Part 17 of Post Your Tough Questions Regarding Christianity

Is Mitt admitting that he basically gets all his answers from a website? And would that explain when gotquestions.org does NOT have an answer to a question...neither does Mitt, and he simply insults the question (or the questioner)???


I suggest people GO to gotquestions.org.....look where the website has not offered a question and (naturally) an answer....

and ask Mitt THOSE questions not mentioned on gotquestions. Let's see how he handles them???

 

Mere conjecture on your part.

 

That seems more like Atheist propaganda as opposed to PROOF.

 

You still believe that the Spectacled Bear walked back to South America and the Kangaroo hoped back to Australia and deny all the science that proves the flood did not happen?

Oh yeah .. I remember. Your spirit guide told you that the Spectacled bear was teleported back to South America.

Funny thing is that your explanation was not the same as Mitt's. He claimed that all the Continents were joined at the time. Perhaps you need to tell your spirit guides to get their stories straight.

Neither of you has ever explained why Kangaroo (or any other fossils from species native to a local area) are not found anywhere else in the world.

Both of you also failed to explain how it is that we have continuous civilizations all over the world from before and after the flood and why, since Noah and Shem were still alive at the time of Abraham why Noah nor Shem (fathers of all humanity and everyone at the time would know this and that they were still alive) are mentioned in any of the creation accounts that we have from the time of Abraham and prior.

Clearly you have some explaining to do before you claim a win.

 

Have you only just noticed that? Other answers he often gives, without acknowledgement, come from websites. I pointed it out weeks ago. That's one of the reasons I lean to my own understanding, not his. The websites used are necessarily Christians interpretation of the Tanakh, not the Tanakh as given by God to the Jews. Christians claim the Bible is inspired, yet reject the prophecies for Jewish fulfilment, and claim them for Christianity.
Still, as I pointed out a few posts ago, a group of Jewish scholars has been 'correcting' errors that have accrued over time in the Tanakh and New Testament. It's a very difficult job, and they have spent 50+ years just correcting 4 books. It's a case of taking the earliest copies, understanding the meaning at the time, and then comparing with different copies down the centuries.
At the rate they are going we should get the results in about 700 years. Will Christianity as we know it still be around? Or will the new god be 'Multivax', the latest universal, all knowing, Omnipresent and the rest - computer. One thing I do know. My name is not Methuselah so I'll not be around.

 

No! That was my human side making a mockery of your childish questions pertaining to such event. BTW: As I recall the situation it was referenced as "beam me up scottie."

There you go discussing other members again in a conversation that is between you and me. Why do you keep on doing that. Are you attempting to use that other member as an authority figure?

I did too.. Remember your statements above about teleporting? Just giving science a chance to disprove my thoughts about teleporting.

I am only one person and do not know why you would say "both of you" when you are talking to me.

Clearly you have some explaining before this discussion between you and me can continue. Why do you reference other members when you are talking to me, and why to you refer to me as "both of you"?

 

1) I am not a non believer. I believe in God
2) You rarely are able to explain the Bible in a coherent fashion and your "got questions site" is a joke.
3) Many of your beliefs are not shared by most Christians. When questioned on those beliefs you sink quickly into demonization rather than objective assessment of the question at hand.

4) You have failed to explain numerous things and when you can not come up with an explanation you start demonizing the messenger. That is your modus operandi. You claim "you interpreted wrong" but can not come with an alternate interpretation or when you do that interpretation makes no sense in relation to the passage in question or is known to be false.

According to Jesus you do.

So that there can be zero doubt about what Jesus meant, he then gives a summary of various OT commands that are to be followed and explains that this is the key to salvation.

You can deny the message of Jesus if you like, but do not shoot the messenger for simply pointing out what this message is. A message that the majority of Christianity believes.

 

The Muslim God? It can't be the Christian God, not the way you've been carrying on here with your opposition towards WR, Inc and myself on these threads of mine.

So tell us what is your religion?

 

If so, he puts himself at a strategic disadvantage. If his "answers" are merely going to somebody else and copying THEIR answer....if he gets a question that those people haven't raised...

he's going to look pretty foolish since he has no experience answering questions himself.

 

Then elaborate, Incorp.....after the Flood, do you believe kangaroos hopped all the way home from the Iran-Turkey border....to Australia?

 

It is all anyone has. Until were off the earth.

 

In other words. When you come across facts that challenge your perspective, rather than assess the evidence and change your perspective if need be, you resort to denial mechanisms such as reverting to childish responses that make no sense.

Now that we have that out of the way. How did Noah and sons manage to collect 2 of every species, fit them into a relatively small boat, feed them for many months, and how did these animals get back home ?

