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 
Nice catch, William!
LikeLike
Hi Laurie.
It’s true that the Hebrew word there can mean ancestor, but the context usually indicates when it’s being used that way. Like referring to Jesus as a son of David — it obviously doesn’t mean his actual father.
More importantly, I’ve seen this claim before that Belshazzar’s mother was the daughter of Nebuchadnezzar, thus creating a familial relationship, but I’ve only ever seen it given as supposition. As far as I know, there is no historical source that backs this up. Herodotus mentions Nitocris (not to be confused with the Nitocris of Egypt, whom he also mentions), but does not suggest that she’s related to Nebuchadnezzar. And I don’t think any records from the time of Belshazzar mention her at all. Do you have a source that shows something different?
LikeLike
“So, if you did concede that existence is compelling evidence for a Creator, I’ve explained repeatedly what the next step would be.. looking for the religion that has the most compelling evidence…"
No, the next step would be searching for the Creator of the god you claim exists, which by virtue of that existence – by your own "compelling evidence," must have one, then his/her/it's Creator, ad infinitum —
LikeLike
Ruth,
I know this is off subject, but because i think this text is so often misunderstood, I thought I would give you my thoughts on it.
“My comment about those highly politicized is in relation to the law – American law. Many of these hyper-politicized “Christians” view American law and their involvement with it as sacred. Almost as sacred as the Bible. They feel so strongly about anti-abortion/anti-gay laws and social programs that if Jesus were to walk the Earth today and tell them, “whoever is without sin cast the first stone” they’d likely not recognize that it were Jesus and want to stone him. They claim to follow Jesus but their political ideals and aspirations tell a different story.”
At the time this took place, the Pharisees were trying to trick Yahusha into breaking the law. This was actually really clever! According to the law, you have to have both the man and woman who committed the sin, two witnesses, and the witnesses have to throw the first stone. In this case they are breaking the law them selves, and bringing false witness against this woman without due process puts them under judgement of the law. That is why they left when he said “whoever is without sin”. It is believed that when he was writing in the sand, it was Deuteronomy 19 that he wrote. Basically telling them they would be judged with the same judgement, if they were bringing false witness.
LikeLike
“I understand it, many Pharisees refused to acknowledge that Jesus was who He said He was, and instead relied on the Law." – actually, Portal, it was the Sadducees who relied on strict compliance with the written law, whereas the Pharisees allowed for the validity of oral tradition, as well. And Kathy is (IMO) damaging Christians, in that a Christian has only to observe her rantings for a few hundred comments, and want to disavow having any relationship with such a person. Her faith, which you appear to tout so highly, appears to me to be based solely on what she's been told – Kathy does not seem to be one who thinks for herself.
Still, it must feel good to play Sir Galahad – I had fantasies like that once myself.
LikeLike
Hi Nate,
Its been a while since I dug into this subject, and I can’t post anything right now, cause I’m heading out, but I will tonight!
I also haven’t forgotten the subject of eternal torment, which I would really like to discuss!
This is a great place to start, maybe Kathy will chime in while I’m gone, and we can actually work together for once! Hopefully, cause the circles we were going in before were just a huge waste of time.
Have a good day guys!
LikeLike
Before I leave…
Arch,
http://creation.mobi/article/4249/
This is off subject, but you should read this when you have time
LikeLike
At the time this took place, the Pharisees were trying to trick Yahusha into breaking the law. This was actually really clever! According to the law, you have to have both the man and woman who committed the sin, two witnesses, and the witnesses have to throw the first stone. In this case they are breaking the law them selves, and bringing false witness against this woman without due process puts them under judgement of the law. That is why they left when he said “whoever is without sin”. It is believed that when he was writing in the sand, it was Deuteronomy 19 that he wrote. Basically telling them they would be judged with the same judgement, if they were bringing false witness.
I have heard this interpretation before but is there any reason other than the fact that they were bringing false witness against the woman that it is believed that he was writing Deuteronomy 19 in the sand?
LikeLike
Laurie,
I know this is off subject, but because i think this text is so often misunderstood, I thought I would give you my thoughts on it.
Thanks for your thoughts on it.
Do you find it ironic that most Christians, though, interpret that text to mean “he who lives in a glass house shouldn’t throw rocks” yet use [portions] of the law to crucify certain people? They believe that they are no longer under law and yet use the law to pummel people with figurative rocks.
LikeLike
Here are a couple of other links about the DH too:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davidbokovoy/2014/01/the-death-of-the-documentary-hypothesis/
And this one mentions chiastic structures toward the end too:
http://richardelliottfriedman.com/?p=289
Both of these articles acknowledge that changes have been made to the DH over the years, which isn’t surprising, but that it’s still widely held in academic circles.
LikeLike
“It is believed that when he was writing in the sand, it was Deuteronomy 19 that he wrote.” – I’ve heard that too, Laurie, but with a 3% literacy rate in the country at the time, I seriously doubt that as the son of a craftsman, a carpenter, Yeshua, if he ever existed, could read or write.
LikeLike
Thank you Columbo – “Oh, uh, one more thing –“
LikeLike
Wow we jumped from burden of proof to second amendment rights, what a morning!
