Why do scripter beleivers cherry pick verses

Author: CaptainSceptic

Posts

Total: 93
Topic's author
#61
CaptainSceptic
CaptainSceptic's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 80
0
0
10
CaptainSceptic's avatar
CaptainSceptic
0
0
10
-->
@Tradesecret
I gotta call foul.

I cannot think of one denomination that has ever started because of a so called ambiguity in the bible.

Differences in interpretation are because of ambiguity.  The details need. to be speculated, or conjectured.  

For political reasons. people will interpret it in their own way.  They justify the interpretation because of the ambiguities. 
#62
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,427
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
Such a laughable dynamic. Of course you have to see it as vague. Otherwise you could not peddle your mis- information.  

People such as you require the bible to be vague. But the fact is most of it is pretty easy to understand and interpret. There are a few vagaries - there you go - I have admitted there are some. But overall-  when a write writes - it is to make a point to his audience. The authors in the bible are pretty clear about what they want to communicate. This is not the issue. The issue comes to down to people such as yourself - who clearly have an agenda. And when someone disagrees with your agenda - you howl them down. Or you make some pathetic excuse as to their character. 

I don't move goalposts. I don't have an agenda - I really don't. I don't have this view - to make money. I don't have this view to gain power. I don't have this to get a reputation. I don't have it to make myself appear smart.  I actually prefer to seek the truth. Now you can take that however you like - and you probably will. You at least historically dismiss people who take a view different to yourself.. Now I know I am sounding petty.  But I happen to be one of those people who think that genre is important,. And so is culture. And so is the intent that the writers had. 

You tend to dismiss anything but the English version you read.  you tend to dismiss other people who disagree with you. I on the other hand don't have an issue with someone who has a different view - so long as they don't resort to being rude or disingenuous. 
Topic's author
#63
CaptainSceptic
CaptainSceptic's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 80
0
0
10
CaptainSceptic's avatar
CaptainSceptic
0
0
10
-->
@Tradesecret
Hmmm,

 I on the other hand don't have an issue with someone who has a different view - so long as they don't resort to being rude or disingenuous. 

It is but clear that your behaviour clearly demonstrates otherwise kind Sir.
#64
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,595
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
Such a laughable dynamic. Of course you have to see it as vague. Otherwise you could not peddle your mis- information.

 Do you actually understand the word "ambiguous"?  I ask questions and scrutinse these ambiguous half stories in the scriptures. I don't believe I spread "mis-information.


People such as you require the bible to be vague.

I don't agree. This is why I highlight these ambiguous, hypocritical, biblical half told stories. I do so to watch you explain them. But you never can, without rewriting scripture and putting words into the mouths of the biblical authors and characters and certainly not without introducing the supernatural.



But the fact is most of it is pretty easy to understand and interpret.
Nope.


There are a few vagaries - there you go - I have admitted there are some.

these will not  be the ones that you say :

"Well, I for one, do not believe that the bible is ambiguous at all". 

And that are :

Crystal clear in fact.





This is not the issue. The issue comes to down to people such as yourself - who clearly have an agenda.

I do. I want to discuss the scriptures. I want to find out what lies beneath the fluffy stories of dead for four days stinking corpses coming back to life? I want to know why Jesus only cured a  leper  but  not eradicate leprosy?  I want to know what those who managed to get to "heaven" actually do when they get there?  I want to know why Jesus wasted a perfectly good so called  miracle on making water turn into  wine because the wedding  party was running dry, when there must have been more deserving and pressing needs to show  how miraculous he was.  <<<Not to mention that this is said to have been his very first miracle! I want to know hundreds of things about the bible. You just don't like it that I refuse to accept your ridiculous answers and that I refuse to accept what you say on faith alone. You keep ignoring that of what YOU believe is only faith based without a single piece of evidence to support what is only your faith and what you have faith in.<<<<< and that is something you find hard to admit .


And when someone disagrees with your agenda - you howl them down.

What you mean is that I disagree,  AND say why I disagree AND offer evidence supporting my disagreement. Something apologist like yourself always fail to do  without rewriting scripture and putting words into the mouths of the biblical authors and characters and presenting opinions as biblical fact AND certainly not without introducing the supernatural.



Or you make some pathetic excuse as to their character. 

I think that is your forte. 



#65
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Listen up, don’t you remember me stating that you follow the fraudulent Preterist Faith that is not only Satanic, but goes directly against Jesus’ inspired true words?!  Subsequent to ungodly Preterists using a Sharpie pen and scissors to mark out, and cut out approximately 75 percent of the JUDEO-Christian Bible, what is left is a Satanic “pocket size” version at Jesus’ expense! BLASPHEME!

As if the above Preterist fraud isn’t disturbing enough to Jesus, and as shown, you come forth with some of the most laugable Devil Speak “mumbo-jumbo-gumbo-dumbo, strum” rhetoric that this forum will probably ever see!  Look at your phrases and words, that are copy and pasted from your Satanic faith’s website, where obviously you don’t have the sense to feel embarrassed.

