What does 70 groups of 7 mean and why you think it means what it does: FOR PGA

Author: ludofl3x

Posts

Total: 79
Topic's author
#31
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@PGA2.0
How would you know this God unless He had revealed Himself and He has chosen to do that by His word? The Bible reveals His word is powerful enough to create the universe, just by speaking it into existence. 

Powerful enough to create the universe, not powerful enough to find a way around the severe limitation of only appearing in a book from one of the least literate cultures in one of the least literate times in the history of humanity. If it's so important to him, he could reveal himself again, right? 

The footnote helps explain something about the Scripture. 
That's one way to look at it. The other way is "it was added after the fact to make events fit into its otherwise incorrect timeline." You can see how bringing it in, at the very least, means you're no longer talking about PURE scripture, right? That and the fact that the words that would have allowed for a more impressive level of specificity existed in the bible are a problem. If the Daniel X: YZ said "490 years from now, Romans will tear down our temple," you'd have a much better case. This is closer to the case I can cite. If I can cite such a case, which I can, and told you the prophet said it was Xenu who told him to write it when he did, would you say Xenu is probably real? 

No, my argument is that you can't make sense of the big questions without first presupposing God.
Actually quite similar to MY argument: that YOU can't make sense of them without presupposing God. I don't presuppose God and I don't need to 'make sense' of any 'big question.' 

What do you consider evidence? IF God has revealed Himself to humanity by people inspired to write down this revelation (which Scripture reveals) THEN the Scriptures should provide evidence that confirms His word and in occasions like origins give reasonable and logical ideas of why we are here that can make sense of the universe and us existing. 
Evidence: Something that isn't the claim. Start with evidence for the underlined, but you're already a step too far. You have to support that your god in the bible is the one that exists (going back to the other topic,only because I've granted you that A god exists, you have to prove it to be YOUR god), THEN that he revealed himself to humans, by asking illiterate people to write down stories in books. Then we can discuss why the books are so weird that they are extremely unlikely to be true.

Wordlview, again one of your favorite words, are another topic which you're free to start. But I ask you again: if I told you that I know a person who said Xenu, the god of Scientology, and DEFINITELY Xenu, not Jesus disguised as Xenu, told him to write that something that had never happened before, that math couldn't predict, in such a way that literally anyone can see proof of it, and the results cannot be questioned or interpreted, it really, really happened, would you then allow for the possibility that Xenu is real?
#32
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@ludofl3x
How would you know this God unless He had revealed Himself and He has chosen to do that by His word? The Bible reveals His word is powerful enough to create the universe, just by speaking it into existence. 

Powerful enough to create the universe, not powerful enough to find a way around the severe limitation of only appearing in a book from one of the least literate cultures in one of the least literate times in the history of humanity. If it's so important to him, he could reveal himself again, right?
No, you are mistaken. He does not appear in a book. He is revealed via the words contained within but that revelation has Him interacting in human history. Therefore, we should be able to see human history reflecting what He has revealed about it. That is why prophecy is evidence that His word is true.

Again, what evidence do you have to present stating that OT Israel was one of the "least literate times" in the history of humanity? 

The biblical teaching is that God has given humanity everything needed to know Him and restore a relationship with Him. There is no need for further written testimony.

 

The footnote helps explain something about the Scripture. 
That's one way to look at it. The other way is "it was added after the fact to make events fit into its otherwise incorrect timeline."
Sure, they were added after the fact. They are a guideline for further understanding. Some footnotes provide an understanding of possible meanings of a word.


You can see how bringing it in, at the very least, means you're no longer talking about PURE scripture, right? That and the fact that the words that would have allowed for a more impressive level of specificity existed in the bible are a problem. If the Daniel X: YZ said "490 years from now, Romans will tear down our temple," you'd have a much better case. This is closer to the case I can cite.
The Gettysburg Address could have been stated differently too.

"Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so 
dedicated, can long endure."


Why did Lincoln not state 87 years if he wanted to make his meaning more clear? It was because the culture of the time understood what was meant better then we would today because "four score" was a commonly understood term for years, a score being twenty years. Likewise, a heptad was a group of seven/seven years.  

In order to understand the Bible, you have to understand the culture of the time to some degree since the words directly we addressed to that audience of address, then us as the secondary audience of address. 


If I can cite such a case, which I can, and told you the prophet said it was Xenu who told him to write it when he did, would you say Xenu is probably real?
What is the nature of the prophecy and how detailed are the accounts? How well do the accounts match what we know of the history and archaeology of the times in which they were written?

#33
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@ludofl3x

 

No, my argument is that you can't make sense of the big questions without first presupposing God.
Actually quite similar to MY argument: that YOU can't make sense of them without presupposing God. I don't presuppose God and I don't need to 'make sense' of any 'big question.' 
You don't have to make sense of the big question yet you would be inconsistent in denying God (or the reasonableness of the Bible) if you did not examine the big questions. The big questions try to answer the reasons why we are here. I content you cannot make sense of them without God. And you are free to live without considering them but when bad things happen don't try to look for meaning or justice in them (which we all do). It doesn't matter unless we are here for a reason. This is just another aspect of a God-denying worldview that makes no sense.  


What do you consider evidence? IF God has revealed Himself to humanity by people inspired to write down this revelation (which Scripture reveals) THEN the Scriptures should provide evidence that confirms His word and in occasions like origins give reasonable and logical ideas of why we are here that can make sense of the universe and us existing. 
Evidence: Something that isn't the claim. Start with evidence for the underlined, but you're already a step too far. You have to support that your god in the bible is the one that exists (going back to the other topic,only because I've granted you that A god exists, you have to prove it to be YOUR god), THEN that he revealed himself to humans, by asking illiterate people to write down stories in books. Then we can discuss why the books are so weird that they are extremely unlikely to be true.
How is history the claim? Was Jerusalem destroyed in AD 70? Did the OT economy cease to be able to be followed as stipulated in the OT? Was the OT written before the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70? Was a Messiah prophesied to come to a Mosaic Covenant people? Were there specifics about the Messiah that fit Jesus Christ? Did these OT prophets warn of coming judgment by God if these people did not repent? Did the Bible list places that have been confirmed by archaeology? Did it list people and events that have been confirmed by history?

