1
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Has anyone considered that this execution debacle could be God's will?
Posted on 11/4/26 at 12:50 am to FooManChoo
Posted on 11/4/26 at 12:50 am to FooManChoo
quote:
Multiple times in John, Jesus says to judge Him by His works (miracles). They were evidence of His authority as the Son of God. Acts 1:3 says that Jesus showed Himself after His resurrection with many infallible proofs. There are several passages across multiples NT books that speaks to eyewitnesses being proofs of the truthfulness of the message. So no, the Faith of Christianity is not "blind", but is reasonable because it is true.
All you have is the scripture - multiple copies and redactions I might add that have variations and don’t all say the same thing. How many endings to Mark are there?
You apply circular logic that the scriptures are the evidence that the scriptures are truthful, historical, and accurate. I have a Harry Potter book, and I know everything in that book really happened because the book is evidence for the material.
Jesus wants you to have blind faith. He blesses those who are blind, but still believe anyway. Just give up and be one of those people. Admit you have no evidence but you believe it anyway. Be honest for a change. It will be refreshing.
Posted on 11/4/26 at 11:26 am to Squirrelmeister
quote:No, Scripture is not all I have, but it is an evidence. I'm glad that you seem to be conceding that and attacking the Bible now, because it's your only move. You are a dishonest person and absolutely vile for how you treat your Creator. You need to repent before it is too late for you. Only Jesus can save you from eternal destruction.
All you have is the scripture - multiple copies and redactions I might add that have variations and don’t all say the same thing. How many endings to Mark are there?
quote:That's not the claim I'm making, but even if it were, there's quite the difference between the claims of the Bible and the author of Harry Potter. The HP books do not claim divine origin or to be documenting historical events. The author admits it is made up for entertainment, not to explain the origins of creation, the end of all things, and the reality as we understand it. Your analogy falls down on so many points that I'm almost surprised that you even used it.
You apply circular logic that the scriptures are the evidence that the scriptures are truthful, historical, and accurate. I have a Harry Potter book, and I know everything in that book really happened because the book is evidence for the material.
quote:I can't admit to your false claims and charges, because you are wrong. Your ignorance of the Bible and historic Christianity comes out in all of these discussions.
Jesus wants you to have blind faith. He blesses those who are blind, but still believe anyway. Just give up and be one of those people. Admit you have no evidence but you believe it anyway. Be honest for a change. It will be refreshing.
Posted on 11/4/26 at 6:28 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
No, Scripture is not all I have, but it is an evidence. I'm glad that you seem to be conceding
Nope, I’m not conceding, and won’t. The text of the Bible is not evidence of the truthfulness of the Bible. Your argument is amateur and childish, just like all your denials. You are a child singing “La La La” with your fingers in your ears.
Not seeing, yet believing, is not blind faith. Yahweh judging the other gods who live in the sky is really just humans on earth. Taking nothing except a staff is the same as not taking a staff. You’re a joke.
I hope you taste the fruit of not voting. Bow down to your Democrat overlords.
Posted on 11/5/26 at 6:20 am to Squirrelmeister
quote:It’s such a shame that you refuse to be serious about these matters and try to understand the other perspective for what is it rather than believe something out of ignorance or bias against.
Nope, I’m not conceding, and won’t.
quote:The text actually is evidence of its truthfulness.
The text of the Bible is not evidence of the truthfulness of the Bible. Your argument is amateur and childish,
What you are missing is the nature of the argument. All you are seeing is that because a book claims to be true, that I believe it. That’s why you make the ignorant parallel with Harry Potter. The actually claim is that I believe the Bible is the very Word of God, and since God cannot lie, His Word must be true and the standard for truth due to His Word being authoritative (there is no higher authority than God).
There are multiple reasons why I believe the Bible is God’s Word, but if it is, then I must believe it.
quote:That's what you are doing when confronted with the truth of your guilt before your Creator and the message of salvation through Jesus Christ.