Whether you are a half assed Preterist, or a whole assed Preterist, the truth is that your pagan faith was “hatched by Satan” in the year of 1790, get it?! Therefore, your faith is yet another DIVISION of Christianity where every Bible reader prior to this date read the bible wrong in your Satanic view, and are therefore 

Furthermore, since your comical and ungodly faith preclude that if all prophecies have happened before and up to 70AD, then you are stating that IT IS A LIE in calling the hope for Jesus to return in bodily form in the future, at the end of time and history, and raise our bodies towards heaven, and bring judgment to all unbelievers, is now a ruse! You slap Jesus in the face because the 4 aforementioned biblical entities unifiy the history of Chrisitianity and Jesus’ Second Coming, but to your Satanic thinking, even though these four entities unify Christianity, and the future Second Coming, to you these precepts is fraudulent and WRONG!  HELLO?

The bottom line is YOU live in the past, where TRUE Christians live in the godly future, understood?
Again, you have done nothing to refute my arguments but instead fallaciously attacked me with namecalling, conjecture, and wild accusations while providing nary one proof to back them up. I underlined some of those attacks to demonstrate to anyone who is interested in reading this. That just shows how weak your arguments are.

I am willing to debate you on this topic and let the reader judge who has the stronger argument. 

What evidence do you have from the Bible that Jesus has not returned? Why do you think the end of the age Jesus spoke of has not come? If you want to discuss and prove me wrong then let us turn to what the biblical verses and words say and see who has a better argument. If you are not interested I will ignore your malicious posts. So either get serious or go bother someone else with your ad home. I'm not interested in them and your bold capitalization.
#66
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@BrotherDThomas
What you fail to realize is post-70 A.D. of the book of Revelation renders all Preterist thought absolutely FALSE. THINK, the earliest Christian historian who recorded the church’s knowledge of the Domitianic dating of Revelation was Hegessippus in 150 A.D. and this continued to be the unanimous view until about 4 centuries later with the Syriac Peshitta NT manuscript in which someone wrote that John was exiled under Nero. HELLO? Therefore, It is sometimes claimed that the Neronic dating is in the original, but this is impossible since the original lacked the book of Revelation. The history shows there is no source or reasoning given for this change in that 6th century manuscript. This is most problematic at best, and definitely lacks the authoritativeness that would be required to credibly make such a huge revision to what was commonly accepted and passed down from the end of the first century/beginning of the 2nd. FACT!
Demonstrate by documenting both biblical verses and how they tie into the history of the times, starting at the beginning, Revelation 1:1-9, as referring to Domitian's reign. Can you do that? 

Revelation 1:9
9 I, John, your brother and fellow partaker in the tribulation and kingdom and perseverance which are in Jesus, was on the island called Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus.

I want you to break down the verses, starting at verse 1 and finishing at verse 9 as to how they related to AD 90-95. And, if you are going to list early church fathers, supply their quotes and reference their works.

Since you mention the Syrian manuscript give evidence of your other claims as to the most reasonable and supply the evidence that the manuscript you reference is speaking of AD 90-95 and Domitian's reign. 

The same can be said for the Muratorian Fragment, which is the 7th century copy of the 2nd century original, with no way to prove the Neronic dating was in the original. There is no record of any of the early church fathers holding to the Neronic date of Revelation, where this is a fascinating glimpse into the early church fathers and what they believed on a variety of topics is in ‘A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs’, over 700 pages that were compiled by David Bercot!  In addition to Hegessippus, who, notably, wrote this prior to Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Eusebius, Jerome, Sulpicius Severus, and a number of other church fathers both before and not long after the council at Nicaea in 325AD, all confirm that John was exiled to Patmos by Domitian where he received Revelation, get it?!!!  The lack of any dissenting view naming Nero in place of Domitian until the 6th century should give early-date advocates pause. 2+2=4! Therefore, most of the events of Revelation are still in our future where some view the messages to the churches as having already been strictly for them and completely fulfilled, while some view each church as symbolic for a different time period, and of course there could be room for double-fulfillment of most of those first 3 chapters.
From Revelation alone, you cannot demonstrate a late date of writing. The full text (Revelation 1-22) and most if not all the evidence in fact reveals just the opposite. I will be glad to get into this if you are willing. I look forward to such a discussion but have not found anyone willing to get in-depth. Will you prove the exception? I think we should start our own thread by copying and pasting this post as its first entree. 

If you want to get into the church fathers as well, please document the quote and where it is cited from - what work of what church father. I think it will be educational for others who read this as well. 

Let us take this in tiny chunks (forgive the comical oxymoron). Start with Revelation 1:1-9.

I invite you to put your money where your mouth is and thoroughly document your viewpoint. In this way, we can gradually document our different stances as to which is the most reasonable to believe based on the evidence available. 

Remember, there was a celebration on Patmos in 1995 commemorating 1900 years, approximately, as in 95 or 96 A.D., since the Revelation Jesus gave to John. Furthermore, what other events in the 1st century A.D. are ever claimed as taking place 2 or 3 decades earlier, or later? UNDERSTAND? With all of the accurate records kept during the Roman Empire era and surviving today, there is little room for such a vast difference being possible.  Understand this simple premise, its commonly believed that Jesus died around 30 or 33 A.D., Paul and Peter were martyred in the 60’s, Nero lived from 37-68 A.D., etc. NO ONE SAYS JESUS DIED IN 3AD OR 60AD, or that Peter and Paul were martyred in the 30’s A.D. or 90’s A.D., or that Nero actually reigned around the time of Jesus’ ministry as recorded in the Gospels!  The majority of scholarship places John’s writing of Revelation in the mid-90’s, but somehow your insidious Preterist faith thinks it’s ok to go against the overwhelming consensus of the past 2000 years? LAUGHABLE!!!  
Your thinking makes some fatal errors, IMO, of which I would be only too pleased to demonstrate, if you can have a serious conversation, without any antics. I invite you to put aside your antics, your name-calling, your unnecessary capitalization of full sentences and show your view is more reasonable not by mere assertion but by citing biblical verses and historical facts. 

