The Bible Says So

[unfogged]

The bible is a map that tells you how to approach and find God.

Fuck him.  Let him shoot up a flare or something.

[Angrboda]

Where in the bible does it say this?

it is an observation The bible does not speak of itself as it was not compiled while written. the bible does however speak of the scripture as a whole being given by God.
14 But you should continue following the teaching you learned. You know it is true, because you know you can trust those who taught you. 15 You have known the Holy Scriptures since you were a child. These Scriptures are able to make you wise. And that wisdom leads to salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is given by God. And all Scripture is useful for teaching and for showing people what is wrong in their lives. It is useful for correcting faults and teaching the right way to live. 17 Using the Scriptures, those who serve God will be prepared and will have everything they need to do every good work.

Well, then that becomes a supposition you have which may or may not be correct. Before I go any further, I want clarification on a few things. First, since this is Paul, I believe, who is speaking, then by teachings and scripture he would be referring to the rabbinical tradition and the old testament, would he not? And he says that the wisdom in those things will lead you to salvation through faith in Christ. I'm not sure the scriptures and traditions he's referring to can do any such thing. Can you clarify? Another problem is the idea that anything, faith in Jesus, notwithstanding, can lead you to salvation. From what I understand, salvation is a free gift from God, and is not earned, by faith in Christ or anything else. Is this not true? I also note that this passage precedes the gospels, including the Ask/Seek/Knock passage in Luke, which you have claimed is a similar map to God. Do you have anything referring to the gospels themselves in this vein? I may have further questions, but it doesn't appear that this indicates that the bible is a map so much as it is simply truth that can make you wise, and that wisdom can lead you to faith in Christ, which may or may not result in salvation. A map is a representation of the territory, so at minimum, that analogy doesn't hold given what I have so far. Especially is it is referrring to 'scripture' here, meaning the old testament, as that truth leads to a very different God than Jesus. Do you have any examples of Paul referring to his own writings as scripture, so we might at least ponder a self-referential statement? Given that these were letters he was writing, unless there is some explicit reference from him that his letters are scripture, that would seem to leave us with the old testament.

Asserted, but not proven.  I've listened to your arguments a long time, Drich, and they all fail by the same objection that Hume used in his argument against miracles.  For any thing you can cite as evidence of God, there is a more probable natural explanation.  That makes believing in God on account of your evidence irrational.  A smart apologist would attack Hume, but I doubt you're that smart.

it is proven on an individual level. If the bible did not deliver ever it the religion would fall by the way side as every other unproductive religion on earth has. Which is why I say every viable religion is supported by something. It keeps it's promises. Every current religion does. the only question is can man manifest those answered promises or is it a god level thing.

Having a no intermediary relationship with God is God level only that is the center of this religion. if this promise was not full filled every single generation for the last 2000 years Christianity would be a mention like gnosticism.

Unfortunately, the evidence does not support your assertion. It's known that movements prosper for many reasons, not necessarily because they contain truth. You haven't shown that the bible actually delivers, as you haven't addressed the Humean objection. You have to do that before you make any arguments as to its fulfillment of promises validating it. Confirmation bias, perseverance of belief, and other psychological mechanism put the whole of your hypothesis in doubt. People do convince them of things that they shouldn't be convinced of, and people do follow movements after having convinced themselves of such things, even for thousands of years. So this amounts to several errors. First, a failure to overcome the Humean objection. Second, an ignorance and misguided view of human nature. And third, an unsupported hypothesis that unsupported religions fail. Something which experience teaches us is actually the contrary. I find it interesting that you assert that every viable and current religion has something undergirding it which is genuine. Ignoring for the moment that this is basically begging the question, this statement is one of those, "heads I win, tails you lose," type propositions. If the religion continues for some arbitrary period, then it is genuine; why did it persevere, because it is genuine. If it doesn't last that long, then it was not genuine; why, because it didn't meet your arbitrary standard. But you have no way of knowing that Christianity will continue, any more than the acolytes of the Eleusinian mysteries knew that their religion was going to end after them. So this is something of a prediction, that Christianity will continue to prosper and not fail. And you are not a prophet. Your predictions have no value. And the example of the Eleusinian mysteries shows the hollowness of your claim. Their religion lasted 1,500 years or so. You have no way of vouchsafing the success of Christianity any more than they had of their religion. So the Eleusinian mysteries presents a counter-example to the claim that a religion will persevere if it is genuine, as the Eleusinian mysteries both did and did not persevere, yielding the conclusion that they both were and were not true, according to your argument, and that's absurd. Any other interpretation of your argument seems to embody nothing more than a lottery effect. Some religions were bound to persevere, it just so happens Christianity is one of those. Its persevering tells us nothing unless you can establish that it persevered for justifiable reasons, and that leads us back to Hume and human psychology. So, no, your claims and your argument for the truth of your beliefs does not hold up to inspection.

[Drich]

Why do I have to find god?

Because he is hidden from you, as we are not born sinful but born to sin which seperates us from God. Otherwise If God's glory was an absolute, (You were perfect and could see God) you could not make the decision you were placed here to make. You would be overwhelmed by his love grace and the hope of a fulfillment in eternity with him as well as a fear of hell that would keep you from being honest with yourself. The question is do you want to serve God for eternity? I'm sure anyone could serve for a few thousand years without complaint but ultimately in the back of your mind or rather in the back of some minds an idea of freedom will over take you. Or at least that is what happened to 1/3 of the angels and Satan. And since we are no better than angels we can assume the same would happen to us.

So God gives us this moment out of eternity to choose to seek him, or to seek our self want and desire. without knowledge of his glory looming over us we are free to make this choice. If we seek and find God the choice is made for us.

