Everything about Buddhism

Author: Critical-Tim
Philosophy
reason
Buddhism

Posts

Total: 136
#61
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,567
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
One thing to rescue from budhism is the meditation which is a powerful tool to get to what they call Nirvana and it's not exclusive to this religion, I think it is also present in other asian religions which was spread all over the world for our delight.

I have to add to the definition you gave of Nirvana that it is also a state where you feel the oneness of man and universe, meaning that we and all that exists in this universe are one only conscioussness. According to some people's experiences, when the meditator manages to activate his pineal gland, which is the most difficult thing to reach when meditating, apart from happiness and peace, he can feel he is part of the whole universe, he feels what it feels to be a plant, an animal, a mountain and everything that exists in this universe at the same time, it's like an omnipresent experience. I've seen this is the same as the near-death experience, people that are dying feels a profound peace and happiness, and also that they are one with the universe which is very pleasant for them to the point that they wanted to stay there. It's as if our real "home" or consciouss state of being were after death.

I'm not sure if Buddhims claims we are one with the universe, I think it does, but as far as I can tell this belief that we are one consciousness that survives after death is based on the experience, contrary to christianity that holds beliefs on mere stories.
Topic's author
#62
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@IlDiavolo
That is fascinating. I can try to explain the psychological phenomenon of near-death experiences (NDEs), which are the conscious, semi-conscious or recollected experiences of someone who is approaching or has temporarily begun the process of dying. Remember this is merely a scientific perspective.

NDEs are not a figment of the imagination, but rather a result of changes in brain function during the process of dying. NDEs vary from case to case, but some common elements include:
  • Feelings of peacefulness or serenity
  • Vivid imagery, such as bright light, movement through a tunnel, or visions of events from one’s past
  • Out-of-body experiences, in which one feels removed from one’s physical body
  • Encounters with other beings, such as loved ones or anonymous entities perceived as angels

Some people may interpret these experiences in religious or spiritual terms, such as going to heaven or hell, meeting God or the devil, or having a life review. However, these interpretations are influenced by one’s personal beliefs, culture, and expectations.

NDEs can have profound effects on the experiencers’ lives. Some common after-effects include:
  • Loss of the fear of death and a strengthened belief in the afterlife
  • A new awareness of meaning and purpose in one’s life
  • A new sense of self with increased self-esteem
  • Changes in values, priorities, and relationships
  • Increased interest in spirituality and altruism
Topic's author
#63
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
To make this simple I will list your options from comment 59, as recited below.
Here is my question to you:
Considering the numerous English Bible versions available, how can we discern which ones represent the direct words of God without human interpretation and establish a dependable dictionary standard to evaluate these translations, considering the diversity of definitions?
Here are your options:
  1. All translations are the Holy word of God.
  2. Only the exact words God spoke are the Holy word of God.

Option 1: All translations are the Holy word of God.

Verbal plenary inspiration: This view holds that every word of the original languages of the Bible was inspired by God, and that the Bible is without error in all matters of faith and practice. This view also holds that the best way to translate the Bible is to preserve the literal and grammatical features of the original languages as much as possible, while making minimal adjustments for readability and clarity. This view assumes that the original languages are the most accurate and reliable expression of God’s word, and that any deviation from them may compromise the meaning and authority of the Scripture. Some examples of translations that follow this view are the King James Version, the New American Standard Bible, and the English Standard Version.

  1. Translation and Interpretation: This scenario holds true if translations are considered to preserve the Holy word of God. However, it's essential to recognize that translation inherently involves interpretation. In essence, translation demands a profound grasp of both the source and target languages, as well as the ability to discern the author's intent, cultural nuances, and contextual aspects of the text. Consequently, every translation encompasses an element of interpretation to faithfully convey the original text's essence and meaning in the target language. By qualifying translations which are interpretations as retaining the Holy Word of God you would be contradicting your stance that interpretation fails to retain God's Holy word.
  2. The Translator's Prophetic Role: One potential solution to this dilemma is to believe that every translator acted as a prophet of God, ensuring an exact transmission of His words in the new translation.
  3. Choosing a Dictionary for Interpretation: However, this raises the question of which dictionary should be used to interpret the words based on their definitions, all without introducing human judgment not explicitly stated by God's words.
Ultimately, to believe that all translations are the Holy Word of God, two paths emerge. The first entails accepting that translations are valid, and since translations inherently involve interpretations, interpretations must also be valid. This, however, contradicts the initial stance against interpretation's validity. The second path involves believing that all translators were prophets through whom God conveyed His exact words. However, this raises the question: which dictionary was intended by God, or are humans to decide how to interpret His word? Consequently, it becomes evident that interpretation is an integral component of the assertion that all translations constitute the Holy Word of God.


