• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Chain of Infallibility

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
If you identify "starting thinking rationally about my beliefs" with "experiencing hurt", then that was very painful :). Actually, it was not. It is very exhilarating to realize to have been wrong. I think it is as good as realizing to be right.



Nothing. Or pray for me. Same thing, basically ;)

Ciao

- viole

I don't want to regret reaching out to you in sincerity, but I'm not buying it. I've walked with Christ quite a while and sincere born agains never leave the church because of "intellectual relief". There's always and forever (and the scriptures agree) some kind of real hurt or some kind of moral failing. If I had a nickel for people who said, "I just can't believe in Hell anymore, I'm out..." and then got caught with drugs or a prostitute or whatever soon after... well, I'd still have only some cents, thank God, but...

If you played around at church for a while then "freed your mind" like Neo and Morpheus, no, you're not born again. If you were born again, you're going straight to Heaven when you die! I'm sure in Heaven we'll all be surprised at some of the folks there... but again, if you're born again, you would be most likely peaches and cream on this forum rather than constantly mocking and denigrating the Lord Jesus Christ and His people...

...So again I ask you, hoping to get a straight answer, "If you were born again, why do you not love Jesus and follow His commandments?"
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Oh I know--I threw in some of the names like JP II to see if you were paying attention.
And I suppose you really expect me to believe that.
Go ahead and take Mark 16:9-20 away and guess what? The gospel ends with "And they fled the empty tomb and were afraid." The Marken ending issue is what is a smokescreen to me.
You've avoided the point altogether.
I'm aware of the harmony issues people find with the angels problem... you seem pretty set that there was one and only one time an angel or angels spoke to anyone. The resurrection would have warranted multiple pronouncements--indeed Jesus appeared to the apostles over a dozen times following.
This is nonsense because we're talking about the women's visitation to Jesus' tomb and not any other angelic visitation.
But look at your 3! It is impossible to determine today whether copies were the same as the autographs, and some copies could be the same and some might not be. No kidding! So why do you and others KNOW the copies aren't God's Word?
I've already explained on numerous occasions why I don't make a judgement on exactly what may or may not be "divinely inspired". Secondly, you just got caught "moving the goalposts" since I was frequently saying the above and you kept denying it. .
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
No you did not. An answer would have been something like "NKJV" but instead you went with "Which God do you think is unable to preserve copies of a written document exactly, precisely, wholly?" Are you making the claim that ALL Bibles are inerrant? If so, we have some serious issues to discuss.

I reminded you that I answered you Socratically, meaning with a question. I’m Jewish, so sometimes I answer questions with questions.

I also already said not all Bibles are inerrant.

And my initial response indicated that ALL of the KJVs fall into that category, which includes your NKJV. The newer ones are merely rewrites of the older.

Work was done, as you know, on the NKJV to shed light not there for the KJV. I also mentioned the NASB...

"If the copies match..." is a moot point because we have no way of knowing. The DSS and other sources don't shed light on squad when it comes to the Autographs. I am fine with someone believing that the Autographs are infallible, but let it stop there. Everything else that is a copy of a copy is subject to human error.

How did you come to an understanding that humans are so fallible they are unable to ever copy any document without errors? That is your underlying premise, if I’m not mistaken.

People did a lot of copying before Gutenberg’s day, and the Masora were exceptionally rigorous and disciplined, and above all ancient copyists. It is unfortunate that secular universities over-criticize the scriptures when the extant fragments et al are remarkably similar.

Nice redirect and dodge. Now go back and answer the question, especially since you studied Hebrew in secular school, and would know that Satan comes from ha-satan, and it refers to the adversary (a title), and that adversary is carrying out God's orders, not working against God.

Adversary = one who opposes = it’s safe to say Satan doesn’t work for God, and in either testament. When a scholar tells me I don’t understand the OT Satan and how he differs from the NT Satan, I’d have to say that Satan was instrumental in the Fall of Man unto death and perdition.

If you were going to teach a class on astronomy, would you do it from a book written 2,000 years ago or 2 years ago?

You answered my question with a question. I’ll repeat: “Should I approach the God of the Bible with the statement, ‘Your book sucks?’ or should I respect God’s communications to fallen men?”

There is more to God than the writings of long dead humans.

I don’t consider Jesus or the great cloud of witnesses long dead, but rather long alive.
 