Regarding Revelation, first, you assume that John, exiled at Patmos, refers to Domitian's reign and not Nero's based on a very dubious statement by Ireneaus and then subsequently borrowed by other early church fathers. I believe this speculation has been well refuted by Kenneth Gentry (Before Jerusalem Fell) and many others, such as John A.T. Robinson).

Second, the language of Revelation supports early writing before AD 70.

Third, I would be glad to debate you on this subject.

LISTED BY DATE
  • -0047-48: James
  • 0050,E: 1 Thessalonians
  • 0050-51: 2 Thessalonians
  • 0055,E: 1 Corinthians
  • 0055,L: 1 Timothy
  • 0056,E: 2 Corinthians
  • 0056,L: Galatians
  • 0057,E: Romans
  • 0057,E: Titus
  • 0058,E: Philippians
  • 0058,M: Philemon
  • 0058,M: Colossians
  • 0058.M: Ephesians
  • 0058,L: 2 Timothy
  • 0040-60: The Didache
  • 0045-60: Mark
  • 0040-60+: Matthew
  • -0057-60+: Luke
  • 0061-62: Jude
  • 0061-62: 2 Peter
  • 0057-62+: Acts
  • 0060-65: 1  John
  • 0060-65: 2 John
  • 0060-65: 3 John
  • 0065,E: 1 Peter
  • -0040-65+: John
  • 0067: Hebrews
  • 0068,L(-70): Revelation
  • 0070,E: 1 Clement
  • 0075: Barnabas
  • -0085: The Shepherd of Hermas
LISTED BY TITLE
  • Acts: 57-62+
  • Barnabas: 75
  • 1 Clement: Early 70
  • Colossians: Summer 58
  • Corinthians 1: Early 55
  • Corinthians 2: Early 56
  • The Didache: 40-60
  • Ephesians: Late Summer 58
  • Galatians: Later 56
  • Hebrews: 67
  • James: -47-48
  • John c. -40-65+
  • 1  John: 60-65
  • 2 John: 60-65
  • 3 John: 60-65
  • Jude: 61-2
  • Luke: -57-60+
  • Mark: 45-60
  • Matthew: 40-60+
  • 1 Peter: Spring 65
  • 2 Peter: 61-2
  • Philemon: Summer 58
  • Philippians: Spring 58
  • Revelation: Late 68 (-70)
  • Romans: Early 57
  • The Shepherd of Hermas: -85
  • Thessalonians 1: Early 50
  • Thessalonians 2: 50-51
  • Timothy 1: Autumn 55
  • Timothy 2: Autumn 58
  • Titus: Late Spring 57



Remember, the great fire of Rome took place for nearly a week during 64 A.D., but no one places it in 54 A.D. let alone 34 A.D. A powerful earthquake in 60 A.D. devastated Laodicea, and yet no one ever says that earthquake took place in 30 A.D. 30 years prior. With the vast majority of evidence to the contrary. Your Satanic Preterist faith literally rests on this single pillar of the dating of the book of Revelation. And, really, that is no pillar at all in light of the historicity of the late date!!!!  
Now, go hide yourself from the above FACTS that make your Preterist faith as comical as the Pentacostals, Mormons, Jehovah Witneesess, etc., because in the true Matthean  4:10 way, BE GONE SATAN! 
I claim Revelation is John's version of the Olivet Discourse found in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. I am willing to back that up, just as I am willing to back up that almost every NT canonized book shows evidence of being written before AD 70. Perhaps we can leave that for the next discussion after we document the evidence for Revelation as written before or after AD 70.

My Preterist belief does not rest on Revelation alone as written before AD70 but on every NT canonized work written before AD70 from the evidence both internally (the book itself) and externally (other pieces of evidence). Since the biblical books are what are in question the majority of the discussion should focus on what they reveal through their time and audience relevance statements. 

Also, since you claim to be a true believer, what church, doctrine, or belief do you expand upon? Is this solely your own interpretation or do you have something you feed off of?
#67
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@CaptainSceptic

Do you deny that to understand someone you need to understand the context, the specific word meaning, and intent of what the author or communicator means?
Sure you need to try to understand that, however, my entire point is that the aforementioned process is still subjective.  Look at all the different opinions you have on this thread alone. And everyone would claim to have a proper understanding.
Subjective? Let us clarify what you mean here because I think it is important. Do you mean that there is no correct interpretation of what I or the Bible says? If you say your view on what I say it subjective in that respect then how can you possibly understand what I have said? It would just be an opinion, no better or worse than any other opinion. Is that what you believe or can you actually understand what I am saying? Furthermore, you would not be trying to understand my meaning but making up your own meaning.

When in doubt on a sentence or statement a person speaks we ask for clarification to grasp anything unclear, or else we would not be able to understand each other. Yet we can, so it is self-evident that you do not believe, generally speaking, that what I say has just a subjective meaning but is conveying something objective that you CAN understand. If you did not believe this then I don't see the point of further communication since it would be a waste of my time.

So, what is it to be?

You were not there, or in the head of the other.  So all you can do is speculate. 