Option 2: Only the exact words God spoke are the Holy word of God.

Dynamic plenary inspiration: This view holds that every thought or concept of the original languages of the Bible was inspired by God, and that the Bible is without error in all matters of faith and practice. This view also holds that the best way to translate the Bible is to convey the meaning and function of the original languages in a natural and idiomatic way, while making necessary changes for cultural and contextual relevance. This view assumes that the original languages are not necessarily superior or inferior to other languages, and that God’s word can be faithfully communicated in different ways, as long as the message and purpose of the Scripture are maintained. Some examples of translations that follow this view are the New International Version, the New Living Translation, and the GOD’S WORD Translation.

  1. In English Translation and Interpretation: If you only know English and are unfamiliar with the original languages of the Bible (such as Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek), you're reading an English translation. As previously discussed, translation inherently involves interpretation. If this premise holds true, then the words you quote in English could be seen as invalidated by your own assertion that they cannot be interpreted. The paradox arises: How can one prove the invalidity of interpretations when that very claim is an interpretation itself?
  2. Multilingual Expertise in English Discussions: Alternatively, if you possess knowledge of these original languages but choose to participate in an English context (assuming others only know English), it could be argued that you're not reading an interpretation but rather facilitating interpretation for the benefit of those who understand English.
  3. Choosing a Dictionary for Interpretation: However, this still leaves the challenge of selecting a dictionary or standard for interpretation. Since all words require interpretation based on their meanings, maintaining a strict and literal stance on the Bible raises the question of which dictionary should be used. Advocating for a particular dictionary without direct scriptural guidance may be viewed as an erroneous human judgment. It involves choosing how to interpret God's words without explicit assurance from the scriptures, potentially conflicting with the belief in their divine origin.
Ultimately, to firmly believe that only the precise words spoken by God are His direct and holy word implies a significant realization. Reading the Bible in English, being a translation of His exact words, is, in essence, an interpretation rather than the direct conveyance of His words. Paradoxically, this understanding calls into question the validity of the verses presented, as they inadvertently become invalidated interpretations according to their own conclusion, resulting in self-contradiction. The alternative path arises in the event you possess the knowledge to read the Bible's original languages. Nevertheless, this path also presents a formidable challenge: determining the intended dictionary for interpreting the meaning of the words inscribed in the Bible.

Of course, there is option three, but it would directly contradict your claim in the first place.

Paraphrastic inspiration: This view holds that every idea or message of the original languages of the Bible was inspired by God, but that the Bible may contain errors or contradictions in matters of history, science, or culture. This view also holds that the best way to translate the Bible is to restate or summarize the original languages in one’s own words, while adding explanations or interpretations that may enhance the understanding or application of the Scripture. This view assumes that the original languages are not sufficient or clear enough for modern readers, and that God’s word can be improved or clarified by human creativity and insight. Some examples of translations that follow this view are The Living Bible, The Message, and The Passion Translation.

In conclusion: All roads lead to Rome (Human interpretation of definitions not explicitly stated by God)

Please don't avoid addressing this unless you concede. What do you think?
Topic's author
#64
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
I am a TRUE Christian that follows our Jewish Jesus’ inspired words as God to the letter as He intended all of His Jewish Christians to do
How can you call yourself "a TRUE Christian who follows God's words to the letter" if you must use your erroneous human interpretations to understand their meanings, as you lack a God given dictionary?
Topic's author
#65
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
You might even believe in a High Priest who conveys God's direct words and specifies the dictionary that God intends us to use. However, even if you have a Bible and a dictionary selected by God's words through a High Priest, you would still need to interpret the words using the definitions provided in the dictionary. This is because the words themselves lack inherent meaning and must undergo interpretation to acquire significance, underscoring the continued necessity of interpretation, aligning with my counter stance in comment 57, recited below.

Therefore, based on these arguments, it seems more likely that Peter is talking about the origin of prophecy, not its interpretation, in 2 Peter 1:20. However, this does not mean that interpretation is unimportant or irrelevant. On the contrary, Peter also warns his readers that some people twist the Scriptures to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:16). He urges them to be diligent and careful in studying and applying the Scriptures, and to avoid being carried away by error (2 Peter 3:17-18). He also reminds them that they have been given everything they need for life and godliness through the knowledge of God and Jesus Christ (2 Peter 1:3). Therefore, as Christians, we should seek to understand and obey the Scriptures, which are God’s word to us, and which point us to Jesus Christ, who is God’s Word made flesh (John 1:14).
Ultimately, the fact you need a dictionary in the first place is evident that you must interpret the words.
Your choice to interpret them literally was not explicitly instructed by God but chosen with your human judgement.

