What do you believe and why do you believe it?

[Spectrox]

Your response reveals that I am correct ... you are unable to comprehend Matt 16.

You haven't even explained what your interpretation is. Just a sentence or two would be a start. Do you have anything - yes or no?

 

[JamOn]

let’s start with this.

Leviticus 26:29
'Further, you will eat the flesh of your sons and the flesh of your daughters you will eat.

this must get a lot of goats

 

[stonesoffire]

No but it seems to read as: If you ask with enough faith you get it.

I dont like that sort of an idea, sounds like a scam to me because its all put on you, and then if it dont come to pass the faith healer or whatever will say to you "Oh well you just didnt have enough faith to be healed, TOUGH LUCK!" and they put the blame on you, that dont sound right to me, but im not gonna disagree with the Bible!

If any expositor wants to put me in my place and 'splain it to me im all ears!

No expositor, but what I believe this means is it’s the faith of no doubt you’ll receive. Not that I have this about everything but resurrection life and what it means has come alive to me recently. I’m gaining success in praying this for others because I know that I know it’s ours through Jesus.

 

[stonesoffire]

I believed this after my conversion/having faith but lost it during my deconversion/loss of faith. Now I just find a lot of the Bible a bit sinister and weird. And irrelevant. Sorry.

But, were you born from above?

 

[Spectrox]

Your response reveals that I am correct ... you are unable to comprehend Matt 16.

Try me. I've been fair with your postings up to now. I have admitted that I cannot prove a clear contradiction or inconsistency between the 2 accounts discussed. And thinking about it this supports the theory that the synoptic gospels copied from each other to a large extent. I dont expect you to explain every inconsistency charge I have - its a long list. But I am interested in Matthew 16 which is not an inconsistency. It just feels like an outright error.

 

[Spectrox]

Have I mentioned the Bible?

Have you ever looked into research about the seat of consciousness? Because no one has ever been able to demonstrate this theorized 'emergence' you mention. No one has ever been able to link the 'self' to a definite physical locality. No one has ever been able to replicate the idea you just parroted to me from Mary Shelly's fiction, and it's not for lack of trying.

I find that pretty interesting.

And you say consciousness is a property of the brain?
What does atheistic evolutionary monism say about the origin of the brain?

Are you not able to respond to my post? In terms of brain evolution- evolution is to do with survival of the fittest or luckiest. Maybe religion is the next stage in brain evolution/adaptation. You can now survive death itself. Maybe that's all it is? A cultural viral program in the brain that cannot accept its own demise? Another word for it is "ego".

 

[Spectrox]

But, were you born from above?

What does that even mean? My mother gave birth to me.

 

[Spectrox]

let’s start with this.

Leviticus 26:29
'Further, you will eat the flesh of your sons and the flesh of your daughters you will eat.

this must get a lot of goats

Sounds pretty bad. Whats your take on it?

 

[Melach]

i hope you can tell me more precisely what you want to know?

i believe in the God of Israel thats true. I believe in His Son Jesus Christ who died for my sins. and your sins too.

 

[Melach]

Sounds pretty bad. Whats your take on it?

my take is it means what it says.

life is tough

but you know in your worldview you cant say oh thats bad thats terrible. you got no objective morality without God. we are all just animals and whats right or wrong is just opinion. whatever we do is okay we are animals in atheism worldview.

thats why in all cultures God is present even if its a false pagan god. everyone believes in god or gods because nothing can bring about something thats just common sense.

 

[JamOn]

Sounds pretty bad. Whats your take on it?

That’s pretty much the ending to a story IMO about “holding on” among other things, though they seem to have held on to the bitter end. probably a right way and wrong way, killing their children to sustain their own self doesn’t seem quite right, whatcha u think?

 

[Spectrox]

i hope you can tell me more precisely what you want to know?

i believe in the God of Israel thats true. I believe in His Son Jesus Christ who died for my sins. and your sins too.

What is your best reason for believing this?

 

[Spectrox]

How

my take is it means what it says.

life is tough

but you know in your worldview you cant say oh thats bad thats terrible. you got no objective morality without God. we are all just animals and whats right or wrong is just opinion. whatever we do is okay we are animals in atheism worldview.

thats why in all cultures God is present even if its a false pagan god. everyone believes in god or gods because nothing can bring about something thats just common sense.