What you are saying is that history is not verifiable, is it not? Again, what is the most reasonable explanation? If you wrote that President Trump was president of the USA in 2020, and I read that 100 years later, are you saying there is no way that is not reasonably verified? If so, then why not the Bible? Can not statements from it be reasonably verified? 

And not only the Bible, but what about philosophically speaking? How do you explain your existence? How do you verify evolution or origins of any kind since you were not there? That, after all, is your criterion. Basically, what you are saying is because we were not there we cannot verify it. Do you think you are being reasonable? If you do, I don't think anything I say will be of value to you and I think we should end our conversation.
#68
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
-->
@Tradesecret
how do you view the story of noah? is it real or a myth? it looks like jesus and peter and folks in the new testament took it literally. but shouldn't there be evidence of all the things that dont add up scientifically? i believe in miracles, but i think when they occur there's scientific evidence to back them up. 

aren't you troubled by verses like noah or the verse where God kills the first born if its parents didn't smear blood on their door?  all the homicide that God does?

i can't say God doesn't kill people in mass, but the science stuff is hard to get past. 
#69
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@CaptainSceptic
That's "scripture" for the well informed.

However, you raise a valid point that many will cherry pick verses, and are rather ignorant of context... including you.

Cherry-picking is easy: you look up a subject, get biblical references, and quote them, often without actually picking up the Bible just to assure that the greater context of their quoted verse actually does match their intent of quotation in the first place, such as your mention of the ten commandments [yeah, Exodus 20, and your Deut. citation]. According to Religion News Service, less than 20% of American adults have read the Bible cover-to-cover, with an MOE of ±3.1%, meaning that as few as 16% have done so. And I'll wager the true figure is less than that; I encounter very few people who have done so, and their citations such as yours demonstrate that very point.

However, "the Law of Moses" is spread throughout the Pentateuch, not just hose highlights. Of that, you appear as ignorant of the subject as those you accuse.

For example, your citations of "support for slavery" and "killing babies and raping women" are nonsense, and ignore the greater understanding of the context in both cases. What you claim as support for, or condoning of these behaviors simply because they are mentioned does not imply anything of the kind. They are mentioned because they are recognized evils of men, not that they are acceptable activities. Context, my friend, is what many, both your Bible-bashing verse-pickers, and your own attitude misplace in the process of discussion of biblical concepts.
Topic's author
#70
CaptainSceptic
CaptainSceptic's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 80
0
0
10
CaptainSceptic's avatar
CaptainSceptic
0
0
10
-->
@fauxlaw
Don't call me friend and ignorant in the same post.  

Context is subjective.  There is no uniform accepted view on what all of the verses mean.   There are different interpretations.  

I will give you an interpretation.  Calling someone ignorant who asks a genuine question is pretty fucking rude.

That's my interpretation.

#71
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,595
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@CaptainSceptic
I will give you an interpretation.  Calling someone ignorant who asks a genuine question is pretty fucking rude.
 I refer you to post#3 above.

"When all the above  fails to convince then its down to the age old veiled insults of one "not being able to read" and "understand".  And being Ignorant.

#72
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@CaptainSceptic
My computer is down. I will hopefully have it running tomorrow.

The debate was all prepared but I shutdown and can't restart. I'm reloading Windows so all data is lost. 

#73
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@PGA2.0
Get a Mac. I was broke on the pane of windows in the 90s and never looked back. Windows copied just enough of Mac to make Windows stupid, but avoid copyright infringement. It has never been worse than now.
#74
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@fauxlaw
After the trouble I'm going through it sounds good. Definitely my next purchase. What does a good one range from?
#75
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@PGA2.0


PGA2.0,

I have only taken the following ignorant statements of yours instead of the myriad of others that only show contradiction between alleged historians, where who and what was right will always remain at a standstill, understood? The adage of: "How can everybody be right, when everyone is wrong" comes to mind.


YOUR OUTRIGHT LIE REGARDING THAT I HAVE CALLED YOU NAMES IN POST #65: "Again, you have done nothing to refute my arguments but instead fallaciously attacked me with namecalling, conjecture, and wild accusations while providing nary one proof to back them up."

Show me in my quote that you used in your post #65, where I have allegedly called you any type of name!  As if your Preterest faith isn't embarrassing enough, now you go to the low level of LYING upon this forum!!!



YOUR CONTINUED BIBLE IGNORANT QUOTE IN POST #66: "What evidence do you have from the Bible that Jesus has not returned?”

This is embarrassing for you AGAIN, whereas the “Revelation” of the Apostle John in the different chapters of the book of Revelation of Jesus’ Second Coming HAVE NOT HAPPENED YET! Understood?

Have the following Second Coming of Jesus events been seen as yet, or if it happened already, is Jesus’ brutal murdering spree upon the nonbelievers on record anywhere in the worlds history? NO IT IS NOT, therefore Jesus HAS NOT returned! 

Try and follow along where the Apostle John was godly revealed in what the Second Coming of Jesus will be like in the following passages: Rev.1:13-16, Rev.9:7-10, Rev.9:15-19, Rev.11:5-10. Now, if you don’t accept these biblical axioms of Jesus’ horrific brutal return, then are you prepared to call the Apostle John a LIAR as well?

Even Matthew agrees with the Apostle Paul where Jesus’ return will be a ghastly, horrifying, and a brutal take no prisoners murdering event! “This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous 50 and throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Matthew 13:49-50). Do you want to call Matthew a LIAR too?