If you say yes to any of these questions then this is evidence that confirms what the Bible says is true.


Wordlview, again one of your favorite words, are another topic which you're free to start.
Everyone who is capable of rational thought has a worldview, a web of beliefs with core presuppositions that the rest of their outlook is built upon (Matthew 7:24-29). 

But I ask you again: if I told you that I know a person who said Xenu, the god of Scientology, and DEFINITELY Xenu, not Jesus disguised as Xenu, told him to write that something that had never happened before, that math couldn't predict, in such a way that literally anyone can see proof of it, and the results cannot be questioned or interpreted, it really, really happened, would you then allow for the possibility that Xenu is real?


If you could prove Xenu with reason and logic, I would ask you to do so, so go ahead if you want to base your beliefs on Xenu.

One thing is certain, two beliefs that state the opposite of each other can't both be true. Now you can live in denial because you are not interested in the big questions/life's ultimate questions but as soon as you start doubting and denying God you are being inconsistent because you have not looked at the big questions, reasons for our existence. I claim over and over that your worldview can't make sense of the big questions thus you have no basis to deny God. My worldview can consistently make sense of the big questions. 

Any result can be questioned. 

What the atheist tries to do is make it seem that the evidence is not there regarding the biblical God, or that it is not reasonable which I claim it is. What the atheist tries to do is shut down the conversation before hearing the proofs/evidence which is not reasonable in any way. 

Topic's author
#34
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@PGA2.0
The big questions try to answer the reasons why we are here.

So what's the answer with God? Is it just "because God"? Because you bite off an awful lot here: 

when bad things happen don't try to look for meaning or justice in them 
So hypothetically, what's the 'meaning' when that guy in TX unloads a machine gun on people while they're in church? What was the 'justice' exactly? THe Muslims who were murdered last, Jesus doesn't care because they're Muslims? The mother who's crying as she watches her newborn struggle to take the last handful of breaths before it dies, the father who's crying while his three year old sits getting chemotherapy for stage 4 leaukemia...what's the'meaning' in all of that? What 'justice' is there for the three year old cancer victim, or the three year oldMuslim baby who was murdered? You see, if the answer is there is no meaning in it, which is what I think, then bad things happen, and they happen to everyone, and you just have to go on living your life best you can. Make the most of it. Your contention is that people should somehow be happy their kid has leukemia, it shows Jesus was thinking about them, I guess? Please, pick one of these and tell me what the meaning of it is. Is the answer "I don't know, only God does," then it's a trite pacifier, not a reason or any meaning at all. It's hubris on your part. 


How is history the claim? Was Jerusalem destroyed in AD 70? 
History isn't the claim. Your claim is it's history because someone in the bible said it would happen, only it happened not when they said it would happen, and therefore God was involved. It'd be like me saying "THor destroyed the Hindenberg." The part about the Hindenberg isn't the problem. It's the part about Thor. 

My worldview can consistently make sense of the big questions. 
Not demonstrated to this point. Again, if you think 'making sense' of 'why are we here' = "BEcause Jesus wants us to sing songs praising him!" I'm afraid you and I have big differences in our definitions of 'making sense.' I've invited you to demonstrate how you make sense of these big questions, you just complain that I don't bother. I'm not contending I do, I don't see a reason to address them in any way other than what's evident. I don't need to add magic to it, it brings nothing to the table.  

If you could prove Xenu with reason and logic, I would ask you to do so, so go ahead if you want to base your beliefs on Xenu
That wasn't the question. If I could show you an indisputably true prophecy that was inspired by Xenu, would you then think Xenu might also be real? And this one doesn't count on a third hand interpretation of a story about a dream that never, ever mentions the greatest nation on earth at the time, Rome, by name. You consistently leave that part out while pointing to your wacky math.  It has photographic evidence, video even, that it really happened, AND that it was really predicted. Nearly to the day. 
Topic's author
#35
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@PGA2.0
What is the nature of the prophecy and how detailed are the accounts? How well do the accounts match what we know of the history and archaeology of the times in which they were written?

It's a prediction of a future event, the accounts match history and archaelogy exactly. EXACTLY. There is literally zero way to misinterpret it. It says "In X years, Z will happen." In X years, Z happened. No one, on earth, denies that it happened. The prophet was ridiculed when he made the prediction. Will you even consider the idea that Xenu is real if he's the one that inspired it? 

#36
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@ludofl3x
The big questions try to answer the reasons why we are here.

So what's the answer with God? Is it just "because God"? Because you bite off an awful lot here: 
The answer is God has revealed what is good and we have disobeyed Him. God has given us light (His word is a light to our feet, it illuminates truth) yet we choose to walk in darkness, to do our own thing (relativism).


when bad things happen don't try to look for meaning or justice in them 
So hypothetically, what's the 'meaning' when that guy in TX unloads a machine gun on people while they're in church? What was the 'justice' exactly? THe Muslims who were murdered last, Jesus doesn't care because they're Muslims? The mother who's crying as she watches her newborn struggle to take the last handful of breaths before it dies, the father who's crying while his three year old sits getting chemotherapy for stage 4 leaukemia...what's the'meaning' in all of that? What 'justice' is there for the three year old cancer victim, or the three year oldMuslim baby who was murdered? You see, if the answer is there is no meaning in it, which is what I think, then bad things happen, and they happen to everyone, and you just have to go on living your life best you can. Make the most of it. Your contention is that people should somehow be happy their kid has leukemia, it shows Jesus was thinking about them, I guess? Please, pick one of these and tell me what the meaning of it is. Is the answer "I don't know, only God does," then it's a trite pacifier, not a reason or any meaning at all. It's hubris on your part.
It means something only if God exists. If God does not exist we are just biological machines doing what our environments and genetics DETERMINE we do. It means people do wrong and choose wrongly only if God exists and has revealed Himself to us. Without God, there is no justice for such actions, for those who consider them wrong, no ultimate accountability. There is no punishment for wrongful actions other than we die which we will anyway. There is also no hope for a future for those who are innocent of wrong and who have been wrongfully accused and are dead (such as in the case of abortion where an innocent life is taken). Where is the justice in that? 