As far as I've heard he's everywhere, and has an inside knowledge of me, why not save me directly for the error of my ways?

To what end? to drag you into heaven kicking and screaming? or to invite you in now and in 10,000 of cleaning up elephant poop in heavenly prades to rebell because you do not like to serve God in the only job you are tasked to do???
Why not take this life and decide once and for all whether or not you want to be a slave of God? If you think slavery is never a good thing thenyou might not like heaven.. So again why should God save you of your sins if heaven is 1700's american to your west african origins? Rather than capture slaves and drag them into service kicking and screaming God is providing each potential slave an opportunity to research life over there and how well we will have it (We as slaves over there will have it better than kings do here) Even so some may not want to serve.

Why would he use a book in one tiny area of the planet, ignoring the vast majority of the human race?

Who said he only used one book? what if the other parts of the planet simply rejected God and Jesus? See how Japan and china both greeted missionaries and converts to christianity.
In truth it is through Jesus the world is saved. Meaning because of what Jesus did those who did not know him (noah abraham David soloman Daniel as well as Tanaka Sobe or a big little foot or a james smythe or a koonta ponte all get judged by Christ Himself and not by the arbertairy rules of a religion.
(I am the way the truth and the light, no man comes to the father but by me.) meaning Jesus is the final judge not Christianity not judahism not any other form of religion ever. Christ and christ alone will judge us and our Serviceability. Did we honorably serve in this life with what God gave us, or did we throw away any knowledge or blessing?

Why would he let his message be written and twisted by corrupted faulty humans?

If you ever studied the bible there are hand written manuscripts that where written before the time of Christ ((hundreds of years) that verify books of the bible that were previously in doubt. the only changes would be grammatical differences given the time span and spelling errors. What changes do you believe you are talking about? As it is not we have 2nd and 3rd century manuscripts that have been vetted by many other sources. In fact last I saw there were over 25,000 different confirmed manuscripts that all confirm our holy Bible.

Why did Jesus not write the updated bible himself (why would a perfect being's bible need to be updated anyway), again allowing his message to be distorted by faulty humans? Why did he then have to send Mohammed to fix what presumably the Jews and the Christians got wrong ?

what's to write? He literally gave us 2 commands. Love God with all of our being and Love our neighbor as our selves. he said in keeping these two commands the whole law is full filled.

The reason for this was Jesus DID NOT WANT To Set Up Another Religion! He was looking for personal relationships, which will be different from group to group and even person to person.

Why does this book have to be interpreted & re-interpreted all the time

because it was not written in english.

causing so many different types of Jewish, Christian & Muslim groups?

Judaism is not an off shoot. Judaism was the original religion with rules and tons of laws. Jesus came to free us from these rules and laws as a way or a means to righteousness (being found right or up standing before the Father.) Once Christ died He took the law away as a means to righteousness and replaced our way to righteousness with love. love for God and love for our neighbor. Did the law go completely away? as a way to righteousness yes, but Jesus also said if you loved him you would keep his commands, not as a way to earn heaven but as a way to show your love to God.

Muslims/Mohamad did not like this lovey dovey crap.. He wanted strict rules and a return to a more brutal crime and punishment system as a way to control the people who followed him. So he set up that system to suit his people's desire to be ruled.

---

So i can call you Gae?

Gae as the "Dae" is long..

For those of us living in the 21st century gay is not an insult. Some of us old farts even figured this out way back in the last century.
[/quote]

yeah, but a gae bologna?!?! There is irony on 10 different levels here! when you are trying to represent yourself as a ultimate spear/God killing weapon.. (which is what his screen name means) but you conjure a mental image of a semi flaccid tube of gelatinatious gae snouts tails and pigs feet... can't help myself, not only that, he stuck with this screen name for the next year!!!

Plus these are not gay jokes the are gae like sundae jokes!!!

[Drich]

Well, then that becomes a supposition you have which may or may not be correct.

again it is an observation based not only on my experience but the experiences of the hundreds of billions if not trillions who have indeed used the bible to find God. The only variable of uncertainty can be found by the one who has yet to use the bible to find God.

 Before I go any further, I want clarification on a few things.  First, since this is Paul, I believe, who is speaking, then by teachings and scripture he would be referring to the rabbinical tradition and the old testament, would he not?

This was indeed a quote from Paul to timothy (one of his primary disciples) specifically 2 tim 3 16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

Note He says all scripture not Just Holy Scripture. Paul says "holy Scripture" i 2 tim 3:15 then in 16 say all scripture. meaning he is including both old testament and what will ultimately become the NT.

The word is in greek is Graphe, it can reference anything written to the holy writings.
https://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons...raphe.html

Holy Scripture from his POV would mean the Ot. which is mentioned in verse 15and that from childhood thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

then again makes a point ALL scripture would include even his inspired writings in verse 16. (there is a difference )

 And he says that the wisdom in those things will lead you to salvation through faith in Christ.  I'm not sure the scriptures and traditions he's referring to can do any such thing.  Can you clarify?  

this is what I am calling a map. the wisdom of both in what he wrote and what was found in the OT specifically the prophesies concerning Christ or the coming messiah and even how the law was structured and what it means to full fill the law, meaning not only the thou shalt not bits but the atonement and redemption bits.. So when it is said by Christ law has been completed we can stand with christ in a perpetual sense of forgiveness. Yes the law is there but so is the atonement. The understanding of the Ot will give you understanding/how perpetual grace is possible and the newer writings help mold and shape one in this freedom. or how to live AFTER you decide to follow Christ. and all the benfits of that.