Your accusations contain inherent contradictions. On one hand, you stress the importance of not interpreting, advocating for strict literal adherence. Yet, on the other hand, you insist on taking God's word literally, deeming any deviation as blasphemy. Is this not, in itself, a form of human judgment not explicitly dictated in the scripture? One might argue that such a stance, even if implied, delves into the realm of interpretation, moving beyond the domain of explicit and literal words. It becomes clear that these two positions cannot coexist harmoniously without inherent tensions and contradictions.
Topic's author
#66
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
How much further must I go, and are you willing?
#67
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,190
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Critical-Tim
Well, I think that "no sub-text" sums up what I mean.

A deeper message hidden in words achieves what?

Other than confusion or misunderstanding or misinterpretation.

One can only fully understand a hidden message with deeper meaning if said message is literally explained.

Therefore it would be logical and sensible to be literal.

 One would hope that a GOD would tell us exactly what it expects from us.
Topic's author
#68
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@zedvictor4
@Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Reading the Bible only as literal would make things easier to understand, but the drawback is the application of knowledge becomes extremely limited to the exact and literal circumstance, rather than abstract and multi-applicable knowledge.

In Matthew 13:10-17 (NIV), Jesus' response to his disciples' question about why he spoke in parables is as follows:
"10 The disciples came to him and asked, 'Why do you speak to the people in parables?' 11 He replied, 'Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12 Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. 13 This is why I speak to them in parables: 'Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.' 14 In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: 'You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. 15 For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise, they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.' 16 But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. 17 For truly I tell you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.'"

In this passage, Jesus explains that he uses parables to convey deeper spiritual truths to those who have the capacity to understand them, particularly his disciples. He contrasts those who have receptive hearts and minds to receive the message with those who have closed themselves off from understanding. The use of parables serves both to reveal and conceal the message, depending on the spiritual readiness of the listener.

To hear without hearing?
To see without seeing?

He could only mean those who don't wish to understand won't understand, implying that the meaning was not explicit or on the surface. Therefore, Jesus employed parables not as literal, straightforward teachings but as metaphorical and interpretive stories meant to engage listeners, encourage reflection, and convey profound spiritual insights. The metaphors and symbolism in parables often concealed the deeper meanings, making them accessible to those with a receptive and open-hearted approach to understanding.

I don't claim the entire scripture is interpretable, but at least some of it was meant to be, making a strictly literal approach ineffective to understand with our eyes and ears open as described above.

Topic's author
#69
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@zedvictor4
@Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Ambiguity in the Bible serves as a deliberate choice to make the text broadly applicable. By not specifying every detail, the scripture becomes a source of wisdom and guidance that can adapt to various situations and cultures. On the other hand, precision, while providing clarity, often lacks context. When rules or guidance are too precise, they might only be applicable in very specific circumstances, limiting their usefulness.

Therefore, a balance between ambiguity and precision is essential. Ambiguity allows for the universality and adaptability of the message, while precision provides clarity when necessary. This balanced approach ensures that the Bible can offer guidance that is both clear and relevant, no matter the context or situation. It allows readers to apply the teachings of the scripture to their lives while considering the specific circumstances they face, striking a harmonious equilibrium between clarity and adaptability.
#70
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Critical-Tim


. 
Critical_Tim, who is on record in calling Jesus a LIAR as God because of His literal words, and is vying to be as Bible Stupid as Miss Tradesecret, and was obviously sent to this Religion Forum from Satan himself to disrupt Jesus’ true literal words within the scriptures,

ADDRESSING YOUR SATANIC POST #54,


YOUR QUOTE IN SHOWING THE BIBLE CONTRADICTS ITSELF!!!:  “Therefore, I ask again, why were many women, fewer than men, preaching or speaking God's words to a congregation composing of both men and women, and God didn't punish them? Specifically, the women I asked about, including Aaron's sister.”
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/9913/posts/411172

Since you are blatantly showing the Bible contradicts itself with your quote above relative to 1 Timothy 2:11 in explicitly showing that women are NOT to teach and just STFU, then you must be so proud to point this anomaly out to everyone, GOOD FOR YOU as you will burn in hell upon your demise!

Jesus as God didn’t punish them Bible fool because Christians are always forgiven: “To him all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.” (Acts 10:43) DUH!

Since Satan has obviously sent you to this Religion Forum to disrupt Jesus’ DIRECT WORDS, how do you want to Satanically reinterpret Jesus’ LITERAL WORDS again in the following passage:

"The women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church." (1 Corinthians 14:34-35)

What ungodly “spin doctoring” this time will you use on the above passage as you slap Jesus in the face again, you minion of Satan!


