God works on the behalf of everyone who comes to him

[Semmelweis Reflex]

And I'm just beginning to know you. And thus far I am somewhat of a fan.

That's mutual and surprising to me. I didn't expect that.

My only criticism is your penchant for using the term "Christian" in a derogatory way, as a label for those whom you deem to be "misrepresenting" the Bible. The Bible seems to me to be too profound and multi-faceted a revelation, or more accurately a compilation of revelations, to claim that any one believer has a corner on its accurate representation. SteveB and I have scuffled over my universalism, and I think he misrepresents the eschatological passages, but I don't therefore wish to disassociate myself from the designation as a Christian. I may be a mere little pinky in the Body of Christ and perhaps worse, a useless appendix which might best be removed, but I do hold out hope that Christ is my Head, and even though, for example, I have serious doubts about your strange belief that the angel Michael and Jesus Christ are the same Guy (I THINK that was you), I accept you as a brother in Him.

Yeah, that was me. And those sorts of disagreements aren't a problem for me. I don't think I must be right and anyone else must therefore be wrong. Even in a world that is much more readily apparent than spirituality, people have different perspectives. I may state my own confidently but that doesn't mean it negates another's. I think of it somewhat like variations in translation. It's best to consider as many as possible. Two people who had a lasting impression on my early study, one atheist and one Catholic, had strong disagreements with me on interpretation, etc. but I respected them tremendously because they were very knowledgeable. They could defend their position and had good reason for it. Three divergent opinions.

I don't consider myself a "Christian." It's very rare that I identify as other than simply "believer." There are several reasons for that, some historical and some personal. I don't mind that others do, I think it's a personal thing and I'm not sure I would say that my using the term as I do is necessarily derogatory. There are issues that I disagree with more strongly than, for example, Jesus/Michael, though. Like immortal soul, hell, trinity, cross and rapture for example. Does that mean in that context I mean the term as derogatory?

Derogatory means either critical or disrespectful. In disagreement over Jesus/Michael I would be critical but on hell, for example, I would be disrespectful. I also expect others such as yourself to have similar distinctions with my beliefs. Because, well, a similitude would be a disagreement over sports teams and emergency medical treatment. Don't analyze that too much, it's just a comparison. In other words one is more crucial than the other.

There is no zoe in cold doctrine.

I'm going to have to look that up. I have no idea what that means. Zoe, Greek for Eve . . . that can't be it. Cold doctrine? What's that? You're gonna' have to help me with that one.

 

[SteveB]

Right.



What is that. I've noticed you do that from time to time. What are those punctuation marks for?



Not really. God isn't Santa who knows when you are sleeping etc. God didn't know Adam was going to sin, he only warned of it.

Wow.
That sure is the antithesis of what the bible says.
It's curious how we read in psalm 139 that YHVH knows our thoughts, from their point of origin.
And Hebrews 4 says that we are laid bare, and there's nothing that God doesn't know about us.
And how that by God's foreknowledge, we are being predestined to be conformed to the likeness of Jesus.




Thank you for stating that though.
It's good to know outright, that your lack of regular reading is giving you false beliefs about God.
Please.... for your sake, start reading the bible again, daily.
And make it a regular habit to talk to God about all your life-stuff.

God knows certain events will unfold because he insures that they do or they can easily be seen. I don't think God sees into the future, like a crystal ball, because the future doesn't exist.

Yeah, that would indeed explain why biblical prophecy.

Isa 41:21-23 WEB 21 Produce your cause,” says Yahweh. “Bring out your strong reasons!” says the King of Jacob. 22 “Let them announce and declare to us what will happen! Declare the former things, what they are, that we may consider them, and know the latter end of them; or show us things to come. 23 Declare the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that you are gods. Yes, do good, or do evil, that we may be dismayed, and see it together.

God can see the way events are likely to unfold.

So, flip a coin, but, what the hey! It's a 50-50 probability, you just might win.

For example he sees two fetuses in the womb struggling, one of them seems greedy, and that's likely going to be an indication of how that one and his family to follow will behave.

Greedy baby in the womb....
Perhaps that's why Jacob was foretold by God that he'd be the one to receive the rights of the firstborn, even though he was second born.

For someone who said they're not actually an expert, don't you think that it'd be beneficial to start reading the bible again, if you're going to talk about the God of the bible?
Or are your beliefs about some other god, who isn't actually a real God?

