>And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, that you send [Lazarus]

>>2517671
Tragically right.

No clue why people think this is a parable.

>>2517671
Does this not prove that saints have no power of advocacy?

>>2517683
Only if you define saints like the Catholics do.

The bible clearly states that all Christians are sanctified by the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit, and thus all born again Christians are saints whether living here or living there.

>>2517683
Acts 9:32 [ Aeneas Healed ] Now it came to pass, as Peter went through all parts of the country, that he also came down to the saints who dwelt in Lydda.

Acts 9:41 Then he gave her his hand and lifted her up; and when he had called the saints and widows, he presented her alive.

Acts 26:10 This I also did in Jerusalem, and many of the saints I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I cast my vote against them.

Revelation 11:18 The nations were angry, and Your wrath has come, And the time of the dead, that they should be judged, And that You should reward Your servants the prophets and the saints, And those who fear Your name, small and great, And should destroy those who destroy the earth.”

>>2517683
Hebrews 2
For both He who sanctifies and those who are being sanctified are all of one, for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren, 12 saying:

“I will declare Your name to My brethren;
In the midst of the assembly I will sing praise to You.”[c]
13 And again:

“I will put My trust in Him.”[d]
And again:

“Here am I and the children whom God has given Me.”

>>2517671
>But he said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.’”
This type of stuff is why I lose immediately all respect for christianity the moment I step out of just abstract arguments for the exsitence of god into the actuality of christianity.
>hey, do this thing which will obviously convince them
>no, they should believe just because of *highly suspicious event*
>oh, right
What? No, just no.

>>2517711
You won't believe because you are a wicked sinner, a child of wrath by nature. Apart from birth of God, you cannot believe.

>>2517692
But can saints once dead advocate for the living through prayer? This passage obviously shows that the Word is the only thing that can save a man, and that God bestows no special favor for advocacy.

>>2517726
How is this even remotely acceptable as an argument?
I can just say "you don't believe in X god because you are a wicked sinner" back at you.
You're just psychologizing away someone else's position.

>>2517735
Don't argue with the crazy fundie. He is a suffering individual that needs medication and steady psychological help.

>>2517711

Moses and the prophets told the people what was required for salvation; either perfect adherence to the Law (impossible) or the intervention of the Messiah.

As Jesus said, if people believed Moses and the prophets, they believed in Jesus, as Moses and the prophets were speaking of Jesus.

>>2517735
>there are multiple positions which claim to be true, therefore truth doesn't exist

>>2517732
I do not believe so, no. Intercessory prayer is for the living, not the dead. God forbade communication with the dead full well knowing that they were alive in the afterlife.

So, God forbid.

Also, not only do we have Moses and the prophets ourselves, we have the Son as well.

>>2517735
Because the premise is that we are all wicked sinners, and your rejection of the means of redemption indicates you are still in your native state.

>>2517740
That's not even me. Just one more time I get to laugh at you for never learning how to /samefag.

>>2517744
Setting aside minor stuff like Moses never having existed in the first place, jews clearly having good arguments as per why Moses never spoke of jesus or jesus never fulfilling crucial prerequisites for being the messiah, that's not what's happening there.
Someone is asking for the sake of someone else that a clear miracle happens so that they may be convinced. The response is "well they don't believe in *dubious event* therefore they wouldn't believe even in the case of *something really convincing*". It's dumb.
>>2517748
No, anon, that's not what I said. I said what you just did is a shitty argument, as it can be used to support anything without giving any actual reason to do so.
>>2517760
>Because the premise is that we are all wicked sinners
The argument is circular, by admitting we're "wicked sinners", we've already assumed christianity is true. Shitty argument.

File: resurrection-icon.jpg (295KB, 1259x1600px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 1259x1600px

>>2517711
But think about it. Think about how often, on this very board, people debate and dismiss miraculous events and happenings. Even if there's a certain amount of evidence for them, it gets cast aside.

It really does seem like "evidence" of God and Christianity is purely for the faithful. It doesn't ever wind up convincing atheists. The only thing that ever winds up convincing them is their actually encountering Scripture and the Gospels--just as Abraham says in the story.

>>2517781
>Even if there's a certain amount of evidence for them, it gets cast aside.

There is NEVER any evidence that has been subject to scientific scrutiny. You just have really fucking low standards of proof.

>>2517781
>Even if there's a certain amount of evidence for them, it gets cast aside.
Discussing something that happened to somebody else, completely removed from you by time and space, and actually witnessing the thing for yourself are two completely different things.
Also the reasons why people reject biblical miracles so quickly are many. For example, because there's not any particular reason to believe those happened but those talked about in other religions didn't. Or the strangely coincidental decrease in the potency of miracles with the passing of time: we basically went from high fantasy to low fantasy, again, coincidentally as our ability to accurately record things and test scientific explanations for them improved.

>>2517775
You can believe whatever you want, until you die.

Then you'll know that you were always wrong, and it's too late.

>>2517775
>I said what you just did is a shitty argument
It wasn't an argument, it was a fact. Learn the difference

>>2517775
Rubbish. We could all be wicked sinners with no plan of redemption, in which case Christianity would not exist.

>>2517802
>>2517803
You're not making your case look any better, dude.
>>2517804
"Sin" already implies theology, which means god exists, which means we've already assumed tons of things. Also, in the way you've formulated, it implies that christianity is true, in fact, a particular strand of christianity. So yes, we've assumed plenty thus making the argument circular.

>>2517793
That's simply not true. It's just that when miracles are subjected to scientific scrutiny, the goalposts are shifted and atheists move on to critiquing and trying to find fault with the scientists doing the studies.

>>2517810

"Sin" means "missing the mark", in this context the mark is "be perfect as God is perfect".

We are all sinners. None of us are like God. If you think you are, please feel free to create your own universe that I can explore.

Some of us have dealt with the problem; you have not.

>>2517802
>>2517803
>>2517804
>fear tactics and non-arguments

You people do literally nothing here but make this board worse and lower the level of discourse even further than the already low 4chan norm.

>>2517813
Yes, it's simply amazing how many thousands of x-rays, MRIs and CT scans "must have been wrong in the first place".

Just amazing.

>>2517820
>Stop disagreeing with me.

Perhaps you'd be better suited to not post here yourself. It seems as though that would solve your problem.

>>2517820
>Why don't I ever have a prevailing thought or argument in this arena in which I am completely ignorant???

>>2517813
All studies get their methodology and practitioners scrutinized. Your studies simply never hold up.

I'm very sorry Christian scientists are expected to play by the big boy rules of science; I know it's very hard for people with your mindset to live in the real world.

>>2517813
I don't know if you were in the thread the other day, but I just found this gem:

Hebrews 2:16 For indeed He does not give aid to angels, but He does give aid to the seed of Abraham.

