Stephen

For you I wouldn't worry about the so called contradictions.

Because the scripture also teaches about speaking plainly. So when you do so, be specific and not broad about your question or request.

Good morning Steven. Tarik had a similar style to Mall. Though I suppose it's fair to say that we all have a particular style.

Scripture does say speak on what you know.

Yup and from the new testament in the book of Ephesians and Hebrews, the scripture is not broken. So you do agree.

On your comment above, Mall. I don't understand what it is that you are asking me.  You will have to expand on that, Mall.

When you say "that", be specific.

You say "comment",  what in the comment?

I don't want to go everything if I don't have to.

Yup and from the new testament in the book of Ephesians and Hebrews, the scripture is not broken.

So you do agree.

You will have to expand on that, Mall.

Expand on what?

Yup and from the new testament in the book of Ephesians and Hebrews, the scripture is not broken.

So you do agree.

Do you agree God of the scripture calls for holiness?

Perhaps they came, did a bit of chemistry and then left.

Not realising that they hade just invented evolution.

The Christian label is man made man invented. It started from a man calling another man that.

Do you think God's people is every single person?

The Scriptures do indicate that God has made for Himself a people. 

The reference is in salvation or chosen in Christ specifically.

Tradesecret wrote @MallAnd it furthermore declared that He called and predestinated them before the beginning of the World.   

We are NOT all gods children . 

1

There were 3 good arguments that Jesus was Black:

1. He called everyone brother

2. He liked Gospel

3. He didn't get a fair trial

2

But then there were 3 equally good arguments that Jesus was Jewish:

1. He went into His Father's business

2. He lived at home until he was 33

3. He was sure his Mother was a virgin and his Mother was sure He was God

3

But then there were 3 equally good arguments that Jesus was Italian:

1. He talked with His hands

2. He had wine with His meals

3. He used olive oil

4

But then there were 3 equally good arguments that Jesus was a Californian:

1. He never cut His hair

2. He walked around barefoot all the time

3. He started a new religion

5

But then there were 3 equally good arguments that Jesus was an American Indian:

1. He was at peace with nature

2. He ate a lot of fish

3. He talked about the Great Spirit

6

But then there were 3 equally good arguments that Jesus was Irish:

1. He never got married.

2. He was always telling stories.

3. He loved green pastures.

7

But then there were 3 equally good arguments that Jesus was Mexican:

1. He treated his mama like she was a saint.

2. He always wore llantas and a serape.

3. He was a carpenter who could fix anything.

8

But the most compelling evidence of all - 3 proofs that Jesus was a woman:

1. He fed a crowd at a moment's notice when there was virtually no food

2. He kept trying to get a message across to a bunch of men who just didn't get it

3. And even when He was dead, He had to get up because there was still work to do.

Thus they where not sure on exactly how babies got made . 

There are only two possible pointers in just two of the gospels and even they show a discrepancy of about ten years.

Show me.   Rather than go through it all I would show you where it's already been done. The Prophetic arival of Jesus [.....................................................................]The Prophetic arival of the end [..................................................................]

Do the gospel's even tell us directly when he [Jesus] was born?

Yes. The fall of 2 BCE. 

Can you expand on that  quoting the gospels? 

On what? I briefly touch on it in the link I gave, under the heading Death of Herod at the bottom.

You have to realize I've done this sort of thing enough. I've gotten lazy and sloppy because it's pointless. Others haven't got to that point yet and maybe they never will, but I'm an intrusion of sorts. Pay no attention to me. 

The Christ mythology is stupid I agree. I have said many times on this forum , that I believe Jesus was a man that believed or was led to believe that he was rightful heir to the kingdom of Israel and that it was his time to rule and  that Christians have wrapped in a myth.

Sort of, but no. The fanatic religious ideologues who were the self-appointed guardians of the kingdom of Israel which is why he rejected them and they rejected him.

But I can tell you, even if we take the superstition of the time, if there is one thing that these ancient Priests and Kings knew about it was the workings of the "heavenly bodies" and the "laws" that they dictated, it was THEIR CLOCK!. .... I also believe that these ancient celestial laws are still  being applied to day.

Their clock, perhaps yes, but not their superstition, which is what you seem to be kicking around. The links to astrology I gave are a rebuttal to that.

That is why  you piqued my interest when you wrote this on another thread> " the way things have turned out, which is exactly the way the Bible foretold". 

I don't understand that, really.

 Yes, Specifically what did they "specifically" tell Herod?

And what was Herod's reaction?

You're going to have to do better than this if you want me to come to your conclusion. Herod told them about the star...

A "science" minded skeptic will look at the celestial phenomenon in John's Revelation as if it's some superstitious fear of primitive people....

