Could Romney win in 2008?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Has it occured to anyone that trying to reason with jmfcst is even a greater waste of time than trying to talk to a Borg?

In other words, resistance if futile.

Has it ever occured to you that you claiming that you know more than God is foolish?

[°Leprechaun]

Has it occured to anyone that trying to reason with jmfcst is even a greater waste of time than trying to talk to a Borg?

In other words, resistance if futile.

Has it ever occured to you that you claiming that you know more than God is foolish?

No, because I've never done that. I wouldn't be surprised, however, if I know more than you.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Has it ever occured to you that you claiming that you know more than God is foolish?

No, because I've never done that. I wouldn't be surprised, however, if I know more than you.

And what proof do you have that the bible is not the word of God?

[°Leprechaun]

If I knew as much as you think I claim I do, I would know the powerball numbers for tomorrow, wouldn't I?

[°Leprechaun]

Has it ever occured to you that you claiming that you know more than God is foolish?

No, because I've never done that. I wouldn't be surprised, however, if I know more than you.

And what proof do you have that the bible is not the word of God?

Do you have proof that it is?
The Bible was written by human beings and the Catholics and Protestants don't even agree as to which books belong there. The Bible was 'canonized' by the Jewish and Catholic religions. If these two are false religions as Protestants believe, then obviously the Bible could not be the infallible innerant Word of God, could it?

[°Leprechaun]

And while you're at it, proof that God exists and/or that there is really a life after death, would be nice, too.

[°Leprechaun]

More to the point would be for to me to prove that hell is not logical.
If I can do that, and that would not be difficult, then either  the Bible is a lie,
or it doesn't really teach that there is an eternal hell.
If God is love, and prove that the Bible doesn't teach that, then s/he would not arbitrarily damn people to eternal hell fire.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Seriously dealing with jmfsct is not really worth the effort. He has the born-again energy... it's inexhaustable.

Once you start talking about the bible as a BOOK written by man, and edited etc etc... you take away his source of everything... he can't make a point without the need to refer to it. Good lord we have free will to come to our own conclusions... you know we've been down this road before and went around in circles.... ah the TRAP!!!!!!

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Do you have proof that it is?

No, but if you agree that the bible can not be proven or disproven, then from what basis are you operating?  Do you get your beliefs from the back of a box of Cheerios?

---

The Bible was written by human beings

So…what is your point?  Even Jesus believed scripture was written by human beings: “have you not read in the book of Moses” (Mark 12:26)

Are you not aware that God uses people to spread the word of God?

---

and the Catholics and Protestants don't even agree as to which books belong there.  The Bible was 'canonized' by the Jewish and Catholic religions

So…what is your point?  Even during the time of Jesus’ life on earth, the different sects had different canons:  The Sadducees only accepted the writings of Moses, but the Pharisees accepted the writings of both Moses and the prophets.

Did that stop Jesus was using scripture?  Not at all!

---

If these two are false religions as Protestants believe, then obviously the Bible could not be the infallible innerant Word of God, could it?

I don’t see how the errors of the differing Sects somehow make the bible errant.  Is anyone claiming the bible was written by the Pharisees or the Sadducees or the Catholics, or even members of a Protestant sect?  No.

Jesus was NOT a member of a sect.  

Paul was a member of a sect, PRIOR to his conversion.  After his conversion, he didn’t consult with those who had become Apostles prior to him, rather he immediately went preaching about Jesus from the scriptures.  He didn’t even meet up with the other apostles until years later.  And once they examined Paul’s doctrine, they found nothing in error.

---

Pointing to the errors of the sects is NOT an excuse for disobeying scripture.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Once you start talking about the bible as a BOOK written by man, and edited etc etc

So, you are claiming to have proof that the bible has been edited? 

Then show me the originals. 

And if you don't have the originals, how on earth can you make the claim that they have been edited?

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Well it's called history.

