Discernment people.. not that complicated.kathy….aka interpret it any possible way that can it can still be true. Not what is most likely, not what is probable, but whatever keeps the believe alive.
“So it wasn’t all divine revelation or inspiration? God chose not to intervene in the most important testimonies of all? ”
He didn’t need to Ruth. The Gospels are more than enough on the testimonies of real people..
which is very strong evidence. Again, those minor discrepancies actually SUPPORT the truth of the Gospels.. because exact accounts are not a normal occurrence.
More lack of objectivity.
“And the fact that you have to come up with “what it could mean” is a problem in itself. Are you being divinely inspired?”
Sorry, it’s not a problem at all. I don’t have all the answers.. no believer makes that claim.
“Discernment people.. not that complicated.kathy….aka interpret it any possible way that can it can still be true. Not what is most likely, not what is probable, but whatever keeps the believe alive.”
This is hilarious coming from a person who’s been proven to lack objectivity.. you can’t even acknowledge simple factual evidence Ruth.
Whaaaaat??? Ruth can’t acknowledge “simple factual evidence” … !??! What do you call it when you can’t accept that the dining rooms in the temples were nothing more than the simple, factual evidence of … dining rooms in the temples?
He didn’t need to Ruth. The Gospels are more than enough on the testimonies of real people..
which is very strong evidence. Again, those minor discrepancies actually SUPPORT the truth of the Gospels.. because exact accounts are not a normal occurrence.
Now you know what God does and does not need? You have no idea! Doesn’t the Bible say that all scripture is God-breathed?
More lack of objectivity.
Meh…okay.
Sorry, it’s not a problem at all. I don’t have all the answers.. no believer makes that claim.
It is totally cool that the unanswered questions don’t bother you. But it is ridiculous that you badger people who want answers. If your God is so great don’t you think he can take it? Is his ego really that fragile?
“What this should say about me William is that I have weighed ALL the evidence.. and these
few questions are not enough to discount the supportive evidence” – kathy
or it says that you dont know much about the actual evidence and that you believe martyrs are good evidence of divinity of the martyrs religion, and that you likely think all these things because you spend too much of your time watching tv.
This is hilarious coming from a person who’s been proven to lack objectivity.. you can’t even acknowledge simple factual evidence Ruth.
The only thing that has been proven is the lack of objectivity coming from you, the person who pleads ‘give God an honest chance’ and ‘the benefit of the doubt’. Those are not statements of objectivity. The irony in you pointing out bias in others is palpable.
“or it says that you dont know much about the actual evidence and that you believe martyrs are good evidence of divinity of the martyrs religion, and that you likely think all these things because you spend too much of your time watching tv.”
Again, William… for the hundredth time.. it’s about WEIGHING the evidence.. martyrdom is extremely strong evidence when combined with other factors and evidence.
“The only thing that has been proven is the lack of objectivity coming from you, the person who pleads ‘give God an honest chance’ and ‘the benefit of the doubt’. Those are not statements of objectivity. The irony in you pointing out bias in others is palpable.”
Right Ruth.. all of the hundreds of thousands of words I’ve typed on this site are about “benefit of the doubt”… not evidence and valid reasoning / arguments that you all fail over and over to defend.
“Again, William… for the hundredth time.. it’s about WEIGHING the evidence.. martyrdom is extremely strong evidence when combined with other factors and evidence.” – kathy
Right Ruth.. all of the hundreds of thousands of words I’ve typed on this site are about “benefit of the doubt”… not evidence and valid reasoning / arguments that you all fail over and over to defend.
Kathy, all of your evidence, reasoning, and arguments have been defended over and over with much success. You are the only one here who thinks you’re doing a bang up job of defending Christianity. The evidence you have provided is all very circumstantial and it all hinges on a presupposition of a deity. The credibility of the Bible hinges on divine inspiration. An a priori belief in God is required to believe in divine inspiration.
and FYI, you’re basically saying that martyrs are only good evidence when other good evince is around, which is the same as saying martyrs arent good evidence, but good evidence is.
so why dont we just leave martyrs alone now that we all agree on that, and you can get to the good evidence now.