PGA2.0, maybe its time for you to actually accept the fact that Religion in general is NOT your forte whatsoever. To compound this fact by swallowing the Satanic faith of being a Preterest, where your faith was “invented by Satan” in the year of 1790 as just “another” DIVISION of Christianity as embarrassingly shown in the link below:


When you are driving to your Satanic Preterest Church, where do you get the authority to laugh at the many different church DIVISIONS of the Christian faith that you pass by, where you take the notion that your church is the only correct one in the eyes of Jesus?!   laughable at best, get it? LOL!




YOUR QUOTE OF WANTING TO KNOW MY ASSOCIATION WITH THE FAITH: "Also, since you claim to be a true believer, what church, doctrine, or belief do you expand upon? Is this solely your own interpretation or do you have something you feed off of?

I accept my long standing statement that I created, in that “what Jesus, as Yahweh God incarnate” said ONCE, He did not mean for His creation to take in many different and contradicting ways, period!  Understood Bible Fool? Therefore the Bible is to be taken LITERALLY without any use of decoder rings, crystal balls, quija boards, and other Satanic means that can degrade its content!  

I don’t need one of the many hypocritical churches like yours to tell me in what the Bible actually says in literal form, is really NOT what the Bible says. This is because of the use of Satanic apologetics, hermeneutics, spin doctoring, and the such to anachronistically bring its content closer to reality of the 21st century to try and make it more believable.  REMEMBER, in the day of Jesus, and subsequent to His pretend death, there were no churches. People were taught the Christian doctrine through oral tradition started by the Apostles, and beyond by alleged godly story tellers! 

Therefore, I don’t need no “Stinkin Churches!”  



Subjectively, you should take the position of RUNNING AWAY from this time hence to my statements, just like TRADESECRET had to do in trying  to save face to his outright Biblical ignorance.  At least think about it, it will definitely save you from additional embarrassment, okay? You can thank me later.



.

#76
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret



Tradesecret,

Listen, after listening to your blustering rhetoric that went nowhere in your posts within this thread relative to me, other than to embarrassingly trap you again and again, I respect the fact that you didn't want to take anymore embarrassment, therefore you had to RUN AWAY from my post below!  Good for you in finally accepting the fact that you  are absolutely no match for Jesus and myself in showing the inept pseudo-christian like YOU their evil ways of rewriting the Bible in Satan's name!  



I have asked this point to other equally dumbfounded of the Bible pseudo-christians like you, and that is, what type of "running shoes" do you wear in the name of Satan?  I am trying to form a list in this vein for pseudo-christian purposes.  If you don't want to be embarrassed again by the Brother D. and don't want to answer this simple question, I completely understand. 


.
#77
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@BrotherDThomas
YOUR OUTRIGHT LIE REGARDING THAT I HAVE CALLED YOU NAMES IN POST #65: "Again, you have done nothing to refute my arguments but instead fallaciously attacked me with namecalling, conjecture, and wild accusations while providing nary one proof to back them up."
I underlined your insults, innuendo, spin, mocking, and multiple assertions in that post.

If you want to discuss then leave out these slurs and slanders and deal with the text of Revelation 1 that I challenged you to prove me wrong with.

At the moment I am typing from my phone so I will answer in depth once I get my computer back. That is if you show a willingness and quit your name- calling which you did again by calling me a liar.

#78
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@BrotherDThomas
This is embarrassing for you AGAIN, whereas the “Revelation” of the Apostle John in the different chapters of the book of Revelation of Jesus’ Second Coming HAVE NOT HAPPENED YET! Understood?
It had not happened at the time of John's writing to the seven churches, yet the language speaks of His soon, quick return. I will get into this as soon as my computer is returned from repair.



Have the following Second Coming of Jesus events been seen as yet, or if it happened already, is Jesus’ brutal murdering spree upon the nonbelievers on record anywhere in the worlds history? NO IT IS NOT, therefore Jesus HAS NOT returned! 
The Second Coming is primarily addressed to a 1st-century audience steeped in OT sacrifice and worship. That is no longer possible after AD70. That is because Jesus came in judgment of THAT generation. "This generation" that Jesus speaks of can logically referred to no other. "This age" that Jesus speaks of is the Old Covenant Age. That age ends in AD70 when the rituals and acts needed for atonement for the people - the priesthood, the animal sacrifice, the temple, the feast days, etc,  - can no longer be performed as specified. Remember Matthew 5:17-18. 

The author of Hebrews makes it plain that the OT is still in practice at the time of his writing, but Hebrews 8:13 is a warning that the system of worship and animal sacrifice will soon disappear. If you want to argue otherwise then deal with the two verses I mentioned and also exegete Revelation 1 as I asked you .


Try and follow along where the Apostle John was godly revealed in what the Second Coming of Jesus will be like in the following passages: Rev.1:13-16, Rev.9:7-10, Rev.9:15-19, Rev.11:5-10. Now, if you don’t accept these biblical axioms of Jesus’ horrific brutal return, then are you prepared to call the Apostle John a LIAR as well?
Revelation 1:13-16 describes Jesus ascension to heaven per Daniel 7:9-10; 13-14. What is applied to God in the OT is applied to Jesus - the Son of Man - in the NT. The imagery is extensive regarding these verse.