Fallen angels BTFO

>>2517818
>"Sin" means "missing the mark", in this context the mark is "be perfect as God is perfect".
You've literally just admitted that talking about sin means you've already assumed god exists. I am disputing that. Saying "you're a sinner" isn't an argument because you've already assumed you're correct about God existing in the first place.

>>2517810
>"Sin" already implies theology, which means god exists
Your erroneous presupposition is that there is no such thing as atheist theology. If you have prerequisites which would cause you to believe in God if met, you have theology.

>>2517824
Perhaps you should go fuck yourself until you bleed. You worthless piece of shit.

You come to a board about academic subjects to proselytize and can't actually make your subjects stand on an academic level. YOU are the problem.

>>2517826
Stop talking about yourself.

>>2517830
It's as though you were completely unaware of the entirety of nascent ID philosophy and science that is overtaking the stale, stultifying evolutionary fantasy.

If you don't know that "peer review" is a circlejerk, you're probably the pivot man.

>>2517833
Of course God exists.

Do you think your disbelief causes him to not exist in reality?

>>2517833
In saying that God does not exist you have assumed that God does not exist. Why is your presupposition more valid than mine?

>>2517838

Why so mad tho?

>>2517842
Because you are a fool, and he is not.

Only the fool says in his heart "there is no God".

>>2517839
>my hot opinions are disregarded due to a conspiracy against them

People make their careers by defying academic expectations. The entire field of quantum physics started out by defying the current paradigm. The reason your bullshit doesn't stand up to scientific scrutiny is because it's built on faulty methodology by people looking to sustain their ideology; all the related jargon is just window dressing for "I'm right because Jesus tells me so (in my head)."

>>2517836
>Your erroneous presupposition is that there is no such thing as atheist theology
There isn't. There's atheistic philosophy of religion, sure.
>>2517841
>Of course God exists.
Not an argument. Also, bad troll.
>>2517842
>In saying that God does not exist you
But I didn't say that, I said I'm disputing as in "I don't know one way or the other, anon, why should I believe you?"

>>2517830
No, that's the trouble, the studies DO hold up. They hold up even though atheists don't want them to. And that's when atheists either deny they ever happened or try to find fault with the researchers.

There's no consistency, except the consistent need to deny God's work in the world. Hence the story. Even if Jesus Christ popped into existence in front of them, some people still wouldn't believe.

>>2517853
>There isn't
What would it take for you to believe in God?
>But I didn't say that, I said I'm disputing as in "I don't know one way or the other, anon, why should I believe you?"
Is it true that atheism is the "lack of belief in a deity or deities"?

>>2517850
To ask whether or not there is a God is pointless, because one cannot prove or disprove it.
What one can argue, however, is whether or not God exists as He is alleged to in the various Abrahamic theologies.
The answer is probably not.

>>2517859
>No, that's the trouble, the studies DO hold up.

Which ones from which academic institutions?

>>2517861
>What would it take for you to believe in God?
It depends. For example, counter arguments to atheistic arguments that I find convincing plus good arguments for the existence of God. Or some personal experience that is so strong that to deny it I'd have to deny my own sanity.
I'd say that atheistm is the belief that gods don't exist, the definition you're using is for pussies desu.

>>2517872
>It depends. For example, counter arguments to atheistic arguments that I find convincing plus good arguments for the existence of God. Or some personal experience that is so strong that to deny it I'd have to deny my own sanity.
What evidence would it take to prove to you that God exists?
>I'd say that atheistm is the belief that gods don't exist
Yes it is, because "I believe that there is no god" and "I do not believe that there is a god" are identical statements. Agnosticism does not exist.

>>2517852
QM. Quantum. Quanta. Particles. Atoms. Atomism.

Atomism is thousands of years old, and already proven wrong thousands of years ago.

You can't pay much attention to science if you don't know it's always wrong.

>>2517853

God exists whether you want him to or not. The sheer arrogance of you and your ilk to deny the obvious is truly beyond reason.

>>2517882
>What evidence would it take to prove to you that God exists?
Haven't I already answered this? Or do you mean what specific personal experience would convince me?
>I believe that there is no god" and "I do not believe that there is a god" are identical statements.
No they aren't, one is a way to practice epoche, the other is flat out stating what is(n't)

>>2517863
The answer would be "yes, of course".

Jesus made extraordinary claims to be God, and backed them up with extraordinary evidence, including raising from the dead to be alive forevermore.

>>2517882
>What evidence would it take to prove to you that God exists?
>it's another "atheists are impossible to convince and I'll prove it by putting them on the spot" episode

Yawn. I guarantee you that if God opened up the heavens every 10 years and blared in a language all could understand "I AM GOD, WORSHIP ME!" you'd have vastly lower disbelief rates.

But that's really irrelevant, as it's not on the disbeliever to decide what proof is necessary; it's on the proselytizing piece of dog vomit to convince people. You don't expect people to give reasons to a car salesman why they don't want to buy his car.

>>2517872
You're already insane by believing there is no God.

>>2517896
>You don't expect people to give reasons to a car salesman why they don't want to buy his car.

Have you never bought a car before, or is this a massive typo?

>>2517906
I said "you" don't, as in it's an unreasonable expectation. Maybe you really are just a pushy piece of human refuse.

>>2517894
>Or do you mean what specific personal experience would convince me?
Yes, this.
>No they aren't, one is a way to practice epoche, the other is flat out stating what is(n't)
It shouldn't have to be explained to you that "I do not X" and "I not do X" are equal statements.

>>2517895
Then why does God change characters, personalities, and even bodily form throughout the Old Testament? If the foundation is suspect, then everything above it is in danger of collapse.

>>2517896
>it's on the proselytizing piece of dog vomit to convince people.

This is perhaps the most uncharitable thing I have ever seen posted.

Please let me know one iota of benefit I receive from telling you the gospel of Jesus Christ, and I will tell you the infinite benefit you would receive by believing the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Let's just see who the dog vomit really belongs to.

>>2517909
Hey, you two young folks looking to buy a car? How about this one right here!

You: Sold!

>>2517896
So you want me both to prove to you that God exists and to do this without knowing what would prove that God exists?

>>2517913
Why do you think you are in a position to say what God can and cannot do?

Who are you that God Himself has to comport to your dictates?

>>2517917
>Please let me know one iota of benefit I receive from telling you the gospel of Jesus Christ, and I will tell you the infinite benefit you would receive by believing the gospel of Jesus Christ.

You fulfill your ideological obligation, you filth. But aside from that, you validate your own beliefs by convincing others of their merit and displaying your own power in so doing, but you've sublimated that so far you don't even acknowledge it.

>Let's just see who the dog vomit really belongs to.

Your parents and they should be ashamed of having made it.

>>2517923
Figure it out for yourself. Paul managed.

>>2517926
I have no such obligation. I am free.

So, wrong again.

Validate my own beliefs? I am already convinced of my own beliefs, and have been since before you were born.

You cannot make the comparison between your two states, the one burning in hell forever, which is where you are headed, and the other living in bliss forever, which is where I and God want you to be.