Neo Deist

Th.D. & D.Div. h.c.
If you played around at church for a while then "freed your mind" like Neo and Morpheus, no, you're not born again. If you were born again, you're going straight to Heaven when you die! I'm sure in Heaven we'll all be surprised at some of the folks there... but again, if you're born again, you would be most likely peaches and cream on this forum rather than constantly mocking and denigrating the Lord Jesus Christ and His people...

For the record, the Bible never says that we go to heaven. If you think it does, name the verse...

Also, I was saved at the age of 12 and follow Jesus' teachings and the two commandments he gave us in the NT. I have a Doctorate of Theology from seminary and the reason I come across as being at odds with you is because I teach biblically, not traditionally. Far too many pastors go with the latter even though it might be wrong.
 

Ben Avraham

Well-Known Member
You quoted Ecclesiastes not as a general rule of life but as a binding rule of life, saying Y'shua broke this rule. You cannot have it both ways--although for a moment earlier, I was pleased that a non-Messianic brother was that firm on G_d's Word. Now you're retreating from "Ha Shem said" to "Ha Shem sort of indicated..." so don't do that!

You are not understanding me! Perhaps the problem is with the language. BTW, I don't need Ecclesiastes to prove that Jesus was a sinner. I have the NT itself to evidence what I am saying.

The Golden Rule was utterly obeyed in Matthew 23. If you catch me shooting heroin, the Golden Rule says take the needle away and break it for me rather than give me heroin so I can be treated to feel good, the way I want to be treated, by getting high. Jesus reproved the Pharisees because they needed to hear it. Have you read in Acts where it says, "Many of the Pharisees were trusting in Jesus [after the resurrection]"? God is so smart that He knows what to say to people--what they need to hear and when they need to hear it! The rulers of our people smarted under a lot worse than "hypocrite" because he told them they were going to Gey-Hinnom! Let's not go there, you and I!

The problem was not with the Pharisees but with Jesus who was the one who insulted them. It does not matter what they were doing but what Jesus did that they did not like. Since Jesus would not like it either, Jesus transgressed the Law.

This is a beautiful thing--most of the Roman Catholic priests and nuns who come to Jesus for salvation do so reading the woes of Matthew 23! They know they are whitewashed tombs.

That's not how the Golden Rule works. It does not matter what others are doing. If they would not like to be reprehended the way Jesus did, Jesus broke the Law.

**Yes, it hurt business to turn the money changing tables over. However, Y'shua fulfilled prophecy in doing so--"zeal for God's house will consume Messiah." Read the passage again and see why Y'shua said He was doing what He did.

You are not understanding me. It does not matter what they were doing, Jesus could not hurt them the way he did. And, BTW, they were doing that legally and, for the good of the Jews from abroad and with the authorization of the High Priest. Jesus committed a blunder; he should have known better.
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
For the record, the Bible never says that we go to heaven. If you think it does, name the verse...

Also, I was saved at the age of 12 and follow Jesus' teachings and the two commandments he gave us in the NT. I have a Doctorate of Theology from seminary and the reason I come across as being at odds with you is because I teach biblically, not traditionally. Far too many pastors go with the latter even though it might be wrong.

I think we both know I'm using "Heaven" as a euphemism for the new Jerusalem, God at its heart, coming down to Earth, to dwell with redeemed men forever--but this is a bit long when "Heaven" fits nicely.

We both speak from the scriptures, the difference being that I trust the scriptures as inspired. Neither saved at 12 or the doctorate seem to have convinced you--were there scriptures involved at age 12 or, perhaps, a vision... a voice, a movement in your heart? I was saved reading the scriptures and asking the God of the scriptures to save me.
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
I don't want to regret reaching out to you in sincerity, but I'm not buying it. I've walked with Christ quite a while and sincere born agains never leave the church because of "intellectual relief". There's always and forever (and the scriptures agree) some kind of real hurt or some kind of moral failing. If I had a nickel for people who said, "I just can't believe in Hell anymore, I'm out..." and then got caught with drugs or a prostitute or whatever soon after... well, I'd still have only some cents, thank God, but...

I am sorry to disappont you, and what Scripture says. But my deconversion was not motivated by any bad thing happening to me. Or being hurt, or whatever. After all, there are no atheists in foxholes, allegedely.

I still remember how it started. I was having Pizza with my family and talking about Jesus and how thankful we should be to Him for being a happy family and have always something to eat. When my older son asked: mom, how can a mathematician like you still believe that stuff?

I told him that far greater mathematicians were devout Christians, but what he meant was: why don't you use the same logic in order to evaluate your beliefs?

