the right to self-preservation - and believe that all people have inalienable rights granted to them by their Creator?

Hey knock yourself out. But what is hypocritical is those insisting they don want government telling them to wear masks for public safety but are fine with government forcing women to give birth to a child ever if raped. No freedom to feel whatever gender a citizens desires, because that is government's law to impose.

Let's note that the inalienable rights you cite here are for humans to set whatever laws they want for self-governance, and that means that humans assume a responsibility to be responsible for their laws and behavior within and for the benefit of a collective society. It is not about a feral community of wild humans who do whatever they want.

The right wing wants all the freedom, but none of the responsibility for freedom. Have you mentioned a single thing about your obligation to the society you live in? No, not a word.

The KKK? You mean that group of five people?

Did you not know that the KKK had millions of members back in the 1920's? Do you understand why the KKK burned a big cross as a symbol of their devotion to Christian beliefs?

I'm sure the leader of every nation has - at one point or another - invoked the name of some god to justify what they are doing.

Sure, every nation and people that act in the name of God have God on their side. That is both the good and evil. It's almost as if a God doesn't exist, or the God is very confused.

If there are no gods - then there are no absolutes - like morality.

There are moral absolutes that function as biological advantages. Otherwise there are no Gods known to exist that endorse or promote any moral absolutes. There are plenty of mortal middlemen to Gods that claim their absent God wants one moral thing or another. These middlemen tend not to agree, so there must be many Gods, or none.

All you would have are secular laws - and no law forbids from being "nuts" or "immoral" - as long as they operate within the confines of said secular laws.

So you don't like secular laws? I'll bet you'd become a huge fan of secular human rights if you were in a Muslim country and was captured by ISIS and they decided to cut your head off for being Christian. Or would you defend their religious law?

You mean to say that you don't believe that there is a God test.

I've debated Christians since 1996 and none have ever offered a test. Do you want to be the first?

You are choosing to believe that probably based on some system of observation by the five senses.

And those are the five sense we all use and rely on to discern what is real in our environment.

You are no different than anyone who believes that God is on their side.

Of course I am. I have no Big Dady to appeal to as justification and an excuse for some bad decision I might make. All my decisions and moral judgments fall on me. That means I have to think about my integrity, character, consequences, etc. I have no dogma to get mired in or confused or conflicted over. I am free, but also have full burden and responsibility. That means i take it seriously. Theists can dissolve themselves of all responsibility and decide to be obedient agents for their articular religious faction. That is the advantage of God being on your side, you can make immoral judgments and believe they are moral, and have no test in reality.

Your point being that no one is perfect and that people can be wrong and do bad/immoral things even if they claim to be good/moral?

That is a fact that most people learn very early on in life.

Yet if they learn to trust God (whatever that means) they learn bad lessons that allow them to avoid responsibility and full accountability for their positions on matters. Indoctrination creates agents for dogma, not moral thinkers.

 

[F1fan]

My favorite prophecy is the Tyre prophesy. It is so wrong that it affected scholarship for centuries after the fact.

I'm not familiar with that one. If you have time and the interest post an outline and lets examine it. Let's see what believers have to say.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm not familiar with that one. If you have time and the interest post an outline and lets examine it. Let's see what believers have to say.

Zeke made a prophecy that Nebby would defeat and utterly destroy Tyre so it would never be found again:

Google Maps

There it is.

And it gets even better. After failing at that prophecy Zeke saw that Nebby would defeat Egypt. He did not do that either.

EDIT:

Bible Gateway passage: Ezekiel 26 - New International Version

@F1fan , I added a link to the verses.

 

[Redemptionsong]

If by inerrant you mean "factual" then you are claiming that God is evil and incompetent. Are you sure that you want to do that? Meanwhile in the real world we know that the stores of Genesis are myth. Which leads to the question why would you believe that the Bible is all meant to be taken literally? It does not even make that claim.

The question that l am asking you and F1fan has to do with prophecy.

If prophecy exists, then so too does the Spirit of God that inspires the prophecy. I believe it's possible to demonstrate that prophetic utterance exists in the Bible.

The Psalms exist, and l'd like you to tell me who you think wrote Psalms 22-24, and when you think they were written.

It had better be verifiable prophesy. It certainly can't be a second edition of texts being written long after the first edition was written, and the second edition is about some unverifiable stories that if true seem to verify the prophesies. The New Testament certainly doesn't convince any critical thinkers that is was showing OT prophesies came to pass. NT writers and editors had plenty of centuries to manufacture stories that seem to fit the narrative of how Christians wanted to interpret the OT. Jews reject these interpretations and the NT. That's very important evidence right there. That's reason to reject how Christians interpret the OT from the start. The OT does not belong to Christians, but they took it for their own purposes.

If the OT had verses that gave a date, and names, and circumstances that could in no way be predicted or manufactured (like the New Testament stories) then it would be truly miraculous and indicate some divine influence.

As it is the NT and Christian interpretations of it are highly manufactured and offer no way to verify there is any special influence. The story of Jesus is highly problematic factually, and just absurd at face value. The claim of salvation is not believable.

