Is the Holy Spirit Misleading You?

[Astonished]

Again, of what significance is this if the vast majority of content in any of these texts is either demonstrably untrue or utterly irrelevant to anything? It's not like there is any wisdom within it that can't be found elsewhere or that all of the advice it offers is completely flawless.

The significance of it isn't in its history or morality, but in that it it leads us to salvation through Jesus Christ.  That's what the whole bible leads up to.

But you're assuming your conclusion. If the book was flawless, you'd have something to stand on. It's not flawless, in any way. Any position on which you try to defend it has failed and always will. So to grasp onto one claim in the book, and not even a coincidentally good claim (for which there is no corroborating evidence, and which is based on an entirely immoral framework set up by a tyrannical monster), well, that's fucking nuts. If the entire document that outlines whatever it is you think you need to know is thoroughly debunked and thoroughly useless, you don't get to suddenly say it has any value. This is an obstinate position and has no ability to convince a person of its truth or validity. Why don't you stop making things up, go out and find the truth if you're so motivated to be right no matter what, and use that to show us? At least then if you're right you'll be being honest about it.

[Lek]

You make an excellent point -- Over time, there is virtually nothing that Christians have agreed upon!

We all believe that Jesus is God the Son and that salvation is through him.  There's much essential stuff we agree on, but I can't walk into a church in which I agree with everyone on all christian doctrine.  I believe we'll continue to be learning throughout eternity.

---

The significance of it isn't in its history or morality, but in that it it leads us to salvation through Jesus Christ.  That's what the whole bible leads up to.

But you're assuming your conclusion. If the book was flawless, you'd have something to stand on. It's not flawless, in any way. Any position on which you try to defend it has failed and always will. So to grasp onto one claim in the book, and not even a coincidentally good claim (for which there is no corroborating evidence, and which is based on an entirely immoral framework set up by a tyrannical monster), well, that's fucking nuts. If the entire document that outlines whatever it is you think you need to know is thoroughly debunked and thoroughly useless, you don't get to suddenly say it has any value. This is an obstinate position and has no ability to convince a person of its truth or validity. Why don't you stop making things up, go out and find the truth if you're so motivated to be right no matter what, and use that to show us? At least then if you're right you'll be being honest about it.

It doesn't have to be flawless, but it needs to lead me to the truth that it is purposed for.  You trust science for answers and it surely isn't flawless.  If you debunk the bible for me then maybe I'll go somewhere else for my truth about God.

[Astonished]

You make an excellent point -- Over time, there is virtually nothing that Christians have agreed upon!

We all believe that Jesus is God the Son and that salvation is through him.  There's much essential stuff we agree on, but I can't walk into a church in which I agree with everyone on all christian doctrine.  I believe we'll continue to be learning throughout eternity.

---

But you're assuming your conclusion. If the book was flawless, you'd have something to stand on. It's not flawless, in any way. Any position on which you try to defend it has failed and always will. So to grasp onto one claim in the book, and not even a coincidentally good claim (for which there is no corroborating evidence, and which is based on an entirely immoral framework set up by a tyrannical monster), well, that's fucking nuts. If the entire document that outlines whatever it is you think you need to know is thoroughly debunked and thoroughly useless, you don't get to suddenly say it has any value. This is an obstinate position and has no ability to convince a person of its truth or validity. Why don't you stop making things up, go out and find the truth if you're so motivated to be right no matter what, and use that to show us? At least then if you're right you'll be being honest about it.

It doesn't have to be flawless, but it needs to lead me to the truth that it is purposed for.  You trust science for answers and it surely isn't flawless.  If you debunk the bible for me then maybe I'll go somewhere else for my truth about God.

The difference is your book is claiming to be the absolute truth, and hold the only true meaning in life. That's a fuck of a lot of balls to make something like that and yet be unaware of germs and perfectly fine with genocide. The bible has already been debunked seven hundred ways from Sunday by people as smart as me with the means and motivation, and far smarter than yourself. The fact that you're ignorant of this or refuse to believe it means you're either inexcusably uninformed or a willfully dishonest liar and should be condemned for it.

[Lek]

We all believe that Jesus is God the Son and that salvation is through him.  There's much essential stuff we agree on, but I can't walk into a church in which I agree with everyone on all christian doctrine.  I believe we'll continue to be learning throughout eternity.

---

It doesn't have to be flawless, but it needs to lead me to the truth that it is purposed for.  You trust science for answers and it surely isn't flawless.  If you debunk the bible for me then maybe I'll go somewhere else for my truth about God.

The difference is your book is claiming to be the absolute truth, and hold the only true meaning in life. That's a fuck of a lot of balls to make something like that and yet be unaware of germs and perfectly fine with genocide. The bible has already been debunked seven hundred ways from Sunday by people as smart as me with the means and motivation, and far smarter than yourself. The fact that you're ignorant of this or refuse to believe it means you're either inexcusably uninformed or a willfully dishonest liar and should be condemned for it.

You're just throwing words around. Insulting me doesn't do you any good. Give me a reference of where the bible claims to be the absolute truth so I can discuss it with you.

