Do we have free will or are we predestined?

[Marvelloustime]

What dog breed is it? Thanks

She’s the long legged Jack Russell. Called a Parson Russell Terrier. Izzy is ten this month.

 

[Marvelloustime]

It is GOD who draws us to CHRIST . yes my friend .
But many are called yet few chosen .
Even in the bad seeds we see THEY BELEIVED , but what happened
lusts entered in
WHY do we think paul said EXHORT one another daily LEST any of you becomes hardened b y
the deceitfulness of sin .
The simple truth is calivn and scores of others have messed things up . While speaking partial truths
but not really KNOWING THE TRUTH .
The simple thing is . Once one Beleives GET His NOSE in that bible . for many are the doctrines of men gone wrong .
ITs a simple walk , but boy has man made it confusion .
To b e sav ed , ONE MUST bLEIEVE ON JESUS . And another fact
IF ONE continues NOT IN HIM they Will be cast out .
From every word , promise and warning , WE had done well HAD WE SIMPLY JUST BELEIVED and OBERSEVED
to DO as THEY SAID TO DO . but now that is known as legalism and etc .
TO remind the church TO DO that which is good and to FLEE evil , that we must continue IN HIM TO THE END
IS called NOT TRUSTING IN JESUS but in self , By THIS generation .
YET they all warned us TO DO SO . ITs real simple . IF ONLY people would return
to the scrips TO LEARN they had seen and they had learned the TRUE PATTERN for ALL THINGS .
SO i make a call to all , CHOOSE YE THIS DAY WHOM YE SHALL SERVE , WHOM YE SHALL BELIEVE
as for me ITS GOD , HIS CHRIST and HIS WORDS I DO BELEIVE . and I KNOW them apostels
by the SPIRIT left us real good letters to learn .

@amigo de christo

 

[amigo de christo]

She’s the long legged Jack Russell. Called a Parson Russell Terrier. Izzy is ten this month.
View attachment 84041

The izzinator called Izzy . One look into those eyes and one can easily see there is an overwhelming amount
of energy within such a creature .

 

[amigo de christo]

She’s the long legged Jack Russell. Called a Parson Russell Terrier. Izzy is ten this month.
View attachment 84041

Izzy turns ten this month . And her energy has but abated very little .
brother also , LORD willing , turns twenty this month as well .
by twenty i speak of the great and wonderful BIRTH day . let all praise the glorious LORD .

 

[bdavidc]

No, the variation is their in black and white.
Matthew says the priests purchased the field.
Acts says that Judas purchased the field.
Your excuse makes no sense to me, it's either one or the other.

And Matthew says that Judas hung himself.
Then Acts says that Judas fell head first.

How can he fall head first when he hung himself. If someone cuts him down he falls feet first, not head first.

Their will always be variations when humans recount something, especially when recounting something from long ago or something they heard from someone else.

Mark says Jesus was crucified on the 3rd hour of the day.
John says that it happened after the 6th hour of the day.

One account says there was two angels in the tomb of Jesus.
Another says there was one angel in the tomb of Jesus.

The genealogies of Jesus are different in Matthew and Luke.

There are heaps af variations in the bible. And I've given many of them careful consideration.
Interview 3 or 4 witnesses to something and you will get these types of variations.

The examples you listed have already been answered. I am not going to keep repeating the same explanations over and over.

Matthew and Acts on Judas and the field were already addressed. Matthew gives the priests’ action. Acts gives Judas’s responsibility and the source of the blood money. That is not a contradiction.

Matthew and Acts on Judas’s death were also addressed. Matthew says he hanged himself. Acts describes what happened to his body afterward. Those details do not cancel each other out.

The same principle applies to the angels at the tomb. One account mentioning one angel does not mean there was “only one.” If two were present, one was present. That is basic reasoning.

So unless you bring something new and deal with the actual wording of the text, there is nothing more to repeat. Scripture has already been shown, and the explanations have already been given.