Rev. 9: 15-19 is speaking of God's punishment of OT Israel. As He promised numerous times in the OT God was avenging the deaths of the prophets and saints wrongly taken as well as the NT apostles and saints taken from the start of the church at Pentecost until the destruction of the city and temple in AD 70.

As with OT apocalypse language, the same is used often in Revelation to signify the judgment of OT Israel. Jesus noted the scope in Matthew 23:23-38, especially verse 29, 34, and 37. Jesus promise that generation that all the things spoken of would happen in "this generation."

Rev. 11:5-11 speaks of OT Jerusalem (aka Sodom and Egypt). The judgments are the same Daniel is told to seal up until the end of the OT, per Daniel 12:1-2, 4; 9, 13 . Revelation is the time they are opened.

When I get my computer back I will prove thus further.



Even Matthew agrees with the Apostle Paul where Jesus’ return will be a ghastly, horrifying, and a brutal take no prisoners murdering event! “This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous 50 and throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Matthew 13:49-50). Do you want to call Matthew a LIAR too?
And it was brutal as noted by Josephus and others. Matthew 13:49-50 is speaking of the end of the OT economy age of temple worship and sacrifice. Verse 51 is where Jesus asks those present, "Have you understood all these things." NASB



PGA2.0, maybe its time for you to actually accept the fact that Religion in general is NOT your forte whatsoever. To compound this fact by swallowing the Satanic faith of being a Preterest, where your faith was “invented by Satan” in the year of 1790 as just “another” DIVISION of Christianity as embarrassingly shown in the link below:


I will document that it is you who do not know what you are talking about regarding Scripture. 
#79
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@PGA2.0

PGA2.0,

YOUR REVEALING QUOTE OF HAVING A COMPUTER BREAK DOWN: "When I get my computer back I will prove thus further."

Your computer not working is a "sign" from Jesus in the fact that He is sick and tired of your Devil Speak regarding His true words within the scriptures!  WAKE UP! He is giving you a "sign" that He is disgusted with your pagan Preterism faith:  "Then some of the scribes and Pharisees answered him, saying, “Teacher, we wish to see a sign from you.” (Matthew 12:38) Get it? DUH!


Within your blithering ungodly post #78 that admits through the chapters of Revelation that I gave you, that you admit that our Jesus was A SERIAL KILLER as explicitly shown in the verses in question!  Thank you for agreeing with me on this most important aspect of Jesus modus operandi, praise!  Of course the discerning  saw the fact that you didn't use the name "Jesus" that did these brutal murders, but used the term "God" instead, even though it is the same entity, be a man and use the correct term of Jesus performing these brutal and horrific murders next time, get it?

 With that being said, do you to have a problem in worshiping a brutal serial killer Jesus, as Yahweh God incarnate, doing those horrific and brutal acts in the book of Revelation to His creation? I will not mention in detail of what Jesus did to unbelievers because it is sickening to the core of Him allegedly being all loving and forgiving, of which I am sure you will agree.  Okay, I'll mention just one of many sickening things Jesus did to unbelievers, of which was, His ghoulish creations when he returns were a bunch of horse-like locusts with human heads, women’s hair, lion’s teeth, and scorpion’s tails! They’re gonna be stinging unbelievers straight for a whole 5 months, ouch! (Rev.9:7-10).

So, in essence, the Satanic Preterest faith takes away all hope of Jesus returning in the future at this time period, because your faith states that He has already returned in a "Second Coming Event" in your Satanic way of thinking,  and calls any pseudo-christian like you that doesn't s swallow your faith, as misguided minions of Satan! 

Bar none, the above is it in a nutshell!  

You are excused in embarrassment once again, therefore go and hide with your equally dumbfounded Bible ignorant TRADESECRET, because he knows all of the great hiding spots on DEBATEART forums!

.
#80
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@BrotherDThomas
How can anyone take your posts seriously? You continually insult believers by attacking the Lord Jesus Christ, the cornerstone of our faith. The whole post was at a moronic level of hermeneutics. You addressed one verse of Revelation not applicable to Revelation 1, our starting point. You are all over the place.  Not once did you show a willingness to conduct a civil and productive dialogue by properly documenting your case against Preterism. You continue to show how little you understand the Bible. If you do not wish to engage in a reasonable discussion then  I will ignore all future posts. You choose.

Okay, I'll mention just one of many sickening things Jesus did to unbelievers, of which was, His ghoulish creations when he returns were a bunch of horse-like locusts with human heads, women’s hair, lion’s teeth, and scorpion’s tails! They’re gonna be stinging unbelievers straight for a whole 5 months, ouch! (Rev.9:7-10).

Rev. 9:7-10
Again, context is key. The fifth and six Trumpet seals are judgments on Israel. This is imagery of the time Jesus warned of in Luke 21:20-24 in which Jerusalem would be surrounded by armies - Roman armies. The swarm of locusts with "breastplates of iron" (v. 8), in which the text explains some of the imagery - "their faces (the locusts) were as the faces of men." There are two logical explanations as to whom these locusts were and the imagery may include both 1) the Roman armies and 2) the three seditious groups of Jews fighting within the city while the Romans surrounded it. The locusts had crowns on their head. We know there were three factions of Jews in Jerusalem during the siege, per Josephus (anyone interested in a further explanation of v.8, please read Wars, 4,9,10, per Arthur Ogden, The Avenging of the Apostles and Prophets, p.235), that the Roman army were fighting against (when these three factions were not fighting amongst themselves). For those who want to check, when Cestus fled from Jerusalem he left lots of weaponry within the city that these groups of Jews (brother against brother as Jesus had warned about) would have had claim to (see Wars, 2,19,8; 4,9,12 for instance, per The Avenging of the Apostles and Prophets, Arthur Ogden, p.235-236).