 

[SteveB]

And I'm just beginning to know you. And thus far I am somewhat of a fan. My only criticism is your penchant for using the term "Christian" in a derogatory way, as a label for those whom you deem to be "misrepresenting" the Bible. The Bible seems to me to be too profound and multi-faceted a revelation, or more accurately a compilation of revelations, to claim that any one believer has a corner on its accurate representation. SteveB and I have scuffled over my universalism, and I think he misrepresents the eschatological passages, but I don't therefore wish to disassociate myself from the designation as a Christian. I may be a mere little pinky in the Body of Christ and perhaps worse, a useless appendix which might best be removed, but I do hold out hope that Christ is my Head, and even though, for example, I have serious doubts about your strange belief that the angel Michael and Jesus Christ are the same Guy (I THINK that was you), I accept you as a brother in Him. There is no zoe in cold doctrine.

I've always thought of myself as a pancreas, or bile duct. Maybe even a gall bladder.

 

[stiggy wiggy]

I'm going to have to look that up. I have no idea what that means. Zoe, Greek for Eve .

For life. As opposed to bios, also Greek for life.

 

[Semmelweis Reflex]

For life. As opposed to bios, also Greek for life.

But what does that mean? Zoe cold doctrine. No doctrine that is cold, dispassionate? Ah. I read it again. No life in cold doctrine. See, it takes me a while but sometimes I get it.

 

[Semmelweis Reflex]

Wow.
That sure is the antithesis of what the bible says.

Only in your mind, Steve, only in your mind.

Your damaged little ego is going to buzz around me like an angry hornet, isn't it, Steve. Buzz, buzz, buzz. Pester, pester, pester. Thick skin, soldier! Your armor should not only protect but also conveniently prevent you from unnecessary expenditure of energy.

It's curious how we read in psalm 139 that YHVH knows our thoughts, from their point of origin.
And Hebrews 4 says that we are laid bare, and there's nothing that God doesn't know about us.
And how that by God's foreknowledge, we are being predestined to be conformed to the likeness of Jesus.

Yep. None of that disagrees with what I said. Not even a little bit. I know all of that.

Thank you for stating that though.

You're sure welcome, buddy. Any time.

It's good to know outright, that your lack of regular reading is giving you false beliefs about God.

Is it? Works out pretty good for you, does it?

Please.... for your sake, start reading the bible again, daily.

I told you I read the Bible daily. Why don't you try to look at what people and indeed, the Bible itself says, not from a rigid doctrinal almost idealistic perspective, like from a fairy tale book put into law, but from what it means overall, like a dictionary or encyclopedia. Try studying instead of just reading. Be an active part of it in a practical sense instead of reading it like a novel that you could wait for the DVD to come out or breaking it up into silly little slogans and platitudes you might read on a bumper sticker. Huh? I'll get you started on your first lesson. Did God know what Cain was going to do when he warned him to change? Why would he warn him if he already knew what he was going to do? Why would there be so many warnings to the early Christians in the Bible if God already knew that they might fall? The same for Adam, huh?

And make it a regular habit to talk to God about all your life-stuff.

You just leave it to me, buddy. I'll see it's taken care of.

Yeah, that would indeed explain why biblical prophecy.

Why Biblical prophecy what, Steve? Did To the wind? To the breath? Ezekiel 37:9? Why did those who spit upon and struck Jesus ask him to prophecy what they had already done? (Matthew 26)

Isa 41:21-23 WEB 21 Produce your cause,” says Yahweh. “Bring out your strong reasons!” says the King of Jacob. 22 “Let them announce and declare to us what will happen! Declare the former things, what they are, that we may consider them, and know the latter end of them; or show us things to come. 23 Declare the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that you are gods. Yes, do good, or do evil, that we may be dismayed, and see it together.

Oh, good. Another excerpt from Steve, wielded like the traditional blind woodsman of religiosity. Hacking, cutting and burning it's way through the smoky ruins of time and rivers of blood with a certain smug self righteousness that adds insult to injury to any thinking man.

[Sigh]

So, flip a coin, but, what the hey! It's a 50-50 probability, you just might win.

Win what? Bingo? A cake walk? A ticket to heaven?

Greedy baby in the womb....
Perhaps that's why Jacob was foretold by God that he'd be the one to receive the rights of the firstborn, even though he was second born.

Ooo! I am impressed. But, why Steve, why? How did they behave in the womb? Another puzzle for you. Why did Noah curse Canaan instead of Ham?