Jesus said, “the scripture cannot be broken” ~John 10:35. That is where I stand. Different details are not contradictions, and I am not going to keep circling the same objections after they have already been answered.

 

[St. SteVen]

Matthew and Acts on Judas and the field were already addressed. Matthew gives the priests’ action. Acts gives Judas’s responsibility and the source of the blood money. That is not a contradiction.

Unless I am missing something, it sounds as if you are whitewashing the contradictions.
As if biblical contradictions can never happen.

What's your take on the withering fig tree? Immediately, or over night?
Or admit that it is a biblical contradiction.

• Matthew 21:19-20
  Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it,
  “May you never bear fruit again!” Immediately the tree withered.
  20 When the disciples saw this, they were amazed. “How did the fig tree wither so quickly?” they asked.
  
  
  
• Mark 11:20-21
  In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots.
  21 Peter remembered and said to Jesus, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!”

 

[Armour of God]

Unless I am missing something, it sounds as if you are whitewashing the contradictions.
As if biblical contradictions can never happen.

What's your take on the withering fig tree? Immediately, or over night?
Or admit that it is a biblical contradiction.

That's exactly what his doing. He'll never admit there are variations in the bible no matter how clear it is. He does it out of emotion because his been taught there is no contradictions in the bible. And he does it out of fear of what atheists and skeptics will say. But an excuse that makes no sense is worse than admitting there are variations.

There are obviously 2 different accounts of how Judas dies and 2 different accounts of who buys the field. His excuse is just mental gymnastics.

Same with the angels. One says there was one and another says there was two. But see his excuse, it's nonsense.

He didn't dare touch my other examples.
Different genealogies and different times of crucifixion cos how else does anyone account for that.

In the end it's better to simply admit that there are different variations of accounts, because humans aren't perfect, instead of continuing to persist in saying there are no variations, when it's clear that there are. It just makes them look even worse

 

[Titus]

@Titus @amigo de christo
Yes, that’s right. She’s the long legged Jack Russell. Called a Parson Russell Terrier. Ten years old this month.

I miss my dog.

 

[Jay Ross]

I miss my dog.

Why, are you really that bad of a shot with your handgun. ROFL

 

[bdavidc]

That's exactly what his doing. He'll never admit there are variations in the bible no matter how clear it is. He does it out of emotion because his been taught there is no contradictions in the bible. And he does it out of fear of what atheists and skeptics will say. But an excuse that makes no sense is worse than admitting there are variations.

There are obviously 2 different accounts of how Judas dies and 2 different accounts of who buys the field. His excuse is just mental gymnastics.

Same with the angels. One says there was one and another says there was two. But see his excuse, it's nonsense.

He didn't dare touch my other examples.
Different genealogies and different times of crucifixion cos how else does anyone account for that.

In the end it's better to simply admit that there are different variations of accounts, because humans aren't perfect, instead of continuing to persist in saying there are no variations, when it's clear that there are. It just makes them look even worse

No, you’re not exposing contradictions. You are taking surface differences, assuming contradiction first, and then calling every reasonable answer “mental gymnastics.” That is not careful reading.

Jesus said plainly, “the scripture cannot be broken” ~John 10:35. He treated Scripture as unbreakable truth. So when two passages give different details, the honest approach is not to force a contradiction into the text, but to ask whether both details can stand together.

Matthew 27:5 says Judas “went and hanged himself.” Acts 1:18 says he fell headlong, burst open, and his bowels gushed out. Those are not contradictions. Matthew tells how he died. Acts describes what followed. The hanging, the fall, and the body bursting open can all stand together without one canceling the other.

Matthew 27:6-7 says the priests bought the field with the blood money. Acts 1:18 says Judas acquired the field with the reward of iniquity. Again, both can stand. The money came from Judas’ betrayal. The priests carried out the purchase. The field was connected to Judas because it was bought with the price of his treachery.

