[Tj3]

You may BELIEVE that. You may not have seen that.
But everyone else following this lead has seen it.
They have seen who is the bullsh*tter here and who is not.

As you wish Cred. I am prepared to stand on the facts.

They also have seen that I repeatedly tried to get the discussion back on-topic, and you are the one who - seeing your posts - refuses to do so.

Cred, you change whatever you think the topic is whenever things get uncomfortable for you.

[Credendovidis]

As you wish Cred. I am prepared to stand on the facts.

Nobody cares what you stand on, Tommy.
What is however important is to always tell the truth. Specially in this specific topic...
And THAT you don't. You lie and you know it.

One thing we know : the truth will not be seen in your posts!!

Why do you insist to get classyT's topic closed for running off-topic?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

.

.

[Tj3]

Nobody cares what you stand on, Tommy.
What is however important is to always tell the truth. Specially in this specific topic ....
And THAT you don't. You lie and you know it.

Cred, I know you don't care what anyone else says, nor clearly about the truth based upon your false accusations.

I still see that you are not posting any validation! Emails sent to LDBC and CDR yet?

[Alty]

Tom, I'm interested in this quote by you;

I have evidence to the contrary, but that does not matter right now - your belief is that God did not write the Bible. Can you validate that claim?

I would love to see the evidence you have that shows that God wrote the bible.

Could you supply that evidence?

[Tj3]

Tom, I'm interested in this quote by you;


I would love to see the evidence you have that shows that God wrote the bible.

Could you supply that evidence?

First, have you ever taken the time to study Biblical prophecy?

[Alty]

Yes Tom, I went to Catholic school for 10 years, it was mandatory.

The funny thing is, even they taught us that the bible was at most "inspired" by God, but written by man. You are claiming that God wrote the bible, I'm interested to see your evidence for this, as you did state that you have evidence.

[Tj3]

Yes Tom, I went to Catholic school for 10 years, it was mandatory.

Okay, so you will know that that the Bible has about 2000 prophecies fulfilled exactly as given, with over 100 of these dealing specifically with the life of Jesus.

The probabilities have been estimated at 1 in 10 to the power of 2000 of this occurring by chance.

The funny thing is, even they taught us that the bible was at most "inspired" by God, but written by man. You are claiming that God wrote the bible, I'm interested to see your evidence for this, as you did state that you have evidence.

Ah, I did not know that we were going to play with semantics. Let me word it for those who wish to be picky - God through the Holy Spirit provided the content by means of inspiration:

2 Peter 1:20-21
20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, 21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.
NKJV

Or as scripture puts it - all scripture is "God breathed"

2 Tim 3:15-17
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
NKJV

(The word used for inspiration is the Greek word theopneustos which means "God Breathed")

And God's word was penned by men. The word wrote, however remains accurate because even some of those who penned scripture used scribes to put pen to paper and yet it is they, because it is their input, the work is attributed to them by even secular sources, just as those authors today who make use of secretaries to assist in their work.

[Alty]

So, in other words, you're using the bible (which I believe was written by man and largely fictional) to prove that God inspired the bible?

I was hoping for unbiased proof. In other words, something other than the bible to prove the bible.

[Tj3]

So, in other words, you're using the bible (which I believe was written by man and largely fictional) to prove that God inspired the bible?

Your validation for these claims is?

BTW, the proof of the fulfillment of prophecy can be shown to be historical - or are you going to reject the historical record because it was written by men also?

[Alty]

Your validation for these claims is?

BTW, the proof of the fulfillment of prophecy can be shown to be historical - or are you going to reject the historical record because it was written by men also?

What's your validation?

Men are fallible, if you ask 10 people that all witnessed the same event, the accounts of that event will all be vastly different, and most will be largely exaggerated or untrue.

In other words, yes, I do reject the "historical records" of prophecy's that have been "fullfilled", because they were written by man.

[Tj3]

In other words, yes, I do reject the "historical records" of prophecy's that have been "fullfilled", because they were written by man.

I did not ask that - I asked do you reject the historical record.

If you reject what men have recorded as history, or if you say that you reject anything accepted as historical record because it substantiates the Bible, then we have nothing to discuss because you then are saying that you believe only what you believe.

Of course taken to a logical conclusion, that means that you cannot even believe yourself because you too are human.

[Alty]

Oy vey.

No Tom, you specifically asked if I reject the historical records of fulfilled prophecies.

How about we make this easy, quote the records that you are referring to. Saying "historical records" is a bit vague.

I'm also not saying that everything in the bible is false, I'm just saying that people should use the brains that we have to decide what is true and what is to good to be true, or too outlandish to be true.

The bible is a mishmash of stories told by different men about Jesus. Are we to believe everything that was written? If so, why did all these miraculous events cease to exist? Have you witnessed anyone parting the sea? The great flood, anything that comes close to the miracles described in the bible?

Logically, if it sounds too good to be true, that's usually because it is.

I have a mind, I will not agree with something that doesn't make sense.

I believe in God, but not the bible.

[Credendovidis]

Oy vey.

Hmmmmm Alty : is that why I miss you here every Friday night ? :D

As to Tj3's arguments and demands :

Tommy clearly is a man of double standards :

- from anyone with a non-Christian view he demands OSE for every word and letter of what is posted.
- for his own and peer views he only supplies and/or accepts wild claims and other unrelated arguments and references.

