@divegeester saidHearing what you want to hear doesn’t mean valid points are being made, and claiming something unspecific, like someone once said something, as if it were a historical event that means anything carries no weight either.
You made this silly analogy to Moonbus a few months ago and he completely dismantled it then.
Got anything else?
You really need to at least make some attempt at a argument with points, points that have do with the topic instead of these unspecified elusive ones without specifics. Backing up your points when questioned would be nice as well,
16 Dec 22
@kellyjay saidSure.
Hearing what you want to hear doesn’t mean valid points are being made, and claiming something unspecific, like someone once said something, as if it were a historical event that means anything carries no weight either.
You really need to at least make some attempt at a argument with points, points that have do with the topic instead of these unspecified elusive ones without specifics. Backing up your points when questioned would be nice as well,
Do you have any evidence whatsoever to support your assertion that the bible is the complete, exclusive and inerrant word of God.
37th time of asking.
@divegeester saidI have given you the reasons I accept the scripture as the Word of God, out of hand you rejected them without giving specific reasons that went to points I gave.
Sure.
Do you have any evidence whatsoever to support your assertion that the bible is the complete, exclusive and inerrant word of God.
37th time of asking.
You can claim that you have not gotten anything from me but that is simply not true. It doesn’t stop you from continuing saying it, as you do with many things with many topics.
16 Dec 22
@kellyjay saidI accept your reasons for you believing what you believe.
I have given you the reasons I accept the scripture as the Word of God, out of hand you rejected them without giving specific reasons that went to points I gave.
You can claim that you have not gotten anything from me but that is simply not true. It doesn’t stop you from continuing saying it, as you do with many things with many topics.
What you are being asked for is evidential based reason why I should agree with you?
Do you understand what I’m asking you kellyjay?
@divegeester saidYou don't even agree with you, or the Bible itself, how would you ever agree with me?
I accept your reasons for you believing what you believe.
What you are being asked for is evidential based reason why I should agree with you?
Do you understand what I’m asking you kellyjay?
@kellyjay saidHa ha, so says the guy who has spent years - almost comically - insisting that every word in the Bible is "literally" true, and now here you are - because, perhaps, your conversational needs are different - insisting that the Bible is full of "visions, dreams, metaphors, parables, even figures of speech" [which are literally the opposite of being "literally" true] and which, by their very nature require subjective interpretation, which - of course - YOU engage in, BUT you condemn someone in the harshest and most sanctimonious of personal terms if their interpretation differs from yours. Consistent in your hypocrisy, as ever.
You are not consistent.
17 Dec 22
@fmf saidExactly!
Ha ha, so says the guy who has spent years - almost comically - insisting that every word in the Bible is "literally" true, and now here you are - because, perhaps, your conversational needs are different - insisting that the Bible is full of "visions, dreams, metaphors, parables, even figures of speech" [which are literally the opposite of being "literally" true] and which, by t ...[text shortened]... of personal terms if their interpretation differs from yours. Consistent in your hypocrisy, as ever.
17 Dec 22
@divegeester saidKellyJay?
I accept your reasons for you believing what you believe.
What you are being asked for is evidential based reason why I should agree with you?
Do you understand what I’m asking you kellyjay?
17 Dec 22
@divegeester saidActually no, when I read the Bible I have to change my opinion about the things
WHAT! I am absolutely consistent.
You on the hand shift your position on the bible being literal or not being literal whenever it suits you.
said in it when I'm shown it doesn't mean what I think it does, not you, you have
freely admitted that for you, your interpretation is true for you, limiting the truth
of scripture to just your opinion, not the truth itself, which are two different things.
I do have thoughts and opinions about the text, but unlike you, I don't rate my
opinion above the text, when I read it, it does not automatically mean I'm correct
when it comes to scriptural truth, it corrects me not the other way around. People
are not wrong, because they disagree with my interpretation of scriptural truth,
they are right or wrong only as they agree with the truth expressed in scripture.
18 Dec 22
@divegeester saidIt is the Word of God, in context you get His truths which can be historical, though visions, parables, metaphoric, or clearly spoken. None of that should be rejected but pray-fully read and pondered, none of it is to be read by private interpretation.
WHAT! I am absolutely consistent.
You on the hand shift your position on the bible being literal or not being literal whenever it suits you.
Saying a verse was true for you suggesting the limits of its truth was limited to you. Did you misspeak, implying that the truth of scripture is simply truth only to what each person makes it out to be, that we get to make it whatever we want?
If you did mean that, how could it correct us if we get to make it say what we want?