One angel or two? Matthew 28:2-5 focuses on one angel at the stone. Luke 24:4 mentions two men in shining garments. If two were present, then one was also present. Mentioning one does not mean only one existed. That is basic logic.

Genealogies? Matthew 1 gives the royal legal line through Joseph. Luke 3:23 notes Jesus was “as was supposed” the son of Joseph and gives a different line with a different purpose. Different lines do not automatically mean contradiction. They show different emphases.

Crucifixion timing? Mark 15:25 and John 19:14 are describing different moments connected to the same crucifixion day. A long legal, political, and execution process had different stages. That does not require a contradiction.

The real issue is this: you are assuming error before you handle the text. But Scripture does not have to repeat every detail in identical wording to be true. Multiple witnesses often give different details without contradicting each other. That is not weakness. That is how testimony works.

So the charge of contradiction has not been proven. It has only been asserted. The Scripture still stands. Jesus said, “the scripture cannot be broken” ~John 10:35. I am going to stand where Christ stood. If you want to keep repeating the same accusations after they have been answered, there is no need for me to keep going in circles.

That version still draws a hard line, but it keeps the focus on the text and gives you a clean exit. If St. SteVen or Armour of God keeps pushing the same hostile claims after that, ignoring them would be reasonable. You have answered publicly for the readers. After that, repeated strife is not fruitful.

 

[amigo de christo]

Why, are you really that bad of a shot with your handgun. ROFL

kinda like i am sure lots of folks miss me . its why i am still standing here today . lol .
but it sure would not be for a lack of trying .
between sharp objects and sharper langague being hurled.
Nobody likes a man who clings to the scriptures . Well sheep dont mind , but man sure do .

 

[amigo de christo]

I miss my dog.

many in churches would miss me too or maybe not . But if this is found hard to beleive
BRING A BIBLE into many ch urches . THEN READ the bible .
Now once words are read that expose sins and false love and etc
Prepare to duck a whole lotta sharp objects coupled with even shaper langauge being hurled at you . and all in the name
of what they say is love and of GOD .

 

[St. SteVen]

No, you’re not exposing contradictions. You are taking surface differences, assuming contradiction first, and then calling every reasonable answer “mental gymnastics.” That is not careful reading.

Jesus said plainly, “the scripture cannot be broken” ~John 10:35. He treated Scripture as unbreakable truth. So when two passages give different details, the honest approach is not to force a contradiction into the text, but to ask whether both details can stand together.

And what if after a careful reading they don't stand together? Then what?

You seem to be trying to whitewash the contradictions.

How did you come to interpret Jesus statement of "the scripture cannot be broken” ~John 10:35
to mean the "Scripture as unbreakable truth."?

What was scripture when He said that? The NT wasn't canonized until the 4th century.

 

[Armour of God]

And what if after a careful reading they don't stand together? Then what?

You seem to be trying to whitewash the contradictions.

How did you come to interpret Jesus statement of "the scripture cannot be broken” ~John 10:35
to mean the "Scripture as unbreakable truth."?

What was scripture when He said that? The NT wasn't canonized until the 4th century.

His excuses are just stupid, irrational and so idiotic. It's the kind of illogical stuff that atheists just laugh at.

Mark says Christ was crucified on the 3rd hour. John says it happens after the 6th hour. But his maths is so bad he doesn't even know the difference between one and two angels.

The genealogies are both from Joseph as Matthew and Luke both tell us.
And the clarity of Judas death and of who bought the field is so obvious that he needs to use extreme mental gymnastics to excuse it.

Differing variations is normal. But engaging him on such nonsense is just not worth my time.
Good luck

 

[St. SteVen]

His excuses are just stupid, irrational and so idiotic that I'm not even going to bother with that kind of nonsense. It's the kind of illogical stuff that atheists just laugh at.

They seem to be protecting the fortress of evangelical doctrine concerning the Bible.
- Every word is inspired. Which they apply to English translations, none of which agree 100%.
- Inerrancy. No errors or contradictions.
- The Bible is doctrine. False definition.
- The Bible is literal history.