NEXT BIBLE FOOL LIKE "CRITICAL-TIM" THAT WANTS TO REINTERPRET THE DISTURBING ONLY VERSES OF THE BIBLE, WILL BE ...? 

.
#71
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Critical-Tim


.
Critical_Tim, who is on record in calling Jesus a LIAR as God because of His literal words, and is vying to be as Bible Stupid as Miss Tradesecret, and was obviously sent to this Religion Forum from Satan himself to disrupt Jesus’ true literal words within the scriptures,


ADDRESSING YOUR SATANIC POST #55,

YOUR CONTINUED PITIFUL UNGODLY QUOTES: “There is no need to quote you. It is clear you have expressed your belief that when the Bible says all of God's words are flawless means he always speak literally.”


Correcto, duh!

“I find this hard to believe, especially since much of the Bible speaks in parables. Do you think the parables were to be taken literally too?”

Why shouldn’t they, they were spoken by Jesus Bible fool!


“It reminds me of what Jesus told the disciples was the reason he spoke in parables. Do you know?”

The bottom line is they came from the mouth of Jesus AS GOD!  Therefore, since you are a minion of Satan, try and spin doctor this parable of Jesus relative to His Second Coming in showing that He is an accomplice to murder:

JESUS SAID: “But those mine enemies which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” (Luke 19:27)

I can only gain solace in knowing that you are Hell Bound upon your demise you little minion of Satan, because of Jesus’ LITERAL words in this passage that you are guilty of: “But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” (Revelation 21:8)”

NEXT BIBLE FOOL EQUAL TO “CRITICAL-TIM” THAT TRIES TO SPIN DOCTOR JESUS’ LITERAL WORDS TO NOT MEAN WHAT THEY ACTUALLY SAY, WILL BE …?

.

#72
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Critical-Tim


.
Critical_Tim, who is on record in calling Jesus a LIAR as God because of His literal words, and is vying to be as Bible Stupid as Miss Tradesecret, and was obviously sent to this Religion Forum from Satan himself to disrupt Jesus’ true literal words within the scriptures,

ADDRESSING YOUR SATANIC POST #56,

YOUR BLASPHEMOUS QUOTE SAYING THAT PETER WAS WRONG IN CALLING JESUS GOD!!!:  “One possible interpretation is that Peter is affirming the deity of Jesus Christ, and that he is using a grammatical construction known as the Granville Sharp rule.”

Fuck the Granville Sharp rule because Peter was talking to the ignorant goat herder Christians at the time relative to the primitive Bronze and Iron Age you ignorant Bible fool!  Then your minion of Satan MO comes out and can actually say; “One possible interpretation ….”  WHAT?  The passage in question is shown below in its LITERAL FORM that states Jesus is God, period!

“Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours.” (2 Peter 1:1)


Now, not only are you calling Jesus a LIAR in your reinterpreting the LITERAL DIRECT WORDS of Jesus, but now you are calling Peter a LIAR as well in the rest of your Satanic post #56 which is BLASPHEME!


NEXT BIBLE DENIER OF THE LITERAL WORD OF JESUS AND PETER LIKE “CRITICAL-TIM” IN SAYING THAT PETER LIED AS WELL, WILL BE …?! 

.
#73
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Critical-Tim


.
Critical_Tim, who is on record in calling Jesus a LIAR as God because of His literal words, and is vying to be as Bible Stupid as Miss Tradesecret, and was obviously sent to this Religion Forum from Satan himself to disrupt Jesus’ true literal words within the scriptures,

ADDRESSING YOUR SATANIC POST #57,

YOU SLIPPING ON YOUR FREUDIAN QUOTE:  “This verse is from the second letter of Peter, one of the apostles of Jesus Christ. He wrote this letter to warn his readers about false teachers who would distort the truth and lead people astray.”

BINGO!  As shown in this discussion, your quote fully describes YOU because of you trying to take Jesus’ LITERAL WORDS away from Him!  Thank you!  LOL!


YOUR QUOTE WHERE YOU ARE NOT SURE OF YOURSELF, THEN YOUR QUOTE IS MOOT!:  “Therefore, based on these arguments, it seems more likely that Peter is talking about the origin of prophecy, not its interpretation, in 2 Peter 1:20.”

WHAT DID YOU JUST SAY; “It seems more likely ….” where you are NOT sure of yourself, but still you want your statement to say that what Peter said in the following passage doesn’t relate to someones interpretation???!!!  ROFLOL!!!!  

“Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any priuate Interpretation:”  (2 Peter 1:20)


NEXT BIBLE FOOL LIKE “CRITICAL-TIM” THAT IS NOT SURE IN AN ABSOLUTE MANNER RELATIVE TO THE VERSE 2 PETER 1:20, BUT CALLS PETER’S DIRECT LITERAL WORDS AS A LIE ANYWAY, WILL BE …?