You cannot even fathom the difference.

>>2517912
>Yes, this.
Dunno, seeing somebody raised from the dead for example would be pretty cool, or having an exact prophecy that isn't vague as fact, or like god literally talking to me and saying stuff I can't know. Lots of stuff.
>It shouldn't have to be explained to you that "I do not X" and "I not do X" are equal statements.
If your language is so plebeian that it doesn't contemplate the difference, maybe, but the sapir-worf hypothesis is false therefore you should be able to understand it anyway. I can neither believe nor disbelief something, it's called being neutral, suspension of judgment or more colloquially "dunno".

>>2517929
So ride a horse back and forth from Jerusalem to Damascus to see if God is going to personally make you his greatest apostle to the Gentiles.

Protip: He's not.

>>2517935
>I have no such obligation.

So not only are you a terrible human being, you're bad at being a Christian. Remarkable.

As for the rest of that post, oh that is some sweet, sweet cognitive dissonance my friend.

No, you're human, driven by the same chemical desires as everyone else.

>>2517937

173,880 days from when Daniel said the Messiah would appear, Jesus rode a colt into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, the only day he allowed people to worship him.

173,880 days exactly.

Zion was to be reborn in one day, her children being citizens on Day One.

That happened May 14, 1948. One day. Exactly as prophesied 2700 years prior.

No, the evidence is everywhere, and but for your ability to rebel against God, which God gave you so that you could reject Him, it is overwhelming.

>>2517944
No Christian has any obligations.

We have been set free by the Son, and we are free indeed.

It's not unusual for someone like you to have zero understanding of Christianity; if you knew what it was, you would embrace it with your entire being.

I am not "human" anymore, no. So, wrong again. I am a new creation in Christ Jesus, just as he promised.

Does your ignorance level ever bother you? Like, ever?

>>2517865
Do you speak Spanish?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwmFYA0H_bI

>>2517925
You'd expect a God who is always right to maintain a constant attitude and act in a logical fashion. Instead, we have a God who demands literal human sacrifice, then bans it, a God who says there are other gods, then those other gods disappear from the theology altogether, a God who had a Son but inexplicably this Son must also be of the line of David.

There is so much interpolation, redaction, rehabilitation, and censorship in the Bible that it contradicts itself many times and people must do all sorts of mental acrobatics in order to have it make sense.

>>2517937
>Dunno, seeing somebody raised from the dead for example would be pretty cool, or having an exact prophecy that isn't vague as fact, or like god literally talking to me and saying stuff I can't know.
See? You have proven you have a theology! If you believe it is possible for there to be evidence of God, then you believe that there are things which are intrinsically divine, since for this to be evidence you have to be able to look at it and say "Yes, God does this." The fact you know what would be intrinsically divine proves you already believe that God exists and you are suppressing that knowledge because of your sin, since something that does not exist does not have intrinsic characteristics, so if you believe something is intrinically divine, so that it could serve as evidence of God, then you must believe God exists.

>>2517949
For the first part, Jesus didn't fullfill several prophecies related to the messiah, like rebuilding the temple so saying he's the messiah doesn't even make sense.
For the second part, people knew about the prophecy, it's called a self-fulfilling prophecy.

>>2517970
>If you believe it is possible for there to be evidence of God, then you believe that there are things which are intrinsically divine
No I don't, I said those things can make me believe in God, that doesn't mean they're intrinsically divine, just that the divine hypothesis is preferred in those conditions.
>The fact you know what would be intrinsically divine proves you already believe that God exists
As I've already said, no, I don't. Also, the argument is yet again so bad it can be used for anything. "Well, is there some way you could believe in Allah? Yes? Then you already believe in allah since those things that would make you believe in allah are intrinsecally allah-related" and so on. Really bad argument.

>>2517975
>rebuilding the temple
He did, He rebuilt the temple of God which is the human being, created in His likeness. Jesus Christ causes the image of God to be restored to its former glory, and the Spirit dwells within this temple. Therefore, Jesus rebuilt the true temple, which was destroyed by sin.

>>2517994
? So why make a reference to the Temple at all? Why not say he will come back to life? Why leave room for ambiguity?
Inb4 muh free will

>>2517957
>I am not "human" anymore, no. So, wrong again. I am a new creation in Christ Jesus, just as he promised.

That is the single cringiest thing I have ever read. You're pathetic. I hope someone photoshops that onto a picture of an obese man.

>Does your ignorance level ever bother you? Like, ever?

Just because I don't agree with it doesn't mean I don't get it. The Bible was the single most retarded and worthless thing I ever read.

>>2517991
>I said those things can make me believe in God, that doesn't mean they're intrinsically divine
But they can't be evidence of God unless they are something which God does by definition. If they are not intrinsically divine then it can't be evidence, since it is more rationally explained by something else.
>just that the divine hypothesis is preferred in those conditions
Why? What makes those conditions more likely to be supernatural rather than natural, is it something inherent about the condition itself?
>"Well, is there some way you could believe in Allah?
Wait, you mean A GOD?? You're telling me this argument supports theism, but cannot be used to support the alternatives?

>>2517994
That is the most absurd asspull ever. The temple is a building, not a person.

>>2517970
Another stupid thing I could prove with your argument.
Do you believe unicorns exists?
No?
Well, do you believe there are things that could prove to you that unicorns exist?
yes? well then you already believe unicorns exist since you admit that those things would be intrinsecally unicorny and so on.

>>2517994
>He rebuilt the temple of God which is the human being
Yeaaaaah, that's not written anywhere in the original prophecy, there's nothing in there that makes you thing about anything except a very real temple.
Imagine you make a prophecy "this guy will erect a building so tall it's going to reach mars, this guy is going to be the prophet".
Then I come around, I build a capsule, go to mars and say "see? This building reached mars? Clearly, I'm the prophet!"
Kinda dishonest.

>>2518013
>since it is more rationally explained by something else
Nope, like there's nothing intrinsically "murdery" about a motive or the lack on an alibi, or being seen on the scene of a crime, but put together it's more reasonable to assume that they are referring to a murder than something else.
>Wait, you mean A GOD?
No, I mean anything, literally anything at all. The argument can be used to "prove" anything exists, gods different than yours, unicorns, anything. An argument like that is shitty beyond belief.

Why is it, when I contacted God, it didn't have any of the qualities of the Christian God?

