Sexual History...Research Confirms the Bible...

[Rich2018]

Yeah I don't think people identify as gay to fit in that's more about standing out.

Though people who identify as "gay" don't do so to "fit in" or "stand out".

 

[bluesmoke]

Perhaps a reading, along with absorbing the meaning of Paul's words, is in order...

All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness,"

I'm not arguing that what Paul said was or was not inspired by God. I've given evidence that what Paul said that you quoted are not the words of God, but of Paul and that Paul makes such distinction in Romans. You've been proven wrong.

 

[Daisy]

I'm not arguing that what Paul said was or was not inspired by God. I've given evidence that what Paul said that you quoted are not the words of God, but of Paul and that Paul makes such distinction in Romans. You've been proven wrong.

Not exactly...

INSPIRATION​

The quality or state of being moved by or produced under the direction of a spirit from a superhuman source. When that source is Jehovah, the result is a pronouncement or writings that are truly the word of God. The apostle Paul stated at 2 Timothy 3:16: “All Scripture is inspired of God.” The phrase “inspired of God” translates the compound Greek word the·oʹpneu·stos, meaning, literally, “God-breathed” or “breathed by God.”

This is the only occurrence of this Greek term in the Scriptures. Its use here clearly identifies God as the Source and Producer of the Sacred Scriptures, the Bible. Their being “God-breathed” finds some parallel in the expression found in the Hebrew Scriptures at Psalm 33:6: “By the word of Jehovah the heavens themselves were made, and by the spirit [or breath] of his mouth all their army.”
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002178?q=God+breathed&p=par

 

[Questerr]

Yes...

Including all the babies in the world at the time?

 

[Rich2018]

Including all the babies in the world at the time?

And the Jehovah's Witnesses say that babies are the enemies of god:

 

[bluesmoke]

Not exactly...

INSPIRATION​

The quality or state of being moved by or produced under the direction of a spirit from a superhuman source. When that source is Jehovah, the result is a pronouncement or writings that are truly the word of God. The apostle Paul stated at 2 Timothy 3:16: “All Scripture is inspired of God.” The phrase “inspired of God” translates the compound Greek word the·oʹpneu·stos, meaning, literally, “God-breathed” or “breathed by God.”

This is the only occurrence of this Greek term in the Scriptures. Its use here clearly identifies God as the Source and Producer of the Sacred Scriptures, the Bible. Their being “God-breathed” finds some parallel in the expression found in the Hebrew Scriptures at Psalm 33:6: “By the word of Jehovah the heavens themselves were made, and by the spirit [or breath] of his mouth all their army.”
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002178?q=God+breathed&p=par

Are you inspired by God? Is the posting you breathe so inspired and thus the word of God?

 

[Daisy]

Are you inspired by God? Is the posting you breathe so inspired and thus the word of God?

No, the writers of the Bible were...

 

[tosca1]

No, the writers of the Bible were...

I'm glad there's some honesty left enough to admit that.
Because.....JW is definitely not inspired by God.

There's hope, Elora.

 

[Questerr]

No, the writers of the Bible were...

And how do you know that? What’s the verifiable evidence?

 

[tosca1]

And how do you know that? What’s the verifiable evidence?

Can you please not repeat asking that juvenile question?

Here's one evidence.
Nobody wants to answer my question about this.
Maybe, you will.

***If you can't answer that - then, you don't have the credibility in asking your question.
***I'll have to ask you - where is your evidence that it's not inspired by God.



Refer to these facts.

Here, these have been written in the Bible long before science had reaffirmed them.
I'm posting them again and you can check the details.



Post # 2 (the universe has a beginning)


#4 (Inflationary Big Bang)


#14 (Infant Earth; frame of reference)


# 17 (Infant Earth; gases and clouds)


#20 (One ocean, one land - Pangaea)


#23 (elements of Genesis creation story compare to science)


#24 (Non-marine eukaryotes)


#43 (expanding universe – first written Big Bang model))


#85 (human body)


#87 (Genesis Enigma)


#90 (Francis Collins)


#92 (reproduction)


#108 (Pathfinder of the Seas)


#112 (The world is round)


#129 (present tense stretches)


#130 (Cursed Snake)


#149 and 150 and #174 (Jacob and Laban)


#169 (formation of continents)


#170 (counting stars)


#176 (Hydrological Cycle)


#189 (Let land produce -animal body composition)


#197 (no separate realm between science and Abrahamic God)


#198 (Atoms)


#203 (Springs In The Ocean/Fountains of the great deep)


#204 (God's time-table and science)


#206 (Job 38/Hubble Constant Tension)


#207 (Video – Nothing Made Everything – an atheist nightmare)


#208 (James Tour Open Letter to Colleagues)


#209 (Universe seems to be getting younger!)