The context is made perfectly clear, the question posed to Jesus by his disciples  make it specifically clear what the context is.  And Jesus responds perfectly in context to what they asked. So again what is the meaning  of "end times"?

[ A] I've told you. The end of Satan's rule of man making way for God's rightful sovereignty. A new heaven (without Satan and his demons which were cast out) and a new earth with the same. 

If that is what you believe then why didn't Jesus simply say so himself when he was asked about the end times.

Assuming that he didn't,  

what do you suppose he did say? And where did he say it?

you  [Tradesecret} are a walking contradiction.

Tradesecret wrote:  Do you have any support for this from credible experts 

Stephen Wrote: What would you consider to be a "credible expert"?  #39

Tradesecret wrote: Some one who has studied and been peer reviewed by his field. Not wikapedia or an armchair theologian. #40

Tradesecret

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/413-who-can-explain-this-verse-to-me?page=2&post_number=40

Tradesecret wrote: Peer review is a bollox. Consensus is not proof.#135

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6878-when-will-jesus-return?page=5&post_number=135

The Reverend Tradsecrete wrote @IlDiavolo:  I'm not a narcissist because I am confident I will go to heaven.

Then you know absolutely nothing.

 I know that a house divided falls and that if your Biblical analysis is dependent upon the use of astrology it falls. I also know that Christ Mythology is stupid. 

What did the magi / wise men tell  Herod?

Specifically?

What did the disciples ask Jesus about the "end times"? 

What was his reply?

Specifically? 

What is meant by "end times"? 

Specifically? Various things depending on the context.

Ultimately, I would say, the time of the world beginning with the conception of Adam's first child and concluding with the destruction of Satan's world making room for Jehovah God's kingdom in which the meek will inherit the earth and live forever upon it. 

When was Jesus born? 

Well that will depend on which clues or pointers and in which gospel one chooses to believe.

All of them.

Do the gospel's even tell us directly when he [Jesus] was born?

Yes. The fall of 2 BCE. 

Jesus didn't operate on the principle of astrology which was forbidden. When was Jesus born? 

When was Jesus born? 

I'm cycling there Saturday morning...92 miles.

 "The phrase 'this generation' should cause no difficulty for interpreters. While admittedly genea in earlier Greek meant birth, progeny, and so race, . . . in the [Greek Septuagint] it most frequently translated the Hebrew term dor, meaning age.  

1. In the Synoptic Gospels Jesus is actually repeatedly cagey about whether he even is the subject of the prophesies he himself references.
   

As far as I know, there is only 144K reserved sit and this individual is pretty sure he will get there out of the 8,000 million people in the world (without considering the dead ones, haha).

 Tradesecret wrote @IlDiavolo.   I don't fit the profile of a narcissist.  

I don't care that I can't defend myself in some of those things. 

Have a pint for me.

We're up in Evesham until Wednesday visiting the daughters.

The youngest's (37th) Birthday bar-b-que Saturday so a few chilled beers for me too.

I'm cycling there Saturday morning...92 miles.

Mrs Zed is driving, with the dog.

All the best to you and yours.

The bible has not been proven to be either completely factual or completely fictitious.

So it's reasonable to hypothesise both options.

Therefore, it's neither correct nor incorrect to assert that it either is or isn't completely fictitious or completely factual.

Wouldn't Jesus have been for Free infinite food?

 rabbit

 The Hebrew word satan means adversary. 

Post #24 doesn't say anything remotely like "the slime of Satan or dumb as fuck."

Which means you are either lying, slandering, or - well - dumb as fuck. 

 The Hebrew word, without the definite article ha (ha satan) means, perhaps in this case, unironically, "liar; slanderer." 

What you seem most certainly blissfully unaware of is that no else did either. By you. 

1. God knew of one righteous man, Ut-Napishtim or Noah.
   

https://danielmiessler.com/p/the-bible-is-fiction-a-collection-of-evidence/

The bible has [....] been proven fictitious so it is [...]correct to assert that it is.

I would suggest there is a further qualification to it. It is the direct personal experience to gain a spiritual or mystical knowledge that no one else has the capacity to obtain.  Almost priestlike.  It's the sort of spiritual knowledge that Stephen has. No one else comes to the same conclusions regarding the Bible but him. No one reading the same scriptures would ordinarily come to same conclusion unless they were led to it by him.  He is a priest in that sense. 

It's the alleged secret meanings that are mystical and more gnostic like. Again, Stephen, is the arch type of this person on this site.

Reverend Tradesecret wrote: @RaymondSheen: 

You think you're right. I think I'm right. Stephen thinks he's right. Best Korea thinks he's right.

So perhaps metaphorically predicting the age of a new intelligence.

Now, I can certainly run with that idea.

zedvictor4 wrote: Meaning, the end of the world or the end of humanity?

