7
   

If the soul is mortal why do christians believe in hell?

 
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 07:26 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

Romeo is one of those people who thinks that if he says something that makes it true. (He's not the only one.)

One clear example of his refusal to face facts is his insistence that the guy who wrote Matthew's Gospel was also a disciple. Any serious scholar of Biblical History will tell you that's a load of old bollocks. It was written sometime between 70 and 110 AD, long after the original disciples, (if there were any,) had passed on.


Romeo is in his own world, Izzy. I wanna get along with him...I think most people do. But he does make it difficult.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  0  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 08:44 am
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Brandon wrote:
Quote:
You cannot argue that something is true because someone said so. That is not evidence.


If your daughter arrived home from school in tears saying a teacher had groped her titties, but there are no marks or other evidence, what would you do?

Because she was reporting something that happened to her personally, and which is an example of phenomena that have been proved beyond doubt to have happened to many people before, I would strongly suspect that she was truthfully and correctly reporting her experiences.

On the other hand, there is no verifiable evidence of the existence of a soul or the afterlife, and it is exactly the type of thing that people would delude themselves into believing to comfort themselves. Therefore, I doubt their existence, and doubting their existence, you cannot present the fact that someone said so as evidence. These are specific assertions about the nature of the universe which are not in evidence. Testimonials are not evidence for their existence. Furthermore, since you, presumably, have never observed real evidence that these things exist, it is irrational for you to believe that they exist. You are free to believe it, but since their existence is completely unsupported by evidence, it is an irrational belief.
0 Replies
 
igm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 09:01 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:

But speaking for myself...I am saying that I see the Bible as very inconsistent.


Frank you are being inconsistent because your position is that things may or may not be as they seem, you simply don't know and you suspect others don't know either, in which case the bible may or may not be inconsistent, according to you. As you constantly say, you may be deluding yourself, in this case... that the bible is inconsistent. This is 'your' argument everywhere else so why not here? Isn't that hypocritical to say you 'know' something about an explanation of the true nature of reality i.e. that the bible explanation is inconsistent... Be consistent Frank and avoid hypocrisy.

Your posts are all over the place, you constantly contradict your own philosophy and this is an example of it.

Romeo Fabulini
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 09:22 am
The fact that the Bible is sometimes inconsistent and contradictory is PROOF that it hasn't been tampered with over the centuries, and has come down to us unedited, warts and all..Smile
Atheists are further confused because they prefer to forget that the Bible consists of two parts, the Old and New Testaments, and as any sunday school child can tell them, Jesus overules the Old T..Smile
"The covenant of which Jesus is mediator is superior to the old one" (Heb 8:6)

As for the authorship of the gospels, we know enough about the writers to be able to do a "This is Your Life" show about them-

Matthew the disciple, formerly Levi (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27) son of Alpheus, was formerly a tax collector (Luke 5:29-30) one of the 12 apostles handpicked by Jesus (Matthew 9:9), he wrote his gospel between c.60 and 80 AD after Mark wrote his first.

Mark, a friend of Jesus's righthand man Peter (1 Peter 5:13) also called John, Mark was a cousin of Barnabas (Colossians 4:10), a helpful co-worker of Paul (2 Timothy 4:11), and wrote his gospel c.60AD not long after some Apostolic Letters were written: i.e., James, Galatians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Corinthians, and Romans. His mother was one of the Marys (Acts 12:12) from an influential and probably wealthy family, and so some speculated that the last supper was held in their home and that he was the young man in Mark 14:51-52 which is not in the other accounts.

Luke, a doctor (2 Tim. 4:11) and a gentile convert (Luke 1:2) probably by Paul who became his traveling companion (Acts 17:1; 20:5, 6-21:18 ). He wrote his gospel c.65 AD.