How is history the claim? Was Jerusalem destroyed in AD 70? 
History isn't the claim. Your claim is it's history because someone in the bible said it would happen, only it happened not when they said it would happen, and therefore God was involved. It'd be like me saying "THor destroyed the Hindenberg." The part about the Hindenberg isn't the problem. It's the part about Thor. 
My claim is that history happened WHEN they said it would happen, as revealed to them by God. You misrepresent me.

Where is the Hindenburg described in Norse mythology? Let's examine the prophecy. Please produce it. 

#37
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@ludofl3x


My worldview can consistently make sense of the big questions. 
Not demonstrated to this point. Again, if you think 'making sense' of 'why are we here' = "BEcause Jesus wants us to sing songs praising him!" I'm afraid you and I have big differences in our definitions of 'making sense.' I've invited you to demonstrate how you make sense of these big questions, you just complain that I don't bother. I'm not contending I do, I don't see a reason to address them in any way other than what's evident. I don't need to add magic to it, it brings nothing to the table.
Again, you misrepresent the reason why. The reason we are here is that a personal God chose to make us so that we could know Him in a loving relationship. He created us so that we could enjoy Him in His majesty and glory, so humanity was created for this purpose. We can know a Being of whom no greater can be known, yet most of us would rather do our own thing and deny this Creator His majesty and glory and usurp it with our own. 

How do I make sense of the big questions?

My belief that life comes from a necessary life is consistent with what I witness, the living from that which is already alive.

My belief is that everything that had a beginning originates from that which is eternal and gives it existence. I do not believe in self-creation, which is a self-refuting or a logically inconsistent belief. I do not believe the universe is eternal or else how would we ever get to the present, another mind-blowing contradictory thought? 

I believe we originate from our own kind, not from a common ancestor unless you call that ancestor the biblical God. That is what I witness. I see humans producing human beings. I don't see them producing other kinds of beings. I don't associate the magical ingredient of time as the reason I witness this consistency. 

I believe that morality must originate from a morally necessary being or we are left in a sea of relativism where no belief is any better than any other, it is just imposed by force. I have what is necessary to make sense of morality, a best in which I can compare good and better with, a fixed measure, an ultimate reference point. Without God, you are left with changing and contradictory beliefs on what is right and what is good.  


If you could prove Xenu with reason and logic, I would ask you to do so, so go ahead if you want to base your beliefs on Xenu
That wasn't the question. If I could show you an indisputably true prophecy that was inspired by Xenu, would you then think Xenu might also be real? And this one doesn't count on a third hand interpretation of a story about a dream that never, ever mentions the greatest nation on earth at the time, Rome, by name. You consistently leave that part out while pointing to your wacky math.  It has photographic evidence, video even, that it really happened, AND that it was really predicted. Nearly to the day. 


I invite you to show me such a prophecy that I may consider it. I would invite you to show me one hundred such prophecies that I may consider them, as I would do with the biblical God. 

Please show me your prophecy and show me it is not made up by your mind. I asked you above to show me the Hindenburg one also and when you propose it was written. 

What do you mean by a third-hand interpretation? In understanding anything there is a correct interpretation and a faulty interpretation. We only understand the authors intent and meaning when we correctly interpret them. 

Please prove Xenu is the source of the prophecy you speak of.



#38
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@ludofl3x
What is the nature of the prophecy and how detailed are the accounts? How well do the accounts match what we know of the history and archaeology of the times in which they were written?

It's a prediction of a future event, the accounts match history and archaelogy exactly. EXACTLY. There is literally zero way to misinterpret it. It says "In X years, Z will happen." In X years, Z happened. No one, on earth, denies that it happened. The prophet was ridiculed when he made the prediction. Will you even consider the idea that Xenu is real if he's the one that inspired it? 

Show me the prophecy, the time it was written and its fulfillment. Show me other prophecies that are accurately fulfilled also. 
Topic's author
#39
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@PGA2.0
The answer is God has revealed what is good and we have disobeyed Him. God has given us light (His word is a light to our feet, it illuminates truth) yet we choose to walk in darkness, to do our own thing (relativism).
This is your answer to the big question "why are we here"? How does this approach an answer to that question, exactly? You profess to have answers, this isn't one.

It means something only if God exists. If God does not exist we are just biological machines doing what our environments and genetics DETERMINE we do. It means people do wrong and choose wrongly only if God exists and has revealed Himself to us. Without God, there is no justice for such actions, for those who consider them wrong, no ultimate accountability. There is no punishment for wrongful actions other than we die which we will anyway. There is also no hope for a future for those who are innocent of wrong and who have been wrongfully accused and are dead (such as in the case of abortion where an innocent life is taken). Where is the justice in that? 
"IF GOD EXISTS." This now sounds like you sort of think he exists as part of some personal comfort level, or incredulity (how can it be another way??). It also doesn't answer the question. What is the meaning in children having leukemia? How is a dying infant justice if it's really repayment for something Adam did? Again, you're claiming to have these answers. This isn't an answer. 

The reason we are here is that a personal God chose to make us so that we could know Him in a loving relationship. He created us so that we could enjoy Him in His majesty and glory, so humanity was created for this purpose. 
Except he made us so poorly he's constantly mad at us for doing what he knew we'd do, according to your religion, right? In any case, this is not materially differnet than "Made to sing songs about Jesus." This also doesn't make sense of anything. It simply asserts the answer, again. "We can know him in a loving relationship" answers the question for YOU. How does it answer the question for the Amazon tribe he created who'd never hear of him forever, that he'd have to burn in hell for the sin of not figuring out from no evidence at all that he is worth singing songs about, and having a personal relationship with? This makes LESS sense. Not more. 

My belief that life comes from a necessary life is consistent with what I witness, the living from that which is already alive.
Is your next move special pleading (all life is from prior life EXCEPT FOR GOD)? I'm not sure what else there is otherwise. How do you avoid the infinite regress? THe former answer makes your character an irrationality, and no longer subject to logic and reasoning as a result. Would you grant Xenu the same leeway?


