Open Letter To Christians

[Drich]

]Ok, first off, the translation I was using is the New International Version, which is a Trinitarian text and which is used by plenty of christian churches and denominations who aren't Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, or anything else that you would define as a heresy of christianity. While some people like other modern translations better, it's pretty comparable to other current translations of the bible.

Here is what the NIV actually says:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=NIV
13 If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!”

You are right about the NIV being a Trinitarian text. However as you can clearly see above you did not quote from it. Your either mistaken, or maybe no one here has warned you about me yet, and you think you can get away with the typical atheist dog and pony show, of just trying to come off like you know what your talking about as a means of trying to intimidate the Christian into silence.

Save yourself the time and don't post unreferenced BS. The reason it takes me so long to respond is I check everything that I say as well as everything you say EVERY time. x10 years in this format of answering questions/debate plus another 10+ in study. Again save the song and dance for someone else, because I have no issue calling you on obviously wrong/foolish posts.

Now, I don't know if you meant for this to happen, but your link goes to the King James Bible, which is an older text that was commissioned by an English King for a particular time and country (Medieval England) and a particular denomination (the Anglican Church).

The link also provides a drop down at the top of the page to change to any literal translation you like. Here is a link to the NIV:
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm...onc_984013

How can it do this? The core Greek text does not change. Despite the popular belief among Atheist, the bible is not a translation of a translation of a translation. All literal copies come from a single codex (The greek that does not change) and the English translation that does is just over laided the same greek text.

It is considered one of the least useful and most suspect English translations of the bible by a broad base of both laymen and clergy alike. If you're seriously calling the translation of the NIV into question and the standard you're holding it up against is the King James Version, you need to try again.

You are barking up the wrong tree pinky, I am not a single translation/KJV purest. I use which ever translation works best with the person I am speaking to. My 'bible' was written in the koine Greek, and it is to the greek I refer to first not the English. The English is a tool of convience, used to quickly identify and capture a given precept. Complete excegesis comes from the Greek.

That's the thing pinky The Holy Spirit is THE Good gift God offers. Why? Because the Holy Spirit literally provides absolutely anything we can need and or want to establish and maintain our belief. It is through the Holy Spirit that "Prayers, and even our petitions get answered.

Or maybe he's just talking about good gifts in general, as the context of the passage seems to suggest.

Again, The passage Identifies the HOLY SPIRIT Specifically, not Good gifts, Unless again you are quoting from a non Trinitarian/doctrinally specific translation of the bible.

Maybe your translation is wrong and mine is right.

Again you have FAILED to correctly identify a translation that portrays the term "Good gifts." Therefore at best you are Mistaken about 'your translation.'

Any attempt to prove one or the other would essentially be appealing to authority, as both explanations of the passage are (apparently) widely accepted. Besides, all I have to do is claim that I have received a recent revelation from god that says the "good gifts" translation is the right one. Who's to say I'm wrong? You?

IF You Had Actually Provided a legit source for your quote I would ask to see or simply look up the Greek/codex in which your translation was created from. Then would move to validate the codex. (because obviously it did not come from the codex sinaiticus which is where Christianity gets it's bible's translated from)

If you can not provide the source material/bible you supposedly quoted from then I would move to identify your 'good works' translation as a personal textual fabrication. then to drive the point home I would show two or three more different literal translations, and maybe even go to another concordance/lexicon to collaborate what I have said... And depending on how obstinate you were to get us to this point would determine whether or not I would draw attention to your intellectual dishonesty you have displayed to this point and call into question the fabric of your character.

As far as your prayers getting answered, that happens because of some combination of confirmation bias, self-fulfilling prophesy, and random chance.

Uh, no.. Again. Prayers and petition are not the same thing. Answered prayers are unique as they Ask god to Change the nature of our character to align ourselves with Him. This transformation is a long and rough road, that most bail out on. not a self full filling prophesy

You send those prayers up, accept any outcome as "god's will," and act like it's proof of miracles when completely mundane events just happen (by chance or by human design) to line up with whatever you prayed for. It's the same mechanism that makes fortune telling work.

This statement is why I believe you have confused Prayer with a petition/supplication. Again prayer = change my nature to match what God wants for us. Petition/supplication As God for 'stuff.' The more one Prays the less one asks for 'stuff.'

