2 Timothy 3:14-17

Includes this line.

Quote:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

But, perhaps you'd prefer Martin Luther? A protestant of some note.

Quote:Luther's straightforward belief in Scripture's inerrancy cannot be downplayed as representing only his "callow youth" or - mutatis mutandis - his "senile old age." From his commentaries on the Psalms of 1513-1516, written before the posting of the Ninety-Five Theses ("All the words of God are weighed, counted, and measured") 24 to his final major attack on the papacy in 1545, the year before his death ("Let the man who would hear God speak read Holy Scripture" ), 25 the Reformer's attitude to Scripture remains categorical. He embraces the bibliology of the historic church: "St. Augustine, in a letter to St. Jerome, has put down a fine axiom - that only Holy Scripture is to be considered inerrant."

It's circular reasoning to show the bible should be taken as without falsehood, by referring the bible itself.

But logically, if you are allowed to cherry pick from the bible, and much of it is false, then how do you know any of it inspired by God or is from God, and why not follow your own thoughts of morality, since your own thoughts are determining what you deem is good from the bible and what is bad.

The bible and gospel definitely ceases to be a guide in this case.

(September 15, 2012 at 12:47 am)Minimalist Wrote: 2 Timothy 3:14-17

Includes this line.

Quote:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

But, perhaps you'd prefer Martin Luther? A protestant of some note.

Quote:Luther's straightforward belief in Scripture's inerrancy cannot be downplayed as representing only his "callow youth" or - mutatis mutandis - his "senile old age." From his commentaries on the Psalms of 1513-1516, written before the posting of the Ninety-Five Theses ("All the words of God are weighed, counted, and measured") 24 to his final major attack on the papacy in 1545, the year before his death ("Let the man who would hear God speak read Holy Scripture" ), 25 the Reformer's attitude to Scripture remains categorical. He embraces the bibliology of the historic church: "St. Augustine, in a letter to St. Jerome, has put down a fine axiom - that only Holy Scripture is to be considered inerrant."

I can't believe you would resort to an appeal to authority...

So you take that verse as claiming infallibility then?
If yes, then does a math book with a mutiple-choice test section mean that it is not "...useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in.." math? As it has incorrect answers in the choices...

Innerancy is an idiotic stance as there are verses that directly refute that possibility.

Luther is supposed to be an "authority" to you shitheads.

I think he was just another dork who had hallucinations. Nonetheless, he answered the question posed by one of the other jesus freaks and 2 Timothy provided the rest.

If you don't like it...tough shit.

There is some extremely poor analysis from people who, supposedly being rationalists, should know better.

The original argument fails because

1) Not all strands (indeed most strands do not) of Christianity hold the bible to be literally true the only workable definition of a christian is that he or she believes in the Nicene creed.

2) You have not proved that you are not evil because you have not adequately defined evil (probably because it is a stupid concept anyway) in a way to differentiate it from the meaning written in the Greek of the New testament.

If you are going to argue your atheism then for fuck's sake know your facts or Christians will just pick you apart..

(September 17, 2012 at 11:19 pm)Puddleglum Wrote: 1) Not all strands (indeed most strands do not) of Christianity hold the bible to be literally true the only workable definition of a christian is that he or she believes in the Nicene creed.

It can be (and I believe it is) the case that the Bible still needs to be true for Christianity to be true.

In this case, what people all thought was holy words confirmed by the holy spirit, turns out it's wrong...where is the holy spirit in all these years...and also if bible is unreliable then there is nothing to prove Christianity...

Quote:2) You have not proved that you are not evil because you have not adequately defined evil (probably because it is a stupid concept anyway) in a way to differentiate it from the meaning written in the Greek of the New testament.

I don't have to prove that, people can have good friends or know good people, in this case, I know my family are good people.

I'm sure many of the Atheists here know good people whom are not Christians.

(September 17, 2012 at 10:08 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Luther is supposed to be an "authority" to you shitheads.

I think he was just another dork who had hallucinations. Nonetheless, he answered the question posed by one of the other jesus freaks and 2 Timothy provided the rest.

If you don't like it...tough shit.

Your lame, strawman, appeal to authority is a joke. See my example if you don't understand why.

Try thinking for yourself once. Stop letting others dictate your opinions to you, 'cause you look kinda stupid when you allow that...

(September 5, 2012 at 7:43 pm)Stimbo Wrote: It could be worse. Some schools of thought hold it that the rib which became Eve wasn't an actual rib from Adam's chest but his baculum, or his penis-bone (as you say, the rib closest to his heart); accounting for why human males don't have one. I'm sure the internet is full of pictures like that.

Unfortunatly, these schools must have little knowledge of genetics. If someone were born with a certain bone in their body and said bone were removed, it would change their physical body, but not their DNA. Any descendants of this person would still be born with that bone; even if the bone were removed at birth every time. After all, if it worked like they suggest, then why do we still have wisdom teeth?

(September 4, 2012 at 4:17 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Joh 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Joh 3:18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.
Joh 3:19 And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.
Joh 3:20 For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed.
Joh 3:21 But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God."

Well I'm obviously evil and I have no objections to my works being exposed.
I make a habit of exposing myself to people on a regular basis so bring it on.
Can't help but feel God didn't think this through.

Good catch Raphiel. I didn't think of "let his works should be exposed" intention.