Oh, look what an evil little creep I am lording over your aforementioned ego with my clever little puzzles!

Pssst!!! Don't tell anyone my secret weapon.

For someone who said they're not actually an expert, don't you think that it'd be beneficial to start reading the bible again, if you're going to talk about the God of the bible?
Or are your beliefs about some other god, who isn't actually a real God?

Hmm. I don't recall that in the Bible. Can you badger me with chapter and verse taken out of context again? Can you imagine what they did in the days before they invented that system? Must have been horrible!

 

[SteveB]

Only in your mind, Steve, only in your mind.

?
Thankfully, YHVH says that he is daily regenerating my mind, so if you have a problem with that, then this comment of yours would make perfect sense.
Thank you for the compliment.

Your damaged little ego is going to buzz around me like an angry hornet, isn't it, Steve Buzz, buzz, buzz. Pester, pester, pester. Thick skin, soldier! Your armor should not only protect but also conveniently prevent you from unnecessary expenditure of energy.

Again curious...
According to Romans 6, Colossians 2-3, and 2 Corinthians 5, I've previously died, and have been raised by God, through Jesus, and am a new creation.
So whatever this ego of your is going on about, my ego is dead.

Yep. None of that disagrees with what I said. Not even a little bit. I know all of that.

Know, or actually live?

You're sure welcome, buddy. Any time.



Is it? Works out pretty good for you, does it?



I told you I read the Bible daily.

I'm working on what you previously explained. 2008.

Why don't you try to look at what people and indeed, the Bible itself says, not from a rigid doctrinal almost idealistic perspective, like from a fairy tale book put into law, but from what it means overall, like a dictionary or encyclopedia. Try studying instead of just reading. Be an active part of it in a practical sense instead of reading it like a novel that you could wait for the DVD to come out or breaking it up into silly little slogans and platitudes you might read on a bumper sticker. Huh? I'll get you started on your first lesson. Did God know what Cain was going to do when he warned him to change? Why would he warn him if he already knew what he was going to do? Why would there be so many warnings to the early Christians in the Bible if God already knew that they might fall? The same for Adam, huh?



You just leave it to me, buddy. I'll see it's taken care of.



Why Biblical prophecy what, Steve? Did To the wind? To the breath? Ezekiel 37:9? Why did those who spit upon and struck Jesus ask him to prophecy what they had already done? (Matthew 26)



Oh, good. Another excerpt from Steve, wielded like the traditional blind woodsman of religiosity. Hacking, cutting and burning it's way through the smoky ruins of time and rivers of blood with a certain smug self righteousness that adds insult to injury to any thinking man.

[Sigh]



Win what? Bingo? A cake walk? A ticket to heaven?



Ooo! I am impressed. But, why Steve, why? How did they behave in the womb? Another puzzle for you. Why did Noah curse Canaan instead of Ham?

Oh, look what an evil little creep I am lording over your aforementioned ego with my clever little puzzles!

Pssst!!! Don't tell anyone my secret weapon.



Hmm. I don't recall that in the Bible. Can you badger me with chapter and verse taken out of context again? Can you imagine what they did in the days before they invented that system? Must have been horrible!

Jehovah's witness eh...

That covers it for me.

It's long been said, once people reject the truth, they'll accept anything.

 

[Semmelweis Reflex]

Jehovah's witness eh...

Uh, no. Never been a part of any organized religion. Never will be.

It's long been said, once people reject the truth, they'll accept anything.

Has it. It's not been said, though, that if they'll accept anything they will reject the truth. I find that more often the case. I think it was you that once brought up Abraham Lincoln. I think he said something like it's easy to convince people of anything but nearly impossible to change their mind once they believe.

 

[Caroljeen]

He doesn't know?
Well, that's a curveball!

I agree with that statement also.
God thinks that he knows but is surprised when he gets a response that he didn't expect.

 

[SteveB]

Uh, no. Never been a part of any organized religion. Never will be.

You're the one who used a watchtower link. That's Jehovah's witnesses.
So, if you don't want to be associated with them, I'd say it'd behoove you to not reference their materials.

What's organized religion?

Has it. It's not been said, though, that if they'll accept anything they will reject the truth.

This group has blindly "accepted" atheism as true.

I find that more often the case. I think it was you that once brought up Abraham Lincoln. I think he said something like it's easy to convince people of anything but nearly impossible to change their mind once they believe.

The other day I quoted Abe.

I'm not interested in getting God to agree with me. I'm interested in making sure that I agree with God.