#216 (Singing Stars)


#220 (Orion and Arcturus)


#229 (Air has weight)

#235 (how rain is formed)


#277 (Physical Laws Are Constant)


#282 (video Scientific proof God in 5 minutes)


$287 (video – theistic evolutionist – what do they mean by “literal?”)


#288 (video – theistic evolutionists – ingredients of life)

[W:94]THE ABRAHAMIC GOD and THEISTIC EVOLUTION

Of course, we'll have to start with the very first 3 words of Genesis 1. In the beginning, The universe has a beginning. This is based on the best cosmological evidence which suggests the cosmos is finite rather than infinite. It began with the “BIG BANG.” Of course, there are atheist...

debatepolitics.com

Can you explain how come the Bible had managed to get so many things right - reaffirmed by science - thousands of years after they've been written?

 

[Questerr]

Can you please not repeat asking that juvenile question?

Here's one evidence.
Nobody wants to answer my question about this.
Maybe, you will.

***If you can't answer that - then, you don't have the credibility in asking your question.
***I'll have to ask you - where is your evidence that it's not inspired by God.



Refer to these facts.

Here, these have been written in the Bible long before science had reaffirmed them.
I'm posting them again and you can check the details.



Post # 2 (the universe has a beginning)


#4 (Inflationary Big Bang)


#14 (Infant Earth; frame of reference)


# 17 (Infant Earth; gases and clouds)


#20 (One ocean, one land - Pangaea)


#23 (elements of Genesis creation story compare to science)


#24 (Non-marine eukaryotes)


#43 (expanding universe – first written Big Bang model))


#85 (human body)


#87 (Genesis Enigma)


#90 (Francis Collins)


#92 (reproduction)


#108 (Pathfinder of the Seas)


#112 (The world is round)


#129 (present tense stretches)


#130 (Cursed Snake)


#149 and 150 and #174 (Jacob and Laban)


#169 (formation of continents)


#170 (counting stars)


#176 (Hydrological Cycle)


#189 (Let land produce -animal body composition)


#197 (no separate realm between science and Abrahamic God)


#198 (Atoms)


#203 (Springs In The Ocean/Fountains of the great deep)


#204 (God's time-table and science)


#206 (Job 38/Hubble Constant Tension)


#207 (Video – Nothing Made Everything – an atheist nightmare)


#208 (James Tour Open Letter to Colleagues)


#209 (Universe seems to be getting younger!)


#216 (Singing Stars)


#220 (Orion and Arcturus)


#229 (Air has weight)

#235 (how rain is formed)


#277 (Physical Laws Are Constant)


#282 (video Scientific proof God in 5 minutes)


$287 (video – theistic evolutionist – what do they mean by “literal?”)


#288 (video – theistic evolutionists – ingredients of life)

[W:94]THE ABRAHAMIC GOD and THEISTIC EVOLUTION

Of course, we'll have to start with the very first 3 words of Genesis 1. In the beginning, The universe has a beginning. This is based on the best cosmological evidence which suggests the cosmos is finite rather than infinite. It began with the “BIG BANG.” Of course, there are atheist...

debatepolitics.com

Can you explain how come the Bible had managed to get so many things right - reaffirmed by science - thousands of years after they've been written?

It didn’t.

You have to seriously strain every single scripture referenced by those claims to even have it appear to be in line with science if you squint.

The Bible claims that the Earth and the plants on it are older than the sun. Is that inline with science?

 

[devildavid]

No, the writers of the Bible were...

When did god run out of inspiration? Was it a limited time offer?

 

[tosca1]

It didn’t.

You have to seriously strain every single scripture referenced by those claims to even have it appear to be in line with science if you squint.

The Bible claims that the Earth and the plants on it are older than the sun. Is that inline with science?

Lol - did you even read them?
Why don't you refute them - one by one!

