[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #18] Huh, learn something new every day. I didn't realize that some apologists were trying to torture scripture so it fit into 3 full days and 3 full nights by backing up Jesus's death to a Wednesday. They seem to be fine 'interpreting' things to smooth out these kinds of issues in other ways so not sure what's happening here. They are fine saying one name means another name, but can't simply use the tradition of rounding up partial days/nights? Take the Catholics: https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print ... -wednesday In the Bible, parts of time units were ..read more

Q4D: So, if the doctrine of inerrancy holds such a minority position in broader Christianity, why are debates here so focused on it? Is it possible to debate the ultimate truths of Christianity without reference to inerrancy? First, it would help to define "such a minority position". Do you have some stats? This is what I found with a quick search: https://news.gallup.com/poll/394262/few ... d-god.aspx The majority of Christians (58%) say the Bible is the inspired word of God but not everything in it is to be taken literally, while 25% say it should be interpreted literally and 16% say it ..read more

That being so, it was the Saturday sabbath even if it was also the Passover (which would make the Last supper NOT the Passover. Unless the argument is to try to explain why the Passover (which it wasn't as I have explained; it was Sukkhot) fell on two different days, it only serves to create problems for no good reason, like trying to make Crucifixion to the women finding the tomb open three days when it only needs to be the Third day. Uh, Transponder . . . This makes no sense. It may be good willed from you, but your bad grammatics/writing makes it impossible for all of us to comprehend ..read more

"There was also a prophet, Anna, the daughter of Penuel, of the tribe of Asher." So much for "zero girlie prophetesses." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_th ... xt=Anna%20 Yeah. Brief appearance in the NT, because needed for dramaturgy. Still no godfearing prophecieing gals wide an' far in the OT. It is exactly the way our ol' pal Transponder, with his as usual bad to unreadable grammatics, spells out. Both NT and OT have a few handy female enablers. Male - dominated socialestatesand customs can always find a fewfemaleflying monkeys to peddle the message - especially ifg they have ..read more

I'm not addressing your Creator Mind theory, but I'm addressing what is mentioned in the original article and the dominant alternative theory to the universe being real. Then we could agree to drop that line of argument, since my focus is on addressing the "We Exist Within The Creator Mind" theory. What should be dropped is your Creator Mind theory, since you alone are the one espousing it and (in my opinion) avoiding providing logical reasoning and supporting evidence. As I mentioned, what has been proposed is we are in a computer simulation as what was stated in the original article. S ..read more

[Replying to The Tanager in post #2] Greetings all. I'm new here, so bear with me as I get my feet wet. In regards to why the gospels vary so much, I believe I have a different take on the Bible specifically; one which may be surprising, but that I can back up with many scriptures. The reason there is such variation among the Bible scriptures and gospels is that the entire Abrahamic tree of faiths is a skillfully crafted ruse that tricks/seduces the adherent into becoming the very liar that the tradition says all men and women are. In debating this topic, I often try to remind my counterpa ..read more

[Replying to otseng in post #4083 I just asked you "how do you interpret the passages". So, yes, it depends on one's interpretation. Then what good does a "natural reading" do? But the root issue is if the universe is real or not. What is your position? The root issue is how we can trust the Bible if it's not inerrant, whether the universe is real or not. Here's my argument: - The natural reading of the Bible based on several passages is God created everything (and we are not in a simulation). - Our intuitive sense and practical interaction with the world is the universe is actually real ..read more

[Replying to oldbadger in post #1] [Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #281] [Replying to LittleNipper in post #291] Dudes, Dudes, Dudes . . . Is it really necessary to quote up to 10 ( T E N ) different posts when you answer ? ? ? I presume you do what you do because being just lazy. Meaning you really are the way it is (falsely) acclaimed to King Noah who used to rule a part of the Nephites, milenniums back. But I tell ya that in doing that, you are unnecessarily rude and ruthless toward your fellow debaters. From what you do, posts get harder to read. And it is endlessly scrolling. Especi ..read more

Resurrecting this topic.... Any Christians out there want to take a stab at this one? I think I have already answered. And this remains a matter of belief. But, it would be nice to know, have you prayed? And when you prayed, did you just talk to yourself? And I'm sure I have already answered. And yes, I did pray for 30 years. And yes, praying is likely nothing more than talking to oneself. Praying is far more than talking to yourself. 1) It is propaganda for your sect. 2) It is self-indoctrination. 3) It is preservation of ones cognitive dissonance. 4) It raises to self-apologeti ..read more

So, you just talked to yourself and expected something? All prayer is speaking to oneself. Statistics: Posted by POI — Mon May 06, 2024 11:20 am ..read more