After breaking 1000 comments on the previous thread, I felt it was a good time to start another.
As a reminder, here are some of the most recent outstanding questions for Kathy:
From Laurie:
You said you answered my questions, and wish more questions were asked. Here are some questions that were not addressed.
Matt 23:8 read first
Philemon 1:10
1 Corinthians 4:14-17
1 Corinthians 12:27
2 Timothy 1:11
1 Timothy 2:7
Ephesians 4:11,12Why is it that messiah says not to be called rabbi or father, but Paul it’s not obedient to this command?
Matt 10:7,8
1 Timothy 5:17,18
1 Corinthians 9:11,12Messiah says here that he had given freely, go and freely give. Again, Paul is disobedient.
Matt 18:15
Galatians 2:11-14
Messiah said that if you have a problem with your brother, you should deal with it privately. Here Paul lashes out at Peter “before them all”.
Matt 9:10-12
2 Thessalonians 3:6,7
Yahusha said in the passage above that he came to call the sinner to repentance, not the righteous. Why would Paul want to separate from those that actually need him?
From William:
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.
In addition to these, I’d like to ask something of both Kathy and Laurie (Matt or Hayden or portal001 (Ryan) can chime in as well):
The Bible defines God as being all-loving, all-merciful, fair, just, etc. It can also be read as promising an eternity in Hell for those who don’t serve him correctly. As a believer, how do you square those two statements?
Finding Truth 
“I’ll gladly take the chance with David Limbaugh over an atheist… the odds are much much better.”
You’ve already demonstrated your lack of math skills, with your 50/50 comments – don’t embarrass yourself further.
LikeLike
“never tell me the odds”
LikeLike
“my question would be if he’s applying HIS ‘context’ or THE context..”
Ah, so now Kathy posses THE context!
Words that Kathy Doesn’t Understand
1. Objectivity
2. Proof
3. Fact
4. Evidence
5. Compelling
6. Debate
7. Truth
8. Hearsay
9. Analogy
10. Obfuscate
11. Logical
12. Context
13. Circular Reasoning
14. Bias
And so the list grows like Pinocchio’s nose —
LikeLike
Ruth,
In Hebrew, “Satan” means accuser or adversary. Judaism views Satan as an agent of God—i.e. Satan works for God.
http://www.whatjewsbelieve.org/explanation7.html
This video explains how Satan was transformed into Christianity’s current conception of the devil.
LikeLike
Ron, I’ll have to ponder that. I believe devil did evolve in the NT from the OT, but his role in the garden of eden makes me think that perhaps he was more than just god’s agent, but maybe even adversary… however, is there any OT passage that says the serpent was the devil?
I guess Gen 3 could be merely a fable to explain why snakes don’t have legs and explain why snakes and people have always been at odds – which is what i believe now anyways…
And I guess most ofmy understanding of satan was from the NT… much like heaven and hell.
LikeLike
Ron,
In Hebrew, “Satan” means accuser or adversary. Judaism views Satan as an agent of God—i.e. Satan works for God.
http://www.whatjewsbelieve.org/explanation7.html
This video explains how Satan was transformed into Christianity’s current conception of the devil.
I get that, but still, how would anything that was offered be tempting to someone who already knew their place in eternity? As creator/owner/co-owner of it all from the beginning how would anything that was offered be tempting?
LikeLike
right, like “I’ll give you two shiny pennies if you give me that quarter…”
LikeLike
Kathy,
I also think you should read “The Age of Reason”, but not because I hope you’ll change your mind, because I think every believer should be able to make a defense for what they believe. You don’t have to have all the answers. People who believe in evolution don’t have all the answers, but they have enough to feel confident that time will prove them right. Elias Boudinot wrote a book called “The Age of Revelation” to counter Paine, and it is also worth a read. I’m sure you won’t agree 100% with either one, but it will certainly help you to make a defense for what you believe.
LikeLike
Arch, are you familiar with the Didache? Or any of the dead sea scrolls?
LikeLike
Karhy, I asked YOU to provide chapter (s) and verse (s). I did not ask anything of Portal so whatever he posts does not answer my request.
LikeLike
AMEN, Laurie! No matter what a person believes, whether in politics, religion, or whatever, they should be able to provide a solid defense for their beliefs. This includes being able to provide facts and evidence obtained from researching a wide variety of resources.