 

[Questerr]

Lol - did you even read them?
Why don't you refute them - one by one!

I’ve seen the arguments before and no, I’m not going to engage with your bullshit sealioning when you aren’t intellectually honest.

 

[tosca1]

I’ve seen the arguments before and no, I’m not going to engage with your bullshit sealioning when you aren’t intellectually honest.

Then......................... you can't ask your silly question. It wouldn't be rational.



What would be rational is for me to ask you:

in light of what I gave from the Bible (information that only the Creator would know) - what's your evidence that the Bible isn't GOD-INSPIRED?



The tables are turned.

 

[Questerr]

Then......................... you can't ask your silly question. It wouldn't be rational.



What would be rational is for me to ask you:

in light of what I gave from the Bible (information that only the Creator would know) - what's your evidence that the Bible isn't GOD-INSPIRED?



The tables are turned.

Demonstrate that the Bible actually specifically refers to the phenomenon that you claimed it did (not that you interpret it to do so through metaphor, but that it actually specifically refers to them) and then demonstrate no one prior to the writing of the specific book of the Bible that specific claim comes from ever had that knowledge.

You do understand “proving a negative” is a logical fallacy, yes? You can’t turn the tables. YOU are making the positive claim. It is on YOU to support it with verifiable evidence.

 

[Questerr]

@tosca1

If I refuted every single one of those points, would you cease to believe the Bible was divine inspired and cease to be a Christian?

 

[tosca1]

@tosca1

If I refuted every single one of those points, would you cease to believe the Bible was divine inspired and cease to be a Christian?

No.
That's only one evidence.

 

[tosca1]

Demonstrate that the Bible actually specifically refers to the phenomenon that you claimed it did (not that you interpret it to do so through metaphor, but that it actually specifically refers to them) and then demonstrate no one prior to the writing of the specific book of the Bible that specific claim comes from ever had that knowledge.

You better read them. It's been explained.

Furthermore, what "phenomenon" are you on about?

All that were given are information about creation that were described in Bible - long before science had even known about them! Nothing supernatural about them!
They haven't been discovered until modern science and advanced technology came along - that's all.
Like the mountains and springs in the ocean.....and the water under the ocean floor. Nobody knew they've been there all along.
What's "phenomenal" about that?

You do understand “proving a negative” is a logical fallacy, yes? You can’t turn the tables. YOU are making the positive claim. It is on YOU to support it with verifiable evidence.

That doesn't apply to you.

 

[Questerr]

No.
That's only one evidence.

So then you admit there is zero point in me doing all that work because you don’t have the intellectual honesty to acknowledge the evidence.

 

[Questerr]

You better read them. It's been explained.

I have read them. At best you can kinda see the metaphor if you squint and avoid taking the context at all into consideration.

These arguments aren’t new. They’re called PRATTs. Points Refuted A Thousand Times.

 

[tosca1]

I have read them. At best you can kinda see the metaphor if you squint and avoid taking the context at all into consideration.

Then, you don't know what a metaphor means. You may know the word, but you don't know what it looks like.


IT'S ACTUALLY THE OPPOSITE OF A METAPHOR WHEN WE SEE THAT IT'S LITERAL.

These arguments aren’t new. They’re called PRATTs. Points Refuted A Thousand Times.

Your word isn't good enough.
For something that you said ha been "refuted a thousand times," I've yet to see A SINGLE refutation on this forum
All I get are deflections (like yours)....................................or, the skeptics suddenly just disappear! Like.......................MAGIC.

 

[Questerr]

Your word isn't good enough.
For something that you said ha been "refuted a thousand times," I've yet to see A SINGLE refutation on this forum
All I get are deflections (like yours)....................................or, the skeptics suddenly just disappear! Like.......................MAGIC.

Why should I spend an ounce of effort refuting anything you claimed when you’ve already admitted it won’t change your mind? You don’t care about the evidence. You lack any kind of intellectual honesty.

 

[tosca1]

Why should I spend an ounce of effort refuting anything you claimed when you’ve already admitted it won’t change your mind? You don’t care about the evidence. You lack any kind of intellectual honesty.

Why should I waste my time on you?


Goodbye, Questerr.

 

[Questerr]

Why should I waste my time on you?


Goodbye, Questerr.

Goodbye, Lies for Christ.