Here's an article about people not being convinced by facts.

Why Facts Don’t Change Our Minds

New discoveries about the human mind show the limitations of reason.

www.newyorker.com

As far as your quote, I'm not able to verify Abe said it.
Something similar was attributed to Mark Twain, but has an earlier source.

It’s Easier To Fool People Than To Convince Them That They’ve Been Fooled – Quote Investigator®

quoteinvestigator.com

 

[Semmelweis Reflex]

You're the one who used a watchtower link. That's Jehovah's witnesses.

Correct. Just clarifying that I'm not one, never have been one and never will be one.

So, if you don't want to be associated with them, I'd say it'd behoove you to not reference their materials.

Why not? Here's my reasoning:

Pros
1. They were the ones to introduce me to the Bible.
2. They removed the pagan influence of Christianity in their teachings.
3. They have had an army of volunteers to do Biblical research for some time which includes references to secular and traditional Judeo-Christian scholars.

Cons
1. They have controversial origins including division (Russell/Rutherford).
2. They think they are Jehovah's earthly organization.
3. They have a controversial past including false prophecy, covering child molestation to prevent bringing reproach on their organization, and cultish/legal devotion. (Higher education, neutrality, vaccinations, organ transplants and blood transfusions)
4. They've become a business.

So I use them as a primary source of the Biblical (pros) and avoid the cons.

What's organized religion?

Any religion that is organized once an appeal to the masses has been achieved, especially, but not necessarily state sponsored. Christianity for example with Constantine the Great and Taoism and especially Confucianism, with Emperor Taiwu (Wu Ti).

This group has blindly "accepted" atheism as true.

This group? On this forum? All atheists? Blindly? Accepted? I would imagine this group represents unbelievers of various paradigms, atheists to various extents, agnostics etc. So I prefer unbelievers as a term for simplification. I can't assume they fit within those various paradigms blindly, though I wouldn't necessarily criticize them for that unless they were critical of alternative paradigms or claimed to be superior based upon a knowledge they didn't appear to possess. The same as I would with believers. Typically that would be the case in a debate forum. I would have to think about accepted, especially since you wrote it in quotation marks which would indicate some specific condition of the term I'm not aware of.

I'm not interested in getting God to agree with me. I'm interested in making sure that I agree with God.

Jesus was a pretty good example. If you agree with God then it logically follows that he would agree with you. That's the goal, to be imitators and eventually like Jesus in that regard, as Adam was meant to be. Realistically you have to be open to the possibility that that is very difficult for all sinners, that is those who have inherited sin from Adam. All of us. If you don't do that you wind up like the Jehovah's Witnesses, thinking they are the representatives of God. You equate or conflate the two possibilities. A good example is the illustration Jesus gave of the tax collector and the Pharisee. (Luke 18:9-14)

I'll quote it for you: "He also spoke this parable to certain people who were convinced of their own righteousness, and who despised all others. “Two men went up into the temple to pray; one was a Pharisee, and the other was a tax collector. The Pharisee stood and prayed to himself like this: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like the rest of men, extortionists, unrighteous, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week. I give tithes of all that I get.’ But the tax collector, standing far away, wouldn’t even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.”

Still to this day that touches me on such an emotional level I can't read it without becoming almost overwhelmed, fighting back the tears.

I know I relate to the tax collector, and you? When we argue everyone probably sees us both as the Pharisee. Especially the unbelievers. But, the apostle Paul had disagreements with Peter and Barnabas. Family and those who feel passionate about a subject sometimes will have disagreements. Real boats rock.

As far as your quote, I'm not able to verify Abe said it.
Something similar was attributed to Mark Twain, but has an earlier source.

It’s Easier To Fool People Than To Convince Them That They’ve Been Fooled – Quote Investigator®

quoteinvestigator.com

Yep. Now I remember. You're absolutely right, it was Mark Twain.

 

[Eightcrackers]

I agree with that statement also.
God thinks that he knows but is surprised when he gets a response that he didn't expect.

That still leaves the question of, if he's the one that wants the attention of a person that's not aware of his existence, why does said person have to "find" him?

Isn't all of the onus on him to present himself first?

 

[The Pixie]

Easy.
YHVH says it.

Deu 32:17 WEB They sacrificed to demons, not God, to gods that they didn’t know, to new gods that came up recently, which your fathers didn’t dread.

Since however you keep making it clear that you don't actually want to know the truth, you make it even easier still to dismiss your diatribes.