The Eccumenical councils of the early Church? These show the political nature... not of God, but how the Church and its Roman political founders wanted the Christian message to appear. Gospels are not included such as those by Thomas. The Gnostic gospels? Which the fundies reject as they don't fill their view of God or the world.

To view the bible as fallible doesn't make God fallible. God is bigger and greater than words written a long time ago, and re-written and translated over and over again.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Well it's called history.

The Eccumenical councils of the early Church? These show the political nature... not of God, but how the Church and its Roman political founders wanted the Christian message to appear. Gospels are not included such as those by Thomas. The Gnostic gospels? Which the fundies reject as they don't fill their view of God or the world.

You have only proven that some writings were rejected, much like I reject Joseph Smith's writings.  Yet your claim was that the bible had been edited.

So, again, do you have any proof that the books of the bible have been edited?

---

To view the bible as fallible doesn't make God fallible. God is bigger and greater than words written a long time ago, and re-written and translated over and over again.

Then, again I ask, what is your basis of your beliefs, the back of a box of Cheerios?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

"No, but if you agree that the bible can not be proven or disproven, then from what basis are you operating?  Do you get your beliefs from the back of a box of Cheerios?"

Well, first of all something has to make *sense*.

In other words, you define God by your wisdom, as if the corrupt finite could define the righteous infinite.

--

If something doesn't how can you believe it?
I can't imagine believing in a God that asks us to suspend math, logic, science, reason, common sense anymore than believing in a God that would arbitrarily damn someone to hell for no good reason (limited atonement, the L in tulip).

Ez 18:4 "The soul who sins is the one who will die."

How, exactly, is that "arbitrary"?

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Allow me to re-phrase my point.

Edited as in - the bible is not a complete work - it is compilation of works which has been assembled.

The basis of my beliefs is internal, it's what I know at my very core - the bible started that - There is more... but with a person who is dogmatic, who doesn't allow themselves to act or think for themselves... which is why we have free will and a conscience... there is no point of discussion.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

"much like I reject Joseph Smith's writings.  "

Why is it ok for you to 'pick and chose' what you believe,
but not the rest of us?
Why is rejecting the Bible as innerrant any different that rejecting
the Book of Moron or the Koran?

I chose a basis, the bible, for my rejection.  

You are also free to choose whatever you wish, but make a choice!  

So, is your basis the Bible, or the Book of Mormon, or the Koran, or the back of a box of Cheerios?  Or is your imagination actually your basis?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Allow me to re-phrase my point.

Edited as in - the bible is not a complete work - it is compilation of works which has been assembled.

News flash!  The bible never claims to be exhaustive:

“Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” John 20:30-31

“Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written” John 21:25

But it does claim to include the necessary knowledge for salvation:

“From infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.  All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.” 2Tim 3:15-17

---

The basis of my beliefs is internal, it's what I know at my very core - the bible started that - There is more

If the bible started your beliefs, then you should have remained in it.  You shouldn’t be adhering to something “more” if it is in disagreement with the bible.  In that case, the bible is no longer the basis for your beliefs, for you are trumping it with whatever this “more” is.

---

... but with a person who is dogmatic, who doesn't allow themselves to act or think for themselves... which is why we have free will and a conscience... there is no point of discussion.

Pro 30:6 “Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.”

Ecc 12:11-13 “The words of the wise are like goads, their collected sayings like firmly embedded nails—given by one Shepherd. Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them.”

1Cor 4:6 "Do not go beyond what is written."

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

It's fine jmfcst - you live with you choices.

I'll live with mine.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Human reason is a pretty wonderful thing.
Without it, we could never have sent someone to the Moon.

Somehow, I have wild guess, call it a premonition, that a trip to the Moon didn't make Neil Armstrong exempt from death.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Ez 18:4 "The soul who sins is the one who will die."

How, exactly, is that "arbitrary"?

How can you believe something that doesn't make sense? That is the issue.
Is Ez 18:4 saying that anyone who has ever sinned is going to hell forever?

Unless God provides a means for you to somehow transfer your death sentence to someone else (hint: Jesus Christ), then yes, you will be lost forever.