>>2518000
>So why make a reference to the Temple at all?
Because the human is a temple?
>Why not say he will come back to life?
Who?
>Why leave room for ambiguity?
Who are you to say what God can and can't do.
>>2518018
Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God?
1 Corinthians 6:19
>>2518021
>Well, do you believe there are things that could prove to you that unicorns exist?
No, unicorns are fictional creatures. Their intrinsic characteristics are a creation of the human mind. Before you use this against God, keep in mind a true God by definition would not have intrinsic characteristics from a human mind.
>there's nothing in there that makes you thing about anything except a very real temple
It is a very real temple. Further, there are prophecies which clearly say the temple would not be rebuilt. It must be fulfilled in this way
>Kinda dishonest
You have no right to determine how God reveals truth.
>Nope, like there's nothing intrinsically "murdery" about a motive or the lack on an alibi, or being seen on the scene of a crime
Uh, yes it is. These are evidences of murder because they are intrinsically "murdery"
>The argument can be used to "prove" anything exists, gods different than yours, unicorns, anything.
See above

>>2518063
Meant to link >>2518038

>>2517969

I understand why these things are confusing to you. They are not confusing to me. They are the things of God, and the things of God are not for the people who do not belong to God.

>You'd expect a God who is always right to maintain a constant attitude and act in a logical fashion.
And that is what we have.

>Instead, we have a God who demands literal human sacrifice
You are omitting the part where God had promised Abraham that his descendants would be numerous as the stars. So Abraham believed God's promise, and was obedient to God's commands knowing that even if he had to kill his son, that God would raise Isaac from the dead in order to fulfill his promises. That is the Father of Faith in action.

Note that Isaac was in his mid-30's and childless at this time. Note that this mid-30's man bore some wood up Mt. Moriah to a place of sacrifice, willingly. Note that at no time did the Son refuse to be obedient to the Father.

Does this seem familiar to you? What if I told you Mt. Moriah was where Calvary was? Would that make the story's allegory more plain?

>then bans it
If you mean "stayed Abraham's hand", then yes. If you mean a total ban, Jesus' sacrifice on the cross was a human sacrifice. Note that God stayed Abraham's hand and provided a ram for the sacrifice. Not a lamb, as Abraham had said: God will provide Himself a Lamb for the sacrifice.

And 2000 years later, God indeed did provide Himself as the Lamb of God as a sacrifice for the sins of the world.

>a God who says there are other gods
He says there are none like him, and there are not. But you can carve a pumpkin and call it your god, and it will be your god. It just means you have a carved pumpkin for a god, and your carved pumpkin will never be God. The devil is the god of this world, but that does not mean the devil is God; it means the world has a devil for a god.

con't.

>>2518063
>Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God?
>proof that this claim of the new testament is valid is from the new testament

Intardesting.

>These are evidences of murder because they are intrinsically "murdery"

Are you fucking retarded? Each of those is circumstantial, and if you just had any one of those alone, you'd get laughed out of a courtroom.

>>2518063
Corinthians is an epistle, written with Paul's interpretation of the events. That's like me using the Book of Mormon to prove that Joseph Smith was indeed a prophet and vessel of God.

>>2518063
>No, unicorns are fictional creatures
Look, you're really bad at this, you keep assuming stuff without realizing it. You can't just say "well they're fictional". Also, again, you can make the same argument for anything, things you don't know if they're fictional or not, things you clearly don't believe in, like allah and so on.
>It is a very real temple
No it isn't, it's a "temple". There's no reason to think about a "temple" in that prophecy.

Anyway, seems as usual people who aren't well versed in actualy philosophy of religion only make christians seem dumb as hell, too bad that wolfshiem dude isn't around, at least he's a smart fella.

>>2517969
>then those other gods disappear from the theology altogether
They do not. The foreign gods the Israelites worshiped when they betrayed Jehovah are gods still worshiped today. For instance, Ba'al is allah, and is worshiped as God by a billion people. Same demon god.

>a God who had a Son
The Son is God. Jesus created the universe. Jesus was in heaven prior to his birth, and came down from heaven in the flesh. There are also many appearances of the preincarnate Jesus in the Old Testament.

>but inexplicably this Son must also be of the line of David.
God promised David that his heirs would rule Israel forever, and God keeps his promises. He said the scepter would never depart from Judah, and Jesus is the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, and the Root of David.

Hence David crying out "The Lord said to my Lord" when no king would ever call his own heir "Lord".

>>2518077
Dude, just give up, these ones are not particularly bright. I literally skipped that part in my reply to him because it's so stupid it makes my head hurt.

>>2518076
Actually, it looks pretty clear that Abraham actually sacrificed Issac. Isaac's life is suspiciously like Abraham's, as if someone copy and pasted it. Also, early Canaanite religions practiced human sacrifice heavily.

There were other gods worshipped. Why not say, you shall have no other God but me? Why, no other god BEFORE me? The primacy of Yahweh is not established until Elijah murderates all the priests of Baal. It is suspected that this is when the redaction of Isaac's sacrifice takes place.

>>2517975
The tear this temple down and I will rebuild it in three days is his death and resurrection; he was a temple of the Holy Spirit, that temple was torn down on the cross, and He raised it on the third day.

>>2518090
It's not even that they're not bright (necessarily, at least one of these people here seems to be a bit of a thicky) it's that they're so emotionally invested in this narrative that they'll twist literally anything to support it, and then act like we're the unrealistic ideologues. I'm not even closed to the idea of God; I found Spinoza's arguments quite plausible if not altogether convincing, I just expect something a bit better than "take it on faith LMAO" for something as extraordinary as a god that kills people with bears.

>>2517975

Actually, nobody recognized the day Jesus rode into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday as a fulfillment of the Daniel 70 Week prophecy. They rejected him as the messiah, remember?

They should have known the day, the exact day, but they did not.

And Daniel's prophecy was triggered by an event that would happen after Daniel's death, by an outside agent. King Artaxerxes.

And of course Jesus rode into town on the exact day because he is God, and can make all things come true.

Luke 19

Jesus Weeps over Jerusalem
And when he drew near and saw the city, he wept over it, saying, “Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace!

>>2518006
It's in the bible dude. Which was written before I was born, if you know even that much about it.

2 Corinthians 5:17
Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.

>>2518120
>the new testament is true because it says it's true

Do you have to get help buttoning up your shirt?

>>2518000
Two reasons. 1) to predict his death and resurrection, and 2) to show us that we too are temples of the Holy Spirit.

By this time, Jesus told the pharisees that he was not going to show them any more signs that he is the messiah; he had completed the entire checklist, including their own personal test: cast a demon from a deaf, dumb and blind man.

But when Jesus did that, they said he had the spirit of Beezlebub, blaspheming the Holy Spirit, and so the only sign they were to receive from that day forward was the sign of Jonah: three days dead in the belly of the beast, and then spit out alive.