Another problem is the idea that anything, faith in Jesus, not withstanding, can lead you to salvation.

being lead to salvation and being saved are two different things. I or the bible can lead someone to belief in Christ but it does not mean they will accept belief in Christ.  In order to be saved you must believe.

From what I understand, salvation is a free gift from God, and is not earned, by faith in Christ or anything else.  Is this not true?

100% true but what I am speaking of goes beyond salvation. Relationship with God is more or what we look for after salvation. it is the reason for salvation. once we are saved by Grace we have the opportunity (as not all who are saved have or seek God Some can sustain salvation by belief alone and Jesus says to those who can there is an extra measure of blessing coming their way) to seek out God/The Holy Spirit and receive the fruit or evidences of the Spirit which will eventually manifest to actual 'gifts' which even today on some levels break the border of the miraculous.

 I also note that this passage precedes the gospels, including the Ask/Seek/Knock passage in Luke, which you have claimed is a similar map to God.

What was written in luke was openly taught by Paul. it was His Gospel Luke penned down The reason luke wrote down paul's gospel was because he was sent by his master to capture the story of Christ. and if paul was representing Christ then Christ before paul wrote to tim the second time, we know he paul was speaking out directions from his 'map' long before it was cannon. meaning before the word of luke 11 was written Jesus Himself taught these directions on how to obtain not just salvation but a relationship via the Holy Spirit. And before Paul could establish a church he had to speak the gospel of Jesus which would include luke 11 because again luke's book was said to be Paul's gospel. (as luke records himself to be a disciple/scribe of Paul)

 Do you have anything referring to the gospels themselves in this vein?

Again the gospels were penned down as the gospel sources were being threatened by death. before that the gospels were personally taught by Peter John Mat and Paul. As Mark was a disciple of the illertate peter, john and mat wrote their own gospels and Luke was a disciple of Paul as recorded by luke in acts. Meaning before salvation before the invitation to be saved could be issued one needed to know who jesus was and the verbal gospel from one of the disciples is what established most churches in that time. Later when the disciples began to die off the gospels became "Graphe" or scripture. at that time it would be apart of the "all scripture" of verse 16 and not the holy Scripture of verse 15 but according to paul equally valid.

 I may have further questions, but it doesn't appear that this indicates that the bible is a map so much as it is simply truth that can make you wise, and that wisdom can lead you to faith in Christ, which may or may not result in salvation.

.... it is a document that makes you wise and LEADS... you to Christ. maybe we should define the word map... now understand.. maps come in different styles. some are topographic which means they depict an area by showing elevation and terrain a pictorial map that shows what the ground looks like. This type of map would be a more verbal map meaning a GPS turn by turn instructive map. which will LEAD you to God the Spirit. Yes salvation comes through Christ and that is a stop on the map but not the final destination. salvation is the key not the end point.

 A map is a representation of the territory, so at minimum, that analogy doesn't hold given what I have so far.

I would disagree as the terrain would be our very lives the bible speaks of how to navigate. This will become more clear the further along you travel as we go we will conjure up ideas of who God is. then God sends trials and hardship to test this picture you have... meaning your world will fall apart and you will cry out to your idea of God... if nothing happens or if your cries go partially heard the bible more over Christ tells you how to navigate this time and how to adjust and prepare for the next storm subsequently carving out the untrue portions of your idea of God and reinforcing the true aspects. Till one day you picture of God is complete enough to allow The holy Spirit Himself to come in and fill in the gaps for you. (if you are seeking Him)  Again you are given direction and wisdom by following the path christ and even Paul lays out.

 Especially is it is referring to 'scripture' here, meaning the old testament, as that truth leads to a very different God than Jesus.

actually same God, same requirements the difference is Christ full fills the requirements of the OT laws. If we wish to reap the benefits of the work of Christ in his fulfillment of the law we must acknowledge and accept it was done on our behalf.

 Do you have any examples of Paul referring to his own writings as scripture, so we might at least ponder a self-referential statement?

1 cor7 Paul goes in and out of what is scripture/command from God and what his personal feeling/thoughts are. they do not contradict so much as paul feel people should follow his example as life would be easier as a follower but understand the institution of marriage does does not countermand what God has to say on the matter. verse 6 is a soft switch between his thoughts and a command and 10 is an absolute This is not me but a command from God!
10 Now, I have a command for those who are married. Actually, it is not from me; it is what the Lord commanded. A wife should not leave her husband. 11 But if a wife does leave, she should remain single or get back together with her husband. And a husband should not divorce his wife.

John also does this in john 12:49 He says I do not say these thing on my own but for God.

Not to mention Paul sometimes starts with a personal greeting to individual concerning personal matter and several instances where paul goes off the road trash talking peter or someone else for his belief of circumcision, there is also paul's personal thoughts on the other 12 disciples and what they think of him, He is recorded personally requesting for coats scrolls and airing personal grievances from certain people. none of which have anything to do with cannon.

 Given that these were letters he was writing, unless there is some explicit reference from him that his letters are scripture, that would seem to leave us with the old testament.

and if there is explicit reference?

Unfortunately, the evidence does not support your assertion.

again this is true with every religion including Christianity. you simply misunderstand the assertion. People even deeply religious are not stupid. If a religion makes a promise more often than not it must be full filled otherwise the religion will die. Now again how those promises are full filled differ. I spoke of societal fulfillment demonic fulfillment and fulfillment by God. All religions work on this principle if it is to sustain followers. Granted these mechanisms do not generally entice people to follow the promises of the religion must do that. but again if the promises are not being full fill the religion will die. history bears this truth out since the beginning of recorded history. to deny this is to deny thousand and thousands of years of broken religions.