Please show me your prophecy and show me it is not made up by your mind. I asked you above to show me the Hindenburg one also and when you propose it was written. 
THe hindenberg one is an example. I have a real one, but you're already wriggling around. I can only assure you that none of the biblical prophecies are nearly as specific or as undoubtable as this one. None, not one, not even close. This was predicted multiple years prior to it happening, it had never happened before, there's no room for interpretation either of the prophesy or of the outcome. If I can show you such a prophesy, and I told you it was attributed to Xenu, god of Scientology (an active religion, with a large population, infrastructure, and a more recent vintage of revelation than 2000 years ago)? My prohphesy doesn't need a story of a dream and a statue of clay and all that other crap or footnotes. Mine's real. And if you presuppose Xenu, it's EXTRA real. Will you grant if I can demonstrate beyond any doubt that htis prophesy was made specifically and accurately, that Xenu's prophets are as powerful as Gods? Would you consider believing in him as a result of this prophesy?

I'll show you, but I don't think prophesy is why you believe in God and therefore, I don't think it's honest of you to use its idea as a reason to believe in god for others. The more excuses and conditions you add to Xenu, you don't add those to Yahweh. Let's say you got one right based on third party footnotes and recalculations. If mine's more accurate and more verifiable, mine would be better, right? I know you're curious. Just not curious enough ismy guess.
#40
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@ludofl3x
The answer is God has revealed what is good and we have disobeyed Him. God has given us light (His word is a light to our feet, it illuminates truth) yet we choose to walk in darkness, to do our own thing (relativism).
This is your answer to the big question "why are we here"? How does this approach an answer to that question, exactly? You profess to have answers, this isn't one.
Not my answer but the biblical answer. How it answers the question is that it makes sense of it. 

Make sense of life coming from non-life.
Make sense of origins.
Make sense of truth.
Make sense of morality without a necessary Being revealing what is right. Make sense of why your contrary and relative view is any better than mine or anyone else without a fixed reference point and measure.


It means something only if God exists. If God does not exist we are just biological machines doing what our environments and genetics DETERMINE we do. It means people do wrong and choose wrongly only if God exists and has revealed Himself to us. Without God, there is no justice for such actions, for those who consider them wrong, no ultimate accountability. There is no punishment for wrongful actions other than we die which we will anyway. There is also no hope for a future for those who are innocent of wrong and who have been wrongfully accused and are dead (such as in the case of abortion where an innocent life is taken). Where is the justice in that? 
"IF GOD EXISTS." This now sounds like you sort of think he exists as part of some personal comfort level, or incredulity (how can it be another way??). It also doesn't answer the question. What is the meaning in children having leukemia? How is a dying infant justice if it's really repayment for something Adam did? Again, you're claiming to have these answers. This isn't an answer. 
I use the "if" looking at the logic from your worldview stance, not mine. To my mind, there is no "if" about God's existence. 

The meaning of children having leukemia is that Adam's choice had consequences. He was barred from Eden and from eating from the tree of life. The meaning of innocent children dying is that they live in heaven with God rather than suffer on earth. The meaning of death is that we only have so much time either to find God or exist without Him. When Adam sinned we inherited a sinful nature that is passed on from generation to generation. We need a transformation that can only come through faith in Jesus Christ. 

Jesus died for the little children. He died to save them from sin just like He died to save those who would believe from sin. God judged sin and He judges sin by death but Jesus came that we might have life eternal through Him and His sacrifice on our behalf. 


The reason we are here is that a personal God chose to make us so that we could know Him in a loving relationship. He created us so that we could enjoy Him in His majesty and glory, so humanity was created for this purpose. 
Except he made us so poorly he's constantly mad at us for doing what he knew we'd do, according to your religion, right? In any case, this is not materially differnet than "Made to sing songs about Jesus." This also doesn't make sense of anything. It simply asserts the answer, again. "We can know him in a loving relationship" answers the question for YOU. How does it answer the question for the Amazon tribe he created who'd never hear of him forever, that he'd have to burn in hell for the sin of not figuring out from no evidence at all that he is worth singing songs about, and having a personal relationship with? This makes LESS sense. Not more.
He is angry with sin, with wrongful action, with people who call what is good bad and what is bad good. 

Again, God has given humanity many convincing proofs yet sin gets in the way of seeing them. You, in denying God prefer to look at life through the lens of your own eyes, your own understanding. 

How do origins from random chance happenstance make sense of anything, yet we continually find meaning from these supposed beginnings? Are we just inventing meaning when there is none?

An Amazon tribe is still accountable to God for wrongful action. Where do you find a righteous man, a man without sin, apart from Jesus Christ? You don't. So God is just in punishing us for our wrong. Sin separates us from God yet God has revealed a way that satisfies His justice and well as His righteousness. This is found in Jesus Christ alone, not in what you or anyone else can do. 

My belief that life comes from a necessary life is consistent with what I witness, the living from that which is already alive.
Is your next move special pleading (all life is from prior life EXCEPT FOR GOD)? I'm not sure what else there is otherwise. How do you avoid the infinite regress? THe former answer makes your character an irrationality, and no longer subject to logic and reasoning as a result. Would you grant Xenu the same leeway?
No more special than your pleading. 

Any life that has a beginning derives from something else. Make sense of it from an atheist perspective since that seems to be the bent you are coming from but will not disclose.

I have offered to explain why prophecy is a reasonable and logical revelation from God. Your bias will not let this happen. 

#41
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@ludofl3x



Please show me your prophecy and show me it is not made up by your mind. I asked you above to show me the Hindenburg one also and when you propose it was written. 
THe hindenberg one is an example. I have a real one, but you're already wriggling around. I can only assure you that none of the biblical prophecies are nearly as specific or as undoubtable as this one. None, not one, not even close. This was predicted multiple years prior to it happening, it had never happened before, there's no room for interpretation either of the prophesy or of the outcome. If I can show you such a prophesy, and I told you it was attributed to Xenu, god of Scientology (an active religion, with a large population, infrastructure, and a more recent vintage of revelation than 2000 years ago)? My prohphesy doesn't need a story of a dream and a statue of clay and all that other crap or footnotes. Mine's real. And if you presuppose Xenu, it's EXTRA real. Will you grant if I can demonstrate beyond any doubt that htis prophesy was made specifically and accurately, that Xenu's prophets are as powerful as Gods? Would you consider believing in him as a result of this prophesy?
So there is no written prophetic utterance regarding the Hindenburg. You are just making one up. You can't supply anything historically that backs up your claim. What is real about that?