LikeLike
Wow we jumped from burden of proof to second amendment rights, what a morning!
Shhh…I’m hunting wabbits!
LikeLike
So other than the problem of eternal torement, is there a consensous on what we are debating/discussing now?
I’ve tried to keep up with Kathy and her replies but find them circular at best.
LikeLike
Matt, it’s really just the same ole thing.
Kathy first graced us during a discussion on Tyre I believe. While there, she seemed unaware of many of the criticisms for the bible, which included several evidences against the bible.
nate started these “letters to kathy” threads initially to share those issues with her and see how or if shewould or could responded to them.
In all of these threads, and over a period of time, she’s listed these 5 as evidence,
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.
We’ve asked other questions surrounding these as well as on other things she’s said, and we usually get the run around… and this is basically where we still are – just repeatedly asking her questions either to make points or to get clarification from her.
We’ll answer what she asks, usually multiple times…
I think we’re supposed to still be waiting for the factual and compelling evidence for the bible that she claims to have.
LikeLike
yeah, I’m hoping she looks into the issues with Daniel that I pointed out. But feel free to jump back into our discussion about Hell if you want. Anything’s up for grabs 🙂
LikeLike
Ron,
““You very well could be leading people away from God and their place in Heaven. ”
If Nate is leading people astray why doesn’t almighty God intervene to prevent that from happening?”
He’s given us the Bible and His commands to follow. Nate is working AGAINST God.
The question about intervening implies that God should intervene to prevent every bad thing
from happening.. and that’s a whole other topic on the concept of free will.
LikeLike
Ron,
“As I’ve stated before, the mathematical odds make all of these examples extremely compelling. ”
What exactly are these mathematical odds and how did you derive them?”
Odds are based on weighing the chances.. what is the chance that a person will allow
their life to be taken for a lie or a belief that has little compelling evidence? Very low.
LikeLike
“Odds are based on weighing the chances.. what is the chance that a person will allow
their life to be taken for a lie or a belief that has little compelling evidence? Very low.” – kathy
this is stupid and is not a good example of “weighing evidences.” In fact, you even agree with me which is why you you do not believe any other martyrs are compelling…
why do you keep holding on to this?
It would be much better if you simply said, “I may not know of ‘great’ reasons, but since I choose to walk by faith and not by sight, i still believe, even though I may not be able to explain…”
I could maybe even respect that.
LikeLike
Ark,
“In fact, If anything ventured by anyone who is not only not a Christian but also not part of a particular ‘brand’ of Christianity then any counter-claim will be summarily dismissed out of hand”
It’s all there for you and others to debate Ark. If I “dismiss” something, WITH an argument, the ONLY way I dismiss anything.. that’s when YOU or someone else ARGUES my points.. it’s not me who dismisses without argument, that would be all of you.. OR, like Nate, you just ignore my argument all together.
“The bottom line is simply that every Christian, and especially a fundamentalist such as Kathy, bases their worldview upon presupposition: namely, because of indoctrination they posit a god, ‘God’ first and foremost and then simply manipulate every piece of what they consider evidence to fit.”
Sorry, but this is just ignorant.. just a few comments up, I list the EVIDENCE.. the REASONS I believe.. and no where on that list is “indoctrination”.. aka the opinion of others. It’s hilarious when liberals make their claims about me that are so blatantly false.
And you are guilty of the very same thing as you accuse me of.. you make a supposition that we aren’t created beings.. and you proceed to manipulate any evidence that argues against that belief.
LikeLike
Ruth,
“Kathy, show us peer reviewed articles written by scholars which confirms ALL 5 Claims above as EVIDENCE of your Christian God. This shouldn’t be hard for you to do. If you can’t, then this post should be over and let’s all move on.”
The scholars don’t disagree on the existence of this evidence Ruth.. and if it’s not evidence for God, what is it evidence for??
Again, please refer to the definition of evidence.
LikeLike
Kathy your wrote:
Odds are based on weighing the chances.. what is the chance that a person will allow
their life to be taken for a lie or a belief that has little compelling evidence? Very low.
That is possibly the most assine statement I’ve read. Odds are not “based on weighing the chanes” Odds tell you what the chances are of something happening given know facts.
Going on the suppostion that the Christian faith is correct, odds are that MILLIONS OF PEOPLE who don’t claim to be christian have been taken for that ‘lie’
LikeLike
Ruth,
“It really should cause people to think really hard about God’s existence since the “argument” against Him is always based on science.. yet, that VERY science argues AGAINST the logic of our existence.
Kathy,
You’ve made this statement several times now. Do you have a source for that? Do you have evidence of this claim?”
My evidence is my claim.. that you are FREE to argue against. But it’s clear that you cannot, so instead you ask for “evidence”.
LikeLike
kc,
“Kathy, show us peer reviewed articles written by scholars which confirms ALL 5 Claims above as EVIDENCE of your Christian God. This shouldn’t be hard for you to do. If you can’t, then this post should be over and let’s all move on.”
It’s not evidence for Zeus.. this part should be pretty clear. Asking for “studies” is a stalling tactic. Why can’t you just argue what I’ve put forth??
LikeLike