>>2518078
The same Spirit inspired 1 Corinthians and Daniel
>>2518077
>>proof that this claim of the new testament is valid is from the new testament
The New Testament is a part of the bible.
>>2518081
>Look, you're really bad at this, you keep assuming stuff without realizing it. You can't just say "well they're fictional". Also, again, you can make the same argument for anything, things you don't know if they're fictional or not, things you clearly don't believe in, like allah and so on.
Keep reading anon, I already refuted this
>you keep assuming stuff without realizing it
No, it is you who are assuming things without realizing it. I am the one who is acknowledging our presuppositions. You have naturalist presuppositions, by which you would dismiss any evidence I could bring forth for God as assuming God's existence. You have to assume God's non-existence.
>No it isn't, it's a "temple"
Keep reading anon, I gave scripture
>seems as usual people who aren't well versed in actualy philosophy of religion only make christians seem dumb as hell
Your mockery is flattering
>>2518090
It makes your head hurt because it is beyond you, evidenty
>>2518095
>Why, no other god BEFORE me
This means "in my presence". This is the obvious meaning of it, hence why you do not see any mention of true gods other than God anywhere in entire bible.
>It is suspected that this is when the redaction of Isaac's sacrifice takes place
I could not care less about the suspicions of "intellectuals"
>>2518123
The New Testament is true because it is from God.

>>2518018

All born again Christians have the Holy Spirit dwelling within us; the Holy of Holies was opened to all who believe, as demonstrated by the veil before the Holy of Holies being rent in two (an impossible task with their tech) from top to bottom the day Jesus died.

>>2518021
Yes of course. A proper understanding of what a unicorn is.

For the last several thousands of years, the unicorn was the Asian rhino; it has only been a few hundred years since "unicorn" meant "mythical horse with a horn on it".

And even then you have the narwhal, which is a unicorn.

So again, your arguments are facile, and you are way out of your depth here. Perhaps there is a Hello Kitty website you'd be more comfy on.

>>2518131
>I'm too stupid to understand what a circular argument is.

Oh... I weep for what your teachers must have felt trying to deal with such a stupid boy.

>>2518132
Mmhmhmhm! That is delicious cognitive dissonance.

>>2518077
Men go to death row based on circumstantial evidence every year. It's the strongest evidence there is.

>>2518131
You haven't refuted anything lol, it's just more assumptions.
>>2518143
No, anon, you're just dumb, look at actual arguments that actual christian philosophers of religion put out, they're not as dumb as the ones you guys are making.

>>2518154
Not on a single piece and not in any civilized country.

>>2518095
Based on what? Nothing? Because in the bible, Isaac lives, is married, has Jacob, Jacob has `12 kids, and those kids are the 12 tribes of Israel, Jacob's name being changed to Israel by God himself.

So yes, if you pull stuff out of your ass, it can seem a certain way to you, but it still smells like shit to me.

>>2518106
God defending his prophet from a murderous gang of arab teenagers using bears is the best story in the bible.

Maybe heaven just isn't for you.

>>2518164
>most retarded story in the bible.

Fixed that for you. It was fucking hilarious though, in so far as there are people actually dumb enough to believe that.

>>2518123
You have not even come to the understanding that there exists objective truth yet. Sad. And it's so simple to demonstrate.

Here, I'll demonstrate it for you.

"There is no objective truth."

For that statement to be correct, it has to be objectively true. For it to be objectively true, objective truth has to exist, and the statement is demonstrably self-refuting and false.

Next.

>>2518151
Circular logic is unavoidable for anyone. Your error is that all circular logic is fallacious, to the contrary, any ultimate authority must be self-authenticating, since any authority to authenticate another authority is necessarily higher than that authority.
>>2518155
>You haven't refuted anything lol, it's just more assumptions.
Not an argument

>>2518151
There's nothing dissonant about it at all. The mystery was revealed by Paul thousands of years ago.

Salvation was always going to be presented first to the Jew, and then when the Jew rejected it, to all who believe.

>>2518167
The more I talk to atheists, the more I am convinced that of all types of people atheists are the least deserving of respect.

>>2518155

Which of those arguments caused you to become a spiritually living being again?

Oh, yeah, none of them.

So no. Telling you the truth, shining a light into your dark heart, does more good than any philosophy you think you might be able to understand.

Your depravity is not an intellectual problem but a spiritual one.

>>2518176
>then when the Jew rejected it, to all who believe.
You mean to the gentiles. It was always to all who believe, it was just delivered to the Jews first.

>>2518171
>there is no objective truth

Things I have never claimed for 400 Alec.

>>2518172
>Circular logic is unavoidable for anyone.

Sure, existence exists because I say so. We build from there.

>Your error is that all circular logic is fallacious

This circular logic sure as fucking hell is. There's literally no reason to believe that the claims of the New Testament are valid, you're just too stupid to see otherwise.

>>2518157
You might be insane. Google "circumstantial evidence" so you know what I'm talking about.

>We found his fingerprints on the eyeball of the decedent. Maybe he did it.

>>2518167
The most retarded stories in the bible always revolve around people hearing the truth of the gospel and then rejecting it. Simon Magus, for example.

>>2518176
>There's nothing dissonant about it at all.

Every time you encounter disagreement that points out how stupid you are, you retreat into schizophrenic rambling. That's cognitive dissonance being shown.

>>2518178
Go cry to your mommy about the mean words.

>>2518178
And they know it, which is part of the problem. A crushing self-hatred mixed with hopelessness and despair.

>>2518186
>Sure, existence exists because I say so. We build from there.
Right, but the existence of existence is not a epistemic authority. It can't be cited to prove anything but itself. We're talking about the ultimate authority, by which we authenticate lesser authorites (like reason and experience, neither of which can prove themselves)
>There's literally no reason to believe that the claims of the New Testament are valid
Not if you want to continue your wanton rebellion there isn't. You need to be born again first, before you recognize this.

>>2518189
>the truth

Oh you poor, stupid little man.

>>2518185
The early Christians were mostly converted Jews; it's not until about the 10th chapter of Acts when they realize that Gentiles can be saved too.

>>2518186

>The New Testament is true because it says it's true.

That statement is a clear indication that you have no concept of objective truth. The only reasoning you know is circular.

>>2518190
There is no schizophrenic rambling on my end; perhaps you need your meds changed.

>>2518196
>We're talking about the ultimate authority, by which we authenticate lesser authorites (like reason and experience, neither of which can prove themselves)

The difference here is that existence is such a plausible leap that we have to take it to get anything done. God is not.

>Not if you want to continue your wanton rebellion there isn't. You need to be born again first, before you recognize this.

And back to the schizophrenic rambling. Tell me, have you ever subjected yourself to psychological analysis?

>>2518197
Yup. Jesus really is God, and he really did rise from the dead.

It's not like this happened in a vacuum.

It's fairly well known.

>>2518198
That doesn't mean only Jews could be saved

>>2518159
The story of Jacob is all bullshit. It's a common ancestor myth that was used to confederate the various Israelite tribes.

>>2518205
Oh man, projection as a means to cover up cognitive dissonance. You guys are a fucking riot.

>>2518209
wow, you can't even tell us apart, and we have two distinct posting styles. Plus, of course, you could always learn how to /samefag.

I really am starting to think you have been misdiagnosed.

>>2518211
>things that don't hold up historical scrutiny

Yep, bullshit spreads far and wide before it's knocked down. This is nothing new.

>>2518213
True. And it doesn't mean all Jews are saved.