.
#74
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Critical-Tim


.
Critical_Tim, who is on record in calling Jesus a LIAR as God, and is vying to be as Bible Stupid as Miss Tradesecret, and was obviously sent to this Religion Forum from Satan himself to disrupt Jesus’ true literal words within the scriptures, and now calls Peter in the scriptures a LIAR,

ADDRESSING YOUR SATANIC POST #58,

YOUR SATANIC STATEMENT OF ERROR:  “I have also gone on the inquiring stance of challenging your assumption, many of which you disputed with verses, but you never reconciled with my verses,”

HELLO, ANYBODY HOME TODAY, NOT!  I do not, I repeat, I do not have to reconcile with your verses in any way whatsoever because my verses are the LITERAL AND DIRECT INSPIRED WORDS BY JESUS, whereas your deceitful Satanic ways contradict them!  GET IT, bible fool? Huh? Maybe?


NEXT BIBLE IGNORANT FOOL LIKE “CRITICAL-TIM” THAT IS TRYING TO BE MORE BIBLE STUPID THAN MISS TRADESECRET, WILL BE …?

.
#75
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Critical-Tim


.

Critical_Tim, who is on record in calling Jesus a LIAR as God because of His literal words, and is vying to be as Bible Stupid as Miss Tradesecret, and was obviously sent to this Religion Forum from Satan himself to disrupt Jesus’ true literal words within the scriptures, and now calls Peter a LIAR,

ADDRESSING YOUR SATANIC POST #59,

YOUR FEEBLE SATANIC STATEMENT TO ME RELATIVE TO THE MANY BIBLE VERSIONS: “Considering the numerous English Bible versions available, how can we discern which ones represent the direct words of God without human interpretation and establish a dependable dictionary standard to evaluate these translations, considering the diversity of definitions?”

The bottom line Satanic Bible fool, is that the King James 1611 Bible is the closest to being inspired by Jesus as God, whereas every other newer version are perversions, which equals YOU in trying to rewrite Jesus’ literal and true words in the 1611 KJV! 


NEXT BIBLE FOOL LIKE “CRITICAL-TIM” THAT QUESTIONS THE 1611 KING JAMES VERSION THAT IS CLOSEST TO THE ACTUAL DIRECT WORDS OF JESUS, WILL BE …?

#76
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Critical-Tim


.
Critical_Tim, who is on record in calling Jesus a LIAR as God because of His literal words, and is vying to be as Bible Stupid as Miss Tradesecret, and was obviously sent to this Religion Forum from Satan himself to disrupt Jesus’ true literal words within the scriptures, and now calls Peter a LIAR,

ADDRESSING YOUR FEEBLE POST #60,

YOUR FEEBLE POST IN LYING AGAIN:  “You think I would hide? No, I wouldn't let you off that easy. You have quite an untraditional perspective, with subpar evidence in support.”

When is it an “untraditional perspective” when I posit the LITERAL AND DIRECT WORDS OF JESUS when I easily bury your Satanic ways in trying so hard to reinterpret the disturbing passages of Jesus as God?

EXPLAIN:  


NEXT BIBLE IGNORANT PERSON LIKE “CRITICAL-TIM” THAT SAYS MY RESPONSES OF THE DIRECT LITERAL WORDS OF JESUS ARE SUBPAR, WILL BE …?

.
#77
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Critical-Tim


.
Critical_Tim, who is on record in calling Jesus a LIAR as God because of His literal words, and is vying to be as Bible Stupid as Miss Tradesecret, and was obviously sent to this Religion Forum from Satan himself to disrupt Jesus’ true literal words within the scriptures, and now calls Peter a LIAR,


ADDRESSING YOUR SATANIC POST #63,

YOUR LAUGHABLE QUOTE RELATIVE TO PROPOSITIONS RELATING TO THE BIBLE, OF BEING PUT INTO YOUR RIGHTFUL PLACE, AND YOU DON’T LIKE IT:  “Please don't avoid addressing this unless you concede. What do you think?”

LOL!!!  Jesus and I NEVER conceit to His truthful and DIRECT LITERAL WORDS, understand you little minion of Satan?

I already addressed your Bible Buffoonery to this topic herewith:


IS THERE ANYONE THAT CAN HELP "CRITICAL-TIM" IN NOT BEING SO BIBLE STUPID, WILL BE ...?

