Part 6 of Post Your Tough Questions Regarding Christianity

Cuz wanren seems to have disappeared.

 

you do know there are accredited seminaries that teach inerrancy of scripture.

 

Who wrote the Bible, why, and how do you know?

 

Because you said that seminaries had to be accredited, before they were serious, I presented those, and they believed in inerrancy, and I haven't been shown by you that scripture is inerrant.

 

What Seminary and accredited by who and for what ? We are not talking state accredation here. We are talking religious accredation.

 

Who does the accrediting?
Do they really know any more than anyone else about the nature of god?

 

It is simply not true that I will slander the source unless that source is obviously biased and you are lying that I move the goal posts. Give one example of me moving the goal post. It is you that rejects, ignores and denies evidence that is contrary to your beliefs.

The question " do you believe everything in the Catholic Encyclopedia" in fact is an example of "moving the goalposts". We are not talking about everything in the CE and nor does everythig in the Encyclopedia have to be true in order for some of it to be true.

You are transferring your issues on to me in order avoid reality.

You give me a link with 30 or more authors claiming this was support for a dating of Matt of around 60 AD. I go through the first 12 Authors and they are all Evangelical with credentials from Evangelical institutions. This alone should be screaming "bias" in your ears. Why is it not ?

Then when I finally find an fellow in the list that does have recognized credentials, he disagrees with your Evangelical friends. Don't you wonder to yourself " Golly gee, how come the only people that agree with me are Evangelicals ?" "Why does no other religious or secular scholar share this opinion ?"

Further, the link gives no rational as to how the conclusion of the Author was arrived. Not a single piece of commentary. Perhaps you do not care how someone arrived at their conclusion, but I do.

Last, after going through 13 people in your link and showing who they were and obvious Evangelical bias, you do not even bother to comment back.

The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of legitimate scholarship gives Matt a dating after the destruction of the Temple.

A total of zero (0) reasons are given in your link for a dating of 60 AD and yet somehow I am supposed just accept the opinion. I give you a link that describes specific reasoning and rational that scholars have for a later dating and you completely ignore it and do not seem to want to discuss any of the details.

I give you a source (Catholic Encyclopedia) that is obviously biased against my premise and is on your side. Because this source conflicts with your premise you immediately try move the goal posts and demonize that source with fallacious questions rather then examine why the CE believes what it does.

The truth of the matter is that you do not want to know the reasons behind the truth if it conflicts with your beliefs. Truth does not lie behind the door of denial, unsupported opinion, and fallacy.



All you will present are Evangelicals. The fact that the only people you can come up with are Evangelicals should tell you something.

 

http://www.holybooks.info/matthew.html

 

Of course you have. You just can't believe. It is tough to find out something you thought correct your entire life may not be. I know.

 

on another post (and know I don't know which one), I listed accredited seminaries. Give me an accreditation source that you will accept.

 

I wouldn't think so, but I wasn't the one originally presenting accreditation. I usually take the evidence presented and don't worry about the source. The evidence will either hold up or not, no matter who the source is reporting the data.

 

If the source is biased or not, can't the data be dealt with?
You asked for sources, and I gave them. You then didn't like the sources, and said they weren't accredited, I presented their accreditation.

 

first its not my entire life, second, where have I been shown scripture was errant?

 

You can't be shown anything. You have stated it doesn't matter what you find.
In spite of any information to the contrary, you will not be moved.
It isn't truth you seek, but certainty, even at the risk of rejecting the love of God with all your mind.

 

I've found the truth, why would I continue seeking it?

 

Perhaps to love God with all your mind.

 

Quote Posted by dairyair on pg. 19 #190 of Part 3

Why do christians claim unbelievers will torment in fire and brimstone for eternity when the RC chuch itself doesn't believe it?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well it appears the RC church is not taking eternity in hell literally as written in the Scriptures. Let me just say that there are many people today that don't believe in a literal place called hell that burns with fire and brimstone (Rev. 21:, where all who die in their sins without Jesus Christ go to be punished for all eternity.

Sadly, there are countless people who twist the Scriptures in an attempt to teach that hell is not what the Bible says it is... a place of flaming torment.

The Bible contains an overwhelming amount of irrefutable evidence teaching that hell is indeed a literal place of torment, where those who die in their sins without Jesus Christ are punished in flaming fire and vengeance by God.

"In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of His power."--2nd Thessalonians 1:8-9 KJV Is just one of the many Scriptures to consider.