A person who is saved is no longer either a Jew or a Gentile, but a new creation. Something new. A voluntary collaboration with the Creator to improve on Human 1.0.

>>2518209
>The difference here is that existence is such a plausible leap that we have to take it to get anything done
Not only is there no point in getting anything done if there is no existence, but there is also no getting anything done. You are in my position against the Solipsist, but you have cut off any foundation to argue against it.
>And back to the schizophrenic rambling. Tell me, have you ever subjected yourself to psychological analysis?
God bless you.

>>2518218
>tell us apart

Don't need to; you're both either crazy or retarded. This much is self-evident.

>>2518215
The day you realize the bible is all true will be a good day for you.

And of course you have zero evidence that any of his story is bogus; you have only your bias.

Which is of course what you accuse us of, even though our foundation, the bible, is available to you.

>>2518217
And you're not.

>>2518225
>Not only is there no point in getting anything done if there is no existence, but there is also no getting anything done. You are in my position against the Solipsist, but you have cut off any foundation to argue against it.

You don't actually need to argue against sollipsism, you just ignore it. Works fine.

>God bless you.

I hope you find the help you need.

>>2518222
It's the best recorded event in ancient history. If you want to throw out the resurrection of Jesus Christ, just go full solipsism and believe only you exist, maybe as a brain in a vat.

>>2518229
I don't think anything is self-evident to you. You can't even figure out God exists on your own.

>>2518234
Of course not, I'm busy here busting your balls and calling you on your shit. This is a goddamn service to humanity that might make you a better person some day.

>>2518231
You're actually insane.

>>2518246
So adding nothing to the thread, pro or con, not funny, and not busting my balls.

Because this is what I do.

>>2518249
You're actually diagnosing people over the internet.

>>2518241
The records don't stand up to historical scrutiny; they're very obviously forgeries produced by insane cultists.

>>2518243
There's plenty that's self evident to me reality, and the fact you're suffering from a textbook delusion for two.

>>2518246
I have a question
Why? Why don't you eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow you die?

>>2518251
Man, where's that picture of wojak with the :^) mask over his crying face, because it describes you perfectly.

I have contacted God on five occasions and didn't see anything about Jesus or heaven.

>>2518260
That wasn't God you contacted.

>>2518256
Well I'm busy being merry right now.

Also Solomon was a pathetic coward for looking at nihilism and balking from existence like that.

>>2518255
You've checked out all 24,000 manuscript bits?

Wow, you've been industrious!

Have you checked out the 7 for Plato yet?

>>2518258
And you couldn't even manage that.

Sad!

>>2518262
Then what was it? I saw information that was definitely out of my own reach at the moment of contact, which is something only God could do.

>>2518270
>Have you checked out the 7 for Plato yet?

Oh this ridiculous argument. The authenticity of Plato's text doesn't matter because it's meant to stand on its arguments. Something you're clearly too stupid to grasp.

>>2518273
It was a demon

>>2518284
So somebody who only wants to know the truth is destined to be deceived, and God makes no effort to stop this? Sounds perfectly legit.

>>2518263
Yeah, not everyone can be the tough hero like you are, champ!

By the way, how close are you to earning Solomon's 666 talents of gold per year? Because you don't know anything, that is about $250,000,000 annually.

How much of a dent are you putting in that, o brave one?

Got 700 wives? Hell, got 1?

God 300 concubines? Hell, ever got any?

Yeah, you mocking Solomon is just delicious.

>>2518280
And the text is the original because we have 7 copies, dated centuries later.

Unlike the tens of thousands for the bible, dated years later.

Yeah, totally irrelevant.

The fact that you don't think the bible makes its case is just fantastic.

>>2518292
Yeah, because being born into wealth is quite the achievement on his part. Very impressive.

>>2518273
There are many spirits in the world.

The test for the spirit is to ask the spirit if Jesus came down from heaven in the flesh.

An evil spirit cannot say "yes" to that.

A spirit from God, or God, will.

So anything but a "yes" and you know you're dealing with an evil spirit.

>>2518298
>And the text is the original because we have 7 copies, dated centuries later.

It really doesn't matter, because the arguments contained within stand on their own, you bloody moron.

>The fact that you don't think the bible makes its case is just fantastic.

It doesn't. Scholarly consensus is that Jesus was just another apocalyptic preacher who got his shit murdered for pissing off the Romans, nothing special and that most of the history in the Old Testament is complete bullshit.

>>2518300
Born into wealth?

Chapter and verse please. (that means show me in the bible where Solomon was born into his wealth)

>>2518306
Plato's arguments stand on their own? I hardly think so.

"Scholarly consensus" here = Bart Erhman, autistic godless hero of the atheist.

The 20 centuries of the church mean more than Bart Ehrman ever will.

>>2518307
The part where he's born as the son of the king and declared heir to the throne, idiot.

>>2518306
>It doesn't. Scholarly consensus is that Jesus was just another apocalyptic preacher who got his shit murdered for pissing off the Romans, nothing special and that most of the history in the Old Testament is complete bullshit.

But you're still talking about Jesus on a Manchurian Pokemon trading board for no reason whatsoever, without any cognitive dissonance clanging about in that empty skull full of much you call a head.

>>2518317
Chapter and verse, please. And please for the assertion that you made, that Solomon was born into his wealth.

Is that asking too much? That you provide the basis for your opinions about the bible, from the bible?

>>2518313
>Plato's arguments stand on their own? I hardly think so.

They're not self-evident in their truth or untruth, but he makes a credible case for his position, and the case made is what matters, not whether they are indeed his writings.

>Bart Erhman, autistic godless hero of the atheist.

No, he's just the most widely known because he wrote some books meant for a non-scholarly reader. His position is standard these days, especially outside of America.

>The 20 centuries of the church mean more than Bart Ehrman ever will.

Academically, they mean nothing, because the church existed only to perpetuate its existence as a power structure, resting on the "legitimacy" of its claims, so it did everything in its power to make sure that this was never effectively challenged until its spine was broken by the reformation. There's a reason they chose to burn Against the Galileans.

ITT atheists getting demolished

>>2518320
I'm enjoying the banter.

>>2518323
>I'm so assmad I'm going to split hairs.

He was wealthy by no virtue of his own. He was declared king through no merit of his own.

>>2518304
You've clearly never contacted God. You'd know the idea of "asking" is absurd if you ever did.

>>2518331
>Godless atheists know more about the bible than the believers.

kek

That you really think that is hilarious.

>>2518304
>An evil spirit cannot say "yes" to that.
That's not true. Evil spirits testify of Arianism. John's point is that evil spirits testify of heresy.

>>2518349
More cognitive dissonance. Yawn.

I assure you, outsiders sure knew more about the fact that the Heaven's Gate cult was full of shit than its cultists did.

>>2518341
You refuse to address the question.

Jesus was a nobody, did nothing, nothing special happened.

