Uncategorized

Kathy Part 4

Nate

I may live to regret this, but I’ve decided to extend this never-ending conversation once again.

Kathy, this time, it would be a nice change of pace if you would actually address what William has repeatedly been saying to you:

I have. Not saying i’m perfect at it or that I’m right, but the “evidences” you listed arent real evidences. And since you refuse to look at things that are counter to your current beliefs, how can you honestly speak to me about evidences?

here’s all I’ve seen you provide:

1) martyrs, even though every religion and many non-religions have them.

2) our very existence – which no one knows how that started, but even if you must land on god(s), you must go back to that book of claims to get to jesus.

3) there were miracles, but as it turns out, those dont happen today, and end up being more claims by the same men who claim they speak for god.

4) the fulfilled prophecies we’ve discussed weren’t really prophecies at all, or had to be viewed so figuratively that it’s difficult to show anything precise about them other than location (maybe) in order to claim they’re actually fulfilled.

5) 40 authors taking 1500 years to write the bible. But there’s nothing miraculous about men writing books, editing books, and being inspired to write a book or letter after reading an older book.

About that last point, if the Bible had been written by 1500 people scattered across the globe, who didn’t know one another, and they did it in 40 days, then you’d really have something incredible. But 40-ish people, all familiar with the Jewish god, and writing over a long period of time with the previous writings as reference, is not that impressive.

Unknown's avatar

Published by Nate

1,038 thoughts on “Kathy Part 4”

  1. Nate, re “smorgasbord” – do you think it might be better to request that Kathy answer the post itself (your reposting of william’s representation of her 5 points)–as opposed to letting her choose any old rabbit trail?

    Like

  3. Nate,

    “Kathy, why did God have anyone else teach the law after Moses? The same reason would apply to Jesus. ”

    So, you’re denying that He came to teach a new message?

    “As far as why he needed to die, Laurie said that: it was part of God’s plan from the beginning.” And I agree with that.

    “The sacrifices alone didn’t cover man’s sins; it required Jesus’ sacrifice. In other words, it’s the same reason most other Christians would give.”

    Why would we still need to give animal sacrifices?.. that’s a statement that what Jesus did wasn’t enough.. that atonement is still needed. Same with the law.. either we trust in following the law to save us or we trust in Jesus’ sacrifice and His GRACE to save us, it cannot be both, if it is both then it is a statement that God’s suffering and sacrifice couldn’t take away our sins without our help.

    This is blaspheme.

    What makes the most sense is what Paul described.. there was an old way, the law, and then there came the fulfillment of God’s plan. Which as I pointed out, is very simple to understand, and demonstrates perfectly God’s grace and love. What does symbolism and animal sacrifice do to show how Great God is?? He’s a God of love and grace and this is what many don’t want to acknowledge.

    “The difference between Laurie’s point and yours is that Laurie doesn’t believe the Old Law was to be jettisoned just because Christ finally made the key sacrifice. Just as prior sacrifices pointed to his, later sacrifices would as well. But when the temple was destroyed, there was no longer a sanctioned place to perform them.”

    Again, there’s no justifiable need for more bloodshed after Jesus’ sacrifice. You nor Laurie have given a reasonable explanation otherwise.

    And again, no one is saying that the laws are no longer valid or should be followed.. of course we are to follow the laws.. but not so that we can be saved.. because no one is able to perfectly follow the law.

    How can anyone be “righteous” when we ALL sin? Laurie uses the comparison of people God called “righteous” who obviously sinned.. so does that mean we can be righteous while committing those same sins? Does it mean those things are not sins? Of course not. There is a context and those are specific people and situations. We are sinners. Nothing we do can make us fit for spending eternity with God… except Jesus’ sacrifice. Again, it’s about Him.. not the law and Jewish traditions and feasts.

    Like

  8. What purpose does a blood sacrifice serve?

    Forgiveness requires nothing more than the extension of forgiveness. A sacrifice is completely extraneous to that process, so why would an all-powerful being request such a pointless exercise?

    Like

  14. I agree, Ron. The whole blood atonement thing is really problematic. And how puzzling that the *true* god would decide to use the same kind of system that all the false gods used…

    Like

  15. We are (allegedly) “made in his image”, so it stands to reason that, if he exists, either (1) what he requires for forgiveness should be the same as our similar to what we require (it isn’t), or (2) if he is interested in us and wants a relationship with us, (yet for some mysterious reason he wants to remain hidden), then the very least he should do is provide a plausible explanation for his insane requirement (he doesn’t).

    Like

  17. That is exactly what you said

    “It was good in that it laid the path that would lead to God’s love and grace.”

    Like

  19. Then why could he not still require it?

    If you don’t know why he required it in the first place, how can you know he doesn’t require it still?

    Like

  20. “That is exactly what you said

    “It was good in that it laid the path that would lead to God’s love and grace.”

    But that doesn’t mean He didn’t show love and grace before.. what it means is that
    God showed how much He loves us and how forgiving He is.

    Like

  21. “Why would you assume that you would know what God, the Creator of all, requires?” – I don’t think he’s doing that, Kathy – I think he’s saying that any other behavior on the part of your god would make him/her/it too bizarre to be worthy of worship.

    Like

  22. How does requiring sacrifices in the OT show how much he loves people and how forgiving he is? Those two things don’t seem to follow to me…

    Like

  23. “Then why could he not still require it?

    If you don’t know why he required it in the first place, how can you know he doesn’t require it still?”

    I know because that’s what the NT tells us… that Jesus’ sacrifice was the ultimate sacrifice, there was no need for further sacrifices. And you can’t deny that it makes sense.. if you disagree, then you are stating that Jesus’ sacrifice was not enough.

    And since you all disagree with Paul’s teachings then please give a better explanation/ teaching.. I’m still waiting for this..

    Like

  25. “How does requiring sacrifices in the OT show how much he loves people and how forgiving he is? Those two things don’t seem to follow to me…”

    Nate, I said it was the first half of God’s plan.. it lead down the path to the ultimate sacrifice and ultimate demonstration of love.

    Like

Comments are closed.