"The bible test" Answered.

[ThomM]

In the future, if you do not want me weighing your truth against the truth God gives us in the bible, then simply do not challenge what I say with your truth. Because when you do, your religious status will not be considered in how I examine what you have said. All that will matter is the content, context and the way you present it. Just like everyone else. I expect no quarter from my 'brothers' on this website when I go out of my way to argue with them (that is why I never start or rarely read what you all say) and none shall be given in return. We all have a responsiablity to what we have been given over to understand. It is complete foolishness to think we all should think believe the exact same thing. Remember we are of the same body but repersent different parts.

[/quote]




Sorry - Drich - but that is where YOU are a LIAR -

THERE is no truth given to anyone by a god in the bible - that is A belief

THe claim that it is truth - requires proof - and since the bible is the source - it would have to come from outside the bible - noting that the bible is NOT a reliable source - there are things in it that are NOT true.

IF you doubt me - then to prove me wrong I request YOU eat a healthy serving of Oleander seeds or fruit - and then get back to me - since the bible says your god gave you all seed bearing plants for food.

IF your faith was so proper - you would admit it is. YOU faith is A belief that is NOT proven to be true - and therefore what you claim to be truths are just beliefs as well.

[xpastor]

Paul and "Luke" diverge on a number of details about Paul's ministry.

Luke says that right after his conversion by a heavenly vision Paul went first to Damascus and then directly to Jerusalem where he was introduced to the apostles. (Acts 9)

Paul himself says that right after his vision he did not see any who were apostles before him. He went first to Arabia, then to Damascus and finally after three years to Jerusalem where he met Peter and James. (Gal. 1)

Luke mentions a second journey to Jerusalem when Paul and Barnabas brought a collection taken up among the Gentile Christians to help the church at Jerusalem. (Acts 11) He then tells of a third meeting at Jerusalem to discuss the question if the Gentiles needed to be circumcised.

Paul describes a second visit to Jerusalem, 14 years after his first, to discuss this question. (Gal. 2)

Luke describes the Jerusalem leaders, especially Peter and James, as agreeing easily that the Gentiles do not need to be circumcised. (Acts 15)

Paul says that James sent emissaries to Antioch, who frightened Peter into refusing to eat with Gentile Christians "because he was afraid of those who were in favor of circumcising them" and Paul rebuked him (Gal. 2:12) According to Paul it was at this meeting that he was asked to remember "the needy" in the Jerusalem church.

Luke shows Paul taking a tolerant view of idol worship in the past:

Since we are God's children, we should not suppose that his nature is anything like an image of gold or silver or stone, shaped by human art and skill. God has overlooked the times when people did not know him, but now he commands all of them everywhere to turn away from their evil ways. (Acts 17:29-30)

However, writing in Romans 1 Paul takes a quite different view:

Ever since God created the world, his invisible qualities, both his eternal power and his divine nature, have been clearly seen; they are perceived in the things that God has made. So those people have no excuse at all! They know God, but they do not give him the honor that belongs to him, nor do they thank him. Instead, their thoughts have become complete nonsense, and their empty minds are filled with darkness. They say they are wise, but they are fools; instead of worshiping the immortal God, they worship images made to look like mortals or birds or animals or reptiles. (Romans 20-23)

So we could conclude ...

A. that Luke did not listen very carefully to Paul, or

B. that Paul had developed Alzheimer's by the time he wrote Galatians, or

C. along with the majority of modern critical scholars we could conclude that Luke-Acts was written a few decades after Paul's ministry by an anonymous person who admired Paul but did not know Paul or his writings very well.

[Drich]

What happened to pretending to be a biblical scholar? Did someone tell you I am making you look like fool, and all you have left are questions about my penis?

Sorry sport, Mrs Drich gets to know if Mr. pee pee sports a picklehaube (it's a German word, look it up for the punch line)

Jesus Christ was circumcised when he was 8 days old. Why do you not follow Jesus Christ?