And Jesus is the most famous person of all time, started the largest movements of all time, and has dozens of miracles accredited to him, as well as prophecies, and as I stated earlier, the resurrection, which is the best recorded event in the ancient world.

You have no answer for why we're still talking about Jesus if Jesus is as you say he is.

Ergo Jesus is not as you say he is.

>>2518331
>Academically, they mean nothing, because the church existed only to perpetuate its existence as a power structure, resting on the "legitimacy" of its claims, so it did everything in its power to make sure that this was never effectively challenged until its spine was broken by the reformation
You are clueless about church history

>>2518358
Asclepius was declared a god for being a good medic. Being nothing special and being declared a God are not all that extraordinary historically speaking.

Christianity spread by appealing to people's baser natures and fear of death.

>>2518347
I have. It's called prayer. He's my father, and I can go to him at will. It's an awesome perk.

I will give you the chapter and verse on testing the spirits, if you continue your foolishness. (they're demons)(and of course they're more intelligent than humans. they're angels too)

1 John 4
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, 3 and every spirit that does not confess that[a] Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.

Do this even if you think it's an ET.

>>2518355
No evil spirit can declare that Jesus came down from heaven in the flesh.

Gnosticism declares that Jesus did not come down from heaven in the flesh.

John was refuting gnosticism.

Arius was born centuries later.

>>2518360
Oh, so they didn't anathematize Against the Galileans and declare that certain subjects were off-limit for philosophers?

>>2518356
The cultists knew more about their cult than any outsider.

It's like you have no reasoning capacity whatsoever.

>>2518366
Literally who.

kek

My entire point.

And it's not just Christianity, it's Judaism, Catholicism, Islam, Mormonism, etc., etc., etc.

>>2518377
Yet they didn't know enough to not kill themselves. Funny that.

When it comes to evaluation of ideas, the things closest to us are by far the hardest to see. It's why introspection is extremely difficult, yet people can make their careers psychologically analyzing.

>>2518379
>Literally who.

Now. He had a long run as a god. But all religions come to an end, like Christianity currently is in the west.

>>2518367
If you can contact God, then tell what's on my desk right now. If you can't, then you're a schizophrenic.

>>2518385
No, they knew enough to kill themselves, and did.

See how an outsider (you) knows fuck all about them?

>>2518390
Eternity is coming to a close?

I highly doubt it.

>>2518401
This is something a schizophrenic would say. Are you the same person in touch with demons?

Because I'm not going to pray to God to turn him into a trick monkey for you. A demon could tell me what is on your desk as well as an angel or God or a really lucky guess.

>>2518367
So everybody who has never heard of Christianity is doomed on principle. Nice "God" you've got there.

>>2518371
You don't get my point (or John's). John's point is that spirits from God testify of the whole truth, so any spirit which declares heresy is from the devil. Arius taught that Jesus came down from heaven in the flesh, but that He was not divine. Are spirits that testify of that from God or satan?

>>2518436
Nope.

Good think you're not God; you suck at it.

>>2518436
They deserved to be damned, because they are sinners.

>>2518445
Why did he make them sinners?

>>2518459
He did not, Adam did

>>2518471
And you're completely fine with this insanity because "no choice lul"?

Why would you put any faith in something that is more flawed than many humans? Why would you believe that it has power that it never demonstrates? Why would you believe its claims of being beyond comprehension, when it follows a very clear pattern? Why would you believe its claims of being "above" when there are so many others like it? If a demon can create a false religion, what exempts your beliefs from being one of these?

>>2518487
God made the universe.

Go ahead and top that for power, glory, and awe.

>>2518487
>If a demon can create a false religion, what exempts your beliefs from being one of these?

The indwelling presence of the Spirit of Truth.

See, you have nothing. You may have been one of those people who killed themselves to catch a ride on a comet, because why not. You don't know any better than they did.

You do not have the Spirit of Truth living in you, teaching you, guiding you, nudging you. You live like an animal.

>>2518487
Dude, we were born into the same universe you were. We see the same universe you see. We have the same choice to accept or reject God that you have.

We're telling you that we lived like you did, and now we live like we do, and there's no comparison. Being saved is better than being saved from death, because it extends past that, and then starts heading into godlike rewards.

It's having a constant companion in times of trouble.

It's having a sure and true guide to live your life by.

It's having the knowledge that you are loved and accepted by your Creator, and that he has provided for you a meaning and purpose for your life that you could not manage on your own.

You have choice because God says choose.

Choose between Jesus, and life ,and good, and heaven on one hand, and satan, and death, and evil, and hell on the other hand.

It's not a trick question. And no, most people choose poorly because people in general are broken, depraved and lost.

You said you'd come
and share all my sorrows
And you said you'd be there
for all my tomorrows
I came so close to sending you away
But just like you promised,
you came there to stay.
I just had to pray.

And Jesus said "come, to the water
stand by my side.
I know you are thirsty,
you won't be denied.
I felt every tear drop
when in darkness you cried.
And I came to remind you.
that for those tears I died."

>>2518524
We are animals.

>>2518565
>we used to be like you, then we turned our brains off and developed schizophrenic delusions

Out-fucking-standing.

>>2518593
May God have mercy on your soul.

>>2518593

I am not an Animal good sir I don't


animal
noun [ C ] uk  /ˈæn.J.məl/ us  /ˈæn.ə.məl/

 
     
animal noun [ C ] (CREATURE)



A1 something that lives and moves but is not a human, bird, fish, or insect:

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/animal

>>2518565
>It's not a trick question. And no, most people choose poorly because people in general are broken, depraved and lost.
>the six billion people that disagree with me must be broken, depraved, or lost

That's fucking appalling. I can't imagine how someone could possess such a toxic mindset.

>>2518614
You are a member of the kingdom Animalia. You are an animal.

>>2518518
And he can't make people believe in him? Yeah fucking right. A powerful being wouldn't bother talking about its own capabilities, it would just act.

>>2518622
I am a member of the Kingdom of God. I live by faith.

You were made in the image of God, but you chose to live your life as an animal. You live by your five senses, like an animal, neglecting the faith that was given you (faith being the ability to believe the unseen).

We are two different sorts of creatures, you and I, and we are currently headed towards two very different places.

I would encourage you to realize that your animal upbringing and worldview has no upside, and only downside.

>>2518630
This is overlooking the fact that a perfect being would have gotten it right and made existence exactly as he wanted it. Which means he either engineered mankind's fall, or he didn't create reality.

>>2518622

Maybe as a biological entity but not as a moral entity

>>2518565
So the thing that has been constant throughout my entire life is just invalidated because it never related itself to Jesus? If this isn't God, then where the fuck is he?

>>2518639
>I'm too stupid for science.

That's terrible. There's a wonderful world out there outside of your Bible. But you have no eyes to see it or ears to hear it.

You are an animal. Kingdom Animalia, Phylum Cordata, Class Mammalia, Order Primates, Suborder Haplorhini, Family Hominidae, Genus Homo, Species Homo Sapiens. Descendant of apes, from the first single-celled organisms of this planet.

