Nine Pieces Of Evidence That Confirm The Historical Accuracy Of The Bible

[MJFlores]

No, that was a valid question.

Do you think that you can reason rationally? So far you have not done so.

When you have lost the argument silly videos are not an example of reasoning rationally. Not are quotes from the Bible, which you appear to understand poorly, examples of reasoning rationally.

I have explained how you are calling your God a liar. If you did not understand you should have asked questions.

I have explained how you are calling your God a liar. If you did not understand you should have asked questions.

First you don't know my God
Next you don't have a god
So how can you call a non existent god an existent liar?
Now that is contradictory.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have explained how you are calling your God a liar. If you did not understand you should have asked questions.

First you don't know my God
Next you don't have a god
So how can you call a non existent god an existent liar?
Now that is contradictory.

I don't need to know your God. You have described him well enough. And please we are not talking about my beliefs, we are talking about what you believe. You are the one calling your God a liar. Not me. Focusing on the subject should help you to reason rationally. I made no contradictions.

 

[MJFlores]

I don't need to know your God. You have described him well enough. And please we are not talking about my beliefs, we are talking about what you believe. You are the one calling your God a liar. Not me. Focusing on the subject should help you to reason rationally. I made no contradictions.

My God does not exist in your view
Why should I defend someone that does not exist in your view?
Why should we discuss "unicorns and fables"?
Why should I tell you a story about "my happy place"?
Why should I tell you my "imaginary friend"?
Would you believe it afterwards?
If not, then we would just be wasting time, wouldn't we?
Now that is being rational.

It would be moot and academic.
You have already concluded before any point is raised.
You have concluded - His lyin' god doesn't exist.
Fine. I respect your atheist opinion.
Because if I won, you would not be a proud atheist.

 

[Subduction Zone]

My God does not exist in your view
Why should I defend someone that does not exist in your view?
Why should we discuss "unicorns and fables"?
Why should I tell you a story about "my happy place"?
Why should I tell you my "imaginary friend"?
Would you believe it afterwards?
If not, then we would just be wasting time, wouldn't we?
Now that is being rational.

It would be moot and academic.
You have already concluded before any point is raised.
You have concluded - His lyin' god doesn't exist.
Fine. I respect your atheist opinion.
Because if I won, you would not be a proud atheist.

It does not matter if your God does not exist in my view. And please do not make false claims about me. The topic is that fact that you keep claiming that your God is a liar.

And until you at least try to discuss this rationally you cannot "win".

 

[MJFlores]

It does not matter if your God does not exist in my view. And please do not make false claims about me. The topic is that fact that you keep claiming that your God is a liar.

And until you at least try to discuss this rationally you cannot "win".

It does matter if my God does not exist in your view.
It is because it would render it moot and academic.
Enjoy your win.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It does matter if my God does not exist in your view.
It is because it would render it moot and academic.
Enjoy your win.

This is not rational reasoning. It is only a weak excuse.

Don't you want to believe true things? Or do you only want to believe comforting things?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Born and raised as a Catholic before by Catholic parents

None of that addresses how we know your interpretation is more accurate than others, nor does it address how we know Christianity is true over every other religion.
Your statements are entirely based on human thinking, and human thinking can't even comprehend the universe. How do we know anything about an alleged god that is beyond?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Makes sense to me. Since this plan clearly needs quality oversight, I will reluctantly stay behind to make sure the process runs smoothly. No, no...don't weep for me...I'm willing to sacrifice my non-life for the greater good.

Such courage I must assume comes from the Heavenly warmth of ignorance. But never mind what I said, pay it no mind. Carry on.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Such courage I must assume comes from the Heavenly warmth of ignorance. But never mind what I said, pay it no mind. Carry on.

*Laughs*

 

[MJFlores]

None of that addresses how we know your interpretation is more accurate than others, nor does it address how we know Christianity is true over every other religion.
Your statements are entirely based on human thinking, and human thinking can't even comprehend the universe. How do we know anything about an alleged god that is beyond?

You can shop for a religion and there are too many to choose from.
A person can have as many as he could possibly have and still won't get to know the truth.
That is my narration

I could subject my faith to an acid test because the truth is good.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 New International Version (NIV)
but test them all; hold on to what is good,

That is how you will be able to know what is good and what is a lie.
It is like shopping for the genuine thing
some will sell you a fake and then you will be had
That is why people should examine, test, ask and evaluate
It could take weeks, months or even years before you could conclude

Jesus likened the search in two parables:

Matthew 13:44-46 New International Version (NIV)
“The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field. When a man found it, he hid it again, and then in his joy went and sold all he had and bought that field.

“Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant looking for fine pearls. When he found one of great value, he went away and sold everything he had and bought it.

But beware - treasures like pearls have fake ones too.

That is why like pearls, religious beliefs should be tested
Faith of people too are tested even by fire.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Faith of people too are tested even by fire.

I'm not surprised at all you have to turn to the Bible to prove the Bible, just as all religions have turned to their own teachings and texts for validation. But they lack external validation that doesn't depend on their own sources. And religious devotees of all religions have their faith confirmed by tests, and visions, and alleged miracles.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

but test them all; hold on to what is good,

Then clearly the Bible is not good for nothing good will say "he that spares his rod hates his son," or "if a man has a stubborn and rebellious child....the men shall stone him to death." Those things are wicked and cruel, not good, merciful, or just.