Excellent demonstration of your assumptions btw.

My assumption that your beliefs are based on the unsupported assumption the Bible is true? Yes, this illustrates it perfectly. When challenged to support your claims, all you have is Bible verses which, of course, assume the Bible is true.

Well, just as long as you believe that, the truth doesn't actually matter now does it!

Not sure how you come to that conclusion.

I believe it because that is what the evidence points to. At every turn when challenged to support your claims, all you have is Bible verses which, of course, assume the Bible is true.

Man you're continuing to do such a great job of demonstrating your assumptions and preconceptions and biases.

And you are doing a great job of confirming them.

Pity you don't actually want to know the truth.

Can you tell me why you think the Bible is true, without assuming it is true?

Pity you cannot show me your claims really are true as you think.

Well, you're doing a bang up job of demonstrating that you have no basis for your beliefs.

I believe you have no good reason to suppose the Bible is true. Every time you post you hand me more evidence that I am right.

I already had.
I don't like man-made religion.

But why do you think Christianity is not also a "man-made religion"? Because the Bible says so!

Further demonstrating that you don't actually pay attention to what I've been saying for close to a decade now.
3600 days of you ignoring what you don't want to know.

Sure I have. You have been saying the Bible is true, therefore the Bible is true.

How about you stop doing that and tell us why you think the Bible is true, without assuming it is true?

Can you do that? Of course not! The only reason you think it is true is that you were told to believe that as a kid.

 

[Whatsisface]

I don't know that I would say the Bible is "proof" of anything. It's evidence. For what? Lot's of things. But specifically in this case, evidence for belief. It could conversely be considered as evidence against as well. That's the way evidence works. That's what it is. Proof and evidence aren't the same.

You said that Bible is all the evidence needed for belief in God, and yet above you say the Bible can be considered as evidence against as well. This means that it's not clear cut that the Bible is representing the truth as far as God is concerned.

How then, can the Bible be all that's needed for belief? How do people come to the conclusion that God exists from the Bible?

Hmm. That could be interpreted in various ways. I'm going to say, the Bible.

I asked for a firm foundation of things known for belief and you say the Bible, after you said that the Bible can be used for evidence either way. that's hardly showing the Bible as a firm foundation.

Okay, good. Thanks for saying. Uh, let me scroll . . . okay. I started out as an unbeliever who loathed religion so I eventually thought I should have some basis other than that. I wanted to debunk the nonsense. What I found was that the Bible appeared (at the time) to be truth but it had been horribly misrepresented by the religious hypocrites I grew up with. I mean the "Christians" where I grew up, the Midwestern US. Since then (1993) I've learned that most Christians I've encountered were far removed from the truth I discovered and very much influenced by the misrepresentation.

It seems most Christians think they have the correct truth of the Bible despite the many disagreements of interpretation of the Bible. This should at least make an individual Christian wonder whether they have the true view if the Bible.

I said I think they look at it like a fairy tale. A fairy tale is a children's story about magical and imaginary beings and lands; something resembling a fairy tale in being magical, idealized, or extremely happy. Christians perceive the Bible like (in a way very similar to) that. A fairy tale can also be, more specifically, a fabricated story, especially one intended to deceive. That is how I see their application. They may believe it, but don't see the problems with their theology. They conflate the Bible with that traditional manifestation. This is my opinion. It's anecdotal.

OK.

 

[SteveB]

My assumption that your beliefs are based on the unsupported assumption the Bible is true?

Pity.
There are numerous resources which explain why the bible is true, and then there's an even better, more effective way to determine the veracity of the bible.

I note here that you are assuming, based solely on your unsupported beliefs.
Sounds like you're having a problem you're not actually interested in resolving.

Yes, this illustrates it perfectly. When challenged to support your claims, all you have is Bible verses which, of course, assume the Bible is true.

Actually, it's known as 45 years of experience, reading, testing, and checking that gives us the wherewithal to actually know the bible is true.
But, according to you, it's not actually allowed to know with confidence that the bible is true.
So, I'd say that we're at a mexican stand off.
I'm experienced, and you don't allow experience, because you're..... well..... you!

Not sure how you come to that conclusion.

Of course not. You keep assuming, instead of actually reading what I've stated several times before.

I believe it because that is what the evidence points to.

You're going to have to show me what your claim of evidence consists of. The evidence that I've been living with for 45 plus years now is clearly different and is based on experience.