#81
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@PGA2.0



.
PGA2.0,

YOUR REVEALING QUOTE EQUAL TO RUNNING AWAY LIKE TRADESECRET: "If you do not wish to engage in a reasonable discussion then I will ignore all future posts. You choose."

Listen up Preterist Bible fool, I don't have to choose, you have made the choice already by subjectively and wrongfully accusing me of not being reasonable in our discussion, therefore you will ignore my future posts regarding your ungodly pagan faith, therefore you are RUNNING AWAY!

SO BE IT RUNAWAY PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN PRETERIST!

I knew you would eventually use a lame excuse to runaway from further discussion, because who in the hell in their logical right mind could ever defend such a Satanic faith of Preterism to begin with? As shown, certainly not you!

Another pseudo-christian bites the dust when engaging the Brother D!


NEXT?


.
#82
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@BrotherDThomas
YOUR REVEALING QUOTE EQUAL TO RUNNING AWAY LIKE TRADESECRET: "If you do not wish to engage in a reasonable discussion then I will ignore all future posts. You choose."

Listen up Preterist Bible fool, I don't have to choose, you have made the choice already by subjectively and wrongfully accusing me of not being reasonable in our discussion, therefore you will ignore my future posts regarding your ungodly pagan faith, therefore you are RUNNING AWAY!

SO BE IT RUNAWAY PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN PRETERIST!

I knew you would eventually use a lame excuse to runaway from further discussion, because who in the hell in their logical right mind could ever defend such a Satanic faith of Preterism to begin with? As shown, certainly not you!

Another pseudo-christian bites the dust when engaging the Brother D!


NEXT?

YOUR REVEALING QUOTE EQUAL TO RUNNING AWAY LIKE TRADESECRET: "If you do not wish to engage in a reasonable discussion then I will ignore all future posts. You choose."

Listen up Preterist Bible fool, I don't have to choose, you have made the choice already by subjectively and wrongfully accusing me of not being reasonable in our discussion, therefore you will ignore my future posts regarding your ungodly pagan faith, therefore you are RUNNING AWAY!

SO BE IT RUNAWAY PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN PRETERIST!

I knew you would eventually use a lame excuse to runaway from further discussion, because who in the hell in their logical right mind could ever defend such a Satanic faith of Preterism to begin with? As shown, certainly not you!

Another pseudo-christian bites the dust when engaging the Brother D!


NEXT?

Zero substance again. Nothing much to add since nothing constructive was said on the subject matter.

Not one reply to my biblical comments, just fluff, more name-calling, and assertions. Not one logical point supporting your charges about Preterists. What a bluff on your part.

It is you who are running away. I'll say it again. You are not offering anything constructive.

#83
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@PGA2.0


PGA2.0,

You are having a very hard time in dealing with what you specifically said, quote: "If you do not wish to engage in a reasonable discussion then I will ignore all future posts. You choose."

As explicitly shown, YOU CHOSE to runaway from discussion because of what you proposed, in that you don't think I am reasonable in discussion regarding your pagan faith, understood?!   It is just that simple! 2+2=4, get it?

Now, start doing what you said you would do, and that is to ignore my posts from here on out, understood? Don't be a hypocrite to your statement above because the membership is watching, Preterist RUNAWAY!


NEXT?


.




#84
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
I just wanted to let everyone reading this examine and judge what has taken place in my dialogue with BrotherD. He has repeatedly avoided any substantive arguments or refutations of my position. He failed to engage in a discussion of Revelation 1 except for a brief retort. Thus, I will not engage with him again, given his vile treatment and lack of respect of Preterism, plus my character assassination, post after post. 
#85
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@PGA2.0


PGA2.0,

Are you still whining like a little BIBLE SLAPPED®️ Runaway Preterist?  Why don't you take your primitive 1790 pagan belief to a Christian's children forum where you will be more at home, where the Childs mind would easily accept such a comical belief like you did, okay?


YOUR CRYING QUOTE:  "Thus, I will not engage with him again, ....."

Good! Not only will this save you from further embarrassment that I would have given you regarding your ungodly faith, but  I will have free reign anytime I want over you and your Satanic faith, as you have to sit on the sidelines being SILENT biting your finger nails because you proffered that you will not engage me anymore!  If you do, I will call you out for being another pseudo-christian HYPOCRITE in not keeping your word, understand? Huh?  I will keep these posts just in case.

YOU CAME UP WITH AN EXCUSE TO RUNAWAY FROM OUR DISCUSSION AS EXPLICITLY SHOWN, THEREFORE, LIVE WITH IT AS YOU NAVIGATE AROUND THIS FORUM IN TOTAL AND COMPLETE SHAME, UNDERSTOOD?

My wasting of time with you is DONE!


NEXT?