So, you offer no valid prophecies, thus no necessity to assume a God exists. So as a rational thinker I have no reason to assume any God exists including your version.

In a previous thread, l gave you the opportunity to attempt to construct your own NT, based on the OT scriptures, but you showed no interest in making an attempt to do so. Yet, your claim is that the NT is a lie, a man-made construct.

Imagine yourself as a Jew in the first century. What scriptures are you going to employ to create a 'new covenant' lie?

 

[Redemptionsong]

Ooh, poorly asked question. The Bible has quite a few examples of failed prophecies. It also has parts where history was written as prophecy. And then it has overly vague prophecies which are automatically failed prophecy.

Which of these do you think is evidence for God?

There only needs to be one clear prophecy to demonstrate that prophecy exists. If prophecy exists, then claims against prophecy also disappear.

To argue a case for false prophecy does not invalidate the case for true prophecy.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There only needs to be one clear prophecy to demonstrate that prophecy exists. If prophecy exists, then claims against prophecy also disappear.

To argue a case for false prophecy does not invalidate the case for true prophecy.

No that is a total non-sequitur. And most Christians do not understand what a proper prophecy is or how a prophecy fails.

Prophecy is one of the absolute worst arguments that a Christian can try to use.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The question that l am asking you and F1fan has to do with prophecy.

If prophecy exists, then so too does the Spirit of God that inspires the prophecy. I believe it's possible to demonstrate that prophetic utterance exists in the Bible.

The Psalms exist, and l'd like you to tell me who you think wrote Psalms 22-24, and when you think they were written.


In a previous thread, l gave you the opportunity to attempt to construct your own NT, based on the OT scriptures, but you showed no interest in making an attempt to do so. Yet, your claim is that the NT is a lie, a man-made construct.

Imagine yourself as a Jew in the first century. What scriptures are you going to employ to create a 'new covenant' lie?

The Psalms are not prophecy. Christians reinterpret them as prophecy after the fact.

 

[Redemptionsong]

No that is a total non-sequitur. And most Christians do not understand what a proper prophecy is or how a prophecy fails.

Prophecy is one of the absolute worst arguments that a Christian can try to use.

I don't agree.

You have attempted to argue that the prophecy against Tyre is a false prophecy, but this, too, is not accurate.

As S.F. Paul writes, 'lt is further foretold that, after seventy years had passed from the destruction inflicted by Nebuchadnezzar, Tyre would be recovered for a season; although there should be an utter ruin eventually, as is evident from some of the prophecies quoted above [Jer., Ezek, Joel, Amos, Zech.]. Isaiah speaks of this temporary restoration (ch.23:15 &c), and Jeremiah includes them with the Jews in this promised return from captivity (ch.25:12). In the case of the Jews, there was a returning to the worship of the true God; but with Tyre, it was but to return to their idols, and to their riches and merchandise, until they should be further destroyed'.

Isaiah tells of the Assyrian destruction of Tyre. Ezekiel tells of the destruction by Nebuchadnezzar. Cyrus set free the nations that Nebuchadnezzar had taken captive, and the city begins to flourish again. But it was the new city.

'The old Tyre, which was situated on the mainland, had been desolated by Nebuchadnezzar, but the people built a new city on an island situated a short distance from the mainland. Here arose a flourishing centre of merchandise, which continued for many years, until the time came for a further fulfilment of prophecy.

This was under the Grecian Empire, when Alexander the Great enlarged the conquests eastward, and Tyre was again under seige in the year 330 B.C. Alexander's engines of war could not reach the new island city from the mainland, but by building a huge mound or mole between the two, he succeeded in reaching and taking the city, and setting it on fire. The mound was made from the ruins of the old city of Tyre, thus fulfilling the words of the prophet: "They shall lay thy stones, and thy timber, and thy dust in the midst of the water".

After this, the city was again rebuilt and flourished for a time, coming under Christian influence during the period of the early churches, as was foreshadowed by lsaiah (see ch.23:18); but under the rule of the Saracens and Turks, it steadily declined into a mere fishing village.

Visitors today can see fragments of the old wall, and piles of granite and marble columns, used by fishermen to dry their nets. As Ezekiel says, 'l will make thee like the top of a rock; thou shalt be a place to spread nets upon'.

Once again, it appears that your criticism is without justification.

 

[Redemptionsong]

The Psalms are not prophecy. Christians reinterpret them as prophecy after the fact.

I don't agree.

They exist, and l would like you to tell me who wrote Psalms 22-24, and roughly when they were written.

 

[Tinker Grey]

The Psalms exist, and l'd like you to tell me who you think wrote Psalms 22-24, and when you think they were written.

They are attributed to David. What makes you think these are prophecies?

For something to be a prophecy, it seems to me that someone should read it before the prophesied events and be able to say "Hey, that guy's prophesying X and Y."

Why would David's contemporaries read those psalms and think that it was prophecy? And, if one asserts that it became obvious only after the gospels were written, then it seems more obvious that the gospels were written to make it seem that way.