LikeLike
William, so-called “satan” does not exist and never has. Laurie talked about the OT ha-satan awhile back and I also discuss it at length in my book. This “being” was an invention of the apocalyptic writers and was later absorbed into Christianity.
LikeLike
“…however, is there any OT passage that says the serpent was the devil?”
Nope.
LikeLike
@William
Genesis 3:1 doesn’t mention Satan. It only states that the serpent was the craftiest animal (“chay” – living thing, animal) God had made.
@Ruth
I can’t answer your question, because even scholars can’t agree on an interpretation of the text. I just wanted to clarify that the Satan of the gospels is not the same entity as the Satan of the OT.
@Laurie
Evolution is not a belief. It is an undeniable fact of life.
Evolution: The change in genetic composition of a population over successive generations, which may be caused by natural selection, inbreeding, hybridization, or mutation. (Source)
Or as Evolution 101 explains it:
“Biological evolution, simply put, is descent with modification. This definition encompasses small-scale evolution (changes in gene frequency in a population from one generation to the next) and large-scale evolution (the descent of different species from a common ancestor over many generations).”
LikeLike
“As creator/owner/co-owner of it all from the beginning how would anything that was offered be tempting”
Still more evidence that the Trinity is a bogus concept.
LikeLike
“Kathy,
I also think you should read “The Age of Reason””
But Laurie, she’s not finished with “Dick and Jane” —
LikeLike
and i guess satan in Job is presented as a son of god, and someone who works under the authority of god… it was god afterall, according to Job, who authorized satan to interact with inflict Job…
the devil and satan is just a subject i never thought too much about.
the devil is in the details It seems
LikeLike
The Khirbet Qumran scrolls, of course, but the Didache, not so much.
LikeLike
“so-called “satan” does not exist and never has”
Think of any book, movie, or TV show – it has a protagonist, and an antagonist – anything without those two elements, is a documentary.
LikeLike
Kathy, you really make things difficult at times because you simply refuse to see or consider ANYTHING outside of your biased viewpoint. Just about every person that has contributed to this blog posting has had experience with Christianity and can speak with authority about the various doctrines. Why? Because they not only studied them, but many LIVED them as well! As a result, while they may no longer be believers, they have the knowledge and background to look at both sides of the issues. You, on the other hand, REFUSE to consider anything outside of what you have been taught since becoming a Christian. This has been pointed out to you a number of times, yet you continue to call these individuals “unobjective,” “biased,” “unwilling to consider evidence“, etc., etc., etc.
___________________________________
Example: Did you even read Laurie’s post about Constantine? “Constantine wanted to make a universal religion for the sole purpose of ruling the world. Join together paganism and Christianity to unite them and rule peacefully over them all.” Laurie is simply pointing out verified history. So, to answer your question, it was HIS doing, not the 300 bishops.
Now let me ask you a question: do you even know WHY the Council of Nicea was held? Are you aware that this council, who met 365 years after Jesus was around, made arbitrary decisions about Christianity that were never addressed in scripture?
LikeLike
William, you made an interesting point with this statement:
We can go one step further and turn this into a simple argument:
1. It is possible for something to exist which does not have a creator.
2. The universe exists.
3. It is possible that the universe does not have a creator.
If a theist tries to argue against (1) they will inadvertently be arguing against their own position. I don’t think anyone disagrees with (2). Therefore, (3).
LikeLike
Ron, I know I don’t need to tell you this, but Christians don’t deny microevolution. They deny macro evolution, because the scriptures say that an animal produces after its own kind. This means that while you can get a tea cup poodle, and a Great Dane within the same species, you can’t get an elephant from a whale. The theory of evolution is not a fact at this point in history, and neither is the bible.
LikeLike
One more thing. You wrote “You are looking from such a narrow perspective.” I think nearly everyone involved in these discussions would say the same about you.
Kathy, like others, I think you are probably a very nice person (even though you often say things that defy this), and I’m not trying to be mean or nasty. But when you throw out some of the statements you do, it’s very difficult not to respond in kind.
LikeLike
Laurie, even evolution agrees that every animal “produces after its own kind.” It’s only when you compare animals that are many, many generations removed from one another that you might be able to determine a difference in species. In other words, micro-evolution and macro-evolution are the same thing.
LikeLike
Thanks Nan! But in case you haven’t noticed, Kathy has been ignoring me. She has not responded to anything I have said.
LikeLike