You are a child singing “La La La” with your fingers in your ears.
quote:You can’t accept that you are not understanding the Bible and are interpreting it only in ways that are the least generous to the text, out of context from the rest of the Bible, and only in context of hostile accounts.
Not seeing, yet believing, is not blind faith. Yahweh judging the other gods who live in the sky is really just humans on earth. Taking nothing except a staff is the same as not taking a staff. You’re a joke.
You are the blind one, and you are walking blindly to your own eternal demise.
quote:The Democrats getting elected across the country is judgement for the wickedness promoted and tolerated here, and the rejection of Jesus as Lord and King.
I hope you taste the fruit of not voting. Bow down to your Democrat overlords.
In your atheistic worldview, you have no rational basis for saying anything is objectively wrong, even the policies of Democrats or Republicans. Preference is all you are left with.
Posted on 11/5/26 at 6:34 am to BrodyDad
Somehow this morning I read the Thread Title
Has anyone considered that this ELECTION debacle could be God's will?
And I wondered about that but won't comment.
Has anyone considered that this ELECTION debacle could be God's will?
And I wondered about that but won't comment.
Posted on 11/5/26 at 8:18 am to Champagne
quote:
Has anyone considered that this ELECTION debacle could be God's will?
And I wondered about that but won't comment.
I believe everything that happens, what seems good and what seems bad, is His will. Sometimes He allows our free will to dictate to teach us a lesson. Same as you would allow your child to fail for his greater good.
Posted on 11/5/26 at 8:48 am to BrodyDad
quote:
We do not always understand why the good Lord does things. They do not always make sense to us and we have to submit to his will and not try to impose our own.
Posted on 11/5/26 at 1:20 pm to Champagne
quote:Of course it's His will, but we have to distinguish between His secret will and revealed will.
Has anyone considered that this ELECTION debacle could be God's will?
His revealed will is that which He has revealed to us and commanded us in the Scriptures.
His secret will is what He decrees and determines to happen in the course of time.
God works all things according to the counsel of His will, and that includes who our rulers are.
God is control, so Christians can take comfort in that, knowing that "all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose." (Rom. 8:28)
Posted on 11/5/26 at 6:04 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
The actually claim is that I believe the Bible is the very Word of God, and since God cannot lie, His Word must be true and the standard for truth due to His Word being authoritative (there is no higher authority than God).
Your new Muslim overlords, due to you and people like you not voting, make the same case. They believe the Quran is the word of God, and since he cannot lie, his word - the Quran - must be true.
You have the logic processing capacity of a 2 year old.
Posted on 11/5/26 at 7:23 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:Of course they do. That’s why an internal critique is necessary, showing them that it isn’t by its own claims.
Your new Muslim overlords, due to you and people like you not voting, make the same case. They believe the Quran is the word of God, and since he cannot lie, his word - the Quran - must be true.
I don’t have a problem with the logic of their claim. I have a problem with the truthfulness of it. They can claim it is evidence for what they believe and I won’t deny it like you do, because I am not illogical like you clearly are.
quote:When a stupid person calls you stupid, it shouldn’t bother you. Same thing when an illogical person calls you illogical. That’s you. You are very ignorant of the topic of logic, so I’m not concerned your statement here.
You have the logic processing capacity of a 2 year old.
Posted on 11/7/26 at 6:49 am to FooManChoo
quote:quote:Of course they do. That’s why an internal critique is necessary, showing them that it isn’t by its own claims. I don’t have a problem with the logic of their claim. I have a problem with the truthfulness of it. They can claim it is evidence for what they believe and I won’t deny it like you do, because I am not illogical like you clearly are.
Your new Muslim overlords, due to you and people like you not voting, make the same case. They believe the Quran is the word of God, and since he cannot lie, his word - the Quran - must be true.
You’re a broken record and an infinite loop. You aren’t completely conscious nor self-aware.
Each time you claim that I am the one that is illogical, you are committing the fallacy of psychological projection. You are attempting to project your own faults - the use of illogical baseless assertions - and simply stating that your opponent is the guilty one.