From online source:
The attributes of the Bible—divine inspiration, authority, inerrancy, clarity,
sufficiency, unity, transformative power, historical accuracy, and universality—
combine to make it a unique and enduring book.

 

[bdavidc]

[Verse 1]
They bring it to the stand with steady hands
Lay it open like a body on the floor
They read the charges slow, they've got their plans
They've done this kind of thing before
One angel here, two angels there
They say the record doesn't match
They take their pen and circle what's not fair
And call the whole thing cracked
[Pre-Chorus]
But I've watched men interrogate the light
And call the sun a liar for the night
[Chorus]
The Word is not the one on trial here
The gavel's in the wrong hand
You built your bench above the thing you fear
And called it taking a stand
The Word is not the one on trial
It was settled before your time
You walked into a courtroom of your own design
And missed the one on trial is you
[Verse 2]
They say the serpent hissed a simple thing
Just four small words and Eden split apart
Hath God said — still the oldest sting
Still the first and favorite dart
They dress it up in modern learned speech
With footnotes where the venom used to be
But underneath the reach is still the reach
To sit where they were not meant to see
[Pre-Chorus]
I've watched men cross-examine fire
And wonder why their fingers don't retire
[Chorus]
The Word is not the one on trial here
The gavel's in the wrong hand
You built your bench above the thing you fear
And called it taking a stand
The Word is not the one on trial
It was settled before your time
You walked into a courtroom of your own design
And missed the one on trial is you
[Bridge — spoken, low and even]
The grass withers.
The flower fades.
But the Word of our God...
...shall stand forever.
You can adjourn.
The verdict was already in.
[Final Chorus — quieter, almost a whisper]
The Word is not the one on trial here
It never needed your defense
It stood before the mountains thought to stand
It'll stand when this is done
The Word is not the one on trial
It was settled long before
You walked into a courtroom built on sand
And the one on trial
...was you
[Outro]
(single fingerpicked guitar, fading)
Hath God said...
Hath God said...

 

[Armour of God]

They seem to be protecting the fortress of evangelical doctrine concerning the Bible.
- Every word is inspired. Which they apply to English translations, none of which agree 100%.
- Inerrancy. No errors or contradictions.
- The Bible is doctrine. False definition.
- The Bible is literal history.

From online source:
The attributes of the Bible—divine inspiration, authority, inerrancy, clarity,
sufficiency, unity, transformative power, historical accuracy, and universality—
combine to make it a unique and enduring book.

He is so angry with us that I think his put us on ignore as he threatened to do so.
LoL so irrational

 

[St. SteVen]

He is so angry with us that I think his put us on ignore as he threatened to do so.
LoL so irrational

That would be an assumption. He may be busy elsewhere.
However IGNORE is a handy tool. I use it liberally.
Life is better with aggravating folks left out.

 

[Jay Ross]

@Lambano

You, being angry at my post, but did you look at his picture, which I assume is of @Titus, and what he is holding and the stance that he has assumed. Here is a snip of the post that I commented on.



We all miss much detail in what we see or hear in a post.

Was Titus shooting at something in the image that he used and did he hit or miss it or just posed for the picture.

 

[Titus]

@Lambano

You, being angry at my post, but did you look at his picture, which I assume is of @Titus, and what he is holding and the stance that he has assumed. Here is a snip of the post that I commented on.

View attachment 84119

We all miss much detail in what we see or hear in a post.

She’s the long legged Jack Russell. Called a Parson Russell Terrier. Izzy is ten this month.
View attachment 84041

She’s the long legged Jack Russell. Called a Parson Russell Terrier. Izzy is ten this month.
View attachment 84041

Was Titus shooting at something in the image that he used and did he hit or miss it or just posed for the picture.

Folks, Jay Ross was just telling a joke.
I got a chuckle out of it, Jay!!

And thanks Marvelloustime for the picture of Izzy!!
That Izzy just melts my heart!!