“Right Ruth.. all of the hundreds of thousands of words I’ve typed on this site are about “benefit of the doubt”… not evidence and valid reasoning / arguments that you all fail over and over to defend.” – kathy
– the bible is a composite book that was heavily edited. This is known fact, not conjecture.
– every book was written by men and only some of those men claimed to be speaking for god, but not all books do.
– they claim wonderful and marvelous things that cannot happen naturally.
– they claim miracles proved that they were speaking for god, but miracles dont happen today.
– they claim that solar events happened, yet there is no corroborative evidence, despite several solar tracking cultures of that time across the world – none, not one recording any of these alleged miraculous events, although they recorded other typical solar events.
– while some of these books contain some historical events accurately, they also record some historical events incorrectly.
– it took 40 people 1500 years to write this book, and even then, it has contradictions and discrepancies. numerically that’s the same as 4 people taking 150 years to write their book, or 1 person 37.5 years to write their book.
– this book, in the first 2 chapters, cant agree on where the birds came from.
– this book says that god makes everything, including all the rules, and then it says he had to sacrifice his son to save people from a fate he created….
what about this is compelling to you? what about this just screams “TRUE” to you?
please tell me that you’re basing your faith off of more than the author’s claims, and matter and martyrs.
Finding Truth 
Discernment people.. not that complicated.kathy….aka interpret it any possible way that can it can still be true. Not what is most likely, not what is probable, but whatever keeps the believe alive.
LikeLike
“So it wasn’t all divine revelation or inspiration? God chose not to intervene in the most important testimonies of all? ”
He didn’t need to Ruth. The Gospels are more than enough on the testimonies of real people..
which is very strong evidence. Again, those minor discrepancies actually SUPPORT the truth of the Gospels.. because exact accounts are not a normal occurrence.
More lack of objectivity.
“And the fact that you have to come up with “what it could mean” is a problem in itself. Are you being divinely inspired?”
Sorry, it’s not a problem at all. I don’t have all the answers.. no believer makes that claim.
You lack honesty and objectivity Ruth.
LikeLike
“Discernment people.. not that complicated.kathy….aka interpret it any possible way that can it can still be true. Not what is most likely, not what is probable, but whatever keeps the believe alive.”
This is hilarious coming from a person who’s been proven to lack objectivity.. you can’t even acknowledge simple factual evidence Ruth.
LikeLike
Whaaaaat??? Ruth can’t acknowledge “simple factual evidence” … !??! What do you call it when you can’t accept that the dining rooms in the temples were nothing more than the simple, factual evidence of … dining rooms in the temples?
Unbelievable.
LikeLike
He didn’t need to Ruth. The Gospels are more than enough on the testimonies of real people..
which is very strong evidence. Again, those minor discrepancies actually SUPPORT the truth of the Gospels.. because exact accounts are not a normal occurrence.
Now you know what God does and does not need? You have no idea! Doesn’t the Bible say that all scripture is God-breathed?
More lack of objectivity.
Meh…okay.
Sorry, it’s not a problem at all. I don’t have all the answers.. no believer makes that claim.
It is totally cool that the unanswered questions don’t bother you. But it is ridiculous that you badger people who want answers. If your God is so great don’t you think he can take it? Is his ego really that fragile?
You lack honesty and objectivity Ruth.
Meh…okay. *shrug*
LikeLike
“Moses wasn’t testifying to anything.. because as you pointed out he couldn’t
have been there.”
hebrews says that moses was giving his testament.
LikeLike
“What this should say about me William is that I have weighed ALL the evidence.. and these
few questions are not enough to discount the supportive evidence” – kathy
or it says that you dont know much about the actual evidence and that you believe martyrs are good evidence of divinity of the martyrs religion, and that you likely think all these things because you spend too much of your time watching tv.
LikeLike
This is hilarious coming from a person who’s been proven to lack objectivity.. you can’t even acknowledge simple factual evidence Ruth.
The only thing that has been proven is the lack of objectivity coming from you, the person who pleads ‘give God an honest chance’ and ‘the benefit of the doubt’. Those are not statements of objectivity. The irony in you pointing out bias in others is palpable.
