All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness. thats the new testament, any christian should believe it
in the old testament, like deuteronomy, sacrifices were made to pay for our sins. After the time of Jesus he paid the ultimate sacrifice and paid for all our sins. hpdude is looking at 2 different times. You have a good point, if you say one part of the bible is not true how do you know the part about jesus is true. any christian needs to believe the bible is true, just dont misinterpret it.
All I have is what is before me. Jesus isn't before me. A book is. Why should I believe that book?
Did I deny the existence of the "spiritual world" (whatever this can be assumed to mean)? In fact I have made no such claims. I make no claims as to the existence of things for which there is no evidence for or against. Do I believe it to exist? No. Do I believe it to be absent? No. Do I have belief pertaining to it? Without reason to believe, I do not believe in any which way.
Seeing may be believing, but believing is not necessarily seeing.
The book has meaning, and the book makes claims, and the book presents lessons to learn. But its a book, and if this book wasn't here and everyone's memory were suddenly erased, Jesus would no longer exist in our minds. All we know about his messianic figure comes from this book. And without this book, he would not exist in our minds.
The book might be right, but Jesus doesn't appear to be before me.
As always, bluefish, I'd prefer it if you would present and argument for what you're claiming rather than making simple statements like "you completely missed the point" and then darting off. If you have something to communicate, then do so.
Sometimes you act like we haven't had discussions before and you don't understand my position on things.
What authority am I rejecting? This is the second time you've said this and I don't understand what you mean. I'm all about authority. But rejecting authority is different than challenging it in order to maintain order, fairness, truth, and goodness.
You still haven't explained how I'm expected to see more than a book. Do you mean the ideas? The stories? The lessons and morals? Sure, that all exists. In the book. By "book" I mean all which it contains.
Well to say that scientific human understanding is inherently limited is a claim which itself deserves support. You may hypothesize that this is the case, but to claim it as a truth at this point is unjustified.
Furthermore, regardless of the breadth of knowledge that scientific explanation offers, I have yet to see any substantiation of the extreme claims of the bible. Once again, claims made without evidence may be dismissed without evidence.
I don't have a reason to believe any of the bible really. Some of the stories roughly and accurately correspond to real history, so these can be looked at more carefully. However, anything unconfirmed by any reliable source other than the bible, especially claims which fly in the face of modern scientific understanding, are greatly called into question in my mind.
Also I am not the one who "follows" this book. Claims made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness. thats the new testament, any christian should believe it
AMagicalWizard 2 years ago
in the old testament, like deuteronomy, sacrifices were made to pay for our sins. After the time of Jesus he paid the ultimate sacrifice and paid for all our sins. hpdude is looking at 2 different times. You have a good point, if you say one part of the bible is not true how do you know the part about jesus is true. any christian needs to believe the bible is true, just dont misinterpret it.
AMagicalWizard 2 years ago
All I have is what is before me. Jesus isn't before me. A book is. Why should I believe that book?
Did I deny the existence of the "spiritual world" (whatever this can be assumed to mean)? In fact I have made no such claims. I make no claims as to the existence of things for which there is no evidence for or against. Do I believe it to exist? No. Do I believe it to be absent? No. Do I have belief pertaining to it? Without reason to believe, I do not believe in any which way.
notNECESSARILYgod 3 years ago
"Jesus isn't before me, a book is."
If all you see is a book there is a bigger problem.
BLUEFlSH7 3 years ago
Seeing may be believing, but believing is not necessarily seeing.
The book has meaning, and the book makes claims, and the book presents lessons to learn. But its a book, and if this book wasn't here and everyone's memory were suddenly erased, Jesus would no longer exist in our minds. All we know about his messianic figure comes from this book. And without this book, he would not exist in our minds.
The book might be right, but Jesus doesn't appear to be before me.
notNECESSARILYgod 3 years ago
you completely missed the point.
BLUEFlSH7 3 years ago
As always, bluefish, I'd prefer it if you would present and argument for what you're claiming rather than making simple statements like "you completely missed the point" and then darting off. If you have something to communicate, then do so.
Sometimes you act like we haven't had discussions before and you don't understand my position on things.
notNECESSARILYgod 3 years ago
It's not a claim nor a statement, it's an exposition.
And so it remains continued that:
- Maintained you reject certain authority, and any other argument results in the aristonewtonian falaciem game which is in and of itself, fallacious.
-Maintained that If all you see is a book, something else is wrong.
-Maintained that the lack of belief is Agnostic viz, Appealing to richard dawkins definitions seems kind of fallacious.
-Maintained that I love you, and hope all is well.
BLUEFlSH7 3 years ago
What authority am I rejecting? This is the second time you've said this and I don't understand what you mean. I'm all about authority. But rejecting authority is different than challenging it in order to maintain order, fairness, truth, and goodness.
You still haven't explained how I'm expected to see more than a book. Do you mean the ideas? The stories? The lessons and morals? Sure, that all exists. In the book. By "book" I mean all which it contains.
notNECESSARILYgod 3 years ago
I'll let you finish with Justin before we start another dialogue.
BLUEFlSH7 3 years ago
Well to say that scientific human understanding is inherently limited is a claim which itself deserves support. You may hypothesize that this is the case, but to claim it as a truth at this point is unjustified.
Furthermore, regardless of the breadth of knowledge that scientific explanation offers, I have yet to see any substantiation of the extreme claims of the bible. Once again, claims made without evidence may be dismissed without evidence.
notNECESSARILYgod 3 years ago
sorry it might be a while cuz im gonna be in the dells. i'll get on a response after that...
hpdude3211 3 years ago
The nature of god is and opinion, of course, perfect to me is definitely not the same as perfect to every one else.
stevenodd 3 years ago
I look forward to hear the other party's response as well. Good job my man.
GuyGuysly 3 years ago
Comment removed
GodMythology2 3 years ago
I don't have a reason to believe any of the bible really. Some of the stories roughly and accurately correspond to real history, so these can be looked at more carefully. However, anything unconfirmed by any reliable source other than the bible, especially claims which fly in the face of modern scientific understanding, are greatly called into question in my mind.
Also I am not the one who "follows" this book. Claims made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
notNECESSARILYgod 3 years ago
Exactly ★★★★★
Katalyzt 3 years ago
love your frames...and awesome video
BethRN74 3 years ago
i believe that the bible is significantly myth,significantly allegory.i never believed that the bible is the "divinely" inspired word of god!
obamadidit2008 3 years ago