I'll show you, but I don't think prophesy is why you believe in God and therefore, I don't think it's honest of you to use its idea as a reason to believe in god for others. The more excuses and conditions you add to Xenu, you don't add those to Yahweh. Let's say you got one right based on third party footnotes and recalculations. If mine's more accurate and more verifiable, mine would be better, right? I know you're curious. Just not curious enough ismy guess.


Biblical prophecy is just one confirmation. It was the vehicle I chose because I like its explanatory and logical soundness. I am still waiting for someone to engage instead of making all kinds of excuses why I can refer to the Bible as proof in conjunction with history.

I can show you a myriad of prophecies, not just one that gives veracity to God. You are proving you are not interested. Why should I waste the effort? 

Topic's author
#42
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@PGA2.0
First Peter 3:15 is why you are bound to make the effort, right?

The Hindenberg was an example to illustrate which part of the prophesy is the problem: not that history happened, that you're ascribing supernatural elements to it. THe prophesy I can show you is not about the Hindenberg. It's about another event in history that someone had zero reason to predict at the time, it was years ahead of the event. the prophet was ridiculed, ignored even. Then it came true. It wasn't even like yours, which according to you and some footnotes claims a year. This at WORST claims a specific month and year, at best brings it down to a WEEK of that month of that year. I have historical evidence for the prophecy. You're having trouble following. 

Do you believe in Jesus due to the prophecy you say is true from the bible? Is that the REASON you believe in Jesus, or do you believe in Jesus and then say "also, this prophecy is true, so that helps." Which is first? The question is in the OP and you don't address it in spite of quoting it. 

Tell me what would make my prophecy impressive enough to perhaps allow that your god isn't the only god. I will, again, describe this prophecy and you can tell me which part of my description is LESS impressive than yours"

  • Predicted an event without precedent
  • Predicted it to the month and year
  • Evidence both written and photographed of both prophecy and event
  • Even could not have been mathematically predicted
If I ascribe this prophecy to supernatural sources, or the prophet does, would you say that means the supernatural source is real?  


Topic's author
#43
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@PGA2.0
Not my answer but the biblical answer. How it answers the question is that it makes sense of it. 

This is non sensical. To trace the conversation, you say "I can make sense of the big questions." I said "Ok, go ahead, what's the reason the universe exists?" You said "God loves us and wants us to love him." That's not an answer to the question, it is a literal non-sequitor. 

The meaning of children having leukemia is that Adam's choice had consequences. He was barred from Eden and from eating from the tree of life. The meaning of innocent children dying is that they live in heaven with God rather than suffer on earth. The meaning of death is that we only have so much time either to find God or exist without Him. When Adam sinned we inherited a sinful nature that is passed on from generation to generation. We need a transformation that can only come through faith in Jesus Christ. 
Wow. So in your mind, when you see that mother crying, you think, "Wow, sucks Adam did that and your kid is about to die for it, but that's justice for you." It just seems weird that you think the objective source of morality finds it moral to punish a mother and her baby for something you think the literal first person on earth did, especially when you factor in that god would have absolutely KNOWN HE WOULD EAT THE FRUIT. That's morality? That's justice? I guess you're a subscriber to divine command? For real, I hope you never know anyone who loses a child. 

An Amazon tribe is still accountable to God for wrongful action. 
Interesting. THey're accountable, even if he gave them no reason to think he's there. So let me ask you: the muslims who were murdered last week, the three year old victim, the youngest one...he's burning in hell right now, right? Don't wriggle about now, you just said he's accountable to god for sinful action, and he was in the act of not worshipping jesus, of denying jesus and the bible. He was in the wrong place at the wrong time and got shot and is dead. He's burning in hell, if you had to guess, right? Not "I don't get to judge," that's cowardice and seems a soft denial of Jesus to me. 

No more special than your pleading. 

Any life that has a beginning derives from something else
Do you know what special pleading is? I'll show you: if all life comes from life, where did Adam come from? He was at one point not alive, and then, according to you, suddenly alive. Did he come from another person who was alive? No? Then did he come from god? Yes? Then god's alive? Yes? Then what live thing begat god? Nothing, god is alive and always was alive and was always here. THIS IS SPECIAL PLEADING. Life always comes from life EXCEPT FOR THIS ONE TIME. Please demonstrate what you think I'm doing that is special pleading. 

No? Then Adam didn't come from something alive, and life, therefore, did not come from life. If no living thing created god and he's alive, then it's special pleading. If Adam came from god and god's not alive...your premise (life only comes from life) is flawed at the outset.

How do I special plead this situation, if I answer "Where did the first life come from" with the honest response "I don't know"? That's not special pleading, it's not answering with an appeal to fallacy. It's very simply I don't know. And stop complaining you're not allowed to use your claim as evidence. The two are different things! How many ways must that be demonstrated? If you have EVIDENCE, produce it. 
#44
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
Make sense of why your contrary and relative view is any better than mine or anyone else without a fixed reference point and measure.
You claim to have a fixed reference and that reference is the morality of your god, yes? It is fixed it is unchanging, whatever your god considers moral is always moral and whatever it considers immoral it is always immoral, yes?

#45
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
-> @
Make sense of why your contrary and relative view is any better than mine or anyone else without a fixed reference point and measure.
You claim to have a fixed reference and that reference is the morality of your god, yes? It is fixed it is unchanging, whatever your god considers moral is always moral and whatever it considers immoral it is always immoral, yes?


#46
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
Make sense of why your contrary and relative view is any better than mine or anyone else without a fixed reference point and measure.
You claim to have a fixed unchanging reference point and that point is the morality of your bible god, yes? Whatever your god claims is moral is always moral and whatever it claims is immoral is always immoral and your god can't be immoral, yes?

#47
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@ludofl3x
I am pretty sure its clear he thinks they're forgeries.

He can speak for himself. I am not interested in how "sure" YOU think HE is.

I agree with you, ludofl3x.


Topic's author
#48
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@PGA2.0
And it wasn't even described as painful or begrudging :)! First time for everything. I don't expect it will continue for very long beyond that post I'm afraid, but I look forward to the discourse.

#49
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
Post 46 too hard?
#50
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@ludofl3x
First Peter 3:15 is why you are bound to make the effort, right?
I have tried to answer your questions.