 

Correct. The only true words in his posts are LOL and great post XXX. And the snobbish condescending comments about a poster. The rest is strictly a copy and paste job.
Mitt has no answers. The thread is a fraud. But a very entertaining fraud at times.

 

You and your alter ego, perhaps.

 

We have two different people who both claim the Noah story is "literal" but two different stories for how things happened.

One of you is wrong.

 

My belief is that God called them and they either appeared, or God called them many years prior to the date of that flood so as to accommodate the requirements of travel time. So, your analogous scenario is absurd IMHO.

 

As usual no surprise you are once again misinterpreting Scripture...what else is new?...lol
So once again I have to give you the correct interpretation even though I know you won't accept it and be in denial of it.

Question: "What does it mean that Jesus fulfilled the law, but did not abolish it?"

Answer: In Matthew’s record of what is commonly called the Sermon on the Mount, these words of Jesus are recorded: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished” (Matthew 5:17-18

It is frequently argued that if Jesus did not “abolish” the law, then it must still be binding. Accordingly, such components as the Sabbath-day requirement must be operative still, along with perhaps numerous other elements of the Mosaic Law. This assumption is grounded in a misunderstanding of the words and intent of this passage. Christ did not suggest here that the binding nature of the law of Moses would remain forever in effect. Such a view would contradict everything we learn from the balance of the New Testament (Romans 10:4; Galatians 3:23-25; Ephesians 2:15).

Of special significance in this study is the word rendered “abolish.” It translates the Greek term kataluo, literally meaning “to loosen down.” The word is found seventeen times in the New Testament. It is used, for example, of the destruction of the Jewish temple by the Romans (Matthew 26:61; 27:40; Acts 6:14), and of the dissolving of the human body at death (2 Corinthians 5:1). The term can carry the extended meaning of “to overthrow,” i.e., “to render vain, deprive of success.” In classical Greek, it was used in connection with institutions, laws, etc., to convey the idea of “to invalidate.”

It is especially important to note how the word is used in Matthew 5:17. In this context, “abolish” is set in opposition to “fulfill.” Christ came “...not to abolish, but to fulfill.” Jesus did not come to this earth for the purpose of acting as an opponent of the law. His goal was not to prevent its fulfillment. Rather, He revered it, loved it, obeyed it, and brought it to fruition. He fulfilled the law’s prophetic utterances regarding Himself (Luke 24:44). Christ fulfilled the demands of the Mosaic law, which called for perfect obedience under threat of a “curse” (see Galatians 3:10, 13). In this sense, the law’s divine design will ever have an abiding effect. It will always accomplish the purpose for which it was given.

If, however, the law of Moses bears the same relationship to men today, in terms of its binding status, then it was not fulfilled, and Jesus failed at what He came to do. On the other hand, if the Lord did accomplish His goal, then the law was fulfilled, and it is not a binding legal institution today. Further, if the law of Moses was not fulfilled by Christ—and thus remains as a binding legal system for today—then it is not just partially binding. Rather, it is a totally compelling system. Jesus plainly said that not one “jot or tittle” (representative of the smallest markings of the Hebrew script) would pass away until all was fulfilled. Consequently, nothing of the law was to fail until it had completely accomplished its purpose. Jesus fulfilled the law. Jesus fulfilled all of the law. We cannot say that Jesus fulfilled the sacrificial system, but did not fulfill the other aspects of the law. Jesus either fulfilled all of the law, or none of it. What Jesus' death means for the sacrificial system, it also means for the other aspects of the law.


Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/abolish-fulfill-law.html#ixzz32NB4xTEI

 

No! It is you who is wrong in attempting to pit two Christians against one another. That would be morally deficient on your part if in fact you are calling yourself a Christian. Are you a Christian?

 

No, the christian God that is NOT of the trinity. Ever hear of this christian God?

 

It is you that refuses to accept the message of Jesus.

All I have done is point out why the Bible is not 100% the literal word of God.

Considering that you cant seem to figure out the identity of the Christian God. What does it matter ?

 

What other self? You are starting to display thoughts that leads me to question your stability.

 

No, he said they teleportation was possible.

 

Well I suppose we should make inquiry of those men and women who have been off the Earth.. Remember some have been said to have visited the Moon. Others were said to be orbiting the Earth in space vehicles. They were all "off the earth". Hmmm.

- - - Updated - - -

Show PROOF of that claim.

 

Reread is question. After the flood. How did kangaroos get back to Australia?

 

And then God "teleported" them back to the Outback of Australia after Noah opened the doors of the Ark on the mountains of Ararat?