RaymondSheen wrote:

World

"Also at this point some clarification should be made as to what exactly is the "end of the world."[.........................]The end of the world is the end of the present system of things and all that involves.

[the end of] Of Satan's influence and sin, which, when concluding brings much destruction, but when ended, allows peace."

That both skeptics and the mislead [ing] religious don't know the real teachings of the Bible, I have seen the wisdom in the way things have turned out, which is exactly the way the Bible foretold. And now I realize that I had been getting frustrated at what was happening even though I knew that the Bible itself said it would happen. 

You should expand on the bold underlined above in a new thread.If I am reading it right, its probably the most interesting comment you have made since you landed here Ray....

Just out of curiosity what do you think I was getting at in the emboldened portion of my statement? I would rather hear what you think than have to tell you. 

That sounds like a - "but before I do" - stalling  statement. 

Regardless, I was thinking along the lines of Matthew 24:3-31 & maybe parts of Revelation?  If I have read it right?

Post # 5 That, Stephen, is what the emboldened text was about. The love of the greater number will cool off, the Bible foretold it because it was obvious that would happen.

Stephen wrote: Did people fall to sleep while listening to you rambling, Ray?

Best.Korea wrote: I think its meant to confuse people, like those philosophers do.

Every God is the correct God. You don't get my message. You don't understand. A God is a personal responsibility, a preference. If you want a God as a cash cow and you perceive it works as such, then it's the right God for you. If you choose your God because it was the one that is geographically, culturally, socially, financially, militarily, intellectually, traditionally fashionably, scientifically or spiritually right for you personally for whatever reason, even if it's not real, if coerced, phony, evil, perverse, or anything else it's right for you.

A god is something, someone or someplace which is of supreme importance to someone. Zeus, Jehovah, Satan, Kim Jong-Un, Eric Clapton, Frodo, knitting, sex, boating, gambling, idols, Jesus, Shiva, Amaterasu, Buddha, Heaven, the universe, the sun, the Big Bang, science, math, fertility, drugs, money, food, or any of the 3000 you mention. The 8 million or countless gods of Shinto, the nameless god in the temple Paul referred to in the book of Acts and all the others I've not mentioned. The difference between a god and God is that titles, like names, are capitalized due to Identification, grammar and syntax, respect and formality, tradition and convention. (Source) So Jehovah is the God of Jehovah's Witnesses and myself, but to unbelievers Jehovah is only a god or, for identification in Christendom, traditionally, conventionally God of the Bible. That doesn't mean other gods can't be God to someone else in some other place or context. 

If someone thinks God is their God but in reality, their God is something else, like tradition, money etc. then their God isn't what they think it is. For example, if someone thinks their God is the God of the Bible because traditionally and socially, they act as if it is, they go through the motions, attend church and pray, worship etc. but their actions reveal that science or money or sex or drugs or food etc. is more important to them, then their God is not really the God of the Bible but science, religion, money or whatever. That's why the God of the Bible, Jehovah, said he was a jealous God, have no Gods before (more important) than him. He said they don't know him. Cain is a good example of that. He picked fruit up off the ground to sacrifice to God as if God were, to him, a trash can while Abel chose the most valuable of his flock to sacrifice. That's why Paul said that it wasn't a big deal eating meat that was, as customary, sacrificed to "false gods" because he knew those gods weren't God's to him. In only that sense they weren't real. It didn't matter if they were real to the people sacrificing. 

That's why faith is more important than knowledge and why atheism and theism more often than not are only ideologies. That's why atheists can have gods without knowing or acknowledging it and why theists think they are theists of a specific God when they aren't. That's why religion is so divisive, syncretistic and destructive, contentious and pretentious.

If you were going to give away a fortune but you wanted to make sure it went to people who genuinely cared about you and who wouldn't piss it away would you advertise an event where you were going to give a fortune away?  

That, @Stephen, is what the emboldened text was about. The love of the greater number will cool off, the Bible foretold it because it was obvious that would happen.

Mark 4:10-12: When he was alone, those who were around him with the twelve asked him about the parables. He said to them, “To you is given the mystery of God’s Kingdom, but to those who are outside, all things are done in parables, that ‘seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest perhaps they should turn again, and their sins should be forgiven them.’” (Isaiah 6:9-10)

That both skeptics and the mislead [ing] religious don't know the real teachings of the Bible, I have seen the wisdom in the way things have turned out, which is exactly the way the Bible foretold. And now I realize that I had been getting frustrated at what was happening even though I knew that the Bible itself said it would happen. 

You should expand on the bold underlined above in a new thread.If I am reading it right, its probably the most interesting comment you have made since you landed here Ray....

Okay, I can do that, but just because it is interesting doesn't mean anyone would want to hear it.

Just out of curiosity what do you think I was getting at in the emboldened portion of my statement? I would rather hear what you think than have to tell you.