Conflicting statements in the bible

[Statler Waldorf]

No, it isn't........................................

Sure it is, I am claiming morals are not relative, you’re taking the positive position that they are, I need proof.

Do you and I share the same morals?

We are supposed to live by the same moral law, yes.

Proof of what...? Is/ought? Either you take that or you leave it. Your call.

You’re the one committing the is/ought fallacy, not me.

Indeed, now get to work

Waiting for you to refute the historically accepted position….still waiting…

No more or less so than "theistic morals". Neither collection of morals are likely to be arbitrary -or- meaningless...even if the justifications offered -are- ( I like to leave room for people who simply cant articulate their thoughts very well.....)

Christian standards of morality are not arbitrary, atheistic standards of morality apparently are. The former is meaningful, the latter is meaningless.

That explains why Calvanists abound!

You’re assuming the majority of people are rational, that’s funny.

So, he wanted it but he didn't want it. Got it.

God has two wills; I thought you’d know that since you claim to have been a Calvinist.

I have proven it by making conscious choices throughout this conversation.

How do you know you’re making a conscious choice?

For example: at first, my responses were prompt and now they are delayed. A varied approach, just as many things are varied.

That does not prove you freely chose your approach.

There absolutely is. Your position preposes that all things meaningless, not to mention extremely petty.

More misrepresentations I see, all things work together for the good of those who believe and to bring glory to God, that’s the opposite of meaningless.

Like I said, it's a difference of progression. I simply have a wider perspective than you, and because of that, I understand the contradictions involved.

You’d have to understand my position first, start there.

Chapter VI…II. By this sin they fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and so became dead in sin and wholly defiled in all the parts and faculties of soul and body. III. They being the root of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed; and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity, descending from them by ordinary generation. (Palmer, p. 126)

Amen.

Not at all. It's not my fault that the doctrines contradict themselves. That's the nature of the bible.

Your misconception of the doctrines contradict themselves, but that’s a reflection upon your mind, not the actual doctrines.

When (or if) you ever graduate, then will talk. Right now it's like trying to discuss the planet with a flat earther.

You’d get schooled this badly by a flat-earther too? That’s funny, but believable.

Just stating one of their contradicting beliefs.

Prove it’s an actual contradiction, set up a syllogism, come on! Nail it!

That makes sense. "God's Word" is so powerful and "appealing" that most people don't truly get it and aren't compelled by it.

Everyone He wants to understand it does.

At its most base level, I think so. Our concept of morals and moral behavior may have developed from there.

Interesting.

As far as I am aware, standards of behavior have changed throughout the centuries, and continue to do so today. They seem to be based on opinion.

I do not see how this proves that morals are therefore relative, rather than there being an objectively true standard that people ought to follow but they simply rebel against and replace with false standards.