 

[MJFlores]

I'm not surprised at all you have to turn to the Bible to prove the Bible, just as all religions have turned to their own teachings and texts for validation. But they lack external validation that doesn't depend on their own sources. And religious devotees of all religions have their faith confirmed by tests, and visions, and alleged miracles.

External validation?
I've been writing about external validation in the past days.
I have been writing about historical validation of bible prophecies in the past days.
And I believe those things I have written are on this thread.

But tell you what.
No amount of external validation would satisfy a person
if he is bent on not believing
it requires an open heart and an open mind.

 

[MJFlores]

Then clearly the Bible is not good for nothing good will say "he that spares his rod hates his son," or "if a man has a stubborn and rebellious child....the men shall stone him to death." Those things are wicked and cruel, not good, merciful, or just.

Proverbs 13:24 New International Version (NIV)
Whoever spares the rod hates their children,
but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them.

What is wrong with discipline?
Discipline is different from violence
Discipline is correcting a wrongful act so the child is not going to repeat the same mistake again
Discipline is not hazing
I was disciplined and I experienced hazing - the latter is senseless

Deuteronomy 21:18-21 New International Version (NIV)
If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. They shall say to the elders, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.” Then all the men of his town are to stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid.

This bible verse are for the Israelites to observe, not for the Christians. That is the old covenant and the old covenant is replaced with the new upon the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. Even the Lord Jesus Christ said "who has not sin, cast the first stone" [John 8] so this rule was practiced by the Israelites. I don't find this improper because it is the commandment of God to Honor thy father and thy mother. That command is the first command with a promise. What would be the result of spoiled children? What would their life be?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What is wrong with discipline?
Discipline is different from violence

A rod is not discipline but is violence. And hitting children is abhorrent and appalling behavior. To even suggest that sparing the use of corporal punishment with an object is to somehow hate your child, such a thing is evil, cruel, and wicked.

This bible verse are for the Israelites to observe, not for the Christians.

That makes not one bit of difference. To demand a parent kill their child is evil, cruel, wicked, and would be considered especially heinous in a court of law.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What would be the result of spoiled children? What would their life be?

Apparently we are better than your god, for there are many of us who are better than that, and do not resort to physical punishment or the death sentence. There are those of us who are more humane and patient than your god, and instead of demanding death we ask those your god condemned what is wrong with them and hear them out. We'd rather see them shed tears as their pains are addressed and resolved, rather than see their blood shed because we care not about our fellow human.

 

[MJFlores]

A rod is not discipline but is violence. And hitting children is abhorrent and appalling behavior. To even suggest that sparing the use of corporal punishment with an object is to somehow hate your child, such a thing is evil, cruel, and wicked.

That makes not one bit of difference. To demand a parent kill their child is evil, cruel, wicked, and would be considered especially heinous in a court of law.

Hitting children is child abuse
We have laws against child abuse
But spanking a child in the rear after the child makes a mistake, saves him

Well good luck raising a kid when you have one.
I hope they don't become young tobacco smokers
But when they do what would you do?

They say - an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure
What would you do if your kid sniffs cocaine?

Lots of lives wasted
The rod would have helped

Now that is external validation

 

[Shadow Wolf]

But spanking a child in the rear after the child makes a mistake, saves him

A rod--the object the Bible states that should not be spared if you love your kid--is not a spank, is not discipline, and is abuse.

Well good luck raising a kid when you have one.

I've helped raise nine nieces and nephews, and I also worked case manage and DCS with kids. I have no desire or want for my own.

But when they do what would you do?

Rather than hitting them, in any way, I would have some rather lovely pictures for them to look at. I might even buy them a Jeffrey the Diseased Lung stuffy and shirt for their birthday. I won't hit them though. It's their choice after all. But if I'm their mom, they might end up seeing some rotten gums and teeth after waking up and reaching for their tooth brush. And if it were a son, perhaps even a big floppy dildo painted up to look like a cigarette that gets tucked just under his pillow so he finds just after lying down.

They say - an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure

Violence is about the worst thing for a case of hard drugs. When that is the case, anything other than lots of patients, tolerance, respect, and love and you're only making things worse. I would be too concerned to even think about hitting my child, and I would want to make sure they are ok.

 

[MJFlores]

A rod--the object the Bible states that should not be spared if you love your kid--is not a spank, is not discipline, and is abuse.

I've helped raise nine nieces and nephews, and I also worked case manage and DCS with kids. I have no desire or want for my own.

Rather than hitting them, in any way, I would have some rather lovely pictures for them to look at. I might even buy them a Jeffrey the Diseased Lung stuffy and shirt for their birthday. I won't hit them though. It's their choice after all. But if I'm their mom, they might end up seeing some rotten gums and teeth after waking up and reaching for their tooth brush. And if it were a son, perhaps even a big floppy dildo painted up to look like a cigarette that gets tucked just under his pillow so he finds just after lying down.

Violence is about the worst thing for a case of hard drugs. When that is the case, anything other than lots of patients, tolerance, respect, and love and you're only making things worse. I would be too concerned to even think about hitting my child, and I would want to make sure they are ok.

Well, alright.

I'm now sure that Fred Trump didn't discipline the Don.

The results are obvious.

 

[SkepticThinker]

External validation?
I've been writing about external validation in the past days.
I have been writing about historical validation of bible prophecies in the past days.
And I believe those things I have written are on this thread.

But tell you what.
No amount of external validation would satisfy a person
if he is bent on not believing
it requires an open heart and an open mind.

How about people who care about believing true things, based on good evidence?