Each time you claim that the Bible is the Truth because it says it is the Truth and it has to be because the Bible is divinely inspired is circular. It’s logically invalid, and patently illogical. It’s the exact opposite of your claim that you are the logical one. Your fault is that you are begging the question. You are trying to argue for the books claims by pointing to the book itself. You’re arguing A is true because of B, and since we know B is true, A must be true. Your two main fallacies are “circular reasoning / begging the question” and “unsupported premise”.
Self referencing guarantees by the booking making a claim about the book doesn’t constitute evidence. We need external evidence, testability, and consistency with known facts to establish truthfulness of the biblical claims. We do have some external evidence, such as when Moab defeated Israel at Moab. What we don’t have is any external evidence nor testability nor consistency with known facts that Chemosh defeated Yahweh in battle. While there is external evidence to some historical stories in the Bible, none of it can be used to prove that there was any magic/miracles or gods involved. And stories like creation, the firmament, the flood, the exodus, etc. aren’t consistent with known historical and scientific facts.
quote:
You are very ignorant of the topic of logic
You are a mental midget. Dumber than a retard when it comes to logic.
Posted on 11/7/26 at 6:54 am to Squirrelmeister
quote:
You have the logic processing capacity of a 2 year old.
Why are you discussing logic in a religion thread? They literally have nothing to do with each other. They are not supposed to.
That is definitional.
Posted on 11/7/26 at 10:35 am to Squirrelmeister
quote:I speak the truth. I’ll keep repeating myself as much as I need to.
You’re a broken record and an infinite loop
quote:Well that’s just not true. I’m speaking as I observe and explaining exactly why I am doing so. You aren’t. You just scream “projection!” and move on like that’s all you need to do. That’s not how it works.
Each time you claim that I am the one that is illogical, you are committing the fallacy of psychological projection. You are attempting to project your own faults - the use of illogical baseless assertions - and simply stating that your opponent is the guilty one.
Also, whether you think I’m doing the same thing or not, it is what you are doing, so it isn’t mere projection. You’ll need to demonstrate it rather than just accuse me of it.
With that said, you have shown you don’t even understand some basic concepts in logic and philosophy. You don’t even know the definitions of the words objective and subjective in terms of truth claims.
quote:That isn’t the actual claim I’m making, though. You don’t seem to understand the nature of the claim, so it’s no wonder you misapply begging the question and such. I’ve explained to you the difference between what constitutes a necessary circular claim (speaking to ultimates and first principles) compared to a viciously circular claim that is fallacious. You haven’t understood that, either.
Each time you claim that the Bible is the Truth because it says it is the Truth and it has to be because the Bible is divinely inspired is circular. It’s logically invalid, and patently illogical. It’s the exact opposite of your claim that you are the logical one. Your fault is that you are begging the question. You are trying to argue for the books claims by pointing to the book itself. You’re arguing A is true because of B, and since we know B is true, A must be true. Your two main fallacies are “circular reasoning / begging the question” and “unsupported premise”.
quote:Ever heard of the concept of testimonial evidence? You don’t have to believe it, but you can’t deny that it is evidence all the same. Your inability to grasp this concept is another example of your deficiency in this discussion.
Self referencing guarantees by the booking making a claim about the book doesn’t constitute evidence.
quote:Perhaps you do. You clearly adhere to the self-refuting epistemological framework of empiricism.
We need external evidence, testability, and consistency with known facts to establish truthfulness of the biblical claims
Even so, there are hundreds of examples where the historical claims of the Bible have been supported by other evidences.
quote:You are putting your own bias against the evidences. First, you limit actual evidence to only that which you will accept based on empiricism, and then you use that bias to reject any and all other epistemological claims gained through philosophy, claimed revelation, or any other method. You reject the logical proofs for God that would undergird claims of the Bible because you reject anything that doesn’t fit your biases. You set a standard that rejects the Bible outright and then pretend that you are being unbiased and only going along with the evidence. You reject all evidence that you don’t want to accept out of the gate and then claim there is no evidence. You are putting your thumb on the scale.
