Jerry N. said:

Take Isaiah 43:1-7 which are the words from God. Compare that to 1 Chronicles 1. Then compare it to Song of Songs 1. Then you have 1 Corinthians 7:12 compared to Galatians 1:11. All of the Bible is true and God inspired the authors to record things. However, some texts are private poetry or written accounts or genealogies and lists of materials, but when author says something is from God, it is of the highest inspiration, like the Ten Commandments. This is why some publications of the New Testament put Jesus’s words in red. It has greater weight being from God directly.

Click to expand...

Jerry you mention Isaiah 43:17, 1st Corinthians 7:12, Galatians 1:11 along with a few other passages, emphasising the importance of when God speaks. You then say all the Bible is true. However you then say some texts are private, poetry, written accounts or genealogies along with a list of materials. You than say but when the author says something is from God then it is the highest inspiration from God. I would agree with that many passages hold higher importance but would disagree that they have a higher inspiration than other scriptures. Simply because all Gods scripture is equally inspired . But when thinking upon Joshua 10:12-13 when Joshua directly asks God to give power to still the Sun and the moon. What category does that fall into ? As the the publications of the New Testament with the words of Jesus in red having greater weight being from God directly. Ok. But others have argued why not the Old Testament as well. Yu know like the 10 commandments or where God speaks directly to Adam and Eve or Abraham or Moses.Just out of curiosity I guess some have debated the issue that the Bible should have remained the one colour. But it does no harm from what i can see. Yours Kathleen

Dan1988 said:

The problem with Thee Shepherd is, that He can't teach you anything and you can't even speak to Him.

Click to expand...

God has spoken through His Son from cover to cover. His speech is entirely sufficient for all, everywhere, already. Openly available. No holds barred.

Dan1988 said:

Unless you of 'course you believe you can ascend to heaven to hang out with Him.

You're either self deluded or you have been indoctrinated by the Gnostics.

Click to expand...

Your man trust claims would bring alarms to most believers of the traditional sorts, me included. It's cultish, particularly when not disclosed who it is, but backhanded to others. You may not even be an accurate spokesperson

DreamyLaLa said:

Yeah, I just wish I knew where to find people who share these values with me. I appreciate your thoughts, though.

Click to expand...

Don't be discouraged.
It's just a trial.

Dan1988 said:

I wasn't able to agree with any of your views

Click to expand...

You already did. I have no issues with ECT.

Verse plucking isn't possible when we believe every Word of God applies to everyone, as Jesus said, Matt. 4:4, Luke 4:4, Deut. 8:3

As to Jesus not being The Savior of the world and you not believing that, what can I say?

Jerry N. said:

It is not stated in the regulations for this forum, but writing about Islam, Mormons, and Jehovah Witnesses in any detail seems to be avoided

Click to expand...

All right, Jerry !
Had just hoped a constructive debate could happen with believers of muslim allah or with veiling partisans, this sub-forum being open for non christian believers, and honestly questionning myself on these issues. Let's forget it !

Strong in Him said:

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you are rejecting anything.
I like a lot of your posts.

Click to expand...

All good - that last post was just for fun.
Keras and I go way back.
I can attest that he is a gospel-hearted guy when it comes down to the essential stuff.
( He's just got this big 'twist' in his eschatology - and a certain manner in explaining it to everyone. )

eclipsenow said:

I don't think I'm even rejecting an interpretation of Scripture, but an interpretation of a movie!
It had bible verses and EVERYTHING!?

Click to expand...

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you are rejecting anything.
I like a lot of your posts.

Strong in Him said:

Or to reject your interpretation of Scripture.

Click to expand...

I don't think I'm even rejecting an interpretation of Scripture, but an interpretation of a movie!
It had bible verses and EVERYTHING!?

Clarifying then - is Rev 12:11 referring to all believers or only those martyred?

keras said:

It IS what is Prophesied and to deny the forthcoming Lords Day of vengeance and wrath, is to reject much scripture.

Click to expand...

Or to reject your interpretation of Scripture.
Stating that you are right and that everyone else is wrong means it is almost certain that it is you who are wrong. You even said in one post, "......... will happen or the Bible's a fairy tale" - or words to that effect.
Really? If something that you think should happen, doesn't, you would rather say that the entire word of God is made up than admit that you could be mistaken? Well you've already been mistaken about 2012 - which means that 14 years ago you were probably saying the kind of things that you are saying now. Recently, admittedly you said that God could pour out his wrath on a certain day, but all your posts have an air of "I know; I have received special revelation". Nothing happened on 14th December, when you said that it could happen, and your response was "well we seem to have got away with it."

Jesus said that the Son of Man will return when we are not expecting him, Matthew 24:44 - you seem to be saying that you know exactly when to expect him.
I'm sticking with Jesus.

Your comment that the PCI went through similar financial problems was unexpected.

Hans Blaster said:

If Trump is nearby, that is important too.

Click to expand...

And considering Rubio as well, it's doubly important! There seems to be some issues following age limits.

Always in His Presence said:

Simple AI search

Click to expand...

How many of your ‘examples’ of Trump being pro-life are actually him claiming to be pro-life and nothing else?

It’s like all these ‘peace deals’ he claims to have brokered; which one’s are actual real deals and not just empty words.

keras said:

I have not changed my beliefs.

Click to expand...

You have not answered the MAIN question of the post above.
But I grant my post was long. So I'll ask again:

What is Isaiah ACTUALLY using the Dark Sun image for in Isaiah 13?​

Hans Blaster said:

I don't know if you could describe your wrong-headed thinking and poor understanding of science anymore clearly.

The *POINT* of peer review (and gatekeeping) is to check ones thinking. To challenge claims. It has nothing to do with protecting the orthodoxy.

Click to expand...

What is ideal and what pans out in reality are two different things. There is plenty of evidence showing the Peer Review process is flawed and bias. Especially in something like Archeology.

Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals

Bias in the Peer Review Process: Can We Do Better?

Hans Blaster said:

Your "independents" aren't credible because they *don't* challenge their own claims, methods, etc. They are the ones who are afraid to have their work checked, not Hawass.

Click to expand...

Actually the independents are not proposing anything and thats why I like them. They just take you to places the mainstream don't bother telling people about.

In fact its good fundemental science in that we are not getting part of the picture but a more complete picture. More information to make determinations. Rather than being fed part info and then forming assumptions based on part of the facts. Which will lead to false narratives.

I reckon the info I have linked in this thread most people would have never heard. So its good to get as many different takes including non experts and independents so we can be better informed.

Hawass has been caught hiding stuff. I would not trust him. But I find it funny how anyone I present is immediately assumed as suspect. But a controversial figure like Hawass with known bias is perfectly ok when he represents the orthodoxy.

Another little red flag of double standards.