Uncategorized

Kathy Part 5

Nate

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 4:11,12

Why 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 9:11,12

Messiah 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?

Unknown's avatar

Published by Nate

954 thoughts on “Kathy Part 5”

  2. I reference to the Paul discussion, I think Brandon has made some good points — I’ve been wondering about a couple of those as well.

    His last paragraph in particular is something I’ve been thinking about. If one criticizes Paul for misusing OT passages, how could he/she possibly accept Matthew?

    Like

  4. Gonewilliam – why don’t you tell her how you really feel? 🙂 BTW, it’s Rush’s younger brother.

    Like

  5. @ Kathy,
    “I shall fulfill your request..” kathy
    ME: “first, i dont know and i dont know that something came from nothing.”

    Kathy: I don’t know what you are trying to say here.. and I don’t know.

    Me: you said that you wanted someone to provide a scenario or an explanation as to how the universe was created from nothing. That’s what I was saying “I don’t know” to, and I don’t know that it had to come from nothing.

    Me: “second, if our very existence means we had a creator, then why doesnt god’s existence mean he had a creator?”

    Kathy: Good question.. when you have a reasonable/ logical answer please share it.

    Me: oh, so you don’t have an explanation either – you just like criticizing others for not knowing and then try to act like that’s some score for your argument…

    Me: “and third, if an exception can be made for god, in that he doesnt need a creator, then isnt that really saying that “existence” doesnt necessarily imply a creator?”

    Kathy: Yes, it is saying that no Creator is a possibility also. My point is that reason and evidence don’t favor this possibility.

    Me: what reason and what evidence? Martyrs? And old book and a “said so?” Come on.

    Me: “fourth, If god was the creator and was not created, did he create jesus and the spirit or were they always around too? If they were also always there and were not created, then how is god the father superior and how does he know things jesus does not? can you answer these?”

    Kathy: I don’t have the specific answers to these questions.. I believe Jesus does know all that the Father knows and that the Trinity always existed.

    Me: you do err not knowing the scriptures. Matt 24:36, jesus says that god knows something that he does not. But you “just believe” and you “know all you need to know.” So objective. I guess, to be fair, if you don’t study, then you’re not a liar, just ignorant – eother way though, you’re still wrong.

    ME: “and finally, if god was the creator and if you could prove that he didnt have a creator, you’d still have to show how your god is that creator and the bible is his book…”
    Kathy: I don’t have to show it William… the compelling evidence is already out there.. for anyone to read and accept.. OR give a more reasonable explanation, which, I’ll just point out yet again, no one has.
    Me: What compelling evidence? It’s out there, but you cant point to it? and you’re saying that a book of contradictions, failed or vague prophecies and larger than life events (that have no external corroboration) contains the most reasonable explanation? So 6 to 7 thousand years ago god created the world when all the physical evidence points otherwise? What are you talking about? You clearly don’t read much. You admit to not reading anything that doesn’t support your view of the bible, so how would you even begin to know what the most reasonable explanation is?

    ME: “you havent done this yet, you havent shown any of that, so then how can you criticize anyone else for not explaining how “something came from nothing?”

    Kathy: Yes, I have. I’ve pointed out the compelling evidence many times now.

    ME: oh yeah, that’s right, these 5 things:

    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.

    But these are neither compelling nor are they good evidences for the bible’s truthfulness or accuracy.

    Since I have asked a billion times if you had more than this, and since you have not given anything else, I can now rest easy knowing that I have not missed any real evidence from you.

    Good lord, my nose is bleeding from trying to decipher the ramblings of a moron.

    Like

  9. Ryan,

    I think Ruth’s main point was this: should it have been possible for Satan to even tempt Jesus by referring to scripture? Wouldn’t Jesus have perfectly understood those passages, and therefore, not found Satan’s arguments the least bit compelling?

    I could be mistaken about that, but it’s the impression I got from her comment, and I don’t think you covered it in your response.

    Like

  10. @Ryan

    One more thing:

    (2) The premise. Satan’s suggestion was based on several erroneous premises or presuppositions.

    First, a God Who is good would not deprive one of His creatures. Doing without food cannot be the will of God.

    Yet there have always been people who experience starvation…

    Like

  11. Yet there have always been people who experience starvation…

    That’s true. Good point.

    I think Ruth’s main point was this: should it have been possible for Satan to even tempt Jesus by referring to scripture? Wouldn’t Jesus have perfectly understood those passages, and therefore, not found Satan’s arguments the least bit compelling?

    I could be mistaken about that, but it’s the impression I got from her comment, and I don’t think you covered it in your response.

    I think these questions were covered through the last points,

    If you disagree though feel free to let me know again:

    Points Redux 🙂

    – The temptation of Christ proved Him qualified for His work on the cross. Only a sinless, spotless ‘Lamb of God’ could take upon Himself the sin of the world. Christ’s sinlessness stood out when tempted by the master deceiver.

    – The temptation prepared Him to be a merciful High Priest.

    “For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin” (Heb. 4:15).

    Christ’s temptation ‘in every point as we are’ enables Him to be a sympathetic High Priest (cf. also Hebrews 2:17-18). While His temptation proved Him sinless, it made Jesus sensitive to our weaknesses. Understanding is gained through experience. This was a severe experience.