We do have some external evidence, such as when Moab defeated Israel at Moab. What we don’t have is any external evidence nor testability nor consistency with known facts that Chemosh defeated Yahweh in battle. While there is external evidence to some historical stories in the Bible, none of it can be used to prove that there was any magic/miracles or gods involved. And stories like creation, the firmament, the flood, the exodus, etc. aren’t consistent with known historical and scientific facts.
Even with the Moabites, you see the Stele and will be happy to believe that account as true but reject the biblical account. Or, you interpret the Bible according to other evidences rather than the other way around. Your bias is evident. At least admit it.
quote:If I were you and believed like you do, I would stick to personal attacks, too. You have no leg to stand on when it comes to these discussions and your knowledge and use of logic and philosophy bear out your ignorance, so it makes sense for you to keep calling me names. It doesn’t help you, but given you come unarmed to all battles of wits, it makes sense.
You are a mental midget. Dumber than a retard when it comes to logic.
Posted on 11/9/26 at 9:25 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
I speak the truth. I’ll keep repeating myself as much as I need to.
No, you’re full of shite. You think “the Bible”… “claims” (because of your false premise of univocality of a bunch of conflicting books written by different authors in different centuries with different theologies)… that there is exactly one god.
Psalm 97
quote:
7All worshipers of images are put to shame, who make their boast in worthless idols; worship him, all you gods! 8Zion hears and is glad, and the daughters of Judah rejoice, because of your judgments, O LORD. 9For you, Yahweh, are the most high over all the earth; you are exalted far above all gods.
Deuteronomy 32
quote:
43Rejoice with him, O heavens; bow down to him all gods, for he avenges the blood of his children and takes vengeance on his adversaries. He repays those who hate him and cleanses his people’s land.
Heiser explains it better than me. There are many gods, according to the biblical authors, and they are very powerful even. Yet Yahweh is special in that he is better and more powerful than the other gods. For Yahweh to judge the gods, those gods must’ve really existed and done some bad deeds. For Yahweh to be highly exalted compared to those other gods, those other gods must’ve existed (else the author would be saying Yahweh is better than non-existent shite). For Yahweh to defeat those other gods and take their inheritance (psalm 82) those gods must’ve existed necessarily to have an inheritance in the first place. When the other gods are supposed to bow down to Yahweh and worship Yahweh, those gods have to exist. It wouldn’t make any sense for non existent things to worship Yahweh.
You start with a false and unsupported premise (there are no other gods besides Yahweh) and then you cherry pick your verses to support your dogma. I’ve already explained to you that just as Nineveh wasn’t the only city to exist, that the exact same verb and phrase was also a boast of incomparability that Yahweh just just the best god, not that he was literally the only god to exist.
For David and Solomon to have dealt with Yahweh directly, so they 100% know Yahweh exists, and they know he is jealous, for them to worship the other gods is another bit of evidence supporting the biblical authors’ world view of henotheism, where Yahweh is a local god that could only be worshipped on Israelite soil - on his inheritance, but that one day he would usurp his brothers and take their inheritance and rule the world (literally psalm 82).
quote:
That isn’t the actual claim I’m making, though. You don’t seem to understand the nature of the claim, so it’s no wonder you misapply begging the question and such. I’ve explained to you the difference between what constitutes a necessary circular claim (speaking to ultimates and first principles) compared to a viciously circular claim that is fallacious. You haven’t understood that, either.
More “special pleading” fallacy. “My circular logic based on unsupported premise isn’t circular because my argument is special because I have the unique knowledge that my starting premise is already true.”
quote:
Ever heard of the concept of testimonial evidence?
You have to shift from “first hand eyewitness” to “testimonials”.
quote:
Even so, there are hundreds of examples where the historical claims of the Bible have been supported by other evidences.