 It's known that movements prosper for many reasons, not necessarily because they contain truth.  You haven't shown that the bible actually delivers, as you haven't addressed the Humean objection.

it is not mine to deliver anything to you besides what God has done for me.. A personal relationship with God like mine has also been promised to you or anyone else who seeks it on his terms.. All I am equipped to do is provide you examples of how this process has worked in my own life. From day one post one I have done this are great personal criticism. So you can't say I have not provided proof as I have in the way of 1sr person testimony which is valid as proof in a court of law. However if you seek more indepth proof you must attend to your own walk with God as I can not walk that path for you.

 You have to do that before you make any arguments as to its fulfillment of promises validating it. Confirmation bias, perseverance of belief, and other psychological mechanism put the whole of your hypothesis in doubt. 

Again I am not God. I can not give you what was given to me. but I can tell you what I was given and how I got it. This is no different than me telling you of the Old Man who set me up in business. He offered me 25,000.00 to start my own business the very first time I spoke to him with in 15 mins of speaking probaly more like5 or 10 mins.. then the second time I met him with my wife (at perkins over pancakes the next morning) with a hand shake and nothing more he wrote me a valid check. I asked why he said this is how he got started (someone he knew gifted him a large sum of money and he wanted to give back) turned out there was one other guy he did something similar with, but in that case he was a partner till he died. After he died I found out from the widow he was looking for people to start up in business that had meet 4 qualifications in his mind. Now let say After being set up I found out the 4 things and told you about this guy and that I knew you had the 4 things he was looking for. all you had to do was meet him on his terms and show him you were ABCD.

would you similarly demand I must provide some undefined "truth" aside from my personal testimony and open invitation to check out what this man has done for me? would it be confirmation bias, preservation of belief and or some other psychological mechanism to simply pass on to you what I personally experienced? Or maybe you do not understand what I am telling you.. In that God will in this world in this life physically confirm himself to you in such away as to be anything and everything you need to establish and maintain a forever relationship, just like he did with me. we even have the biblical example of doubting thomas. but like thomas you have to meet him in his time on his terms. just like the Guy writing checks you have to go to him on his terms. I can't write the check to you from him. If you want to know the truth seek it out yourself.

Besides what I don't understand is what do you have to loose? do you hate pancakes that much? I'm not asking for money I'm not telling to go to a specific church I'm not telling you has to stop servicing sailors as they come in from the ship yards. Remember Jesus met with and sat down to dinner with active sinners. He right now has no problem working with you even while so long as your hearts in the right spot and you are willing to work with him.. If you can do this He will send the Spirit which will instruct you on which way to go. Which at that point after experiencing God yourself you will want more. How is it confirmation bias when I experienced all of these things long before I ever read or knew anything about them? like wise how would it be confirmation bias if I'm telling you how to obtain your own unique journey with God? I promise God is not who you think him to be otherwise you would be teaching me not me you. He's probably almost the opposite of what most of you think and believe.

 People do convince them of things that they shouldn't be convinced of, and people do follow movements after having convinced themselves of such things, even for thousands of years.

again those are examples of societal fulfillment of given promises in a given religion.. For example lets say the people of roman donate food and wine to the temple alter of Abundantia the roman goddess of food and prosperity. so long as rome stands people donate to this temple and the temple monks live off of and give out food and wine when times are tough thus full filling the role of this God. Now say rome falls and the priests are all killed. Meaning the roman society is no longer able to support this god and her role. so then how much longer do you think people would donate to this 'god' if she had no society to full fill this role? how many generation would bring tons and tons of grain and wine to this broken temple if this god did not full fill her promises???

The same is true with Christianity. There are however some aspects that require societal help, the primary promise or primary goal is direct contact with God. Now if the majority did not have SOME contact in one form or fashion in over 2000 years... how long do you think it would be before people stoped going to church.

I can tell you. one generation. My grandfather generation (WWII guys) were all very religious but after war did not pass on what it took to establish a personal relationship with God. So the boomers went in 100 different directions looking for God (the Televanglist/get God to make you rich bunch) most of them and us the following generation knew there was no God in men and churches like that. one generation later this idea of there being no God in the most visible/biggest churches makes this generation think there is no God at all. and because they like you tried once or twice and God of the bible did not come a running like the uncle-grandpa you think he is, most of you assume there is no God.

That... is confirmation bias. You assume your efforts demanded an audiuence with God and because you didn't get one. God could not exist, because you did ABC.. Too bad or never mind God seeks 123

 So this amounts to several errors.  First, a failure to overcome the Humean objection.

David hume is a little minded moron. (taking a chapter out of your debate style/Attack the person's character thus discrediting his conclusions.) if that is not enough to show small minded thinking. from what I understand the crux of his argument is even if we can show a creator this does not mean he is almighty and all powerful..

Do you see the problem with that small minded logic?

Let's say your mother birthed you and your father... Fathered you. Now are they all powerful? Are they all knowing? Do they deserve your love and respect? Now IF you say yes, then why is it the God david Hume says could exist but not be all powerful and all knowing but still creator God of this universe and everything in it somehow deserves less love or respect than your basic mom or dad?

Yes yes you can see and feel and know you mom and dad in this life... but what if you were like a puppy born with his eyes closed? still has a mom and dad but you are just too young to have opened your eyes yet. once you do in this life literally all powerful or not you will see the ultimate authority who is indeed the alpha and the omega in all of creation.

IE David Hume is a small minded moron who has detached mummy and doda issues or he would have been able to answer his own question.

 Second, an ignorance and misguided view of human nature.

I clearly shown you are the one who does not have a grasp on humanity.
I speak having lived both sides of the argument.

 And third, an unsupported hypothesis that unsupported religions fail.