At every turn when challenged to support your claims, all you have is Bible verses which, of course, assume the Bible is true.

Well, considering that you're not interested in doing what Jesus said, so you can gain your own experience, and know for yourself, I'd say that you have a problem which no one else can assist you with.

I have a novel idea.
Are you into repairing your own mode of transportation?
What would you need to accomplish this?
tools, a manual, and what else?
I'm not talking about anyone else. I'm talking about you, personally.

And you are doing a great job of confirming them.

?

Can you tell me why you think the Bible is true, without assuming it is true?

Experience.
Going back to my question to you regarding repairing your own mode of transportation.....
I actually do enjoy servicing, and repairing my own vehicles.
I have a collection of tools I use, and a manual, to work through, read, and in specific chapters, I'm able to focus on solving/repairing specific problems associated with my vehicles.
In reading on my particular vehicle, I had to take the word of the writers that they're actually talking about my particular vehicle--- year, make, model....
In this case, I'm talking about a 1967 Ford Mustang.

Here's a manual I can obtain to do the repairs.

Mustang Restoration Guide 1964-1/2 thru 1970 Haynes Online Manual

With Haynes Online Manuals, you get all the trusted content of a Haynes printed manual but with added features to help you get the job done right. Haynes takes repair information into the digital age with Manuals Online and the new electronic format allows these benefits for you: -- All-color...

haynes.com

Now, as these things are specific to a range of cars, I don't want to get the 1974 Bronco manual, because it's a completely different car.

Ford Bronco 1973 - 1979 Haynes Repair Manuals & Guides

Need to service or repair your Ford Bronco 1973 - 1979? Online and print formats available. Save time and money when you follow the advice of Haynes' master mechanics

haynes.com

In like manner, I have to make sure that I'm getting the right documents to deal with spiritual issues.
Buddha, and the Vetas as well as the Quran don't tell me how I can be forgiven by God, nor do they tell me how I can be saved, and freed from the power of sin. What they do tell me is that if I work really hard, and discipline myself assiduously, I'll become what they say is a good person.
The problem with that is--- each has a different idea what being a good person means.
To the Muslim, a Buddhist is an atheist, and a Hindu is an idol worshipper.
To the Buddhist, the Muslim is an angry, hateful person, who is running around killing people who don't follow their beliefs. And the Hindu just hasn't risen to the level of freedom from ancient superstitions. In spite of the fact that numerous buddhist beliefs have their origins in hinduism.

I'm interested in repairing/servicing my Mustang, so I need to get the right manual, by the manufacturer's authorized publisher. In this case, Haynes/Chilton is the long-time publisher for this car.

In like manner, I want the manufacturer's authorized publisher. In the case of the human being, only the maker knows how we work.
Others try, but they're always off somewhere, and when the fix they recommend is applied, it's clear, pretty quickly, that it's not the right fix, or stops short of resolving the real problem.
Only what YHVH does actually fixes the problem we humans have.
Patchwork, and fancy clothes don't cut it.

Pity you cannot show me your claims really are true as you think.

It's an even greater problem that you won't take the time to learn to do what Jesus said for yourself. He's made it really clear that if you keep his teachings, He and God will come and make their home with you.
I don't know about you, but that sounds like an incredible opportunity.
In this op, the passage--- God's Spirit searches throughout the whole world, looking for those whose hearts are wholly towards him, so he can show himself strong on their behalf.

It's actually a simple concept--
God is looking to demonstrate himself to anyone who will believe Him.

I was further reminded this morning of a passage which states--

12 What shall I render to YHVH for all His benefits toward me?
13 I will take up the cup of salvation and call upon the name of YHVH.

We further read in another passage

Whoever offers praise glorifies Me; and to him who orders his conduct aright I will show the salvation of God.”

So, instead of pushing him away, call on him. He'll demonstrate himself to you.

I believe you have no good reason to suppose the Bible is true. Every time you post you hand me more evidence that I am right.

Sounds like your belief is what's preventing you from knowing God.
Sounds like your belief is what keeps you from knowing the truth.
And every time you post, you expose yourself for who you really are---
An unbeliever who actually WANTS to spend their eternity in the lake of fire.

But why do you think Christianity is not also a "man-made religion"? Because the Bible says so!

Do you actually want to find out why, or are you satisfied with your assumptions?

Sure I have. You have been saying the Bible is true, therefore the Bible is true.

Sounds like you're assuming, so you don't actually have to learn why.