1 Peter 3:15 (NASB)
15 but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;


True, but it also depends on the motive of those who ask. Some people show they have ill intent in their questions or are not open to hearing the message. I'm not saying that statement speaks of you but every post reveals things about whether a person is interested in hearing the reasoning of the Christian faith or whether they have another motive. While it is God's right to judge your motives it is mine to discern from His word and when to walk away because someone is not open. I have learned over 35 years that if a person is not open to hearing there is no amount of reasoning that is open to them. I can usually tell that by the objections I receive and whether or not someone will engage with me in dialogue. 

for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.


The Hindenberg was an example to illustrate which part of the prophesy is the problem: not that history happened, that you're ascribing supernatural elements to it. THe prophesy I can show you is not about the Hindenberg.
Then I fail to see why you gave that example. 


It's about another event in history that someone had zero reason to predict at the time, it was years ahead of the event. the prophet was ridiculed, ignored even. Then it came true. It wasn't even like yours, which according to you and some footnotes claims a year. This at WORST claims a specific month and year, at best brings it down to a WEEK of that month of that year. I have historical evidence for the prophecy. You're having trouble following. 
I have no idea what you are talking about. What does this other event in history have to do with the one you cited regarding the Hindenburg?

I have explained with good reason how the OT helped them understand the heptad, the Jewish word for seven. You have brushed this aside. 


Do you believe in Jesus due to the prophecy you say is true from the bible? Is that the REASON you believe in Jesus, or do you believe in Jesus and then say "also, this prophecy is true, so that helps." Which is first? The question is in the OP and you don't address it in spite of quoting it. 
The understanding of the prophecy came after I believed in Jesus, not before. What I am saying is that there were good reasons for believing in Jesus before I understood the prophetic message. The prophetic message is just one aspect and course of defence of the faith and the one I prefer to use because I have not found a reasonable answer to it with the evidence available to us. 

What I continue to hear/understand from you and others is that you see no extra-biblical evidence for the faith. I see everything in creations as pouring forth the knowledge of God. 


Tell me what would make my prophecy impressive enough to perhaps allow that your god isn't the only god. I will, again, describe this prophecy and you can tell me which part of my description is LESS impressive than yours"
Show me another "god" who can predict over and over again the end of things from the beginning and give good reason to doing so repeatedly.


  • Predicted an event without precedent
The Bible predicts many, not one. The destruction of the city, temple and whole worship system was a major theme of OT Scripture but so was the coming of the Messiah to these covenant people. 

  • Predicted it to the month and year
Daniel 9:24 does not speak of which month, just within 70 years of sevens that were decreed.

  • Evidence both written and photographed of both prophecy and event
I'm not sure what you mean. How do you photograph ancient history? The means were not available then.


  • Even could not have been mathematically predicted
If I ascribe this prophecy to supernatural sources, or the prophet does, would you say that means the supernatural source is real?  


It would give good reasons for belief, would it not? A person predicting hundreds, if not thousands, of events before they happened is not something we see happening.

But the other line of reasoning that is always in the back of my mind is life's ultimate questions, of what makes sense in pondering these questions. 
As I have said many times, I do not see how any other worldview can make sense of those questions. 
Topic's author
#51
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@PGA2.0
The understanding of the prophecy came after I believed in Jesus, not before. What I am saying is that there were good reasons for believing in Jesus before I understood the prophetic message. The prophetic message is just one aspect and course of defence of the faith and the one I prefer to use because I have not found a reasonable answer to it with the evidence available to us. 
If this prophecy was proven false to your satisfaction, would you then stop believing in Jesus? I think the answer is no. It sounds like from the above, the answer would be no. If I'm right, then why do you continue to talk about this prophecy as if anyone else should care about it, or stake their faith on it? It just seems strange. It doesn't mean much to you, if your faith doesn't hinge on it. Why should anyone else care?

Tell me what would make my prophecy impressive enough to perhaps allow that your god isn't the only god. I will, again, describe this prophecy and you can tell me which part of my description is LESS impressive than yours"
Show me another "god" who can predict over and over again the end of things from the beginning and give good reason to doing so repeatedly.

Show me your god doing it and we can compare, but you're missing the point: if I could show you unquestionable evidence of a prediction and a result, predicted years prior, to the month, with no reason or inkling to make it likely, would you think that would be evidence of whatever god I'd ascribe it to? 

My event without precedent means IT NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE. Your biblical prophesy hinges on something happening that had happened hundreds if not thousands of times before, and was totally unremarkable: Romans gentrifying an unrurly populace by destroying cultural touchstones. They did it for a thousand years. Mine? Never happened, and hasn't happened since. Would you say it was harder to predict something that NEVER happened before, or something that had happened thousands of times before in very similar situations? 

Daniel 9:24 predicts something into a year depending on where you start and how you work your extra-biblical multiplication in. Mine? Was predicted with unquestionable accuracy. It says "IN X YEAR THIS WILL HAPPEN." Which is more impressive prophesy, using clear language and an exact event and year, or vague poetry with some scholar figuring it out eventually, after the fact? 

My prophesy has photographic evidence. Yours does not. Which one is more impressive?

So you believe then if I can provide you this prophesy and the prophet says Xenu told him, you'd say "You're right, I'll give Xenu credit?"
#52
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
I do not see how any other worldview can make sense of those questions. 
If you mean atheism can seem nihilistic then I agree with you.  I imagine it's something every atheist has to found their own way of dealing with. 

Most atheists deal with it by adopting a broadly humanist stance, even if they don't explicitly identify as a humanist(*).  But even humanism isn't a logical consequence of atheism.   I don't think atheism implies any particular stance,  other than denying god any role.   Atheism doesn't imply hedonism or humanism, selfishness or altruism.  It just denies gods exist.

(*check out what the term means, don't assume!)

#53
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@ludofl3x
Not my answer but the biblical answer. How it answers the question is that it makes sense of it. 

This is non sensical. To trace the conversation, you say "I can make sense of the big questions." I said "Ok, go ahead, what's the reason the universe exists?" You said "God loves us and wants us to love him." That's not an answer to the question, it is a literal non-sequitor.
What are the big questions to your mind? 

How did we (humanity) get here? What makes sense of why we are here? Does blind indifferent chance happenstance make sense? I say, no.