This is a fail supposition. as no hypothesis was provided concerning how God has worked in my life full filling the promises found in the bible.

 Something which experience teaches us is actually the contrary.

says someone who failed to read the map about the wind and rain and how it is supposed to obliterate any false religious ideas you may have.

  I find it interesting that you assert that every viable and current religion has something undergirding it which is genuine.

Because all bullshit aside and despite what you may think I have been a student of all religion most of my adult life. All active religions are being fueled by something. they will not work in a vacuum. People are not stupid even if they don't full understand how something works. Most of them are smart enough to see and understand that something is driving/forcing making a given religion work. even if they mislable that force God.

 Ignoring for the moment that this is basically begging the question, this statement is one of those, "heads I win, tails you lose," type propositions.   If the religion continues for some arbitrary period, then it is genuine; why did it persevere, because it is genuine.
[quote]
If you called my phone number right now and I picked up and I was speaking to you and you me would it mean I was speaking with a genuine Iphone X? Or better yet if I said I have a 1967 ford mustang all redone and said I can take you a ride in it but I show up with a 'red' car that had 1967 mustang written on it would it make it a genuine 1967 produced ford mustang? Bottom line just because something works doesn't make it genuine.

Religion like the mustang if you want to believe my red car with 1967 written on it was the real deal without vetting anything or checking anything but want to believe out of faith, then you could very well have a pig in a poke. I guess it depends on whether or not my "red hand written mustang" covers the promises you want covered (to go for a ride/don't care what kind of car) , or if you simply don't know any better/the fact that this is your first car you've seen is enough.. but again. as a whole we as a species are not stupid someone is going to point out that color and my writing does make it a 67 mustang!

[quote]
 If it doesn't last that long, then it was not genuine; why, because it didn't meet your arbitrary standard.  

look at buddhism or hinduism.. it hits all the right notes for those who want to live in that culture under those 'rules and or gods.' for them they are looking for a ride and don't care what they are riding in. they are 'cashing out' a specific social order and life style for this life time with the promise of something better that they can not vet in the next life. and that is all they want. hence a ride in a car. they get something now they want (social structure and organized way of living with the idea of some after if they live they way they all want in this life.) win win.

But you have no way of knowing that Christianity will continue, any more than the acolytes of the Eleusinian mysteries knew that their religion was going to end after them.  

Once the last that can be saved gets saved... Triggers the end. The book of revelation while to us is supoosed to predict the future. in truth the book of revelation is written as a historical account. Meaning Christianity will not last is it not supposed to. It is mean to save those it can. once that task is complete, then this world will pass.

So this is something of a prediction, that Christianity will continue to prosper and not fail.  And you are not a prophet.

you assume too much. meaning you assume I am making a prediction. I am simply citing a historical account of the end times. (I am not a prophet I am quoting one.)
and you wrongfully assume I am saying christianity is to last forever. In fact I hope I get to see the end.

maybe I will be left behind to help you guys get your sh*t together and one of the 'remnant' after the rapture.

 Your predictions have no value.

like the brewmaster said to his boy.. give time my boy, give it time..

 And the example of the Eleusinian mysteries shows the hollowness of your claim.

These guys only strengthen my claim in that if people see something that works they will follow it. there is something in that religion that people see working still. but once everything fueling that movement died so too did the religion.

 Their religion lasted 1,500 years or so.  You have no way of vouchsafing the success of Christianity any more than they had of their religion.

I do as I can attest as well as millions of other our beliefs are still being fueled by the meeting of the promises made and kept. You cant find one person still practicing that other religion devoutly and have them still say their religious beliefs are being full filled.

 So the Eleusinian mysteries presents a counter-example to the claim that a religion will persevere if it is genuine, as the Eleusinian mysteries both did and did not persevere, yielding the conclusion that they both were and were not true, according to your argument, and that's absurd.

not my claim or not my intended explanation. I contend all active working religions have valid mechanisms in them that full fill the promises of said religion. I narrowed them down to community making good on the promises of the religion. demonic influence, and finally God. I also say time will bear out all religions whether they be false or true.

 Any other interpretation of your argument seems to embody nothing more than a lottery effect.  Some religions were bound to persevere, it just so happens Christianity is one of those.  Its persevering tells us nothing unless you can establish that it persevered for justifiable reasons, and that leads us back to Hume and human psychology.  So, no, your claims and your argument for the truth of your beliefs does not hold up to inspection.

what more likely, trillions of people are so stupid they will believe anything for the sake of belief all except you and people like you in these last few generations?

OR

There is power behind belief, whether it be self full filling or power by a non human force? Therefore people will believe so long as they see this power act in accordance to their doctrinal beliefs.

[Angrboda]

Well, then that becomes a supposition you have which may or may not be correct.

---

again it is an observation based not only on my experience but the experiences of the hundreds of billions if not trillions who have indeed used the bible to find God. The only variable of uncertainty can be found by the one who has yet to use the bible to find God.

 Before I go any further, I want clarification on a few things.  First, since this is Paul, I believe, who is speaking, then by teachings and scripture he would be referring to the rabbinical tradition and the old testament, would he not?

This was indeed a quote from Paul to timothy (one of his primary disciples) specifically 2 tim 3 16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

Note He says all scripture not Just Holy Scripture. Paul says "holy Scripture" i 2 tim 3:15 then in 16 say all scripture. meaning he is including both old testament and what will ultimately become the NT.