LikeLike
LikeLike
“or it says that you dont know much about the actual evidence and that you believe martyrs are good evidence of divinity of the martyrs religion, and that you likely think all these things because you spend too much of your time watching tv.”
Again, William… for the hundredth time.. it’s about WEIGHING the evidence.. martyrdom is extremely strong evidence when combined with other factors and evidence.
LikeLike
“Sorry, it’s not a problem at all. I don’t have all the answers.. no believer makes that claim.” – kathy
then why do you act like such jerk when atheists say that they dont have the answer to the origins of the universe?
LikeLike
“The only thing that has been proven is the lack of objectivity coming from you, the person who pleads ‘give God an honest chance’ and ‘the benefit of the doubt’. Those are not statements of objectivity. The irony in you pointing out bias in others is palpable.”
Right Ruth.. all of the hundreds of thousands of words I’ve typed on this site are about “benefit of the doubt”… not evidence and valid reasoning / arguments that you all fail over and over to defend.
LikeLike
“Again, William… for the hundredth time.. it’s about WEIGHING the evidence.. martyrdom is extremely strong evidence when combined with other factors and evidence.” – kathy
that’s why you reject all other martyrs…
what other factors and evidence?
LikeLike
Right Ruth.. all of the hundreds of thousands of words I’ve typed on this site are about “benefit of the doubt”… not evidence and valid reasoning / arguments that you all fail over and over to defend.
Kathy, all of your evidence, reasoning, and arguments have been defended over and over with much success. You are the only one here who thinks you’re doing a bang up job of defending Christianity. The evidence you have provided is all very circumstantial and it all hinges on a presupposition of a deity. The credibility of the Bible hinges on divine inspiration. An a priori belief in God is required to believe in divine inspiration.
LikeLike
Back to square one.
LikeLike
Back to square one.
King me, baby! 😉
LikeLike
LikeLike
“that’s why you reject all other martyrs…”
Right! Those religions lack the compelling evidence that Christianity has.. their martyrdom evidence isn’t enough on it’s own.
LikeLike
Those religions lack the compelling evidence that Christianity has.. their martyrdom evidence isn’t enough on it’s own.
Have you studied these other religions objectively to know what evidence they have?
LikeLike
what other factors and evidence?
what compelling evidence does Christianity have?
and FYI, you’re basically saying that martyrs are only good evidence when other good evince is around, which is the same as saying martyrs arent good evidence, but good evidence is.
so why dont we just leave martyrs alone now that we all agree on that, and you can get to the good evidence now.
LikeLike
“Right Ruth.. all of the hundreds of thousands of words I’ve typed on this site are about “benefit of the doubt”… not evidence and valid reasoning / arguments that you all fail over and over to defend.” – kathy
ah, it makes sense now. you’re crazy.
LikeLike
LOL
LikeLike
William, my LOL was directed at this comment:
“and you can get to the good evidence now.”
I’m still laughing. 😀
LikeLike
kathy,
– the bible is a composite book that was heavily edited. This is known fact, not conjecture.
– every book was written by men and only some of those men claimed to be speaking for god, but not all books do.
– they claim wonderful and marvelous things that cannot happen naturally.
– they claim miracles proved that they were speaking for god, but miracles dont happen today.
– they claim that solar events happened, yet there is no corroborative evidence, despite several solar tracking cultures of that time across the world – none, not one recording any of these alleged miraculous events, although they recorded other typical solar events.
– while some of these books contain some historical events accurately, they also record some historical events incorrectly.
– it took 40 people 1500 years to write this book, and even then, it has contradictions and discrepancies. numerically that’s the same as 4 people taking 150 years to write their book, or 1 person 37.5 years to write their book.
– this book, in the first 2 chapters, cant agree on where the birds came from.
– this book says that god makes everything, including all the rules, and then it says he had to sacrifice his son to save people from a fate he created….
what about this is compelling to you? what about this just screams “TRUE” to you?
please tell me that you’re basing your faith off of more than the author’s claims, and matter and martyrs.
LikeLike
“An a priori belief in God is required to believe in divine inspiration.”
Which I’ve asked you all over and over.. got a better explanation?
No, you don’t. It’s the most obvious, reasonable explanation we have.
When you don’t have proof, you have to apply reason.
LikeLike