John the disciple, (John 13:23) son of Zebedee, the brother of James the "greater" (Matthew 4:21; 10:2; Mark 1:19; 3:17; 10:35) wrote his gospel c.95AD, the last to be written before Revelation. Also from a wealthy family (Mark 1:20; Luke 5:3; John 19:27). His mother was probably Salome (Matthew 27:56; Mark 15:40). He was one of the closest disciples to Jesus among the twelve (Matthew 17:1; 26:37; Mark 5:37; 13:3). He was zealous (Matthew 20:20-24; Mark 3:17; 10:35-41; Luke 9:49, 54). He became one of the leaders of the Jerusalem Church (Acts 15:6; Galatians 2:9) and of the seven churches in Asia (Revelation 1:11). He was banished to the island of Patmos where he wrote Revelation.



izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 09:28 am
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
Matthew the disciple, formerly Levi (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27) son of Alpheus, was formerly a tax collector (Luke 5:29-30) one of the 12 apostles handpicked by Jesus (Matthew 9:9), he wrote his gospel between c.60 and 80 AD after Mark wrote his first.


Different Matthew, also he's not the same guy that made jeans.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 09:45 am
@igm,
Quote:

Frank you are being inconsistent because your position is that things may or may not be as they seem…


How is that inconsistent???

Quote:
…you simply don't know and you suspect others don't know either…


How many times do I have to explain that because I do not “know” some things…I can “know” other things. Why are you insisting that because I do not know the true nature of REALITY…I cannot know my brother’s first name?


Quote:
…in which case the bible may or may not be inconsistent, according to you.


No, I was very clear about that: “But speaking for myself...I am saying that I see the Bible as very inconsistent.”

And I do.

Is that upsetting you in some way?

Quote:
As you constantly say, you may be deluding yourself, in this case... that the bible is inconsistent.


I absolutely, positively MAY BE DELUDING MYSELF that the Bible is inconsistent. (Try saying that about some of the things you assert!)


Quote:
This is 'your' argument everywhere else so why not here?


It is here! My take on the Bible MAY BE TOTALLY INCORRECT. I MAY BE DELUDING MYSELF.

(Try those words on some of the things you are asserting, igm)




Quote:
Isn't that hypocritical to say you 'know' something about an explanation of the true nature of reality i.e. that the bible explanation is inconsistent... Be consistent Frank and avoid hypocrisy.


There is no hypocrisy except in your need to see hypocrisy in me. I do not know the true nature of REALITY…and I suspect you do not either. I also suspect you are not ethical enough to simply acknowledge that you actually do not know it…if you do not know it.


Quote:
Your posts are all over the place, you constantly contradict your own philosophy and this is an example of it.


Not even slightly…but thank you for the enjoyment you furnished in trying to make it seem so.

You are a delight, igm. Wish we could have a beer together some day.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 09:46 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

Romeo Fabulini wrote:
Matthew the disciple, formerly Levi (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27) son of Alpheus, was formerly a tax collector (Luke 5:29-30) one of the 12 apostles handpicked by Jesus (Matthew 9:9), he wrote his gospel between c.60 and 80 AD after Mark wrote his first.


Different Matthew, also he's not the same guy that made jeans.


Wink

Sounds as though Romeo has fallen off the cliff!
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 09:47 am
Romeo

There are lots of people here who think you are way-out-there.

Stop helping them by posting the kind of nonsense you have taken to posting. Be more reasonable...and don't shoot from the hip.
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 09:51 am
The Old T is quite specific that an adulteress must be killed, yet when Jesus arrived he completely trashed that ruling, so yes, he contradicts the Old T but who cares?..Wink
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/JesusAdultrss.jpg
0 Replies
 
igm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 10:17 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:

It is here! My take on the Bible MAY BE TOTALLY INCORRECT. I MAY BE DELUDING MYSELF.


Don't assert otherwise then Frank.... without saying so... it is confusing.. the bible is a version of an explanation about the true nature of reality the very thing you say you know nothing about therefore the bible may or may not be consistent... so now you have corrected your error but you should not have made it in the first place... as you argue all the time that you do not do such things... to vikorr and the like.

You went on to compound that assertion with this low blow:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Romeo is in his own world, Izzy. I wanna get along with him...I think most people do. But he does make it difficult.