Sure, like when Moab defeated Israel. What isn’t supported was that Yahweh or Chemosh was involved or even exist.
quote:.
You don’t even know the definitions of the words objective and subjective in terms of truth claims.
You think something is objective if you believe it. It’s a good thing we don’t rely on people like you for scientific advancement.
quote:
Even with the Moabites, you see the Stele and will be happy to believe that account as true but reject the biblical account
The main difference is the names of the Israelite kings and the issue of Mesha sacrificing his son on the wall. They both end in Moabites victory over Israel and they both attribute it to Chemosh. In the biblical account, the excuse for the moabite victory was that Mesha sacrificed his son, and the sacrifice worked, and because of that sacrifice, divine fury drove Israel away. Now obviously a non-retard would know that Chemosh was the patron deity of Moab to which the sacrifice would have been meant for. If you don’t accept that, then you’d have to argue the sacrifice was to Yahweh - and it worked - and Yahweh delighted in that human sacrifice.
Posted on 11/9/26 at 9:42 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
The Democrats getting elected across the country is judgement for the wickedness promoted and tolerated here, and the rejection of Jesus as Lord and King.
Excellent.
So, your position is that this Democrat election victory is God's Divine Intervention to teach the American People a Divine Lesson. God is going to punish us because in His Judgment, we are wicked and promote wickedness and tolerate wickedness AND the USA has rejected Jesus as Lord and King.
Got it. Thanks.
Posted on 11/9/26 at 9:49 pm to FooManChoo
This post of yours that I respond to here doesn't make sense to me, and that's OK because this particular issue is a mystery.
If God's Divine Judgment is to put Democrats in charge of the USA, then Democrats are going to do Democrat things, and make the USA even more wicked than it was before.
I don't think you are very well qualified in this area, Foo. Your Theology tells you that the US Constitution is wicked because it does not enshrine Jesus Christ as Lord and King of the USA and the Universe. That position is bit more extreme than most Americans would share with you.
Perhaps this Democrat Victory is God's Will in that God has set us on the way to The Great Tribulation and the Last Days before the Second Coming. We may one day see Christians in the USA martyred for their Faith.
If God's Divine Judgment is to put Democrats in charge of the USA, then Democrats are going to do Democrat things, and make the USA even more wicked than it was before.
I don't think you are very well qualified in this area, Foo. Your Theology tells you that the US Constitution is wicked because it does not enshrine Jesus Christ as Lord and King of the USA and the Universe. That position is bit more extreme than most Americans would share with you.
Perhaps this Democrat Victory is God's Will in that God has set us on the way to The Great Tribulation and the Last Days before the Second Coming. We may one day see Christians in the USA martyred for their Faith.
This post was edited on 11/9/26 at 10:17 pm
Posted on 11/12/26 at 12:00 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:Yes, I believe what historic Christianity teaches about the Bible and God being its spiritual author. I speak what I believe is true. You can disagree all you like, but I've been consistent. It's why I keep repeating myself.
No, you’re full of shite. You think “the Bible”… “claims” (because of your false premise of univocality of a bunch of conflicting books written by different authors in different centuries with different theologies)… that there is exactly one god.
quote:You even quoted it and you missed the parallelism. God is comparing the "gods" to the "images" and "worthless idols". That's how He speaks in the OT, comparing the "gods" to worthless things that aren't actually there, or are made with the hands of people.
Psalm 97
You are clearly differentiating the "gods" from the "idols" made with hands, but back then, they were the same thing. The idols were the gods, and they were prayed to and worshipped them (their statues and so on).
You see this clearly in the account of the Phiistines capturing the ark of the covenant in 1 Samuel 5:
quote:
When the Philistines took the ark of God, they brought it into the house of Dagon and set it by Dagon. And when the people of Ashdod arose early in the morning, there was Dagon, fallen on its face to the earth before the ark of the Lord. So they took Dagon and set it in its place again. And when they arose early the next morning, there was Dagon, fallen on its face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. The head of Dagon and both the palms of its hands were broken off on the threshold; only Dagon’s torso was left of it.
quote:And he was wrong about it. He took the same false approach that you do: he interpreted the Bible according to the ANE mythologies.
