God's Creation, and Some Misconceptions

[101G]

assume

no need for assumptions, commonsense prevail ...... (smile).... now with common .... sense is these two separate persons or the same "ONE" person in both scriptures, yes or no..... last chance to [rove yourself /

101G.

 

[101G]

What? That is a poorly formed question. Why assume that there was a "who?

do the PN "I", and "HE", do not suggestion "a" person? if you don't know... or cannot answer... that's ok... (smile)

101G.

 

[101G]

What "evidence"? The Bible is the claim. The Bible is not the evidence. Again, if you want to claim that the Bible is reliable the burden of proof is upon you.

is not the earth & Heavens are here? yes, and the written record says God, by name, JESUS, created both. do you have written record of someone else "WHO" created both? if so GIVE NAME, not a title, but NAME and source.

101G.

 

[Subduction Zone]

is not the earth & Heavens are here? yes, and the written record says God, by name, JESUS, created both. do you have written record of someone else "WHO" created both? if so GIVE NAME, not a title, but NAME and source.

101G.

Define "heaven". But yes, the Earth is here. There is still no evidence of a need for a "who". And there is no evidence that Jesus or if you prefer "JESUS" created anything. What you have does not appear to be a written record. It appears to be a book of myths.

So, once again, what is your evidence that the Bible is more than a collection of myths, many of which have been refuted.

I am waiting (but I am not holding my breath).

 

[101G]

Define "heaven"

NO, pay attention, "heaven" ... with the "s" on the end. meaning the inner and outer heavens.

But yes, the Earth is here. There is still no evidence of a need for a "who".

why not?

And there is no evidence that Jesus or if you prefer "JESUS" created anything.

are you saying the Lord Jesus is lying?

What you have does not appear to be a written record. It appears to be a book of myths.

personal Opinion? U know what I do with that. now, not to further waste yours or my time, "is the Lord Jesus the CREATOR of this world and the heavens". yes or no, Matthew 12:36 "But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment." Matthew 12:37 "For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned."

101G

 

[101G]

now, while these minds are solving the John 1:3 and Isaiah 44:24 person problem.... A & B =C. one other. the US and the WE in Genesis 1:26 is a single person there at Genesis 1:26. A & B = C.

101G.

 

[idea]

the Bible is ... a collection of myths ...

From the authors, a major tenet of rabbinic Judaism is that the Bible is not to be taken literally.

Aesop's fables are not literal, yet contain many valuable lessons and fruit for thought. So too should all scriptures be used I think.

 

[idea]

personal Opinion

agreement from multiple sources, reproducible, measurable as opposed to one groups opinion.

Those in China, Russia, India, Africa, South America, when all cultures and backgrounds agree, then it is no longer opinion.

This is what I seek, those few principles which all agree upon.

 

[101G]

From the authors, a major tenet of rabbinic Judaism is that the Bible is not to be taken literally

First thanks for the reply, second, "the Bible is not to be taken literally". is that everything or somethings?

101G

 

[101G]

agreement from multiple sources, reproducible, measurable as opposed to one groups opinion.

agreement from multiple sources? so are you saying the majority is correct? yes, or no.

101G.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

no need for assumptions, commonsense prevail ...... (smile).... now with common .... sense is these two separate persons or the same "ONE" person in both scriptures, yes or no..... last chance to [rove yourself /

101G.

It assumes the following. That a text about something means that it actually happened. I question that assumption in that I choose to say that I don't know, if it is true or false that it happened.
Thus it is irrelevant if it was one or two persons.

You have to learn to spot the given assumptions in a question and consider if you accept them.
Try to learn this. We, you and I, think differently, but from there doesn't follow that one of us are right and the other one wrong. It could be that just do it differently. How is that for common sense?

 

[Subduction Zone]

NO, pay attention, "heaven" ... with the "s" on the end. meaning the inner and outer heavens.

why not?

are you saying the Lord Jesus is lying?

personal Opinion? U know what I do with that. now, not to further waste yours or my time, "is the Lord Jesus the CREATOR of this world and the heavens". yes or no, Matthew 12:36 "But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment." Matthew 12:37 "For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned."

101G

LOL!! The Gospels were written by anonymous men. You have no idea what Jesus actually said.

Where is your evidence? You do not get to assume that your stories are true any more than a Harry Potter fan gets to assume that his stories are true.

 

[Subduction Zone]

From the authors, a major tenet of rabbinic Judaism is that the Bible is not to be taken literally.

Aesop's fables are not literal, yet contain many valuable lessons and fruit for thought. So too should all scriptures be used I think.

They were wiser than the OP. The fastest way to refute the Bible is to assume that it is literally true front to end.

 

[101G]

It assumes the following. That a text about something means that it actually happened. I question that assumption in that I choose to say that I don't know, if it is true or false that it happened.
Thus it is irrelevant if it was one or two persons.

without the assumption, of either being true, or false, based on the writing itself is this the same person or not? yes or no.

You have to learn to spot the given assumptions in a question and consider if you accept them.

again, without acceptation, the basic question is mathematical. can you deduce two or one person from both writings.

101G.

 

[101G]

LOL!! The Gospels were written by anonymous men. You have no idea what Jesus actually said.

Where is your evidence? You do not get to assume that your stories are true any more than a Harry Potter fan gets to assume that his stories are true.

so, we can take this as you cannot ANSWER the question.... thought so..... next.

101G.

 

[101G]

They were wiser than the OP. The fastest way to refute the Bible is to assume that it is literally true front to end.

INCORRECT in that assumption.

101G.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

They were wiser than the OP. The fastest way to refute the Bible is to assume that it is literally true front to end.

Yeah, but that doesn't stop other people form believing differently than you. Since we are in science and religion that is in the end a consequence of the replication part of the replication of the fittest genome.
We humans have to make our own purpose in effect. And they do it differently than you. That is one fact of how the natural world works. The joke is that if you claim they do it wrong, then that is not just science in the end, because they can do differently than you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

so, we can take this as you cannot ANSWER the question.... thought so..... next.

101G.

You did not ask a proper question. It is not proper to have unjustified assumptions in a question. For example:

Have you quit beating your wife yet?

Can you spot the unjustified assumption in that question?

 

[101G]

let 101G help you out. everything written in the bible is not necessary a statement of TRUth, but ... EVERYTHING written in the Bible is TRULY STATED. i.... (smile).

101G.

 

[101G]

You did not ask a proper question. It is not proper to have unjustified assumptions in a question. For example:

Have you quit beating your wife yet?

Can you spot the unjustified assumption in that question?

NO, because 101G never beat his wife at anytime..... (smile). lol, lol, lol, Oh dear. next.... please.

101G