Tut-tut Frank!

neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 10:20 am
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
The Old Testament notions of hell are not always accurate, that's why Jesus trumps them all just as he said-
"I'll tell you things hidden since the creation of the world" (Matt 13:35)
That does not mean the Hebrew scriptures were inaccurate. If you can't reconcile the Bible as a whole, your compass is skewed. "For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope." (Romans 15:4)
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:." (2Timothy 3:16)
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 11:13 am
@igm,
igm wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

It is here! My take on the Bible MAY BE TOTALLY INCORRECT. I MAY BE DELUDING MYSELF.


Don't assert otherwise then Frank.... without saying so... it is confusing..


I imagine lots of things are confusing to you, igm.

I asserted that in my opinion, the Bible is contradictory.

If you don't like that kind of opinion...just do not read my posts.


Quote:
the bible is a version of an explanation about the true nature of reality the very thing you say you know nothing about therefore the bible may or may not be consistent... so now you have corrected your error but you should not have made it in the first place... as you argue all the time that you do not do such things... to vikorr and the like.


Did you have help corrupting that sentence...or did you do it on your own.

If you have a specific "error" to call to my attention, just do so. I have not corrected any error. The error was your misreading of what I wrote.


Quote:



You went on to compound that assertion with this low blow:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Romeo is in his own world, Izzy. I wanna get along with him...I think most people do. But he does make it difficult.
Tut-tut Frank!


Tut, tut yourself, igm. Nothing wrong with what I said there...and certainly sounds as though it was coming from someone more content than the stuff you are generating right now.


izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 11:30 am
@Frank Apisa,
I never knew Jesus fought at the Alamo.
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 11:40 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:
I never knew Jesus fought at the Alamo.
Right. Jesus lives down the street from me. Which is confusing, I'll admit. I remember him hitting home runs for the Giants.
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  0  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 01:45 pm
Neologist asserted:
Quote:
If you can't reconcile the Bible as a whole, your compass is skewed. "For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope." (Romans 15:4)
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:." (2Timothy 3:16)


You can follow the OT if you like mate and go out killing gays, adulteresses and witches but I don't think Jesus would approve..Wink
"In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent." (Acts 17:30)

Speaking of witches, a witch in a chatroom once said she was invoking the Egyptian goddess Sekhmet to come and get me, I put the kettle on but she never turned up, gosh don't you just hate getting stood up by goddesses?
Mind you, looking at her picture I wouldn't have known whether to tickle her chin or offer her a saucer of milk-
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/sekhmet.gif



InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 02:17 pm
@neologist,
neologist wrote:

Either the Bible is consistent or it is not.

Obviously, it's not. It's time to move on.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 02:18 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
. You can follow the OT if you like mate and go out killing gays, adulteresses and witches but I don't think Jesus would approve.
I would think a brilliant Bible scholar such as yourself would understand that Jesus fulfilled the law. Of course you would have gays, adulteresses, and witches roasted, toasted, boiled, baked, and broiled by whatever god you have falsely cloaked in Jesus' name.
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  2  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 02:20 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:

In one breath atheists say "The Bible is not consistent", then in their next breath they say it's been edited, censored and tidied up over the centuries to make it look good.
Wish they'd stop flip-flopping and make up their minds whether it's been prettied up or not..Wink

How are the statements, "the Bible is not consistent," and "the bible's been edited, censored and tidied up" inconsistent with each other?

The editing, censoring and tiding up themselves were inconsistent.
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 02:25 pm
@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote:

How are the statements, "the Bible is not consistent," and "the bible's been edited, censored and tidied up" inconsistent with each other?

The editing, censoring and tiding up themselves were inconsistent.
Good point, Blue. I wonder if romeo will think to avert that a God powerful enough to inspire accurate scripture is certainly powerful enough to protect its veracity.
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Sep, 2013 02:30 pm
Just as eyewitness accounts of a traffic accident differ on points of detail, so do the Bible's eyewitness accounts sometimes differ, it's a normal human trait..Smile
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 03/03/2024 at 10:41:50