How do you know you have the correct objective morality?
Atheism is not a worldview. It's a single claim about a single issue. You are probably thinking of secular humanism or rational skepticism.
Define what you mean by nothing. All we have is examples of something coming from something. We don't have a "nothing" that we can examine.

 

[Spectrox]

Le

That’s pretty much the ending to a story IMO about “holding on” among other things, though they seem to have held on to the bitter end. probably a right way and wrong way, killing their children to sustain their own self doesn’t seem quite right, whatcha u think?

Leviticus is one of my least favourite books in the Bible. It is not acceptable to me at any level and is now largely an irrelevance. And yet a supposedly timeless God chose to keep it in his "good" book. Bizarre.

 

[Spectrox]

Got any examples of what seems sinister and weird in the Bible?

Try
11 kinds of Bible Verses Christians Try to Ignore @ salon.com
OR
Skeptics Annotated Bible

 

[Spectrox]

I fully understand this is your position. What I asked you to explore in your own heart and life was why do you find it so difficult to admit that there is no inconsistency in Scripture in the two records.

In your Post #748, you have finally done so. However, that small concession occurs on Page 38 of this thread ... 36 pages after you were shown there was no discrepancy concerning the two purchases of the potters' fields and 15 pages after you were shown there was no discrepancy concerning the "six days" of Matthew/Mark and the "about eight days" of Luke.

You need to understand that you have issues when it comes to even considering there is no inconsistency in Scripture. Why is that? What is it about Scripture which causes you to automatically reject anything written...

Once bitten, twice shy I suppose. It's not just alleged inconsistencies that bother me about the Bible. In fact I would say morality and credibility are more important.

 

[JamOn]

Le
Leviticus is one of my least favourite books in the Bible. It is not acceptable to me at any level and is now largely an irrelevance. And yet a supposedly timeless God chose to keep it in his "good" book. Bizarre.

there’s people who starve today and don’t eat their children, and there’s many of things people hold on too to the bitter end. there’s a moral issue in the story not to resort to killing people for food. let the lights go out across the world for a couple of weeks many people will resort to such things. it can happen today or tomorrow or next.

 

[JamOn]

Try
11 kinds of Bible Verses Christians Try to Ignore @ salon.com
OR
Skeptics Annotated Bible

there’s two sides to a coin, cant just read one side.

https://www.gotquestions.org/skeptics-annotated-Bible.html

https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-errors.html

 

[JamOn]

God wrote ten sentences and it wasn’t on paper, the rest was inspired to the people using their own language and experiences to convey. Yes many of translations have gone astray by man’s hand. things happen for a reason some are hard to explain for we can’t see tomorrow

 

[reneweddaybyday]

Your response reveals that I am correct ... you are unable to comprehend Matt 16.

You haven't even explained what your interpretation is. Just a sentence or two would be a start. Do you have anything - yes or no?

Try me. I've been fair with your postings up to now. I have admitted that I cannot prove a clear contradiction or inconsistency between the 2 accounts discussed. And thinking about it this supports the theory that the synoptic gospels copied from each other to a large extent. I dont expect you to explain every inconsistency charge I have - its a long list. But I am interested in Matthew 16 which is not an inconsistency. It just feels like an outright error.

Once bitten, twice shy I suppose. It's not just alleged inconsistencies that bother me about the Bible. In fact I would say morality and credibility are more important.

Your reply to stonesoffire here tells me you are incapable of understanding Matt 16.

As far as your statement that Matt 16 "just feels like an outright error" ... consider the other two issues which have now been cleared up. These were two relatively simple matters. Yet, all you want to do is "prove a clear contradiction or inconsistency" when it comes to Scripture. What is it about Scripture that makes you "feel" that there is "outright error" or that you have to "prove" contradiction/inconsistency?

God is holding out His Hands to you, calling you to join Him and you resist. You can let go of your resistance to Him. You will find that He is able to provide understanding concerning Scripture. Maybe not on your time frame because first milk then meat. But He will give understanding. The blindness which engulfs the mind is removed as we turn our hearts to the Lord. I know that sounds like foolishness to you, but I am speaking truth to you. Do not harden your heart to truth. Think about it ... ponder it ... don't just automatically reject it in obstinate stubbornness.