[Godscreated]

---

When discussing biblical events be sure to consider actual history.  Remember, Egypt was much larger than it is now.  The Egyptian Empire included the Levant area all the way to the Tigris River.  So even if the Hebrews were in the Levant and never actually in modern-day Egyptian territory they were in Egypt.

No evidence, though, that the Hebrews worked as slaves for the Egyptians.  In fact, it is know widely recognized that the pyramids were built by paid laborers who were organized into work groups who took pride and ownership in their contributions to the pyramid that they built.

The Egyptians were masters at erasing their own history. Pharaohs would blot out anything they disliked or went against the things they believed. The 25th Dynasty was headed by black Pharaohs (Kushites), when the Egyptian people took back their kingdom they erased everything about the black Pharaohs that they could find, names included. The Bible however was outside their control and in it is mentioned a black Pharaoh by name, oh goodness the Bible more realistic in telling history than those Egyptians that erased or rewrote history. How are we to trust Egyptian history when we do not even know what is reality of history of the rewrite of history to suit a Pharaoh's pride.

GC

[Astonished]

The difference is your book is claiming to be the absolute truth, and hold the only true meaning in life. That's a fuck of a lot of balls to make something like that and yet be unaware of germs and perfectly fine with genocide. The bible has already been debunked seven hundred ways from Sunday by people as smart as me with the means and motivation, and far smarter than yourself. The fact that you're ignorant of this or refuse to believe it means you're either inexcusably uninformed or a willfully dishonest liar and should be condemned for it.

You're just throwing words around.  Insulting me doesn't do you any good.  Give me a reference of where the bible claims to be the absolute truth so I can discuss it with you.

I give up. You're a hopeless case. Not even a modicum of self-reflection could be gleaned from all this.

[Minimalist]

Through archaeology which has no trouble tracing the kings of the 25th Dynasty in spite of your absurd claims.

BTW, that same archaeology tells us that Judah was an insignificant vassal of Assyria which had the temerity to rebel and got the shit kicked out of it.  You see, your fucking bible did not exist at the time.  Perhaps it was an oral tale.... like "my girlfriend who lives in Canada!"

[Jehanne]

---

No evidence, though, that the Hebrews worked as slaves for the Egyptians.  In fact, it is know widely recognized that the pyramids were built by paid laborers who were organized into work groups who took pride and ownership in their contributions to the pyramid that they built.

The Egyptians were masters at erasing their own history. Pharaohs would blot out anything they disliked or went against the things they believed. The 25th Dynasty was headed by black Pharaohs (Kushites), when the Egyptian people took back their kingdom they erased everything about the black Pharaohs that they could find, names included. The Bible however was outside their control and in it is mentioned a black Pharaoh by name, oh goodness the Bible more realistic in telling history than those Egyptians that erased or rewrote history. How are we to trust Egyptian history when we do not even know what is reality of history of the rewrite of history to suit a Pharaoh's pride.

GC

It's much, much more than that.  If the Hebrews were in Egypt, then there would be some archeological evidence of that, and, indeed, there is none, an untenable proposition, as there should have been some artifacts from just outside of Egypt, from the Hebrews leaving.  Again, find me a scholar who takes the Exodus story at face value who is not also a Biblical inerrantist (an absurd position equivalent to Holocaust denial), and post their findings and/or reasons here.  All the evidence is that the Biblical narratives were written much later than was traditionally believed and underwent layers upon layers of redaction and modification up until and even beyond the 1st century of the common era.

[Lek]

It's much, much more than that.  If the Hebrews were in Egypt, then there would be some archeological evidence of that, and, indeed, there is none, an untenable proposition, as there should have been some artifacts from just outside of Egypt, from the Hebrews leaving.  Again, find me a scholar who takes the Exodus story at face value who is not also a Biblical inerrantist (an absurd position equivalent to Holocaust denial), and post their findings and/or reasons here.  All the evidence is that the Biblical narratives were written much later than was traditionally believed and underwent layers upon layers of redaction and modification up until and even beyond the 1st century of the common era.

I believe the Dead Sea Scrolls would refute this.

[Rhondazvous]

The significance of it isn't in its history or morality, but in that it it leads us to salvation through Jesus Christ.  That's what the whole bible leads up to.

But you're assuming your conclusion. If the book was flawless, you'd have something to stand on. It's not flawless, in any way. Any position on which you try to defend it has failed and always will. So to grasp onto one claim in the book, and not even a coincidentally good claim (for which there is no corroborating evidence, and which is based on an entirely immoral framework set up by a tyrannical monster), well, that's fucking nuts. If the entire document that outlines whatever it is you think you need to know is thoroughly debunked and thoroughly useless, you don't get to suddenly say it has any value. This is an obstinate position and has no ability to convince a person of its truth or validity. Why don't you stop making things up, go out and find the truth if you're so motivated to be right no matter what, and use that to show us? At least then if you're right you'll be being honest about it.

If that which can be known is incorrect, why trust that which cannot be known? If your basic arithmetic is faulty, why should I trust your calculus?

He who is faithful (trustworthy) in little will be faithful in much. Apparently, Lek disagree with this.