Here are many others to consider...Numbers 26:10...Psalm 9:17…Isaiah 5:14…Ezekiel 31:16…Matthew 5:28,29…Matthew 16:18…Matthew 23:15…Matthew 23:33,34…Mark 9:45,46…Luke 10:15…Luke 12:5…Luke 16:23… James 3:6…2nd Peter 2:4…Revelation 1:18…Revelation 20:13-15.

As we note, the Bible plainly teaches that all sinners are condemned to hell. If hell simply means grave, then what harm or worry is there in fornicating, getting drunk, raping, murdering, partying with illegal drugs and committing all sorts of other sins?

There would be none. If there is no place of punishment in eternity, then there is no justice for all the victims of crimes committed in this earthly life.

If one believes that the Bible is God's Word, then you absolutely must believe that hell is a literal place of torment and anguish, that burns with searing flames of fire and brimstone, where sinners are eternally punished for their sins against a holy God.

In conclusion, the Bible contains an overwhelming amount of evidence showing that hell is a literal place that burns with fire for all eternity. Those people who scoff and deny the existence of a literal hell that burns with fire for all eternity are calling God a liar. Either you believe the Bible is God's Word or you don't. There is no middle ground.

 

Make it stop. Someone. Make it stop.

 

According to the above statement, then, there are millions of Catholics among those countless people.

So, anyone who dies in their sins without Jesus Christ will be tortured for eternity. Since the Bible makes it pretty clear that we're all sinners, then if follows that the billions of people who live, or who have lived on the Earth without believing in, in many cases without even knowing about, Christ, are in for eternal torture.

That would place Mahatma Ghandi right next to such luminaries of history as Ghengis Kahn, in the torture chamber.

While Torquemada, Christian that he was, is living it up in Heaven.

That just seems to me like a sort of strange theology.

 

The nature of God was settled by the early Fathers/Saints of the Church at the First Ecumenical Council in Nicea 325 AD.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


The Nicene Creed


I believe in one God, Father Almighty, Creator of
heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of
God, begotten of the Father before all ages;

Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten,
not created, of one essence with the Father
through Whom all things were made.

Who for us men and for our salvation
came down from heaven and was incarnate
of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man.

He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate,
and suffered and was buried;

And He rose on the third day,
according to the Scriptures.

He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father;

And He will come again with glory to judge the living
and dead. His kingdom shall have no end.

And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Creator of life,
Who proceeds from the Father, Who together with the
Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified, Who
spoke through the prophets.

In one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

I look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the age to come.

Amen.

 

Faith based assertion and not evidence of anything slightly related to a god or proving one.

 

The world and all existance consists of God's love. If you're away from God's Creative 'Love', it's going to be a very cold world so frankly I wouldn't go there.

Anyway I do know that everyone has some affect on everyone around them, so if the hearts around you are filled with 'passions' and/or evil, then that harmful evil will permeate everything and everyone. If on the other hand people around you are loving, then that will permeate everything and everyone as well. I think what God is trying to tell us is that we are the ones who form the world around us as well as our eternal destiny, but He is willing to help if we ask for it. This last part is the key, because unless you believe in Jesus Christ as God's Son, then how will you know that God is willing to help us through His Grace?

As for Mahomet Ghandi, I wondered about that too untill I read he went to a Christian school. He might have even been baptized.

 

The proof was in the martyric virtues and holiness of the Fathers/Saints of the Church. If you are serious, which I doubt, then you can study up on what established them as being 'holy' and enlightened by God. I know the Apostles were given special charisms by God such as performing miracles.

 

If we are the ones who form the world around us as well as our eternal destiny, why in the world would we form a world of eternal torment?

and the people who have believed in innumerable other gods throughout history, are they just lost?

Anthropologists have estimated that about a hundred billion human beings have lived on Earth. Only a small fraction of those are/were Christians. Many of them died long before Christ even lived, what about them?

 

There are certainly discrepancies and apparent contradictions in the Bible, but nothing like what atheists portray. They are minor matters of placement and reference and/or overcoming years of misplaced context.

I am a believer and have only in the last few years been graced the tools to better analyze what is being said, bring context to what is eloquent poetry and that which is supposed to be taken literally.

I agree though, it is the hostility that drives the atheist more than what the atheist actually experiences. I have an associate who is an atheist who complains bitterly about Christians knocking on her door trying to get her to convert. I recently asked her "Has I or anyone else ever done that?"

She paused and then said: "No and I don't want them to start."


As a reformed atheist who was never evangelized by anyone, who was dragged to the cross by the Holy Spirit Himself, I wonder what atheists are so afraid of hearing before they've heard it, who condemn the most studied book in the history of man without reading it and who fear simply being spoken to by one who believes?

What great crime has the church committed to have created such fear and loathing of a God who gave his only begotten son so that we could be free?