.
#78
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Critical-Tim


.
Critical_Tim, who is on record in calling Jesus a LIAR as God because of His literal words, and is vying to be as Bible Stupid as Miss Tradesecret, and was obviously sent to this Religion Forum from Satan himself to disrupt Jesus’ true literal words within the scriptures, and now calls Peter a LIAR,


ADDRESSING YOUR SATANIC AND NOW WANTING POST #64,

YOUR PITIFUL NOW ON YOUR BACK FOOT QUOTE BECAUSE OF YOUR BIBLE STUPIDITY:  “How can you call yourself "a TRUE Christian who follows God's words to the letter" if you must use your erroneous human interpretations to understand their meanings, as you lack a God given dictionary?”

HUH? My what interpretations?  HELLO!!!  I have  NO INTERPRETATIONS when I follow Jesus’ direct and literal words, whereas, IT IS YOU, that have a “plethora” of ungodly interpretations that you Satanically use to respond to my direct literal words of Jesus!  How outright Bible Stupid can you get?

Your posts are getting WEAKER and WEAKER, and don’t think that the membership doesn’t see this, you little minion of Satan!

NEXT BIBLE IGNORANT LYING PERSON LIKE “CRITICAL-TIM” WILL BE …?

.
#79
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Critical-Tim


.
Critical_Tim, who is on record in calling Jesus a LIAR as God because of His literal words, and is vying to be as Bible Stupid as Miss Tradesecret, and was obviously sent to this Religion Forum from Satan himself to disrupt Jesus’ true literal words within the scriptures, and now calls Peter a LIAR,

ADDRESSING YOUR SATANIC AND NOW EVER, EVER, EVER, WANTING POST #64,


YOUR GRASPING FOR STRAWS QUOTE NOW THAT I HAVE MADE YOU THE COMPLETE BIBLE FOOL IN FRONT OF THE MEMBERSHIP:  “Your accusations contain inherent contradictions. On one hand, you stress the importance of not interpreting, advocating for strict literal adherence. Yet, on the other hand, you insist on taking God's word literally, deeming any deviation as blasphemy. Is this not, in itself, a form of human judgment not explicitly dictated in the scripture? ? One might argue that such a stance, even if implied, delves into the realm of interpretation, moving beyond the domain of explicit and literal words.”

I can visually see your fingertips bleeding because now you are grasping for the proverbial straws that are not even there to begin with to TRY and talk your way out of your Satanic ways of reinterpreting the scriptures where you are not to perform this ungodly act,  because what Jesus said once, HE DID NOT MEAN FOR ANYONE TO TAKE HIS WORDS IN CONTRADICTING WAYS!  GET IT MINION OF SATAN? HUH?

Your exact words showing that your position above is not an absolute: “One might argue that such a stance, even if implied, delves into the realm of interpretation, moving beyond the domain of explicit and literal words.”

"One might argue of such a stance ..." is not an absolute, you minion of Satan!  There is NO, I repeat, NO interpretation of Jesus’ DIRECT AND LITERAL WORDS, where this is hard for you to understand in a simple sense!  You are having a very hard time in defending your Satanic ways, and this will be brought out further in discussion of your complete Bible stupidity, do you understand?!

NEXT RUNAWAY FROM THE DIRECT LITERAL WORDS OF JESUS LIKE “CRITICAL-TIM” IS DOING, WILL BE …?

.
#80
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Critical-Tim


.
Critical_Tim, who is on record in calling Jesus a LIAR as God because of His literal words, and is vying to be as Bible Stupid as Miss Tradesecret, and was obviously sent to this Religion Forum from Satan himself to disrupt Jesus’ true literal words within the scriptures, and now calls Peter a LIAR,


ADDRESSING YOUR SCARED POST #65, 


YOUR QUOTE OF DESPAIR:  “How much further must I go, and are you willing?”

Listen up you Satanic minion of Satan, I haven ’t even started with you yet, where Jesus’ TRUE WORDS will continue to bury your Satanic modus operandi from now and into the future, do you understand?

CHAIN UP, because Jesus and I have great embarrassments for you in the near future, whereas if you have the balls, create a thread where you will take your pathetic Satanic answers to questions about the Bible, and I WILL BE THERE in making you the continued Bible inept fool of this Religion forum, understood? 


NEXT PERSON WITHIN THIS FORUM THAT IS TURNING SCARED LIKE “CRITICAL-TIM” TO JESUS’ TRUE LITERAL WORDS, WILL BE …?

.
#81
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Critical-Tim


.
Critical_Tim, who is on record in calling Jesus a LIAR as God because of His literal words, and is vying to be as Bible Stupid as Miss Tradesecret, and was obviously sent to this Religion Forum from Satan himself to disrupt Jesus’ true literal words within the scriptures, and now calls Peter a LIAR,

ADDRESSING YOUR SATANIC POST # 68, 


YOU SLIPPING ON YOUR FREUDIAN AGAIN QUOTE:  “Reading the Bible only as literal would make things easier to understand, but the drawback is the application of knowledge becomes extremely limited to the exact and literal circumstance, rather than abstract and multi-applicable knowledge.”