How about you stop doing that and tell us why you think the Bible is true, without assuming it is true?

45 years of experience, and history.

Can you do that?

Just did.

Of course not! The only reason you think it is true is that you were told to believe that as a kid.

Sounds like you have a lot of assumptions, without any reasoning.

 

[Semmelweis Reflex]

You said that Bible is all the evidence needed for belief in God, and yet above you say the Bible can be considered as evidence against as well. This means that it's not clear cut that the Bible is representing the truth as far as God is concerned.

Correct. And that's exactly the case. For several different reasons. First of all evidence is simply the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid. Unbelievers who typically debate this subject think that they have an evidence based conclusion. That doesn't mean what they seem to think it means. They seem to think it means absolute truth (or as close as you can get to it). They think atheism is factual and theism isn't. A fact is a thing that is known or proved to be true. To prove is to demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument. Truth is a fact or belief that is accepted as true. So evidence is data to support whether or not a specific fact or belief can be demonstrated to be true or valid. In this case the existence of God. Evidence supports whether a thing is true or false. In a court, for example, you get evidence for or against guilt as well as innocence.

How then, can the Bible be all that's needed for belief? How do people come to the conclusion that God exists from the Bible?

By examining the evidence it presents.

I asked for a firm foundation of things known for belief and you say the Bible, after you said that the Bible can be used for evidence either way. that's hardly showing the Bible as a firm foundation.

Above I explained evidence, truth, proof and fact. Many believers think the Bible is the infallible word of God. It isn't. The Bible is fallible. It has mistakes. Errors. The inspired (God breathed/spirit) word of Jehovah God, as given to the writers of the Bible, is infallible, without error, but what we have in the Bible is the uninspired translation of that. To be inspired by, as in the case of the Bible, means to be directed by. So when Ezra and Matthew were compiling data on the genealogy of Jesus they didn't have to have it directly dictated by God. The records were recorded as legal documents in the archives at the temple. God spoke to the prophets and they recorded the pertinent information in their scrolls. God insured that the information needed was recorded as accurately as it needed to be. It doesn't need to be what we might call perfect.

Think of it like a newspaper publishing information recorded in government documents. The information you read in the newspaper doesn't need to be perfect for you to get the information you need. Reporters may have different perspectives of the data but that's okay, in fact it can be helpful to get a broader perspective. For example one gospel writer may call Jesus's outer garment scarlet while another calls it red. That could be due to lighting, it could be just that what one calls red the other would call scarlet. The Jews used to keep notoriously inaccurate translations of scrolls in various local temples for reading during services. I can never remember what they are called, but they didn't need to be accurate because more accurate translations were available if needed beyond just daily reading in the temple. These documents preserved are not good for translating the Bible but they are tremendously helpful in getting a good look at the culture because they include that sort of information. From them we can more fully understand some things about the accurate scrolls that don't include that information. Exactly how the information is viewed, used, implemented etc.

The Bible serves us in a similar way in that it gives us a fairly accurate (like a newspaper, well, as newspapers used to do) understanding of what was going on. It was more important in that time to be accurate whereas now not so much.

It seems most Christians think they have the correct truth of the Bible despite the many disagreements of interpretation of the Bible. This should at least make an individual Christian wonder whether they have the true view if the Bible.

I've known believers that told me they were terrible at knowledge but they were great at faith. I'm good with knowledge but not so good with faith. I'm a skeptic. We all have our individual burdens. I've know people who went from door to door for 40 years all the while overcoming the obstacles set before them and then were captured by their government, imprisoned and tortured beyond what most of us could imagine, keeping their faith until they were freed from their captives only then to abandon God altogether because they couldn't bear the thought of going through that again. God sees into the heart. It isn't a test of knowledge, works or faith in the sense most unbelievers might think. It's where the heart is. One can have faith, knowledge, and works but their heart is in the wrong place. Another could be completely wrong in their theology but their heart is in the right place.

 

[Whatsisface]

Actually, it's known as 45 years of experience, reading, testing, and checking that gives us the wherewithal to actually know the bible is true.

You do a lot of boasting, shame you don't do any detailed showing.