That was the beginning of the end of my faith. Because I started doing exactly that. You should try it.

If you played around at church for a while then "freed your mind" like Neo and Morpheus, no, you're not born again. If you were born again, you're going straight to Heaven when you die! I'm sure in Heaven we'll all be surprised at some of the folks there... but again, if you're born again, you would be most likely peaches and cream on this forum rather than constantly mocking and denigrating the Lord Jesus Christ and His people...

Bummer.

...So again I ask you, hoping to get a straight answer, "If you were born again, why do you not love Jesus and follow His commandments?"

Because I had time to grow up. Probably. If I had died before, I would presumably play harp in Heaven by now. Who can say? :)

And I am not mocking the believer. I am mocking the belief. I love the believer.

Ciao

- viole
 

Neo Deist

Th.D. & D.Div. h.c.
I think we both know I'm using "Heaven" as a euphemism for the new Jerusalem, God at its heart, coming down to Earth, to dwell with redeemed men forever--but this is a bit long when "Heaven" fits nicely.

We both speak from the scriptures, the difference being that I trust the scriptures as inspired. Neither saved at 12 or the doctorate seem to have convinced you--were there scriptures involved at age 12 or, perhaps, a vision... a voice, a movement in your heart? I was saved reading the scriptures and asking the God of the scriptures to save me.

No, I do not believe in divine dictation of the Bible. Nor do I believe in miracles as that would interfere with free will consequences. Satan as the devil and his band of demons, is a bunch of crap as well.

Heaven, coming from the Greek ouranós, has 3 different meanings depending on the context:

1. The dwelling place of God
2. The cosmos
3. The sky

When you start using euphemisms, you confuse people as to the truth. Just say paradise, as that is what the Bible says. It's only 2 more letters vs Heaven.
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
Among many, many others, The Lord Buddha done good and never sinned - because there is not an Almighty God to "sin" against.

Okay. If a devout Hindu asked you, "Do you disbelieve in the Lord Krishna, who is above all?" or if a Native American told you, "The Great Spirit, He made all else, creation and the other spirits," how might you respond?
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
I am sorry to disappont you, and what Scripture says. But my deconversion was not motivated by any bad thing happening to me. Or being hurt, or whatever. After all, there are no atheists in foxholes, allegedely.

I still remember how it started. I was having Pizza with my family and talking about Jesus and how thankful we should be to Him for being a happy family and have always something to eat. When my older son asked: mom, how can a mathematician like you still believe that stuff?

I told him that far greater mathematicians were devout Christians, but what he meant was: why don't you use the same logic in order to evaluate your beliefs?

That was the beginning of the end of my faith. Because I started doing exactly that. You should try it.

Do you feel like I use logic to try to persuade you or emotional appeals? Because your remark here is hurtful (again).

I’m having a heckuva argument (okay, it’s really a discussion since you like to argue by contrast) on another thread with a Christian who says faith is of the heart and mind but not by logic, reason or scripture.


What’s a bummer? That you will incur greater judgment than another because you enjoy your attempts to shipwreck people’s faith? (Now, that last would be an emotional appeal.)

Because I had time to grow up. Probably. If I had died before, I would presumably play harp in Heaven by now. Who can say?
clip_image001.png


And I am not mocking the believer. I am mocking the belief. I love the believer.

If you showed love for me, you wouldn’t say cruel statements like “try some logic sometime” after I’ve used logic with you across 100 posts.

If you showed logic, you’d actually heed what I’ve written many times on these threads—we don’t sit on clouds and play harps in Heaven. We live eternally—eternal learning, eternal growth, eternal relationships, eternal playing and singing and day-by-day’ing, eternal life.

If you think—to borrow a phrase from the Scientology cult—that you’re “clear” now, you can say something like “Good for you, you’re religious,” instead of contriving to say something accusatory and/or mocking—don’t deny it—you just wrote “mocking the belief”--every 30 to 40 seconds you’re on this site. If you’re clear now, don’t feel like you need to rescue my from my “delusions”, I wallow in them, and enjoy them. Don’t bring my high down, please, sister.

Just go away and enjoy your life of peace… without.

To be frank, I’m excited to post here at RF because there are many seekers, many of them, lurkers. You are like a crossing guard holding out both arms at a busy intersection while the cars run over you.