PRAISE JESUS!  You actually ADMITTED that in reading the Bible LITERALLY would make things easier, where there is no drawback whatsoever because look how outright STUPID you have made yourself in taking the position that one is not to read the Bible literally!  LOL!!!

NEXT PERSON THAT SLIPS ON THIER FREUDIAN LIKE "CRITICAL-TIM" HAS DONE, WILL BE ...?

.
#82
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Critical-Tim


.
Critical_Tim, who is on record in calling Jesus a LIAR as God because of His literal words, and is vying to be as Bible Stupid as Miss Tradesecret, and was obviously sent to this Religion Forum from Satan himself to disrupt Jesus’ true literal words within the scriptures, and now calls Peter a LIAR,

ADDRESSING YOUR SATANIC POST #69


YOUR FEEBLE QUOTE ONCE AGAIN:  “On the other hand, precision, while providing clarity, often lacks context. When rules or guidance are too precise, they might only be applicable in very specific circumstances, limiting their usefulness.”

Isn’t it an irony that the most disturbing passages within the scriptures need to be “reinterpreted” to a better outcome like you have shown throughout your Bible stupidity in this discussion?  

I have great plans for you in this discussion, and you better not RUN AWAY from them, do you understand? YES?

WHO WANTS TO HELP “CRITICAL-TIM” IN MY CONTINUED FORTHCOMING BIBLE SLAPPING HIM SILLY®️, WILL BE …?

#83
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Critical-Tim


.
Critical_Tim, who is on record in calling Jesus a LIAR as God because of His literal words, and is vying to be as Bible Stupid as Miss Tradesecret, and was obviously sent to this Religion Forum from Satan himself to disrupt Jesus’ true literal words within the scriptures, and now calls Peter a LIAR,

OH OH!  Guess what, you are still HIDING from the following post that I made to you, whereas I have addressed every Satanic post thus far that you have made to me!  What gives? SCARED? 

Here is the link that you are running away from in front of the membership, where you say you own this forum? Surely you jest! LOL! 

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/9913/posts/411140

The above link that you run from is only a modicum of what is yet to come in your Satanic behalf, understood? CHAIN UP!


NEXT PERSON THAT HAS TO RUN AWAY FROM DISTURBING BIBLICAL AXIOMS LIKE “CRITICAL-TIM,” WILL BE …?

#84
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Stephen


Stephen,

If I can be frank, and you can still remain Stephen, do you think that Miss Tradesecret is starting to be worried that her only claim to fame within this Religion Forum is her being the #1 Bible Stupid fool as is shown over many years, where this position of hers might be jeopardized because as shown in my last 14 posts shown above to the ever so Bible dumbfounded Critical-Tim, where he may be wanting to take over her rightful said position in the future?

Jesus and I have such great plans for poor Critical-Tim, where he said that he will not run away from me, like the Bible inept Miss Tradesecret had to do to try and save face in front of the membership!  

Grab the popcorn, Critical-Tim's ride is going to get real bumpy from here on out, praise my serial killer Jesus' true LITERAL AND DIRECT WORDS!
Topic's author
#85
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
YOUR QUOTE IN SHOWING THE BIBLE CONTRADICTS ITSELF!!!:  “Therefore, I ask again, why were many women, fewer than men, preaching or speaking God's words to a congregation composing of both men and women, and God didn't punish them? Specifically, the women I asked about, including Aaron's sister.”

Since you are blatantly showing the Bible contradicts itself with your quote above relative to 1 Timothy 2:11 in explicitly showing that women are NOT to teach and just STFU, then you must be so proud to point this anomaly out to everyone, GOOD FOR YOU as you will burn in hell upon your demise!

Jesus as God didn’t punish them Bible fool because Christians are always forgiven: “To him all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.” (Acts 10:43) DUH!

Since Satan has obviously sent you to this Religion Forum to disrupt Jesus’ DIRECT WORDS, how do you want to Satanically reinterpret Jesus’ LITERAL WORDS again in the following passage:

"The women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church." (1 Corinthians 14:34-35)
I was asking a relevant question about God's Holy scriptures, which I assume God intended us to read being it is in the Bible. It is you who have claimed it is contradicting itself; on the other hand, I have inquired how it can be made sense of rather than assuming it is God's flaw, as you have done. Instead, try considering how he did not contradict himself, perhaps contextual??