 

[Whatsisface]

Correct. And that's exactly the case. For several different reasons. First of all evidence is simply the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid. Unbelievers who typically debate this subject think that they have an evidence based conclusion. That doesn't mean what they seem to think it means. They seem to think it means absolute truth (or as close as you can get to it). They think atheism is factual and theism isn't. A fact is a thing that is known or proved to be true. To prove is to demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument. Truth is a fact or belief that is accepted as true. So evidence is data to support whether or not a specific fact or belief can be demonstrated to be true or valid. In this case the existence of God. Evidence supports whether a thing is true or false. In a court, for example, you get evidence for or against guilt as well as innocence.

There are two types of evidence. That which can be used to support a proposition, and that which shows a proposition true. There is no evidence that shows Christianity true.

By examining the evidence it presents.

None of which shows Christianity true. The best it shows is Christianity might be true.

Above I explained evidence, truth, proof and fact. Many believers think the Bible is the infallible word of God. It isn't. The Bible is fallible. It has mistakes. Errors. The inspired (God breathed/spirit) word of Jehovah God, as given to the writers of the Bible, is infallible, without error, but what we have in the Bible is the uninspired translation of that.

Which means you can never what is true in the Bible and what isn't. I asked for a firm foundation of the Bible, and you've tacitly said there isn't one.

To be inspired by, as in the case of the Bible, means to be directed by. So when Ezra and Matthew were compiling data on the genealogy of Jesus they didn't have to have it directly dictated by God. The records were recorded as legal documents in the archives at the temple. God spoke to the prophets and they recorded the pertinent information in their scrolls. God insured that the information needed was recorded as accurately as it needed to be. It doesn't need to be what we might call perfect.

Think of it like a newspaper publishing information recorded in government documents. The information you read in the newspaper doesn't need to be perfect for you to get the information you need. Reporters may have different perspectives of the data but that's okay, in fact it can be helpful to get a broader perspective. For example one gospel writer may call Jesus's outer garment scarlet while another calls it red. That could be due to lighting, it could be just that what one calls red the other would call scarlet. The Jews used to keep notoriously inaccurate translations of scrolls in various local temples for reading during services. I can never remember what they are called, but they didn't need to be accurate because more accurate translations were available if needed beyond just daily reading in the temple. These documents preserved are not good for translating the Bible but they are tremendously helpful in getting a good look at the culture because they include that sort of information. From them we can more fully understand some things about the accurate scrolls that don't include that information. Exactly how the information is viewed, used, implemented etc.

The Bible serves us in a similar way in that it gives us a fairly accurate (like a newspaper, well, as newspapers used to do) understanding of what was going on. It was more important in that time to be accurate whereas now not so much.

To me, you always seem to be on the verge of contradicting yourself. You've said that the Bible isn't accurate, and yet it's good enough for belief. Thing is, once you admit to fallibility, you can never know what is or isn't right or wrong.

I've known believers that told me they were terrible at knowledge but they were great at faith. I'm good with knowledge but not so good with faith. I'm a skeptic. We all have our individual burdens. I've know people who went from door to door for 40 years all the while overcoming the obstacles set before them and then were captured by their government, imprisoned and tortured beyond what most of us could imagine, keeping their faith until they were freed from their captives only then to abandon God altogether because they couldn't bear the thought of going through that again. God sees into the heart. It isn't a test of knowledge, works or faith in the sense most unbelievers might think. It's where the heart is. One can have faith, knowledge, and works but their heart is in the wrong place. Another could be completely wrong in their theology but their heart is in the right place.

I'm not sure of the relevant point here.

 

[SteveB]

You do a lot of boasting, shame you don't do any detailed showing.

It's impossible to do any showing when you refuse my several years of invitation.

Showing isn't a detailed description. Especially when you've previously demonstrated that you have no interest in actual descriptions.

Did you have show and tell in elementary school when you were a child?

It's a thing we did in elementary school here in the western US, back in the 60's. We'd bring an example of something we did, and then describe it, and the process we used.
As such, I've used that technique here, on this forum, but you keep showing you don't actually care, or want to know. So, your complaint is invalid, because you keep rejecting it, and mocking it.
?‍

 

[Whatsisface]

It's impossible to do any showing when you refuse my several years of invitation.

Showing isn't a detailed description. Especially when you've previously demonstrated that you have no interest in actual descriptions.

Did you have show and tell in elementary school when you were a child?

It's a thing we did in elementary school here in the western US, back in the 60's. We'd bring an example of something we did, and then describe it, and the process we used.
As such, I've used that technique here, on this forum, but you keep showing you don't actually care, or want to know. So, your complaint is invalid, because you keep rejecting it, and mocking it.
?‍

Yep, no showing here, just empty rhetoric.