Heiser explains it better than me.
I interpret the Bible according to the Bible, first and foremost. It explains what it means, as I showed above.
quote:1) see above: it's not an unsupported claim to use the Bible to interpret the Bible. It claims to be the word of God and that God cannot lie, so that's why I start with that assumption, because I believe what it says. You can disagree, but it's not "unsupported"; it's just how books are to be read: within its context.
You start with a false and unsupported premise (there are no other gods besides Yahweh) and then you cherry pick your verses to support your dogma. I’ve already explained to you that just as Nineveh wasn’t the only city to exist, that the exact same verb and phrase was also a boast of incomparability that Yahweh just just the best god, not that he was literally the only god to exist.
2) We already talked about Nineveh and I explained how the word was used. It doesn't support your claim.
quote:Only be worshipped on Israelite soil? The justification that God gives to Israel over and over again as to why He is the only God and all-powerful is that He delivered them out of bondage in Egypt. He was there in Egypt. He met with Moses in Mt. Sinai, which was not in Israel. God was worshipped in Eden and outside Eden, which wasn't in Israel. God came to Abram when Abram was not in Israel, and he worshipped God outside of Israel. God was worshipped and performed miracles all over the place. From Melchizedek to Job to Balaam to Jethro to Naaman to Nebuchadnezzar in Babylon, there are dozens of people, places, and events where God interacted with others and was worshipped and acknowledged as God outside of the physical domain of Israel.
For David and Solomon to have dealt with Yahweh directly, so they 100% know Yahweh exists, and they know he is jealous, for them to worship the other gods is another bit of evidence supporting the biblical authors’ world view of henotheism, where Yahweh is a local god that could only be worshipped on Israelite soil - on his inheritance, but that one day he would usurp his brothers and take their inheritance and rule the world (literally psalm 82).
Your claim is absolutely ridiculous from the biblical text, itself.
quote:You keep digging your hole deeper, showing you are ignorant of what is being discussed.
More “special pleading” fallacy. “My circular logic based on unsupported premise isn’t circular because my argument is special because I have the unique knowledge that my starting premise is already true.”
No, it isn't special pleading. The claim is that the Bible is the word of God and that God is ultimate, meaning that there is no higher authority to appeal to. That's what an ultimate claim is.
quote:That's not a shift. It's literally a eyewitness testimony. I just used a different word.
You have to shift from “first hand eyewitness” to “testimonials”.
quote:Say what you like about the Stele, but that isn't the only evidence one way or another.
Sure, like when Moab defeated Israel. What isn’t supported was that Yahweh or Chemosh was involved or even exist.
quote:That's a false claim. I don't think something is objective just because I believe it is true. You, again, demonstrate your ignorance on this topic.
You think something is objective if you believe it. It’s a good thing we don’t rely on people like you for scientific advancement.
quote:You have inserted a few different interpretations and conclusions of your own into this statement that aren't actually said by the Bible. You are doing what I said: drawing conclusions from extra-biblical sources and forcing them into the Bible.
The main difference is the names of the Israelite kings and the issue of Mesha sacrificing his son on the wall. They both end in Moabites victory over Israel and they both attribute it to Chemosh. In the biblical account, the excuse for the moabite victory was that Mesha sacrificed his son, and the sacrifice worked, and because of that sacrifice, divine fury drove Israel away. Now obviously a non-retard would know that Chemosh was the patron deity of Moab to which the sacrifice would have been meant for. If you don’t accept that, then you’d have to argue the sacrifice was to Yahweh - and it worked - and Yahweh delighted in that human sacrifice.
Posted on 11/12/26 at 12:02 pm to Champagne
quote:Yes, except I would say it's ongoing judgement. The leaders we have had, the cultural rot and shift away from Christianity, and the embracing of immorality are all God's judgement on us as a people for our wickedness. He's giving us over to our sin, like Romans 1 speaks of.