So, if you want to be more productive around here—go for it! Please tell me exactly HOW you “began” to employ logic after pizza night. You hadn’t used logic all the time before that you were a believer? “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge”. Please tell me what logical steps you made away from the Bible after the power and drama of big pizza night. My son has pizza with me and tells me of the illogic of skeptics. We make Vulcan greetings with our hands and smile.

PS. “I don’t like God’s Laws!” or “My modern sensibilities don’t like slavery or rape in the Bible!” are presentism and emotional appeals, not LOGIC.

I LOVE logic. Bring us some for a change instead of one liners, why don’cha!

PPS. Sorry to be so harsh, but you really are a bitter pill, making caustic remarks constantly. You sound like a 90-year-old woman in hospice without friends or hope. I’d LOVE to hear your steps of logic away from God, and I’d feel like at least I was talking to a person, not a broken record.
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
No, I do not believe in divine dictation of the Bible. Nor do I believe in miracles as that would interfere with free will consequences. Satan as the devil and his band of demons, is a bunch of crap as well.

Heaven, coming from the Greek ouranós, has 3 different meanings depending on the context:

1. The dwelling place of God
2. The cosmos
3. The sky

When you start using euphemisms, you confuse people as to the truth. Just say paradise, as that is what the Bible says. It's only 2 more letters vs Heaven.

No, paradise is too Islamist for my refined tastes.

Yes, I know of the three Heavens, troposphere, cosmos, dwelling place. All three are mine, because I'm meek! God will meet me in the trophosphere and I will help rule the cosmos as I visit Him in His dwelling place so I kind of like Heaven.

But let's not fight over semantics. Rather, let's talk about how miracles do NOT interfere with free will. I know for a fact that God does super-cool things all the time and then skeptics exercise their free will to deny God.

Have you heard the theory that we misunderstand "demons" for destructive emotions? "Spirit of fear, spirit of lust, spirit of wrath..." It makes some sense to me. After all, a skeptic is:

Someone so possessed by spirits that they come to forums to attack beliefs.
 

buddhist

Well-Known Member
Okay. If a devout Hindu asked you, "Do you disbelieve in the Lord Krishna, who is above all?" or if a Native American told you, "The Great Spirit, He made all else, creation and the other spirits," how might you respond?
I would respond that I would disbelieve, because Krishna and "the Great Spirit" are specific personalities, and their teachings depend on the reality of the personalities (the foundations).

Whereas the Buddhist teachings themselves are the foundation because of their intrinsic enlightened value, therefore the person(s) who thought of them are called the "Buddha".

E.g. Krishna *must* be real (faith) -> therefore his teachings are real.
vs.
The Buddhist teachings have intrinsic value (personal knowledge) -> therefore the "Buddha" existed.
 

Rick O'Shez

Irishman bouncing off walls
The truths of Buddhism are verifiable in the here (space) and now (time).

It depends which teachings you are referring to. We can observe impermanence and conditionality in the here and now, but we cannot observe post-mortem rebirth in the here and now.
 

Ben Avraham

Well-Known Member
Among many, many others, The Lord Buddha done good and never sinned - because there is not an Almighty God to "sin" against.

Have I ever said here that when we sin, we have done it against HaShem? No, the Biblical definition for sin is the transgression of the Law. When we sin therefore, we sin against our own selves. Ourself and others. Then, according to the law of cause & effect we, somehow must pay for the consequences thereof. It is impossible for a human to offend God with his or her sin. We end up as the cause of our own punishment. Now, your lord Buddha, not meaning an offense to you, was never a perfect man. It is against the nature of being human to think of humans as perfect beings.
 

Ben Avraham

Well-Known Member
If you have and read the NT you seem to be missing the hundreds of prophecies that show Y'shua is Mashiach.

Let's make a deal. You show me one; and I say, no more than one prophecy about Jesus as the Messiah in the Tanach, and I'll give you my word that I'll become a Christian. Now, to explain to you why I am being so bold, the Messiah cannot be an individual because, the individual is born, lives his span of life and dies. The Messiah is not supposed to die but to remain as a People before the Lord forever. (Jeremiah 31:35-37) Besides, according to Prophet Habakkuk 3:13, "The Lord goes forth to save His People; to save His Anointed One." That's what Messiah is, the Anointed One of the Lord, aka Israel the Son of God, if you read Exodus 4:22,23. "Israel is My Son," said the Lord. Now, if you still want to look for that prophecy go right ahead and do it. If I failed to explain to you what the text is talking about, I'll
reconsider my boldness.
 
Top