Why does the universe exist? It is because God chose to create it, or is there no reason why it exists? Why is there something rather than nothing?

Why do we find purpose and meaning? Do we just fleetingly make it up and if so what does it really matter? Why does our morality change? Where is our ultimate standard in making sense of what is right or good?

Please attempt to make sense of these things. Show me why your reasoning is sound and logical and better than my Christian reasoning. 

 

The meaning of children having leukemia is that Adam's choice had consequences. He was barred from Eden and from eating from the tree of life. The meaning of innocent children dying is that they live in heaven with God rather than suffer on earth. The meaning of death is that we only have so much time either to find God or exist without Him. When Adam sinned we inherited a sinful nature that is passed on from generation to generation. We need a transformation that can only come through faith in Jesus Christ. 
Wow. So in your mind, when you see that mother crying, you think, "Wow, sucks Adam did that and your kid is about to die for it, but that's justice for you."
No, it reminds me of how we got to where we are. It reminds me that you would not have done any better than Adam did having been given that choice. It reminds me why there is so much inhumanity in this world - that humanity decided to do what they saw fit, not what God commanded was good. 


It just seems weird that you think the objective source of morality finds it moral to punish a mother and her baby for something you think the literal first person on earth did, especially when you factor in that god would have absolutely KNOWN HE WOULD EAT THE FRUIT. That's morality? That's justice? I guess you're a subscriber to divine command? For real, I hope you never know anyone who loses a child.
Our mortality brings us to the realization that the life we live on earth is temporary. The curse reminds me that sin brought death and God has given a solution since Adam was barred from eating from the Tree of Life. 

I see the heartache of those who lose children and I see God's promises that those who trust in Him will never be put to shame, that God has promised a better life for those who believe
than
for those that do not trust Him. I see a better life than what we experience without Him. I see the reason for life - to love and enjoy God forever. I understand that God NEVER takes an innocent life without restoring it. I also understand that Jesus said the kingdom of heaven belongs to little children and that Jesus Christ died to save His people.


She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.”


An Amazon tribe is still accountable to God for wrongful action. 
Interesting. THey're accountable, even if he gave them no reason to think he's there.
There are all kinds of reasons and they understand them. There are beliefs in gods. These tribes worship idols. They understand that wrongful action deserves punishment. They are judged for their sin just like we are. I don't believe their punishment is as severe as those who hear the gospel message, understand it (one way to God that satisfies His justice and righteousness), and reject it. That is just a personal belief based on some Scripture for it is not my place to judge but God's. I have to give an account, just like you will. That is why I trust in the Savior as my Mediator. That is why I trust His sacrifice on my behalf. That is why I trust in His life lived on my behalf. 

Romans 8:1 (NASB)
Deliverance from Bondage
8 Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 

Others have suggested that God judges us on the knowledge we have revealed to us as to the severity.  

#54
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@ludofl3x


So let me ask you: the muslims who were murdered last week, the three year old victim, the youngest one...he's burning in hell right now, right? Don't wriggle about now, you just said he's accountable to god for sinful action, and he was in the act of not worshipping jesus, of denying jesus and the bible. He was in the wrong place at the wrong time and got shot and is dead. He's burning in hell, if you had to guess, right? Not "I don't get to judge," that's cowardice and seems a soft denial of Jesus to me.
I truly believe any innocent life, such as an infant, will be with God in heaven for the reason that Jesus said,

“Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to Me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”


Jesus died for such as these children.

The problem with Isalm as I see it is that they do not have a sufficient atonement for sinful actions even though it recognizes the OT Scripture in which animal sacrifice is used to atone for sin. Is an animal sacrifice sufficient? It always pointed to a better sacrifice and was only a covering until that sacrifice was made, then that covenant was taken out of the way and replaced with a better one. 

Hebrews 8:13 (NASB)
13 When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.

It is most reasonable to believe that verse and that letter of address was written before the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. 


No more special than your pleading. 
Any life that has a beginning derives from something else
Do you know what special pleading is?
Yes - " Applying standards, principles, and/or rules to other people or circumstances, while making oneself or certain circumstances exempt from the same critical criteria, without providing adequate justification.  Special pleading is often a result of strong emotional beliefs that interfere with reason.

I have offered to show you the justification and evidence yet you continue to avoid going there. 

You have continued to assert and believe what you believe without justification in any way. This is a two-way street. You are examining my worldview, but I am also examining yours. When I continue to ask you to make sense of your statements you ignore my requests. Where is the give and take?



I'll show you: if all life comes from life, where did Adam come from?
Creating by the eternal LIVING God --> life from the living.  


He was at one point not alive, and then, according to you, suddenly alive. Did he come from another person who was alive? No? Then did he come from god? Yes? Then god's alive? Yes? Then what live thing begat god? Nothing, god is alive and always was alive and was always here. THIS IS SPECIAL PLEADING. Life always comes from life EXCEPT FOR THIS ONE TIME. Please demonstrate what you think I'm doing that is special pleading.
There is evidence that points to the underlined conclusion. And yes, Adam came from other Persons (the triune God).

Where have you ever witnessed life coming from something not living? Yet you believe it. You build a whole worldview on a basic premise (or premises) that is not provable, just presumed. That is special pleading. 

In all life that had a beginning we see/witness coming from other life. It is unreasonable to state this?

It is unreasonable to think that blind chance happenstance can produce let alone sustain life. An atheist worldview continues to push the narrative that it can. 


No? Then Adam didn't come from something alive, and life, therefore, did not come from life. If no living thing created god and he's alive, then it's special pleading. If Adam came from god and god's not alive...your premise (life only comes from life) is flawed at the outset.
Is it reasonable to believe that God - an omniscient, omnipotent, eternal, unchanging Being; the greatest possible Being - is the source of life? Explain life without such a Being, and don't use special pleading. Can you do that or do we all being with base presuppositions that we build everything else upon? If so, then what is the more reasonable explanation? 


How do I special plead this situation, if I answer "Where did the first life come from" with the honest response "I don't know"?
You plead God is not the reasonable answer without alternative justifiable reasons. You dismiss the reasoning without hearing it. 


That's not special pleading, it's not answering with an appeal to fallacy. It's very simply I don't know. And stop complaining you're not allowed to use your claim as evidence. The two are different things! How many ways must that be demonstrated? If you have EVIDENCE, produce it. 