.
#86
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,427
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@n8nrgmi
how do you view the story of noah? is it real or a myth? it looks like jesus and peter and folks in the new testament took it literally. but shouldn't there be evidence of all the things that dont add up scientifically? i believe in miracles, but i think when they occur there's scientific evidence to back them up. 

aren't you troubled by verses like noah or the verse where God kills the first born if its parents didn't smear blood on their door?  all the homicide that God does?

i can't say God doesn't kill people in mass, but the science stuff is hard to get past. 
Hi n8nrgmi,

thanks for your question.  Jesus is the Son of God. Peter was one of the first disciples, and writers of the NT.  He was a Jew. It does appear that they took the story of Noah literally. Should I believe them or some scientists?  I don't have an issue with miracles per se - but I disagree that scientific evidence will ever back it up.  How for instance does science back up the resurrection of Jesus? 

Why should I be troubled with any verse in the bible - unless it was put there to trouble us?  And there are many verses meant to trouble us and cause us to repent of our sins.  Examples abound in the words of Jesus who spoke about Hell more than anyone else.  Hell is a troubling word. 

Personally, I think science when it is done correctly is good. Science which is based on truth is always good. And always good for the bible.  God on the other hand is God and not subject to the rules of man.  I am only troubled by the facts of Noah when I realise how many people rejected God despite his constant warning towards of them to stop being so evil.  I am troubled by any nation that gets wiped out - yet I am troubled because nations would prefer to do things their own way according to their own evil ways rather than listen to a good God that wants the best for them.  

Your comments don't seem to born out of a love for science so much as a love for our world's concept of ethics. That is fine - that is your right - but I do think that it is also dangerously close to bigotry against other cultures and time and views of ethics.  
#87
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,427
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Using the word " think" is not me being uncertain. In fact for many people using the word think actually means they are sure. I suppose for some, perhaps like yourself, you would prefer to use know without having to resort to thinking. Well good for you. 

I am sure that Jesus did not abolish the law. Yet, I understand law in the sense of the underlying reason for the law in the first place. I don't get caught up in the letter of the law - but rather am addressing the spirit of the law. 

How the spirit of the law is applied looks different in  different scenarios.  How one addresses the fool looks different depending on the fool - yet it is the spirit of the law that needs to understood rather than the letter. 

For me, The spirit of the law remains constant because the character of God remains constant. Yet, the letter of the law will change depending upon the circumstances, for instance whether you are living in a desert, your own sovereign land, or are held captive by the Romans.  Similarly, Christians will continue to uphold the spirit of the law of God constantly, yet, differently depending upon whether they live in a Christian country or a secular atheistic one. 


#88
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,595
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
For me, The spirit of the law remains constant because the character of God remains constant
 

Would that be "hermetically" speaking?
#89
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@Tradesecret
I am sure that Jesus did not abolish the law. Yet, I understand law in the sense of the underlying reason for the law in the first place. I don't get caught up in the letter of the law - but rather am addressing the spirit of the law. 
When you speak of abolishing the "law," what are you referencing, the law of Moses in its 613 specific commandments or the evidence that we are aware of God's law of right and wrong which embodies the Ten Commandments and which Jesus expands upon in the NT?

How do you reconcile Matthew 5:17-18?

Jesus specifically told His disciples that not the smallest part of the law would disappear until everything was accomplished. Where do you see the law of Moses being followed today in regards to animal sacrifices, feast days, the priesthood, following the genealogical descendency of Aaron, or temple worship? Since these are not evident how do you explain Jesus' words that not one stroke would disappear until everything was accomplished?

And how do you reconcile Hebrews 8:13 as soon disappearing, or Jesus telling His disciples that everything said of Him would be fulfilled (i.e., Luke 21:20-24) as applying primarily to the 1st-century Jews, or the fact that He said that it would happen in "this generation." What did Jesus mean by "this age" and the one to come? Do you believe the Gospel was preached to the ends of the world in the 1st-century or that it is still to be fulfilled, or is being fulfilled now, in our day?

Finally, what did Jesus mean when He spoke of 1) the last days, the day of wrath, that day, and 2) His Second Coming? In Matthew 16:27-28 Jesus told some of His disciples that some of them would not taste death until they saw Him (the Son of Man) coming in His Father's glory and with The angels. How do you reconcile those two verses? 
#90
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@CaptainSceptic
The Preterist faith, being yet another DIVISION of the faith,  denies the future prophetic book of Revelation, where the Preterist movement  teaches that all the end-times prophecies of the New Testament were fulfilled in AD 70 when the Romans attacked and destroyed Jerusalem!   The comedy of Preterism teaches that every event normally associated with the end times, Christ’s Second Coming, the Tribulation, the Resurrection of the Dead, the Final Judgment and such, HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED! HELLO? 
If you believe what BrotherD is saying you have not examined Revelation and the time statements, let alone the audience  of address statements well. Various texts in Revelation refer to a very specific time  frame, such as the seven kings in which five have fallen, one IS,  and is yet to come. That identifies Nero as the one who is, no one else. ( Rev. 17:10).                                                                                                                                John on Patmos is writing to seven specific churches that existed in the 1st-century. His primary audience was those churches concerning the shortly to take place judgment of the Jews, a judgment that  is at hand - then, at that time, before Jerusalem fell. The people who John refers to as piercing Jesus are Jews, per Matthew 24:30 in conjunction with Zechariah 12:10. See Rev. 1:1, 3  concerning the shortness of time and Rev. 1:7 concerning those who pierced Him.         BrotherD is all bluster and lack of substance. He clearly does not understand the biblical Revelation or it's significance and I  have found dialogue with him is futile .