Excellent.
So, your position is that this Democrat election victory is God's Divine Intervention to teach the American People a Divine Lesson. God is going to punish us because in His Judgment, we are wicked and promote wickedness and tolerate wickedness AND the USA has rejected Jesus as Lord and King.
Got it. Thanks.
Posted on 11/12/26 at 12:08 pm to Champagne
quote:Yes, that is the pattern of the Scriptures. Look at the old testament and the book of judges. The people reject God and do what's right in their own eyes, and God punishes them by giving them bad leaders (they are conquered by other nations, peoples, and tribes) who make things even worse for them. When it gets bad enough, they cry out to the Lord in repentance and He delivers them. Then the cycle repeats.
This post of yours that I respond to here doesn't make sense to me, and that's OK because this particular issue is a mystery.
If God's Divine Judgment is to put Democrats in charge of the USA, then Democrats are going to do Democrat things, and make the USA even more wicked than it was before.
quote:I wouldn't say it's absolutely wicked in every way because of that. I'd say that it is wicked in the attempt at religious neutrality, but not every aspect of the Constitution is wicked. It promotes principles that are good and godly, but because Jesus is not the focal point, it's left to be executed in rebellion against God, who established and upholds our rights according to His good pleasure.
I don't think you are very well qualified in this area, Foo. Your Theology tells you that the US Constitution is wicked because it does not enshrine Jesus Christ as Lord and King of the USA and the Universe. That position is bit more extreme than most Americans would share with you.
quote:Perhaps that's true, but regardless of God's secret will on this matter, it's clear that we as a nation have rejected God (even the nominal Christians reject Him in practically in many ways, through ignorance of His Word and perverting His worship), and that is showing itself in our policies and politics, and what our social morality looks like.
Perhaps this Democrat Victory is God's Will in that God has set us on the way to The Great Tribulation and the Last Days before the Second Coming. We may one day see Christians in the USA martyred for their Faith.
Posted on 11/12/26 at 9:20 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
You even quoted it and you missed the parallelism. God is comparing the "gods" to the "images" and "worthless idols". That's how He speaks in the OT, comparing the "gods" to worthless things that aren't actually there, or are made with the hands of people. You are clearly differentiating the "gods" from the "idols" made with hands, but back then, they were the same thing. The idols were the gods, and they were prayed to and worshipped them (their statues and so on).
You’re retarded and you know nothing. Let me educate you. “Elilim” - the Hebrew word used has three roots. The etymology is “el” which means a god, “il” which modifies the preceding root and makes it diminutive (thing Lupe vs Lupita, or Poncho vs Ponchito), and the “im” is just a suffix that makes the entire word masculine plural. All “Elilim” means is “little gods”.
“Eidolon” in Greek was the word they used to translate “Elilim” but it has a different meaning. The etymology is that of an idea or knowledge that is seen or represented.
It’s a fact, Foo, that in the ANE, all the peoples in using the Israelites used divine images that weren’t their gods, but represented their gods, and were used to ritualistically invoke the “real” presence of their gods. In ancient Israel there were figurines used for Baal, Asherah, and all their gods including Yahweh, and they have been dug up in modern times. Figurines of Yahweh, plus standing stones and the ark were all “idols” of or for Yahweh. Three times a year, each male Israelite had to see the face of Yahweh (in the temple).
That the “Elilim” were simply carvings or statues or figurines is modern apologetics. In reality, they all believed those statues and figurines and carvings represented gods that actually existed, but that those gods were inferior to and subjugated by Yahweh.
I noticed you didn’t address “worship him all you gods!” from psalm 97. Dude you can still believe in faith alone in Jesus and all that shite while acknowledging not only what the Bible literally says but taking the context into account. The context of ANE mythology. When the Bible literally tells the “Elilim” to worship him (Yahweh) all you gods… just take it for what it says. Non-existent things can’t worship Yahweh. How about you not be an idiot for once.
quote:
And he was wrong about it. He took the same false approach that you do: he interpreted the Bible according to the ANE mythologies.