The word is in greek is Graphe, it can reference anything written to the holy writings.
https://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons...raphe.html

Holy Scripture from his POV would mean the Ot. which is mentioned in verse 15and that from childhood thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

then again makes a point ALL scripture would include even his inspired writings in verse 16. (there is a difference )

 And he says that the wisdom in those things will lead you to salvation through faith in Christ.  I'm not sure the scriptures and traditions he's referring to can do any such thing.  Can you clarify?  

this is what I am calling a map. the wisdom of both in what he wrote and what was found in the OT specifically the prophesies concerning Christ or the coming messiah and even how the law was structured and what it means to full fill the law, meaning not only the thou shalt not bits but the atonement and redemption bits.. So when it is said by Christ law has been completed we can stand with christ in a perpetual sense of forgiveness. Yes the law is there but so is the atonement. The understanding of the Ot will give you understanding/how perpetual grace is possible and the newer writings help mold and shape one in this freedom. or how to live AFTER you decide to follow Christ. and all the benfits of that.

Another problem is the idea that anything, faith in Jesus, not withstanding, can lead you to salvation.

being lead to salvation and being saved are two different things. I or the bible can lead someone to belief in Christ but it does not mean they will accept belief in Christ.  In order to be saved you must believe.

From what I understand, salvation is a free gift from God, and is not earned, by faith in Christ or anything else.  Is this not true?

100% true but what I am speaking of goes beyond salvation. Relationship with God is more or what we look for after salvation. it is the reason for salvation. once we are saved by Grace we have the opportunity (as not all who are saved have or seek God Some can sustain salvation by belief alone and Jesus says to those who can there is an extra measure of blessing coming their way) to seek out God/The Holy Spirit and receive the fruit or evidences of the Spirit which will eventually manifest to actual 'gifts' which even today on some levels break the border of the miraculous.

 I also note that this passage precedes the gospels, including the Ask/Seek/Knock passage in Luke, which you have claimed is a similar map to God.

What was written in luke was openly taught by Paul. it was His Gospel Luke penned down The reason luke wrote down paul's gospel was because he was sent by his master to capture the story of Christ. and if paul was representing Christ then Christ before paul wrote to tim the second time, we know he paul was speaking out directions from his 'map' long before it was cannon. meaning before the word of luke 11 was written Jesus Himself taught these directions on how to obtain not just salvation but a relationship via the Holy Spirit. And before Paul could establish a church he had to speak the gospel of Jesus which would include luke 11 because again luke's book was said to be Paul's gospel. (as luke records himself to be a disciple/scribe of Paul)

 Do you have anything referring to the gospels themselves in this vein?

Again the gospels were penned down as the gospel sources were being threatened by death. before that the gospels were personally taught by Peter John Mat and Paul. As Mark was a disciple of the illertate peter, john and mat wrote their own gospels and Luke was a disciple of Paul as recorded by luke in acts. Meaning before salvation before the invitation to be saved could be issued one needed to know who jesus was and the verbal gospel from one of the disciples is what established most churches in that time. Later when the disciples began to die off the gospels became "Graphe" or scripture. at that time it would be apart of the "all scripture" of verse 16 and not the holy Scripture of verse 15 but according to paul equally valid.

 I may have further questions, but it doesn't appear that this indicates that the bible is a map so much as it is simply truth that can make you wise, and that wisdom can lead you to faith in Christ, which may or may not result in salvation.

.... it is a document that makes you wise and LEADS... you to Christ. maybe we should define the word map... now understand.. maps come in different styles. some are topographic which means they depict an area by showing elevation and terrain a pictorial map that shows what the ground looks like. This type of map would be a more verbal map meaning a GPS turn by turn instructive map. which will LEAD you to God the Spirit. Yes salvation comes through Christ and that is a stop on the map but not the final destination. salvation is the key not the end point.

 A map is a representation of the territory, so at minimum, that analogy doesn't hold given what I have so far.

I would disagree as the terrain would be our very lives the bible speaks of how to navigate. This will become more clear the further along you travel as we go we will conjure up ideas of who God is. then God sends trials and hardship to test this picture you have... meaning your world will fall apart and you will cry out to your idea of God... if nothing happens or if your cries go partially heard the bible more over Christ tells you how to navigate this time and how to adjust and prepare for the next storm subsequently carving out the untrue portions of your idea of God and reinforcing the true aspects. Till one day you picture of God is complete enough to allow The holy Spirit Himself to come in and fill in the gaps for you. (if you are seeking Him)  Again you are given direction and wisdom by following the path christ and even Paul lays out.

 Especially is it is referring to 'scripture' here, meaning the old testament, as that truth leads to a very different God than Jesus.

actually same God, same requirements the difference is Christ full fills the requirements of the OT laws. If we wish to reap the benefits of the work of Christ in his fulfillment of the law we must acknowledge and accept it was done on our behalf.

 Do you have any examples of Paul referring to his own writings as scripture, so we might at least ponder a self-referential statement?

1 cor7 Paul goes in and out of what is scripture/command from God and what his personal feeling/thoughts are. they do not contradict so much as paul feel people should follow his example as life would be easier as a follower but understand the institution of marriage does does not countermand what God has to say on the matter. verse 6 is a soft switch between his thoughts and a command and 10 is an absolute This is not me but a command from God!
10 Now, I have a command for those who are married. Actually, it is not from me; it is what the Lord commanded. A wife should not leave her husband. 11 But if a wife does leave, she should remain single or get back together with her husband. And a husband should not divorce his wife.

John also does this in john 12:49 He says I do not say these thing on my own but for God.

Not to mention Paul sometimes starts with a personal greeting to individual concerning personal matter and several instances where paul goes off the road trash talking peter or someone else for his belief of circumcision, there is also paul's personal thoughts on the other 12 disciples and what they think of him, He is recorded personally requesting for coats scrolls and airing personal grievances from certain people. none of which have anything to do with cannon.

