It is not in the bible.....sola scripture

[bbyrd009]

and you have none, ok. zero. everything you "know" is a lie. you cannot give one example of objective truth, even though you are likely convinced that you can.

 

[bbyrd009]

I dont need to use worldly examples. If God says so who am I to disagree?

still waiting on that quote; that is not what you just quoted

 

[Mjh29]

still waiting on that quote; that is not what you just quoted

If instead of being vague and just continuously retyping the same thing, maybe if you explained exactly what you mean I might be able to answer your question. Because scripture obviously isn't enough for you

And it's funny how you haven't answered my questions either

 

[bbyrd009]

Then how can anyone go to heaven? Or does everyone?

ha, heaven as a place, so...anyway, um, about going to heaven...the kingdom is right beside you, right now, ok, and this vision of a future heaven that you might go to if you avoid hell is a really poor substitute for "i came that you might have life, and more abundantly."

When did that turn into "I can't wait to die, and go to heaven?"

 

[bbyrd009]

If instead of being vague and just continuously retyping the same thing, maybe if you explained exactly what you mean I might be able to answer your question. Because scripture obviously isn't enough for you

And it's funny how you haven't answered my questions either

ah that is because i have no answers.

and as we have just seen, Scripture is not really a Book of answers, either.
if no one can provide a single example of an objective truth.

 

[bbyrd009]

the men who wrote Scripture were masters of dialecticism, who knew the symbology, and stuck to a simple script. that will make no sense at all logically. Bring me your doctrine or belief of a truth and i will quote its opposite. Provide for your family. Don't work for food. Faith is all you need. You must have works, that manifest faith. God is in 3; except you can't quote Christ saying that, but refuting it; "Son of Man."

i could go on.

 

[Mjh29]

So.... you don't think the Bible is infallible? Oh well no wonder we aren't making any headway. You could have told me that earlier, and avoided this whole mess.
You see, I believe that the Bible contains no error: it is the Word Of God, and as such is his perfect revelation to man. If you don't believe that, then my work here is done. There is no point debating someone who does not hold the same view of Scripture as me. All I can say is that you don't seem to understand the meaning of objective truth. Let me explain. When I am wondering if something is a sin or crime, I look to Scripture. Scripture says "thou shalt not steal." When anyone says "yeah, I think stealing is ok," I say "No, stealing is a crime and a sin." If they ask why, my simple reply is " because the Bible says so." That is what objective truth is; a universal truth for all men.

 

[mjrhealth]

ah well a minnit ago every objective truth under the sun could be derived from Scripture, so what gives?

never said that, and you by now know full well my opinion of the bible, this book this idol that men have raised to greater height s than God Himslef, that even men will deny God when He teaches them teh truth because often what He teaches doent agree with the bible, and God has being forced by man to agree with the bible and not teh bible with God. You would think if Gos was going to write a book teher would be only one version and it would ber right the first time. Its amazing how men bring God down to a status lower than man...

 

[Mungo]

To me the only objective truth is the Bible

Maybe, but your personal and fallible interpretation is not.

 

[tabletalk]

the men who wrote Scripture were masters of dialecticism

Definition of dialectics: a discourse between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject but wishing to establish the truth through reasoned arguments.

Most were not masters of dialectics.

 

[Mungo]

So.... you don't think the Bible is infallible? Oh well no wonder we aren't making any headway. You could have told me that earlier, and avoided this whole mess.
You see, I believe that the Bible contains no error: it is the Word Of God, and as such is his perfect revelation to man. If you don't believe that, then my work here is done. There is no point debating someone who does not hold the same view of Scripture as me. All I can say is that you don't seem to understand the meaning of objective truth. Let me explain. When I am wondering if something is a sin or crime, I look to Scripture. Scripture says "thou shalt not steal." When anyone says "yeah, I think stealing is ok," I say "No, stealing is a crime and a sin." If they ask why, my simple reply is " because the Bible says so." That is what objective truth is; a universal truth for all men.

So when the Bible says that the world was created in six days do you take that literally or do you accept that it is not literal?

Do you not accept it uses many literary forms, metaphors, poetry, hyperbole and so on that cannot be taken literally?

Do you not accept that the Bible does not necessarily teach accurate science and history?

Do you not accept that the Bible requires interpretation and that your personal interpretation may be wrong?

 

[Mungo]

When I am wondering if something is a sin or crime, I look to Scripture. Scripture says "thou shalt not steal." When anyone says "yeah, I think stealing is ok," I say "No, stealing is a crime and a sin." If they ask why, my simple reply is " because the Bible says so." That is what objective truth is; a universal truth for all men.