Heiser was such a shithead, using ANE mythology as context, right?
quote:
I interpret the Bible according to the Bible, first and foremost
But only the Old Testament derived from Phariseeism, the sect of Jews that “Jesus” rebuked. And only the New Testament provided by Marcion of Sinope and edited and appended to by the Roman Catholic Church. frick all the context, right? All the other Jewish and Christian works that didn’t make the cut.
quote:
2) We already talked about Nineveh and I explained how the word was used. It doesn't support your claim.
Nope, you’re wrong and stupid. I’ve already explained it to you. Keep your head in the sand and fingers in your ears. Great job.
quote:
Only be worshipped on Israelite soil?
Yes, stupid, this was the older mythology. It’s why when David was exiled he was “forced to worship other gods”. Go read it up on it. When the Syrian king wanted to return to his own land and worship Yahweh, what did he bring back with him to enable Yahweh worship?
quote:
God came to Abram when Abram was not in Israel, and he worshipped God outside of Israel. God was worshipped and performed miracles all over the place. From Melchizedek to Job to Balaam to Jethro to Naaman to Nebuchadnezzar in Babylon, there are dozens of people, places, and events where God interacted with others and was worshipped and acknowledged as God outside of the physical domain of Israel. Your claim is absolutely ridiculous from the biblical text, itself.
These are later traditions. During the exile, they wrote psalm 82 as a means or excuse to begin worshipping Yahweh everywhere. Even later than that, they wrote the stories of Abraham and Moses during the Persian period where Yahweh was already sovereign over a larger geographical area. You keep invoking the baseless presupposition of univocality of the scriptures. Stop it.
quote:
No, it isn't special pleading
Yes, it is.
quote:
That's not a shift. It's literally a eyewitness testimony. I just used a different word.
I don’t know if you are talking about the gospels, but if you are, it obviously isn’t eyewitness testimony.
1. None of the 4 gospels that made the Catholic canonical cut claim to be written by any author. No authorship is claimed.
2. It’s written in 3rd person omniscient point of view, not 3rd person objective nor first person.
3. We can see - it is a fact - that the four gospels are literarily related. That is, they are all copies or edits of each other and though John is less of a copy it still uses the material from the others.
4. “Luke” specifically tells the reader he literally is NOT an eyewitness but compiled these stories from others.
5. Eyewitnesses can’t explain how an angel appeared to Mary, or what the magi were thinking or what they told Herod, or what Pilate was thinking in his heart or what he told his wife, or what the Pharisees were thinking in their heart when they were trying to trip up “Jesus”, or what Judas said when he gave back his blood money, or what “Jesus” prayed word for word while he was the only one awake while the disciples slept, or what was said between Jesus and Satan on the mountain. There were no eyewitnesses to any of this theological shite and couldn’t have been - even if the stories were true and historical.
quote:
Say what you like about the Stele, but that isn't the only evidence one way or another.
I love it. It anchors the biblical story in history. The stele and the Bible both explain the reason for the loss - Chemosh, the patron deity of Moab. The Bible goes further and explains why Chemosh was able to defeat Yahweh… because the Moabites cheated by giving Chemosh extra fury and strength by sacrificing a Moabite prince on the city wall. I doubt that part happened, but it is plausible. At any rate, the biblical author of Kings attributed the loss to the very “real” Chemosh.
quote:
That's a false claim. I don't think something is objective just because I believe it is true. You, again, demonstrate your ignorance on this topic.
Nope, you believe everything that you believe is objectively true, and you can’t imagine the possibility of you being wrong about any theological topic. Everything that you believe is true is something that you believe is objectively true, when all you have in reality is your own opinions brought forth by your delusions.
quote:
You are doing what I said: drawing conclusions from extra-biblical sources and forcing them into the Bible.
You are complaining that I am using context, while you prefer to take the myth out of context. Literally.
Page 13 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News