Paul's Message is Irrefutable

Author: Fruit_Inspector

Posts

Total: 244
#61
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
This site has both a debate section and a forum section.

A forum section on a site devoted to debate would be related to debate. Its a context thing. Similarly, if there were a forum section on a sermon site it would be contextually related to preaching. 

If you don't want to debate, that's fine, but let's not pretend there is not a reasonable expectation of debate here.

So my simple question: Is Paul's message true?
I'm not inclined to think Paul's message is true. I see no reason to think Paul was talking about real things.
#62
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
Why is that irrefutably true?
#63
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
couldn't stay away.

From you? Easy

And I will respond to others. 
#64
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Paul is a liar and corruptor of the messages of Jesus Christ you are either a Christian or Pauline.

Indeed he was and he admitted he was.  , Witch. 




“If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?”Romans 3:7

So there it is.  Paul claiming to do what ever it takes including telling bare faced lies.

Paul also doctors Old Testament verses to further his own Christian agenda . .... just as many Christians do to this day. A lesson they learned from  ' St' Paul no doubt.

Ex:


Isaiah 28:16  King James Version

" Therefore thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste".


Now see what crafty ole' Paul did with that , Witch


Romans 9:33 King James Version

As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.


Would you like another?


Deuteronomy 30:14  King James Version

" But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it".

PAUL:


Romans 10:8  King James Version

 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;".


Would you like another?

Jeremiah 31:32 King James Version

" Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord":

PAUL:

Hebrews 8:9  King James Version

"Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord".



Topic's author
#65
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@zedvictor4
Why is anything true? Simply because it is, regardless of what you or I think. So I'll ask you the same question I asked SkepticalOne. If you read my reiteration of Paul's message in comment #60, then I ask: Is it true?
Topic's author
#66
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@SkepticalOne
I was certainly aware that criticism and pushback were inevitable and I am fine with answering both. But my goal was not to get into a debate with atheists about theology. Stephen's inept handling of textual interpretation in comment #64 is a good reason why. Though it may have been carelessness since he probably just copied it from an atheist forum without checking his source.

But, perhaps I simply wanted people to read Paul's message in his own words, and then make a decision as to whether they believed it was true or not. You answered quite in line with your username: "I'm not inclined to think Paul's message is true. I see no reason to think Paul was talking about real things." I would have rather seen a different answer since eternal destinies are at stake. I do hope that you carefully read my comment #60 rather than skimming it because you think it's just more of that Christian nonsense. But I certainly can't force you to do so.

Topic's author
#67
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
You said these humans are right about some things and wrong about others, so what methods should we use to distinguish between which claims they are correct about and which they are not? Is it merely the fact that multiple humans made the claim that makes the claim irrefutable?

I almost forgot to respond to this. If something is true, it is by definition irrefutable. What makes Paul's message irrefutable is that it's true. You can agree or disagree, but that does not change whether or not the message is true.

As far as measuring the claims of the authors of the Bible, I would use a simple method. That which the Bible affirms is true. That which the Bible rejects is false.

For instance, one would have trouble making the argument that the Bible affirms Paul's previous belief that Jesus was not the Messiah. Similarly, one would have trouble making the argument that the Bible rejects Paul's claim that the Bible itself is inspired.

Basic rules of textual interpretation allow us to determine the meaning of the text of the Bible, which then informs us of what the Bible - and ultimately, God - affirms or rejects.
#68
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
@ Stephen

On pg 2, are those fence posts, or driving lanes?
#69
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
So...

1) You know that what Paul said is true because it was in the bible,
2) You know Paul's claims in the bible are true because the bible was inspired by a divine being,
3) You know the bible was inspired by a divine being because the bible says it was inspired by a divine being,
4) You know the bible was telling the truth about being inspired by a divine being because it says so in the bible.

I think I get it now.
Topic's author
#70
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I assume you have considered the topic of epistemology. So, what method do you use to determine if something is true? Or, how do you know what you know?
#71
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
So, what method do you use to determine if something is true?
Evidence. If a claim cannot logically stand on its own without unnecessary assumptions then there is no reason to consider it likely to be true.
Topic's author
#72
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
So if something has evidence, and it is not illogical, then it is true?
#73
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
If there is evidence to support something and no evidence against it then logically it is more likely to be true than if there is no evidence to support it.
Topic's author
#74
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
So you cannot know that something is true. You can only know the probability of it being true, but without any certainty. Is that correct?
#75
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
That is sometimes correct. If you give a more specific example I could give a more specific response.
Topic's author
#76
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I'm simply asking, can you know that anything is true?
#77
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
I don't see why not.
Topic's author
#78
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
And you know something is true if it has evidence and is not illogical?
#79
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
With varying degrees of certainty depending on the situation, yes. Absolutely.
Topic's author
#80
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
But can you know anything with absolute certainty? If so, how?
#81
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
I mean, just as a random example I know that an ice cream truck just passed in front of my house. I was there and I watched it happen.
#82
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
But, perhaps I simply wanted people to read Paul's message in his own words, and then make a decision as to whether they believed it was true or not. You answered quite in line with your username: "I'm not inclined to think Paul's message is true. I see no reason to think Paul was talking about real things." I would have rather seen a different answer since eternal destinies are at stake.
Lol, I'm not inclined to think eternal destinies are at stake.

You are starting with presuppositions I do not share and do not think are warranted. Specifically:"That which the Bible affirms is true. That which the Bible rejects is false." If you can justify that, we would be on the same page - in the same book even! ;-)
#83
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
Why is anything not true? Simply because it is.

Though I'm not arguing about the accepted truth of something.

All biblical interpretations are contextually true.

Whether or not they represent a universal reality, is a completely different issue.

And in that context Pauls message is refutable.


Topic's author
#84
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
To clarify how you know something with certainty then, would you say you know what is true based on your senses (empiricism)?
Topic's author
#85
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@SkepticalOne
Do you know for sure what happens after you die? Or are you just skeptical of the claim of the Bible without actually knowing yourself?
Topic's author
#86
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@zedvictor4
Why is anything not true? Simply because it is.
Exactly! We agree on something.

But I didn't ask if Paul's message is refutable in a particular context, or whether it was a contextually true biblical interpretation. Paul's message in Acts 17:24-31 is either true or false simply because it is, which is why I asked: is it true?
#87
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
I see nothing wrong with the idea that empirical evidence in favor of or against a particular claim ought to be taken into account when evaluating said claim, sure.
Topic's author
#88
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
That doesn't answer the question about specifically how you can know something for certain is true. That's fine if you can't know anything for certain, but just say that then.

#89
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
If I am giving general non-specific answers it is because I am given general non-specific questions.

I have no problem with any of the questions you have asked or how you have asked them of course. There is nothing wrong with asking big-picture questions just as there is nothing wrong with asking more detailed and pointed questions, so long as you know that you should expect the response to be on the same level as the inquiry.
Topic's author
#90
Fruit_Inspector
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 855
3
4
7
Fruit_Inspector's avatar
Fruit_Inspector
3
4
7
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
You are not giving non-specific answers. You are giving non-answers. Let me try again. Can you know anything with absolute certainty? If so, please be specific in how you can know anything with absolute certainty. Saying "I don't see why not, I saw an ice cream truck today" is not a good answer. If you are unfamiliar with epistemology, let me know and I will move on.