If God gets circumcised, it's the first thing I would do to myself if I really believed.

Wait so, in the Bible it says God said, let there be light. Did he utter the words with his mouth?

Oh, i forgot to ask How was church this past sunday?

---

Sorry - Drich - but that is where YOU are a LIAR -

THERE is no truth given to anyone by a god in the bible - that is A belief

Sorry -thommmmm..mm- This is where I get to show you, that your a (Insert personally insulting remark that shows a person in ablity to think for himself here.) The bible makes claims for any new potential believer, it takes a small amount of faith to take up and impliment said claims, the final result (the full fillment of those claims) makes what the bible says "True/Truth."

THe claim that it is truth - requires proof - and since the bible is the source - it would have to come from outside the bible - noting that the bible is NOT a reliable source - there are things in it that are NOT true.

How do you know this is true? I just said the exact oppsite of what you said here. I followed the claims/promises the bible makes to every potential believer, and I found what the bible said I would find.

What have you done that makes you believe the bible to be not telling the truth? Take on faith that people who hold to be smarter than you made that claim for you about God? Can you not see the Irony here?

IF you doubt me - then to prove me wrong I request YOU eat a healthy serving of Oleander seeds or fruit - and then get back to me - since the bible says your god gave you all seed bearing plants for food.

If you trutly want proof of God then follow the directions found in Luke 11 and do exactly what it says do. Rather than try and take God up on something He has promised to someone else.

IF your faith was so proper - you would admit it is. YOU faith is A belief that is NOT proven to be true - and therefore what you claim to be truths are just beliefs as well.

My 'faith' (if you can call it faith anymore) is based on all that I have seen and experienced. God has taken an illerate god hating monster, and has given me wisdom, oppertunity, wealth and a life that is/was well beyond my ablities. I can't talk about everything now as there is still things in the works, but afterwards (maybe as soon as the spring Lord willing) I will be happy to share and even fly any established interactive fence sitter of this forum down to Orlando for a weekend to see what God has done for me. You can have Saturday to do whatever, but be ready to goto Chruch on sunday, afterward we will have lunch and a tour of what God has simply given me.

---

Paul and "Luke" diverge on a number of details about Paul's ministry.

Luke says that right after his conversion by a heavenly vision Paul went first to Damascus and then directly to Jerusalem where he was introduced to the apostles. (Acts 9)

Paul himself says that right after his vision he did not see any who were apostles before him. He went first to Arabia, then to Damascus and finally after three years to Jerusalem where he met Peter and James. (Gal. 1)

Luke mentions a second journey to Jerusalem when Paul and Barnabas brought a collection taken up among the Gentile Christians to help the church at Jerusalem. (Acts 11) He then tells of a third meeting at Jerusalem to discuss the question if the Gentiles needed to be circumcised.

Paul describes a second visit to Jerusalem, 14 years after his first, to discuss this question. (Gal. 2)

Luke describes the Jerusalem leaders, especially Peter and James, as agreeing easily that the Gentiles do not need to be circumcised. (Acts 15)

Paul says that James sent emissaries to Antioch, who frightened Peter into refusing to eat with Gentile Christians "because he was afraid of those who were in favor of circumcising them" and Paul rebuked him (Gal. 2:12) According to Paul it was at this meeting that he was asked to remember "the needy" in the Jerusalem church.

Luke shows Paul taking a tolerant view of idol worship in the past:

Since we are God's children, we should not suppose that his nature is anything like an image of gold or silver or stone, shaped by human art and skill. God has overlooked the times when people did not know him, but now he commands all of them everywhere to turn away from their evil ways. (Acts 17:29-30)

However, writing in Romans 1 Paul takes a quite different view:

Ever since God created the world, his invisible qualities, both his eternal power and his divine nature, have been clearly seen; they are perceived in the things that God has made. So those people have no excuse at all! They know God, but they do not give him the honor that belongs to him, nor do they thank him. Instead, their thoughts have become complete nonsense, and their empty minds are filled with darkness. They say they are wise, but they are fools; instead of worshiping the immortal God, they worship images made to look like mortals or birds or animals or reptiles. (Romans 20-23)

So we could conclude ...