By the way, the verse was Micah 6:4, which says:
For I brought you up from the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of slavery. I sent Moses to lead you, also Aaron and Miriam.
Topic's author
#86
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
YOUR BLASPHEMOUS QUOTE SAYING THAT PETER WAS WRONG IN CALLING JESUS GOD!!!:  “One possible interpretation is that Peter is affirming the deity of Jesus Christ, and that he is using a grammatical construction known as the Granville Sharp rule.”

Fuck the Granville Sharp rule because Peter was talking to the ignorant goat herder Christians at the time relative to the primitive Bronze and Iron Age you ignorant Bible fool!  Then your minion of Satan MO comes out and can actually say; “One possible interpretation ….”  WHAT?  The passage in question is shown below in its LITERAL FORM that states Jesus is God, period!

“Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours.” (2 Peter 1:1)
The rule is not the point; the point is during that "and" could refer to both as two entities, or to one with two attributes.
Therefore, your claim of one is not of God's words but your own.
Topic's author
#87
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
YOU SLIPPING ON YOUR FREUDIAN QUOTE:  “This verse is from the second letter of Peter, one of the apostles of Jesus Christ. He wrote this letter to warn his readers about false teachers who would distort the truth and lead people astray.”

BINGO!  As shown in this discussion, your quote fully describes YOU because of you trying to take Jesus’ LITERAL WORDS away from Him!  Thank you!  LOL!

YOUR QUOTE WHERE YOU ARE NOT SURE OF YOURSELF, THEN YOUR QUOTE IS MOOT!:  “Therefore, based on these arguments, it seems more likely that Peter is talking about the origin of prophecy, not its interpretation, in 2 Peter 1:20.”

WHAT DID YOU JUST SAY; “It seems more likely ….” where you are NOT sure of yourself, but still you want your statement to say that what Peter said in the following passage doesn’t relate to someone's interpretation???!!!  ROFLOL!!!!  
Why did you ignore my correlation I drew between other parts of the Bible and instead pointed at my open mindedness as to escape the question?
You provided absolutely no evidence in this post to counter my argument, please do in the next one.
Topic's author
#88
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
YOUR FEEBLE SATANIC STATEMENT TO ME RELATIVE TO THE MANY BIBLE VERSIONS: “Considering the numerous English Bible versions available, how can we discern which ones represent the direct words of God without human interpretation and establish a dependable dictionary standard to evaluate these translations, considering the diversity of definitions?”

The bottom line Satanic Bible fool, is that the King James 1611 Bible is the closest to being inspired by Jesus as God, whereas every other newer version are perversions, which equals YOU in trying to rewrite Jesus’ literal and true words in the 1611 KJV! 
You insist I am a "Satanic Bible Fool" for asking a stupid question, yet you fail to provide evidence for this so called "simple question," why is that?
Topic's author
#89
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
YOUR PITIFUL NOW ON YOUR BACK FOOT QUOTE BECAUSE OF YOUR BIBLE STUPIDITY:  “How can you call yourself "a TRUE Christian who follows God's words to the letter" if you must use your erroneous human interpretations to understand their meanings, as you lack a God given dictionary?”

HUH? My what interpretations?  HELLO!!!  I have  NO INTERPRETATIONS when I follow Jesus’ direct and literal words, whereas, IT IS YOU, that have a “plethora” of ungodly interpretations that you Satanically use to respond to my direct literal words of Jesus!  How outright Bible Stupid can you get?
Even literal words are an interpretation as they need a dictionary to interpret the meaning behind the non-inherent meanings of words.
I say again, with what not God given dictionary have you chosen with your human judgement to interpret the words of God?
Topic's author
#90
Critical-Tim
Critical-Tim's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 902
3
2
7
Critical-Tim's avatar
Critical-Tim
3
2
7
-->
@Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Listen up you Satanic minion of Satan, I haven ’t even started with you yet, where Jesus’ TRUE WORDS will continue to bury your Satanic modus operandi from now and into the future, do you understand?

CHAIN UP, because Jesus and I have great embarrassments for you in the near future, whereas if you have the balls, create a thread where you will take your pathetic Satanic answers to questions about the Bible, and I WILL BE THERE in making you the continued Bible inept fool of this Religion forum, understood? 

NEXT PERSON WITHIN THIS FORUM THAT IS TURNING SCARED LIKE “CRITICAL-TIM” TO JESUS’ TRUE LITERAL WORDS, WILL BE …?
Your increasing insults give me a bit of perspective of the level of your agitation, making me believe you are the one becoming disturbed.
Moreover, I am glad to hear you are thinking of me being scared, since after all I have shown no signs, meaning it was in your imagination.
I then ask myself why you would imagine me running, and I believe it is because you may be running out of options.

This, of course, is speculation, which could be entirely false. - I'll be here.