bob talks Hell with youkrst.

[youkrst]

bob, those are not absolute truths

allow me to demonstrate.

God is righteous (never does wrong).

k,

Then Peter said to her, “Why is it that you have agreed together to put the Spirit of the Lord to the test? Behold, the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out as well.” 10 And immediately she fell at his feet and breathed her last, and the young men came in and found her dead, and they carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11 And great fear came over the whole church, and over all who heard of these things.

so ananias and sapphira are killed by the holy ghost for lying about the price of a house, what is this god a real estate agent?

but Hitler kills a heap of the "chosen people" of the same god and the holy ghost does nothing, zip, nada...

bob, not only is your god not righteous, he's not even as righteous as me, and i'm not that righteous.

the holy ghost cares more about real estate deals than jew slaying?!?!?

come on, really.

and yet you say

God is righteous (never does wrong).

yet he sits there while.... bob, you really need to think, you can you know, or are you scared the holy ghost will strike you down if you have a mind of your own?

trust me the holy ghost is an impotent figment of your imagination

unless of course YOU ARE SUPERSTITIOUS enough TO BELIEVE otherwise

this is why "pointing the bone" usually doesn't work, most people don't believe in it anymore.

bob, please THINK MAN!

stop giving God the power of your belief, and He will fade away like the bad dream He is.

i usually try to kill a god or two before breakfast

many days i succeed

[Robert Tulip]

There are absolute truths about God that are not open to any interpretation!!

i can dig that

please type out one of these absolute truths about God that are not open to any interpretation!

yall aytheists gwine frah en hayull

[youkrst]

you gotsta git yer mieeend rart bwoyeah

just teasing brother bob, we aren't trying to offend you just giving you a valuable opportunity to see how your "target audience" may see your doctrine as somewhat deficient in rationality

which is a fancy way of saying most people will think you are believing dumb stuff

we love you bob, but your doctrine needs work if it is to be welcome in the 21st century.

major overhaul needed could be an understatement

[LanDroid]

Compare and contrast this

God is righteous (never does wrong).

with this.

We see this practiced in MANY instances of the Bible - 10 plagues, prophet attacking 30 children with two she bears, Elijah battling the 850 prophets of Baal and Ashteroth in a duel to the death, Moses gives his sister Miriam leprosy for attacking him, David LIKELY is insulted by an agreement with a herdsman he works for and produces the first heart attack in history (he turned to stone), Paul encounters some adversaries that had in their employment a man that foretold the future - and Paul heals him for this disorder (Acts 16:16-18), even two people of the newly founded church were killed for falsely claiming that they gave all of their proceeds of selling their house to the church (Acts 5:1-11), Moses coming off of Mt. Sinai with the tables and 23,000 people die for rejecting God and making the golden calf, you might even include Paul becoming blind - we don't know the full context, but likely Christians were praying for his destruction or a changing of his ways.

I expect we're about to be told how all these punishments are just and proper. Wait, it's a tautology: all of God's punishments (and failures to act) MUST be just and proper otherwise the first quote, the absolute truth above, would be incorrect.

[Dexter]

Since the Bible was written for its time and place and talks about what to do with your donkey, I think in a modern version this would be hell:

[brother bob]

So much garbage, so many wasted words!

Tulip - GREAT QUESTION if one is serious to learn the understandings of God.

Case in point, is GOD IS ALL POWERFULL. For God to create the Universe by speaking is such immense power that mankind cannot comprehend it.

However, to take your question to the inth degree - it would and could be argued that there is no statement that is not open to interpretation - disagreement

Just take the users of this site. They could not agree on the next president, the next best place to eat, carbon dating, global warming, etc. The "double edged" sword of free will is the innate desire for man to disagree and seek to please self in a wrongful manner(sin).

So technically there is nothing that man cannot disagree with or about in our Universe.