 Given that these were letters he was writing, unless there is some explicit reference from him that his letters are scripture, that would seem to leave us with the old testament.

and if there is explicit reference?

Unfortunately, the evidence does not support your assertion.

again this is true with every religion including Christianity. you simply misunderstand the assertion. People even deeply religious are not stupid. If a religion makes a promise more often than not it must be full filled otherwise the religion will die. Now again how those promises are full filled differ. I spoke of societal fulfillment demonic fulfillment and fulfillment by God. All religions work on this principle if it is to sustain followers. Granted these mechanisms do not generally entice people to follow the promises of the religion must do that. but again if the promises are not being full fill the religion will die. history bears this truth out since the beginning of recorded history. to deny this is to deny thousand and thousands of years of broken religions.

 It's known that movements prosper for many reasons, not necessarily because they contain truth.  You haven't shown that the bible actually delivers, as you haven't addressed the Humean objection.

it is not mine to deliver anything to you besides what God has done for me.. A personal relationship with God like mine has also been promised to you or anyone else who seeks it on his terms.. All I am equipped to do is provide you examples of how this process has worked in my own life. From day one post one I have done this are great personal criticism. So you can't say I have not provided proof as I have in the way of 1sr person testimony which is valid as proof in a court of law. However if you seek more indepth proof you must attend to your own walk with God as I can not walk that path for you.

 You have to do that before you make any arguments as to its fulfillment of promises validating it. Confirmation bias, perseverance of belief, and other psychological mechanism put the whole of your hypothesis in doubt. 

Again I am not God. I can not give you what was given to me. but I can tell you what I was given and how I got it. This is no different than me telling you of the Old Man who set me up in business. He offered me 25,000.00 to start my own business the very first time I spoke to him with in 15 mins of speaking probaly more like5 or 10 mins.. then the second time I met him with my wife (at perkins over pancakes the next morning) with a hand shake and nothing more he wrote me a valid check. I asked why he said this is how he got started (someone he knew gifted him a large sum of money and he wanted to give back) turned out there was one other guy he did something similar with, but in that case he was a partner till he died. After he died I found out from the widow he was looking for people to start up in business that had meet 4 qualifications in his mind. Now let say After being set up I found out the 4 things and told you about this guy and that I knew you had the 4 things he was looking for. all you had to do was meet him on his terms and show him you were ABCD.

would you similarly demand I must provide some undefined "truth" aside from my personal testimony and open invitation to check out what this man has done for me? would it be confirmation bias, preservation of belief and or some other psychological mechanism to simply pass on to you what I personally experienced? Or maybe you do not understand what I am telling you.. In that God will in this world in this life physically confirm himself to you in such away as to be anything and everything you need to establish and maintain a forever relationship, just like he did with me. we even have the biblical example of doubting thomas. but like thomas you have to meet him in his time on his terms. just like the Guy writing checks you have to go to him on his terms. I can't write the check to you from him. If you want to know the truth seek it out yourself.

Besides what I don't understand is what do you have to loose? do you hate pancakes that much? I'm not asking for money I'm not telling to go to a specific church I'm not telling you has to stop servicing sailors as they come in from the ship yards. Remember Jesus met with and sat down to dinner with active sinners. He right now has no problem working with you even while so long as your hearts in the right spot and you are willing to work with him.. If you can do this He will send the Spirit which will instruct you on which way to go. Which at that point after experiencing God yourself you will want more. How is it confirmation bias when I experienced all of these things long before I ever read or knew anything about them? like wise how would it be confirmation bias if I'm telling you how to obtain your own unique journey with God? I promise God is not who you think him to be otherwise you would be teaching me not me you. He's probably almost the opposite of what most of you think and believe.

 People do convince them of things that they shouldn't be convinced of, and people do follow movements after having convinced themselves of such things, even for thousands of years.

again those are examples of societal fulfillment of given promises in a given religion.. For example lets say the people of roman donate food and wine to the temple alter of Abundantia the roman goddess of food and prosperity. so long as rome stands people donate to this temple and the temple monks live off of and give out food and wine when times are tough thus full filling the role of this God. Now say rome falls and the priests are all killed. Meaning the roman society is no longer able to support this god and her role. so then how much longer do you think people would donate to this 'god' if she had no society to full fill this role? how many generation would bring tons and tons of grain and wine to this broken temple if this god did not full fill her promises???

The same is true with Christianity. There are however some aspects that require societal help, the primary promise or primary goal is direct contact with God. Now if the majority did not have SOME contact in one form or fashion in over 2000 years... how long do you think it would be before people stoped going to church.

I can tell you. one generation. My grandfather generation (WWII guys) were all very religious but after war did not pass on what it took to establish a personal relationship with God. So the boomers went in 100 different directions looking for God (the Televanglist/get God to make you rich bunch) most of them and us the following generation knew there was no God in men and churches like that. one generation later this idea of there being no God in the most visible/biggest churches makes this generation think there is no God at all. and because they like you tried once or twice and God of the bible did not come a running like the uncle-grandpa you think he is, most of you assume there is no God.

That... is confirmation bias. You assume your efforts demanded an audiuence with God and because you didn't get one. God could not exist, because you did ABC.. Too bad or never mind God seeks 123

 So this amounts to several errors.  First, a failure to overcome the Humean objection.

David hume is a little minded moron. (taking a chapter out of your debate style/Attack the person's character thus discrediting his conclusions.) if that is not enough to show small minded thinking. from what I understand the crux of his argument is even if we can show a creator this does not mean he is almighty and all powerful..

Do you see the problem with that small minded logic?