Appeal to fallacy? You stymied my presentation before it even began. You showed me that you did not want to hear the argument by shutting it down. Why should I waste my time? Will you discuss it? No, you will find reasons to avoid it. You have never answered my OP questions to this day.   



#55
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
It is unreasonable to think that blind chance happenstance can produce let alone sustain life. An atheist worldview continues to push the narrative that it can. 
I don't think that those scientists working on abiogenesis (there aren't all that many)think of it in terms of the noble task of disproving divine creation!

 Anyone familiar with the complexity of even the simplest living thing should agree it does seem very unreasonable and unlikely that blind chance could produce life.  But if you don't - for whatever reason - like to just say 'a miracle occurred'  the only option is to go into the lab and see how it could have happened.  it's not anti-religion that motivates researchers; it's their curiosity and love of having a really difficult problem to solve.

They don't think they aredisproving god - they are just being there crurious.

I don't mind it being said that belief in abiogenesis requires faith - it does.  It requires bloody-mindedness that there is a naturalistic,mechanistic explanation of life to not give up on such a hard problem!  But I've not met, read or heard of a biologist who was motivated anti-religious fervour, with possible exception of Richard Dawkins but he gave up being a badly-paid biologist and became a rich professional atheist!  His early books are so much better than The God Delusion... but I digress!




#56
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
I truly believe any innocent life, such as an infant, will be with God in heaven for the reason that Jesus said,
Thus making abortion the greatest gift god could give.

#57
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
What does 70 weeks mean?
Topic's author
#58
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@PGA2.0
Your off topic again.

I'll shorten for clarity. I am not the one who claims to  'make sense' of any of the following questions. YOU are. I invited you to make sense of just one of them, and your answer literally made zero sense. I said "make sense of the universe" and you said "god loves us." This is a non-sequitur and makes no sense of the question. Similarly, I think that it's the same answer for your litany of other 'big questions.' Your making sense of it is basically because Jesus, which does not in any way make sense of anything, it just adds a layer of mystery which you've repeatedly been unable to demonstrate is required. The other thread's at 28 pages and all you have done is say 'The bible says it so it's true!"

No, it reminds me of how we got to where we are. It reminds me that you would not have done any better than Adam did having been given that choice. It reminds me why there is so much inhumanity in this world - that humanity decided to do what they saw fit, not what God commanded was good. 

...and therefore it's just that some mother's suffering the loss of her child, neither of whom had nothing to do with any of that. 

I see the heartache of those who lose children and I see God's promises that those who trust in Him will never be put to shame, that God has promised a better life for those who believe than for those that do not trust Him

Wow, tough luck for those muslims and jews, then. 

There are beliefs in gods. These tribes worship idols. They understand that wrongful action deserves punishment. 
But they don't have Jesus as a mediator. So they burn in hell, because all of the knowledge that was presented to them had nothing to do with Jesus or God, or the bible or anything else, so according to your doctrine, they are eternally punished. Because the stuff about what "some people suggest" and what you "believe based on some scripture", that's all NOT scripture. Why does this make you so uncomfortable that you have to read anything into it? It's the perfect justice! Isn't it?

I truly believe any innocent life, such as an infant, will be with God in heaven for the reason that Jesus said,
Please cite the scritural support that shows you can get into heaven without believing in Jesus. Not your interpretation, I want the verse that says "verily I say unto thee on this day, all people who are good, especially the tiny children even if they're born in Australia which I've never spoken about or you've never heard of, but trust me it's a place and children die there before they will ever hear of me, and I don't want them to be in trouble over it forever." Or something along those lines. 

I have offered to show you the justification and evidence yet you continue to avoid going there. 

You have continued to assert and believe what you believe without justification in any way. This is a two-way street. You are examining my worldview, but I am also examining yours. When I continue to ask you to make sense of your statements you ignore my requests. Where is the give and take?
You continue to point to your claim as your evidence. We've been through this, the two are independent of each other. And I'm willing to answer any questions, but start a topic specific to them. But this was in response to my quetion DO YOU KNOW WHAT SPECIAL PLEADING IS? And you then answered with the above then immediately demonstarted that you don't understand it. Watch:


I'll show you: if all life comes from life, where did Adam come from?
Creating by the eternal LIVING God --> life from the living.  
So where did the life in the LIVING god come from?

Is it reasonable to believe that God - an omniscient, omnipotent, eternal, unchanging Being; the greatest possible Being - is the source of life?

Demonstrate the existence of this being, because stuff that doesn't exist doesn't cause anything else to exist, right? Then, demonstrate this being is the character in the bible. Then we can have a basis of discussion. But 700 responses in the other thread, not one step toward doing so. 

You plead God is not the reasonable answer without alternative justifiable reasons. You dismiss the reasoning without hearing it. 
This is not special pleading in any way. You seem confused. There's no need for me to offer you an alternative justifiable reason (though I have, with the greco-roman Pantheon and you've not refuted it yet). You're offering a supernatural, undemonstrated explanation, and I'm just saying I have no reason to believe that unless you can show me otherwise. I have no idea why you think I'm not answering whatever questions you are asking. I have no idea where life came from, how it started, why the universe is here, or if there's a why at all. That's my answer. I guess at least we're off the prophecy kick now that you've said it's not key to or even part of your belief process. Progress!
#59
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@keithprosser
I do not see how any other worldview can make sense of those questions. 
If you mean atheism can seem nihilistic then I agree with you.  I imagine it's something every atheist has to found their own way of dealing with.  

Most atheists deal with it by adopting a broadly humanist stance, even if they don't explicitly identify as a humanist(*).  But even humanism isn't a logical consequence of atheism.
How is that?


  I don't think atheism implies any particular stance,  other than denying god any role.   Atheism doesn't imply hedonism or humanism, selfishness or altruism.  It just denies gods exist.
I believe secular humanism and materialism fit into an atheistic worldview.


(*check out what the term means, don't assume!)

I could not open the site.
#60
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@disgusted
I truly believe any innocent life, such as an infant, will be with God in heaven for the reason that Jesus said,
Thus making abortion the greatest gift god could give.
No human being has the right to take innocent life so doing so puts that human in jeopardy of judgment.