Just as I could and would postulate that the Bible is the Word of God based on three premises. Even though many on this site would vehemently disagree. Just as Youkrst wants to "manipulate" the account of Ananias and his wife being killed by the Holy Spirit. He concludes that due to his limited information that he has the right to conclude that God must be wrong in this case.

I on the other hand, understand the nuances and tendencies of God that enables me to "see further" into the workings of God.

As by this case, I don't believe that they just sold their home and came to the body of believers, church, and lied and immediately were killed. I would postulate the following scenario.

1) These two had a propensity for "stretching" the truth you might say, which equals lying.

2) They may have tried to use their generosity to win them fame or fortune - by being generous they were gaining influence for future financial endeavors. Kind of like Trump "buying" politicians.

3) This lying was known by the spiritual leaders - as Peter states "why are they putting the Holy Spirit to a TEST." It was a personal challenge against the Holy Spirit. Just like the 23,000 that died at Mt. Sinai. It was a "testing" of God. You could call it an insult against Him.

Ignorance of men can question anything. You can find those that question if eating is necessary as I have seen a man that claims he has never done so. Or oxygen, or seeing a doctor for maladies. You see people that are ignorant - without knowledge, can question anything.

The THREE scientific tests (hermeneutics) are called 1) Revelation (delivering information that only a God could do); 2) Inspiration (proving information that man cannot concoct on his own); 3) Preservation (keeping God's word intact).

I prove in my book how this has been done. And even though there are scientific principals that sound theologians use to interpret God's word - there are always those that get it wrong. Even the best intending people. I have done this myself. That is why James 1:5 comes into play. To seek God to illuminate the mind of man is essential.

Hope this covers to adequately answer your proposed question.

[brother bob]

Dexter, I give you a clue. Hell is the opposite of this picture! I prove it scientifically.

[Interbane]

I prove it scientifically.

Using the words "prove" and "scientifically" in the layman's context makes you seem dumb. If you don't actually know what these words mean, don't use them. Layman's usage won't suffice. You know, they actually have standard meanings. Look them up.

I'm not making fun of you Bob. Look the words up. You have a universe of information at your fingertips.

[Interbane]

I realize you already think you're educated on these things. And the heuristic with the biggest drill bit seems to be authority, so here you go.



"... in science there is no 'knowledge', in the sense in which Plato and Aristotle understood the word, in the sense which implies finality; in science, we never have sufficient reason for the belief that we have attained the truth. ... This view means, furthermore, that we have no proofs in science (excepting, of course, pure mathematics and logic). In the empirical sciences, which alone can furnish us with information about the world we live in, proofs do not occur, if we mean by 'proof' an argument which establishes once and for ever the truth of a theory."

Sir Karl Popper, The Problem of Induction, 1953


"If you thought that science was certain — well, that is just an error on your part."

Richard Feynman (1918-1988).


"A religious creed differs from a scientific theory in claiming to embody eternal and absolutely certain truth, whereas science is always tentative, expecting that modification in its present theories will sooner or later be found necessary, and aware that its method is one which is logically incapable of arriving at a complete and final demonstration."

Bertrand Russell, Grounds of Conflict, Religion and Science, 1953.


"It is the aim of science to establish general rules which determine the reciprocal connection of objects and events in time and space. For these rules, or laws of nature, absolutely general validity is required — not proven."

Albert Einstein, in Science, Philosophy and Religion, A Symposium, 1941.

[brother bob]

"science" is a term also used in theological terms. This is what Brittanica has to say

Hermeneutics, the study of the general principles of biblical interpretation. For both Jews and Christians throughout their histories, the primary purpose of hermeneutics, and of the exegetical methods employed in interpretation, has been to discover the truths and values of the Bible.

A brief treatment of hermeneutics follows. For full treatment, see biblical literature: The critical study of biblical literature: exegesis and hermeneutics.

http://www.britannica.com/topic/hermene ... rpretation

In theological circles the practice of proper hermeneutics is refered to as a science.

A precise order to practice.

Sorry, hope this clears that up.