Is stealing ALWAYS a sin, or is can there be some situations where stealing is not a sin?

 

[Mjh29]

So when the Bible says that the world was created in six days do you take that literally or do you accept that it is not literal?

Do you not accept it uses many literary forms, metaphors, poetry, hyperbole and so on that cannot be taken literally?

Do you not accept that the Bible does not necessarily teach accurate science and history?

Do you not accept that the Bible requires interpretation and that your personal interpretation may be wrong?

I believe in a literal 6 day creation
Yes of course it does, but when it says dont murder it means dont murder
science and history are only correct if they square with the Bible
Of course, my interpretation can be wrong! However, it is better to have a standard and interpret it, an perhaps discuss interpretation than to have free-for-all subjective morality

 

[Mjh29]

Is stealing ALWAYS a sin, or is can there be some situations where stealing is not a sin?

I dont know. The only justifiable form of stealing would be one you can support in Scripture, such as when Isreal took gold and silver from the Egyptians, because God told them to. Any justifiable form of stealing isnt really stealing, however, if you have permission from the words of the one who created it.

 

[Marymog]

um, Jews consider family lines via Matriarchy, not Patriarchy, which is likely why Mary's line to David is also supplied in Scripture; at least that is my understanding. I'm curious how one might otherwise understand the divergence in the two lineages?

Dear sir,

Please take the time to learn Jewish history. It was only many years AFTER the birth/death of Jesus that there was a shift in Judaism from patrilineal to matrilineal descent. That is why Joseph and Mary went from Nazareth to Bethlehem to be registered for the census because the MALE lineage was primary and Joseph was a descendent of King David who was born in Bethlehem.

From the Torah: And on the first day of the second month, they assembled the whole congregation together, who registered themselves by families, by their fathers’ houses, according to the number of names from twenty years old and upward, head by head. (Numbers 1:18)

It is also COMMON KNOWLEDGE that laws of inheritance and the descent of the Davidic dynasty follow the father and that a Jew belongs to the tribe of his/her father. It is possible that Mary married within her own tribe of Judah which would give her Davidic genealogy. (Gen 49:8-12)

 

[Mungo]

I believe in a literal 6 day creation
Yes of course it does, but when it says dont murder it means dont murder
science and history are only correct if they square with the Bible

In that case you are quite correct to say "There is no point debating someone who does not hold the same view of Scripture as me."

Of course, my interpretation can be wrong! However, it is better to have a standard and interpret it, an perhaps discuss interpretation than to have free-for-all subjective morality

And you could be wrong about that as well

 

[Mungo]

I dont know. The only justifiable form of stealing would be one you can support in Scripture, such as when Isreal took gold and silver from the Egyptians, because God told them to. Any justifiable form of stealing isnt really stealing, however, if you have permission from the words of the one who created it.

You have just described subjective morality. Stealing isn't really stealing if, in your fallible opinion, it can be justified.

 

[Mungo]

Yes of course it does, but when it says dont murder it means dont murder

Actually it doesn't say don't murder. It says don't kill.
"Thou shalt not kill." (Ex 20:13 - KJV).

 

[bbyrd009]

never said that, and you by now know full well my opinion of the bible, this book this idol that men have raised to greater height s than God Himslef, that even men will deny God when He teaches them teh truth because often what He teaches doent agree with the bible, and God has being forced by man to agree with the bible and not teh bible with God. You would think if Gos was going to write a book teher would be only one version and it would ber right the first time. Its amazing how men bring God down to a status lower than man...

there is only one version, you cannot quote any passage that does not adhere to the proper symbology, it simply will not make sense to you as long as you read with logical eyes. The Book plainly tells us that people will see and not see, and makes many other alliterations to misunderstanding what you are convinced that you do understand, even though one may not, and it is not God's fault that men make an idol of the Book, nor that men worship a Snake on a Pole, for that matter. It's all in There, and all that is on men, not the Book.

So all you have done imo is to recreate God in your image, and you have a new religion, Anti-Bible, when you cannot practically discredit anything in the Bible, i'd like to see you try.

 

[bbyrd009]

Most were not masters of dialectics.

and you reached that conclusion from where? They still argue dialectically today, they do not discuss Scripture anything like we do, and i don't think you can substantiate your claim tbh. That is just what you prefer to believe. But of course you do not want to test this, by say maybe offering me some logical truth from Scripture, now do you?