But I think you picked his balloon !
Just keep pushing him for DIRECT OSE for whatever he claims.
And hold back on going off-topic and ending up in an endless argument with Tommy about futilities he finds in your posts with which he tries to change direction in the conversation !

This topic is about "What is truth"?

The meaning of the word "truth" depends on how you approach the word.
The linguistic meaning of "truth" refers to the property of being in accordance with the actual state of affairs. And as the word "actual" refers to reality, it should refer to OSE as its only guideline.

Unfortunately in the religious field the words "true" or "truth" are used in and out of season to SUGGEST a level of accuracy, and in effect are used to provide some BOGUS VALIDITY to personal interpretations that are at best only covered by Subjective Supported Evidence.

In Tommy's posts you see the efffect of this bogus validaity reoccuring time and time again.
He SUGGESTS a lot but does NOT OSE support anything at all.

So do not look for "truth" in Tommy's posts. At least not while he continues in the way he has done here since his arrival.

You know that I respect anyone's personal BELIEF. But the moment people here start posting that what they BELIEVE is the "truth" , I clearly let them know that that is not "true" but an empty claim. For something to be "true" DIRECT OSE has to be provided. Nothing else will do.

:) :) :) :) :)



.

.

[Tj3]

Oy vey.

No Tom, you specifically asked if I reject the historical records of fulfilled prophecies.

Read more carefully.

What I said was, and I quote"...are you going to reject the historical record because it was written by men also?"

How about we make this easy, quote the records that you are referring to. Saying "historical records" is a bit vague.

If you are going to reject anything which was written by men that disagrees with what you want to believe, why should I waste my time?

Do you or do yolu not accept the historical record?

I'm also not saying that everything in the bible is false, I'm just saying that people should use the brains that we have to decide what is true and what is to good to be true, or too outlandish to be true.

Then I would have to ask you what the basis is for judging what in the Bible is true and is not true.

[Tj3]

As to Tj3's arguments and demands :

Tommy clearly is a man of double standards :

Grow up Cred. I wouldn't let my kids behave like you are when they were toddlers.

[Credendovidis]

As to Tj3's arguments and demands :
Tommy clearly is a man of double standards

Grow up Cred. I wouldn't let my kids act like you are when they were toddlers.

Tommy : so you suggest that we level the playing fields right now?

A simple YES or NO will do !

If you agree, we can discuss the type and level of support from now onwards later.
If you do not agree : why do you question that you are a man of double standards ?

Face it Tommy : you can not have it both ways!!

:D :rolleyes: :) :p :rolleyes: :D

.

.

[Tj3]

Tommy : so you suggest that we level the playing fields right now?

A simple YES or NO will do !

If you agree, we can discuss the type and level of support from now onwards later.

I don't know what type of support that you are suggesting that you could give, but I am not looking for support from you, Cred.

Further, if you are saying that I must compromise the truth for you to behave like an adult, no that is not happening either.

If you do not agree : why do you question that you are a man of double standards ?

Because your immature behaviour has nothing to do with whether I am speaking the truth. If you think that you can refute what I say, there is an open and level playing field for you to do so - bring forward some credible information and the sources and we can look at it.

If you plan to throw a temper tantrum at anyone who disagrees with you, that speaks volumes about you, but does nothing to refute what I said.

[Credendovidis]

Tommy : so you suggest that we level the playing fields right now? A simple YES or NO will do !
If you agree, we can discuss the type and level of support from now onwards later.

I don't know what type of support that you are suggesting that you could give, but I am not looking for support from you, Cred.

The question was simple and easy : do we level the playing fields, and do we agree to use the same type and level of support from now onwards ?
Don't you understand that, or do you prefer to stay a man of double standards, Tommy ?

I guess I already know what your answer will be , and what for man you are...
I fear my initial description of you hit the "truth" button...

:D :rolleyes: :) :p :rolleyes: :D

.

.

[Tj3]

The question was simple and easy : do we level the playing fields, and do we agree to use the same type and level of support from now onwards ?

And the answer was simple. Since we already have a level playing field, I don't know what type of support that you are suggesting that you could give, but I am not looking for support from you, Cred.

Further, if you are saying that I must compromise the truth for you to behave like an adult, no that is not happening either.

If you do not agree : why do you question that you are a man of double standards ?

Because your immature behaviour has nothing to do with whether I am speaking the truth. If you think that you can refute what I say, there is an open and level playing field for you to do so - bring forward some credible information and the sources and we can look at it.

If you plan to throw a temper tantrum at anyone who disagrees with you, that speaks volumes about you, but does nothing to refute what I said.

Why do you keep trying to distract from the topic? Do you fear dealing the issue?

[Credendovidis]

And the answer was simple. Since we already have a level playing field,

No Tommy : we do NOT have a level playing field.
You demand OSE from every opponent, while you provide only SSE yourself for your claims and suggestions.

Specially in a topic that is about "What is truth" a level playing field is essential.
But this little encounter has clearly shown to all that you refuse to debate on level terms.
I know your way of operation already many years, now all others know it too .

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

.

.