    Hebrews 4:15-

    For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

    Like

  12. (2) The premise. Satan’s suggestion was based on several erroneous premises or presuppositions.

    First, a God Who is good would not deprive one of His creatures. Doing without food cannot be the will of God.

    Although the erroneous premise was that a God Who is good would not deprive one of His creatures…

    Yet this doesn’t make a Creator not good. For a major example, Jesus was deprived for the sake of humanity.

    Like

  13. I agree that it explains why Christ needed to be tempted, but the real question is whether he really was.

    For instance, someone could tell me that I should take a guitar and play an E chord by holding down all the strings on the 5th fret. But since I know how to play guitar, I would know that’s wrong.

    If Jesus was God and he was the Word, how could he have been tricked by his own book?

    Like

  16. I think Ruth’s main point was this: should it have been possible for Satan to even tempt Jesus by referring to scripture? Wouldn’t Jesus have perfectly understood those passages, and therefore, not found Satan’s arguments the least bit compelling?

    This was precisely my point. 🙂

    Like

  17. So is your point, Ryan, that Jesus wasn’t really tempted like we are tempted – in the sense that he was actually tempted to do any of those things – but that he needed to suffer the things that we suffer that cause us to be tempted?

    Like

  18. I’m not even sure that last question is coherent. Does anyone understand what I’m trying to ask?

    It might just be that I’m so tired I need to leave it and come back to it later.

    Like

  19. “For a major example, Jesus was deprived for the sake of humanity.” – about some things, there just aren’t even words for a response. I have no quarrel with you Portal, go, my son, and sin no more —

    Like

  20. Portal,

    maybe you’re right. maybe I woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning and after reading kathy’s comments, i let myself fall into a tirade…

    I regret not proof reading earlier… and I guess that;s about it.

    Over the last few months, kathy has not tried to learn or to reason or to empathize or to understand or to study,she has only tried to argue for the sake of arguing. She doesn’t seem to care or able to recognize a good point from a turd under her foot.

    I have no doubt she is a decent person who loves her family and no doubt does many selfless deeds for them. That is as commendable as much as it is conjecture. But, it addition to that possibility, she continues to show herself ignorant and a lazy student (if she can be called a student)… while calling others ignorant.

    And I am not suggestting tHat she should learn from me, but I think we should all continue and try to learn. If you think you have all you need to know, well then you’re not looking to learn anything are you.

    It’s like I’m watching Derek Zoolander pretend to be a female christian fundamentalist, and it makes me feel like Mugatu, in that I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.

    am i way off base here? have I missed her better points?

    I do not think she should go to hell. I do not think she should be punished. I do not think she should be allowed to use scissors. i do not think she should criticize any for being ignorant or unobjective – as that would make her a hypocrite.

    Like

  21. So is your point, Ryan, that Jesus wasn’t really tempted like we are tempted

    well, personally speaking, if I ran into magic man that wooshed me up! onto the top of a mountain to view the whole city, and then said its mine if I bowed down and worshipped him.

    personally, I would think something was up. I would not bow, because hey, what’s the catch?

    I may not know as much Bible as Jesus, but I think the temptation is still temptation whether or not you recognise the magic man as the devil, or whether or not you rebuke him with specific scripture, or tell him to just get stuffed. Its still temptation….those are some of my thoughts anyway

    Like

  22. (2) The premise. Satan’s suggestion was based on several erroneous premises or presuppositions.

    First, a God Who is good would not deprive one of His creatures. Doing without food cannot be the will of God.

    Are you suggesting that it’s a false premise that a God who is good would not deprive one of his creatures? Or are you saying that a God who is good actually would not deprive one of his creatures?

    Clearly by what can be seen that there is a God who has been deemed to be good yet people are deprived of basic needs – up to and including food – regularly.

    Like

  24. well, personally speaking, if I ran into magic man that wooshed me up! onto the top of a mountain to view the whole city, and then said its mine if I bowed down and worshipped him.

    personally, I would think something was up. I would not bow, because hey, what’s the catch?

    Right, but that’s not exactly what I meant. Like you, if a magic man whoosed me to anywhere I’d likely not bow the knee. That may be because I’d be dead from the heart attack caused by said wooshing, but I digress…

    What I meant was Jesus clearly knew the outcome. He supposedly knew why he had been sent to earth and what would be happening after that (i.e. resurrection, ascension, Father’s right hand, etc.) He also perfectly – not imperfectly – knew God’s word.

    Yet, when we are “tempted” today it isn’t by any [apparent] magical means. It’s ordinary, everyday stuff. We see through a glass darkly. We don’t have all the answers. We don’t even have a clear picture.

    So his temptation was not the same as ours.

    Like

  25. I do not think she should go to hell. I do not think she should be punished. I do not think she should be allowed to use scissors. i do not think she should criticize any for being ignorant or unobjective

    quote of the night/day where you are! That made me laugh out loud.

    not to worry, I’m not allowed to use scissors either, not without my helmet anyway…

    Big, Big fan of that movie btw

    What is This….. a centre for Ants!

    Like

Comments are closed.