Just to pre-empt your reply, no, your gish-gallop of links is not an argument, don't even bother with it; it never stands up to actual scientific scrutiny, and it's basically just an attempt to make your opponent give up by burying them in shit.

There's no punishment in this case for refusing to accept reality (because science isn't a cult of life-denying fear mongers), but it's really quite sad if you don't.

>>2518643
As a moral entity to. Our social systems are just an extension of our instincts, little else.

>>2518131
>This means "in my presence". This is the obvious meaning of it, hence why you do not see any mention of true gods other than God anywhere in entire bible.

So why is it that Saul named two of his sons after Ba'al?

>>2518822
Why did Saul try to kill David, God's anointed?

>>2518825
So? Are you forgetting Saul was anointed as the first King of Israel by Samuel himself?

>>2518651
The Son is building the New Jerusalem (streets of gold, gates of pearl,etc.); the Spirit is here on earth living in all born again Christians; and the Father is where he has always been, in the third heaven living in unapproachable light.

I know this may cause some confusion.

Father is God.
Son is God.
Spirit is God.
There is one God.

As God has more dimensions than we do, we cannot understand his nature any more than a Flatlander could tell that we were showing him one six color cube, and not six different color squares.

Here's his promise to you.

Seek, and you will find. Knock, and the door will be opened to you. Ask, and you will receive.

>>2518664
Attempting to cast off your immorality by saying morality is a social construct.

Go back to /pol/.

>>2518837
Morality IS a social construct. There were hundreds of cultures where killing worthy foes and raiding great riches were held to be the greatest of honors, like the Greeks of the Iliad.
A feral child does not know right or wrong.

>>2518660
I have a BS degree, many awards for science, and absolutely love science.

Unlike you, I'm not autistic enough to need to put every living thing in a pigeon hole. I do hope you know that's what drives you.

And there is a wonderful world that God made, but we don't live in it. We live in the ruined world, cursed and broken, and soon to be destroyed.

If you actually want to live in the new world, then you have to do what the Son says to do. Believe he is who he says he is.

All of your useless information will be completely useless to you as you are immersed in a pitch black lake of fire that will never go out, and you will never die.

>>2517813
the goalposts are shifted and atheists move on to critiquing and trying to find fault with the scientists doing the studies

You dont seem to realize how far away the goalpost are in actual science. Nothing without multiple confirmations is considered actually confirmed, and tests by people who have a stake in the tests success are suspect, especially if they are claiming results that are not in keeping with the scientific consensus

>>2518831
Are you forgetting he displeased God and was removed? Are you forgetting he was a joke king to begin with? A coward chosen because he was tall?

>>2518846
A feral child knows more than you do about morality.

>>2517961
A man who makes his living doing speaking tours about the science of miracles falls under this

>>2518848

There are many examples of tests on other stuff, even those conducted by prestigious institutions being widely doubted, at least until many other people confirmed the results in separate experiments

>>2518849
How was he a coward? He is described as a man of mighty valor. He was brave and upright, merciful and mild. David is the true sneakthief, driven out of his own kingdom, living like a bandit chief in exile until Saul was killed.

>>2518878
1 Samuel 10
But when they sought him, he could not be found. Therefore they inquired of the Lord further, “Has the man come here yet?”

And the Lord answered, “There he is, hidden among the equipment.”

So they ran and took him from there, and when he stood among the people, he was taller than any of the people from his shoulders upward.…

(You know Ba'al means Lord, yes?)

>>2518878
>David is the true sneakthief,

1 Samuel 17
But David said to Saul, “Your servant used to keep his father’s sheep, and when a lion or a bear came and took a lamb out of the flock, I went out after it and struck it, and delivered the lamb from its mouth; and when it arose against me, I caught it by its beard, and struck and killed it. Your servant has killed both lion and bear; and this uncircumcised Philistine will be like one of them, seeing he has defied the armies of the living God.” Moreover David said, “The Lord, who delivered me from the paw of the lion and from the paw of the bear, He will deliver me from the hand of this Philistine.”

It's like you live in Opposite World. Or are Jewish.

>>2518893
Ba'al is the SPECIFIC name of a "pagan" GOD that Elijah banned the worship of. How the fuck are you gonna tell me it means one thing when it is clearly being used in the context of another?
Humility is a virtue. He didn't want to be king. The kingship was thrust upon him against his will by the people of Israel. God even disapproved the kingship.

>>2518903
>A man killed a 500-lb lion or a half-ton bear with his bare hands.
Lol okay. If I tried that as a pubescent shepherd boy, would God give me super human strength and let me smack around some lions too?
If David was so popular, why didn't the people of Israel rise for him? Why did the confederated tribes instead continue to support Saul, even though they had no obligation to support his armies?

File: Screenshot_2017-03-16-17-27-49.png (178KB, 720x1280px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 720x1280px

>>2518959

>>2518847
>I have a BS degree, many awards for science, and absolutely love science.

Oh, I'll buy that for a dollar.

>Unlike you, I'm not autistic enough to need to put every living thing in a pigeon hole. I do hope you know that's what drives you.

Haha, yeah. I'm sure you know me so well, friend.

>rest of post

Heard it before. You're a lunatic.

>>2518847
>we have to do exactly what god told a very specific tribe of people in a very specific area or we're fucked
>Aztecs/Sumerians/hindus/every other civ that isn't christian is fucked for no reason at all
>oh and he undoubtedly believes in some looney tunes 'believe this moronic interpretation of everything or u bad' denomination, so most christians are fucked as well.

You're interpretation of god is no more valid than someone sitting with a mask and a rattle on the siberian steppe 2000 years ago. There is no objective superiority between the two whatsoever.

Hurts, doesn't it?

>>2518858
A good example of this was a few years ago when one lab seemed to have results that showed neutrinos traveling faster than the speed of light, and asked for help dealing with it. Other institutions investigated, found fault with the design, and when the tests were redone with better controls the effect disappeared.

Every single new discovery is met with scrutiny, and it is only those that survive scrutiny that are accepted. Theists with miracles aren't singled out in particular, everyone gets the same treatment. It just so happens that no miracle we have access to test holds up to scrutiny.

>>2519433
You've never been given access to miracles in a way that allows for repeated scrutiny. The Church tends to test them once and then open them up for adoration. The rigorousness you speak of has never been applied to most miraculous happenings, except for the Shroud of Turin, which is filled with confusion.

>>2518985
>ignores rest of article
Ba'al means lord and in the context of the bible refers to a specific god. who does Gideon destroy the shrine of? Ba'al. Who does Elijah have the competition with the priests of? Ba'al. though in a way you are right, the northern kingdom did syncronize Ba'al and Yahweh. Yahweh has several characteristics taken from Ba'al (such as being a "cloud-rider") and Hosea condemns the practice of calling Yahweh Ba'al