Ah... no. What I have does is provide an accurate exegesis of Luke 11 and Mat 7 concerning the common verses they share by compiling the teaching and providing a singular biblically based doctrinal truth, by citing book chapter and verse as well as providing an on line/verifiable link to the orginal text and it's meaning. What you did was try and baffle me with conjecture and unfounded speculation about what you think my approach was based on nothing.

Do you see the difference?
Me= explaination based on three points of verifiable refrence.
You= flash in the pan explaination based on what you think about the bible, citing nothing.

Ah...no. What you've done is started squibbling over which translation is the best one to use and how much context is needed to understand the verses in question. I quoted all of Matthew 7 and picked apart each parable, destroying your claim that the "context" is the key to understanding this quote. It isn't. The key to understanding this quote, according to your other arguments, is to decide what's the best translation to use, and that's a game for theists to play. To me, it all says the same thing, and it's all a fictional story.

This is a dishonest representation of my argument. If this is not the case then I ask you which translation are you saying I have said is better than another?

This is a failed attempt at a 'pink herring.'

But, do you see how their explaination does not include the whole context of the complete passage? They would have to literally ignore everything said from verse 15 to the end of the chapter concerning what Christ said about forgiveness or pretend that the context provided by verse 15 to the end of the chapter is indeed about forgiveness and then verse 19 Christ suddenly breaks away from his teaching on forgiveness and then tells everyone to just wish in groups to get what you want from God, then in verse 20 goes right back to speaking about forgiveness..

How target locked one have to be to not see that everything said in that block of text is about forgiveness? Take the verse denotations out of the text and read through again. Does it make sense that Christ mid stream stop his teaching about sin and forgiveness and the out of the blue in a single breath teach how to get wishes granted by praying in twos, and then next breath go back to teach forgiveness following up a parable on the subject?

Sorry no. you and your 'scholars' got it wrong.

For somebody who's accusing me of not citing things, you're having a lot of trouble with this whole "context and quotations" thing, aren't ya? Everything said in that block of text is about forgiveness, huh? Let's look at Matthew, chapter 18 (NIV again because Google likes it):

---

The Greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven

18 At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Who, then, is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?”
2 He called a little child to him, and placed the child among them. 3 And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me.
Causing to Stumble
6 “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. 7 Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to stumble! Such things must come, but woe to the person through whom they come! 8 If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire. 9 And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.
The Parable of the Wandering Sheep
10 “See that you do not despise one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven. [11] [a]
12 “What do you think? If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one of them wanders away, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off?13 And if he finds it, truly I tell you, he is happier about that one sheep than about the ninety-nine that did not wander off. 14 In the same way your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should perish.
Dealing With Sin in the Church
15 “If your brother or sister[b] sins,[c] go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. 16 But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’[d] 17 If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
18 “Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be[e] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[f] loosed in heaven.
19 “Again, truly I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything they ask for, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. 20 For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.”
The Parable of the Unmerciful Servant
21 Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother or sister who sins against me? Up to seven times?”
22 Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.[g]
23 “Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. 24 As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand bags of gold[h] was brought to him. 25 Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt.
26 “At this the servant fell on his knees before him. ‘Be patient with me,’ he begged, ‘and I will pay back everything.’ 27 The servant’s master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go.
28 “But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred silver coins.[i] He grabbed him and began to choke him. ‘Pay back what you owe me!’ he demanded.
29 “His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay it back.’
30 “But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt. 31 When the other servants saw what had happened, they were outraged and went and told their master everything that had happened.
32 “Then the master called the servant in. ‘You wicked servant,’ he said, ‘I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. 33 Shouldn’t you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?’ 34 In anger his master handed him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.
35 “This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother or sister from your heart.”

---

So, as you can plainly see, this "block of text" is talking about several different things. The last block is about forgiveness, but that's its own passage, separate from the one where the contentious verse appears. The passage where the verse actually appears seems to be describing how to handle church members who won't listen when told of their sin. The passages before that talk about removing sin-causing obstacles from one's life, how Jehovah wants no one to wander or perish, and coming to god with the humility and faith of a child.
...Again Mat 18:15 through the end of the chapter is about sin and forgiveness NOT about getting petitions granted. Where do you see it differently? Where in Mat 18:15 thru the end of the chapter beside '19' is Jesus speaking about how to pray or petition God?