Let's say your mother birthed you and your father... Fathered you. Now are they all powerful? Are they all knowing? Do they deserve your love and respect? Now IF you say yes, then why is it the God david Hume says could exist but not be all powerful and all knowing but still creator God of this universe and everything in it somehow deserves less love or respect than your basic mom or dad?

Yes yes you can see and feel and know you mom and dad in this life... but what if you were like a puppy born with his eyes closed? still has a mom and dad but you are just too young to have opened your eyes yet. once you do in this life literally all powerful or not you will see the ultimate authority who is indeed the alpha and the omega in all of creation.

IE David Hume is a small minded moron who has detached mummy and doda issues or he would have been able to answer his own question.

 Second, an ignorance and misguided view of human nature.

I clearly shown you are the one who does not have a grasp on humanity.
I speak having lived both sides of the argument.

 And third, an unsupported hypothesis that unsupported religions fail.

This is a fail supposition. as no hypothesis was provided concerning how God has worked in my life full filling the promises found in the bible.

 Something which experience teaches us is actually the contrary.

says someone who failed to read the map about the wind and rain and how it is supposed to obliterate any false religious ideas you may have.

  I find it interesting that you assert that every viable and current religion has something undergirding it which is genuine.

Because all bullshit aside and despite what you may think I have been a student of all religion most of my adult life. All active religions are being fueled by something. they will not work in a vacuum. People are not stupid even if they don't full understand how something works. Most of them are smart enough to see and understand that something is driving/forcing making a given religion work. even if they mislable that force God.

 Ignoring for the moment that this is basically begging the question, this statement is one of those, "heads I win, tails you lose," type propositions.   If the religion continues for some arbitrary period, then it is genuine; why did it persevere, because it is genuine.

If you called my phone number right now and I picked up and I was speaking to you and you me would it mean I was speaking with a genuine Iphone X? Or better yet if I said I have a 1967 ford mustang all redone and said I can take you a ride in it but I show up with a 'red' car that had 1967 mustang written on it would it make it a genuine 1967 produced ford mustang? Bottom line just because something works doesn't make it genuine.

Religion like the mustang if you want to believe my red car with 1967 written on it was the real deal without vetting anything or checking anything but want to believe out of faith, then you could very well have a pig in a poke. I guess it depends on whether or not my "red hand written mustang" covers the promises you want covered (to go for a ride/don't care what kind of car) , or if you simply don't know any better/the fact that this is your first car you've seen is enough.. but again. as a whole we as a species are not stupid someone is going to point out that color and my writing does make it a 67 mustang!

 If it doesn't last that long, then it was not genuine; why, because it didn't meet your arbitrary standard.  

look at buddhism or hinduism.. it hits all the right notes for those who want to live in that culture under those 'rules and or gods.' for them they are looking for a ride and don't care what they are riding in. they are 'cashing out' a specific social order and life style for this life time with the promise of something better that they can not vet in the next life. and that is all they want. hence a ride in a car. they get something now they want (social structure and organized way of living with the idea of some after if they live they way they all want in this life.) win win.

But you have no way of knowing that Christianity will continue, any more than the acolytes of the Eleusinian mysteries knew that their religion was going to end after them.  

Once the last that can be saved gets saved... Triggers the end. The book of revelation while to us is supoosed to predict the future. in truth the book of revelation is written as a historical account. Meaning Christianity will not last is it not supposed to. It is mean to save those it can. once that task is complete, then this world will pass.

So this is something of a prediction, that Christianity will continue to prosper and not fail.  And you are not a prophet.

you assume too much. meaning you assume I am making a prediction. I am simply citing a historical account of the end times. (I am not a prophet I am quoting one.)
and you wrongfully assume I am saying christianity is to last forever. In fact I hope I get to see the end.

maybe I will be left behind to help you guys get your sh*t together and one of the 'remnant' after the rapture.

 Your predictions have no value.

like the brewmaster said to his boy.. give time my boy, give it time..

 And the example of the Eleusinian mysteries shows the hollowness of your claim.

These guys only strengthen my claim in that if people see something that works they will follow it. there is something in that religion that people see working still. but once everything fueling that movement died so too did the religion.

 Their religion lasted 1,500 years or so.  You have no way of vouchsafing the success of Christianity any more than they had of their religion.

I do as I can attest as well as millions of other our beliefs are still being fueled by the meeting of the promises made and kept. You cant find one person still practicing that other religion devoutly and have them still say their religious beliefs are being full filled.

 So the Eleusinian mysteries presents a counter-example to the claim that a religion will persevere if it is genuine, as the Eleusinian mysteries both did and did not persevere, yielding the conclusion that they both were and were not true, according to your argument, and that's absurd.

not my claim or not my intended explanation. I contend all active working religions have valid mechanisms in them that full fill the promises of said religion. I narrowed them down to community making good on the promises of the religion. demonic influence, and finally God. I also say time will bear out all religions whether they be false or true.

 Any other interpretation of your argument seems to embody nothing more than a lottery effect.  Some religions were bound to persevere, it just so happens Christianity is one of those.  Its persevering tells us nothing unless you can establish that it persevered for justifiable reasons, and that leads us back to Hume and human psychology.  So, no, your claims and your argument for the truth of your beliefs does not hold up to inspection.

what more likely, trillions of people are so stupid they will believe anything for the sake of belief all except you and people like you in these last few generations?

OR

There is power behind belief, whether it be self full filling or power by a non human force? Therefore people will believe so long as they see this power act in accordance to their doctrinal beliefs.

---

Thank you for the reply, Drich.  I won't have the opportunity to read and respond to your post until Tuesday at the earliest, but I'll see what I can do then.  I'm a bit backlogged with other things as well, so if I don't reply, accept my thanks for the effort you've put in here.