A. that Luke did not listen very carefully to Paul, or

B. that Paul had developed Alzheimer's by the time he wrote Galatians, or

C. along with the majority of modern critical scholars we could conclude that Luke-Acts was written a few decades after Paul's ministry by an anonymous person who admired Paul but did not know Paul or his writings very well.

If "c" were true and Acts/luke was written decades later than why doesn't the book include the final imprisionment and death of Paul by the romans?

I thought you told someone you stopped responding to my posts... Could it be you only stop responding to what you can not answer, but will speak up when you think you have an ironclad arguement?

Would you like me to poke some holes in your iron clading to prove this point?

[Lemonvariable72]

Okay drich how do you explain people like me who followed the instructions in luke 11 and got nothing?

[Esquilax]

Okay drich how do you explain people like me who followed the instructions in luke 11 and got nothing?

He asked, as though he didn't already know the answer is going to be, "you didn't try sincerely enough."

[Tonus]

Okay drich how do you explain people like me who followed the instructions in luke 11 and got nothing?

I think it's some combination of either "you didn't ask the right way" or "god spoke and you didn't listen" or "keep asking, you need to be patient" and there's always "you're lying" if the others don't seem sufficient. I would note that this is one of those areas where "I don't know" would be a perfectly valid response, but from my time as a believer I can not recall a single time that a fellow theist said that. It's as if we feared that our belief system was so fragile that any doubt was harmful to it. We see much of that here in the many attempts to fit god into gaps in our knowledge, as if not knowing for certain is dangerous.

[Lemonvariable72]

Okay drich how do you explain people like me who followed the instructions in luke 11 and got nothing?

He asked, as though he didn't already know the answer is going to be, "you didn't try sincerely enough." :rolleyes:

Perhaps I should add that I asked as sincerely as any man could, I was terrified of going to hell and I was seeking god to make me a better christian.

[Esquilax]

Perhaps I should add that I asked as sincerely as any man could, I was terrified of going to hell and I was seeking god to make me a better christian.

None of that's going to change the answer you get, because the answer isn't based on reality at all. Rather, it's based on keeping the christian dogma safe from interference at any cost.

It's not an answer for you, it's a method of shutting down the conversation before difficult questions have time to make an impact.

[Bad Writer]

Joseph Smith Jr., the founder of the Mormon Church, actually performed A.S.K. just as our buddy Drich here describes. The result? At 14 years of age, he got what he perceived to be an answer from God the Father and Jesus Christ, which led him to label all denominations as abominations in the eyes of The Lord. People believed he was a prophet sent forth to restore the true Gospel of Jesus Christ.

We know enough now to say that the man was sorely mistaken about the entire affair. If a person who truly believed that god had answered him could be demonstrably wrong, then all other people following A.S.K. should take Smith's example into account when trying get their own answers from god.

Joseph Smith was sincere as I'm sure Drich believes himself to be. Why should we consider anything Drippy has to say when this proscribed method has been proven ineffectual? Let's assume for a moment that Mormonism hasn't been completely turned on its head since its initial inception; why is Joseph Smith Jr. wrong while Drich is supposedly correct?

---

Hmmm, maybe I should have made the above post into its own thread. However, if I had done that, then I wouldn't have been able call Drich out on his A.S.K.

[Lemonvariable72]

Perhaps I should add that I asked as sincerely as any man could, I was terrified of going to hell and I was seeking god to make me a better christian.

None of that's going to change the answer you get, because the answer isn't based on reality at all. Rather, it's based on keeping the christian dogma safe from interference at any cost.

It's not an answer for you, it's a method of shutting down the conversation before difficult questions have time to make an impact.

But if two people follow the same instructions from the same bible, and it works for one and not a another, should it not be called into question wither or not the instruction is sound? How much more so for a god?