Now, because 19 mentions prayer/how to pray and the surrounding context is about sin and forgivness then that means the passage that speaks on prayer is directly speaking about how/what to pray inorder to forgive and receive forgiveness. Verse 19 is not a stand alone mid paragraph appeal to group wishing/petitions. It just does not read correctly in context.

What the whole chapter is talking about is an instance where the disciples were arguing about who would be the greatest in the kingdom of heaven, and Jesus proceeds to tell them what the criteria for greatness in heaven are. This passage is about what must be done to get in good with god and get what you want from him. Forgiveness is mentioned, but it's far from the focus if this story. The focus is actually celestial self-service.

Again pinky I meantion verse 15 to the end of the chapter because It directly speaks to sin and forgiveness. I am well aware of what the start of the Chapter speaks to.

Have you stopped to consider that maybe the reason your faith failed is because you were wrong on too many critical issues that God could not support your understanding of Him? After all why would God positively reinforce something He does not want you to understand or believe?

So when you were old enough to test your faith you rightly found out that your understanding of God does not exist...

The reason my faith failed is that my critical thinking skills progressed to such an extent that I could no longer justify believing claims with no evidence.

This is exactly what I meant. You had a corrupt understanding of God. So much so He could not support it with the 'evidence you sought.' Again why would God positively support a understanding of him He did not want you to have? So when you grew up you tested what you thought was God and found out there was nothing there.

Now just because your understanding of God failed to pass, how is it in your mind you can say God can not exist? What if God exists outside of your limited/broken understanding?

Furthermore, I was exposed to convincing evidence that Jesus of Nazareth was a purely fictional character who never walked Earth. In order for christianity to be even remotely plausible, Jesus has to have at least lived, leaving it up to faith whether he did miracles or rose from the dead. If he wasn't a real person, though, the test is no longer whether you can believe in something that is unlikely, but whether you can believe something that runs directly contrary to evidenced reality.

"Evidenced reality" is a subjective term isn't it? It is based on what You personally believe to be evidence. The problem with that? what if what you believe is incomplete?

Example: 600 years ago 'evidenced reality determined the earth was flat. Because of said evidence and pop culture's support this 'evidenced reality was understood to be 100% truth, and all of the evidence we now use to support a spherical planet was ignored.

The question here then becomes how can you say for sure your 'evidenced reality' is not really a biased reality similar to the reality of those who lived 600 years ago and believed the world was flat? How do you know your 'reality' is not limited by what you can perceive? This at it's core is exactly what made men think the world was flat.

What that means is that god wants us to believe he exists in a world that he deliberately invented to point to the idea that he is fictional. He isn't just asking us to believe something that is improbable, but something that is shown to be untrue by the evidence in the universe that he himself built. If he's working that hard to seem fictional just so we'll have to take him on faith, then fuck him. It's much more likely, though, that he doesn't exist at all, and that christians are guilty of a host of mental gymnastics (like I used to employ) to make these beliefs seem reasonable. They are not.

The only way one can foolishly assume God is fictional is if one believes that our ablity to explain how the universe works somehow superceeds God.. I went into greater detail in my piano/mouse thread, but the bottom line was, that god is the God/Creator of the natural Universe, So why would be Limited to only move through it supernaturally?

Even the term 'Supernatural' only describes what we perceive to be natural, it does not actually mean an event or happening must be beyond all scientific explaination. If you look up the word it means an event is currently beyond our scientific understanding. It is the unknown not the unknowable. So as our understanding of the universe around us grows, what in the bible or in your mind/perception of god says that He must remain beyond all explaination?

So yeah...while it's cute of you to try to say that my unbelief somehow equates with a lack of understanding of scripture, the fact is that the more I understood about scripture and how it conflicts with the observable world, the more I realized how fictional it all had to be. It was like piecing together the non-existence of Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy when I was a young kid. The evidence just lined up, and I stopped believing because I knew it wasn't true. I had been lying to myself all my life, just as you are lying to yourself now.

Again, no. My post said your lack of understanding did not come from a lack of Scripture, it came from silence from God. 'Scripture' is the tool we use that points us in the direction of God and the tool we use to verify what we found is indeed God. Failed belief is almost always the direct result of God not supporting a broken understanding of Him/Religious belief of Him.