The John 3:16 & 4:16 flaw?

Started by anaconda41 pages

Especially yo momma. Zing, *****.

Especially super lame 🙄

Originally posted by anaconda
Especially super lame 🙄

It went over your head.

Originally posted by peejayd
* if you read the Bible, you will know that it is not Christ's mission to write... His mission is to preach and fulfill the will of His Father... and Christ is the One who commanded His disciples to write...

"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age. Amen."
Matthew 28:19-20

* but to be Biblically strict, Christ actually has an epistle according to Saint Paul...

"Ye are our epistle, written in our hearts, known and read of all men;
Being made manifest that ye are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in tables that are hearts of flesh."
II Corinthians 3:2-3

* which are the Christians in the Bible...


As I said it is not his words plain and simple, how can the son of God not have the knowledge to read and write? Not even one scrap piece of paper jotting down his thoughts? Give me a fricken break.

Originally posted by peejayd
* so? try King James Version, it's a very good translation...

How do you know??? It is still translated therefore not the original words in their original context and meaning and it has already been shown to be incorrect on many things.

Originally posted by peejayd
* own views and ideas? it's just common sense, my friend... if your body is holy, it is pure and clean... it is not dirty and evil... but it's still not my own interpretation, read this:

"Having therefore these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God."
II Corinthians 7:1

"That he might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing of water with the word,"
Ephesians 5:26


You are still putting your modern definition of what you think “clean” means, in their time this meant something completely different and this is still a translation from the original text. They all drank wine with dinner because it was safer then drinking water but by your definition that would be “unclean”.

Originally posted by peejayd
* yes, God wants everyone to worship Him, true... happy? but the point is, He did not force you to do it... that's why you have the prerogative to say those things, intiende?

* wrong... if you have no chance or opportunity to believe, like the premise on the first post (if Christianity never reached you), you will not go to hell...

"For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without the law: and as many as have sinned under the law shall be judged by the law;
For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified:
(for when Gentiles that have not the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are the law unto themselves;
In that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness therewith
, and their thoughts one with another accusing or else excusing them);"
Romans 2:12-15

* even the people who literally crucified Christ was offered salvation by the apostles... you are out of your line here, my friend, because you are not the One who will judge people... it's God's and Christ's...

* sure... as i've said, if you choose not to believe, that's your prerogative... however, if you want to believe, but just confused, i would be able to help you... 😉

It simply comes down to this and I don’t want to start this argument all over again. In the eyes of God man does not have free will because God is supposed to be all knowing and all seeing therefore he would already know every decision that you will ever make in your life and has already seen how you will live it. Free will can only exist with the prospect of an undetermined future and since God already knows the future there is no free will.

Originally posted by Da Pittman

You are still putting your modern definition of what you think “clean” means, in their time this meant something completely different and this is still a translation from the original text. They all drank wine with dinner because it was safer then drinking water but by your definition that would be “unclean”.

Or they just liked being hammered 24/7, wouldn't you, if you lived in those ass-backwards times?

Originally posted by Robtard
Or they just liked being hammered 24/7, wouldn't you, if you lived in those ass-backwards times?
😆

It went over your head.
again, super lame

Originally posted by Da Pittman
As I said it is not his words plain and simple,

* what kind of argument is that? the 4 gospels were written by Christ's disciples... if you do not believe that, then why believe your country's history? history books were not written by the characters in it... nice try, fella...

Originally posted by Da Pittman
how can the son of God not have the knowledge to read and write? Not even one scrap piece of paper jotting down his thoughts? Give me a fricken break.

* i never heard someone complain why Christopher Columbus never written any books to prove his claim...

Originally posted by Da Pittman
How do you know??? It is still translated therefore not the original words in their original context and meaning and it has already been shown to be incorrect on many things.

* how do you know too? are you a translator? a super-bilinguist? i still recommend King James version of the Bible, you can read the preface of it, then tell me what you think...

Originally posted by Da Pittman
You are still putting your modern definition of what you think “clean” means, in their time this meant something completely different and this is still a translation from the original text.

* you're grasping ropes... i even gave verses to support my argument... if you're so down with it, prove to me that something holy is not pure and clean...

Originally posted by Da Pittman
They all drank wine with dinner because it was safer then drinking water but by your definition that would be “unclean”.

* irrelevant... they can drink water if they wanted to...

Originally posted by Da Pittman
It simply comes down to this and I don’t want to start this argument all over again.

* why? scared to be owned and pawned? 😛

Originally posted by Da Pittman
In the eyes of God man does not have free will because God is supposed to be all knowing and all seeing therefore he would already know every decision that you will ever make in your life and has already seen how you will live it.

* hah! "supposed to be all-knowing and all-seeing", eh? let me impart something, my friend:

"The eyes of the Lord are in every place, beholding the evil and the good."
Proverbs 15:3

* true, God sees all... but does He knows all? does God knows what decision you will make? why did you think God tested Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac as a burnt offering for Him? and then when Abraham is about to truly kill his son, God sent an angel to stop him? why, my friend?

"And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me."
Genesis 22:12

* God had known only when Abraham had made a decision... but prior to that, God does not know Abraham's decision...

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Free will can only exist with the prospect of an undetermined future and since God already knows the future there is no free will.

* still think so? 😉

Originally posted by anaconda
again, super lame

Agian, it went over your head. It wasn't an insult to Shaky and it wasn't an insult to you when I said you didn't get it.

Originally posted by peejayd
* what kind of argument is that? the 4 gospels were written by Christ's disciples... if you do not believe that, then why believe your country's history? history books were not written by the characters in it... nice try, fella...

* i never heard someone complain why Christopher Columbus never written any books to prove his claim...

I’m not your “fella” so drop it, however Columbus did read and right. You can read his words and thoughts about his adventures and what he did in his logs. Christ is supposed to be the son of God and he can’t read and write, his words were supposed to inspire and be the teaching for all man kind and he can’t even write anything??? Give me a fricken break.

Originally posted by peejayd
* how do you know too? are you a translator? a super-bilinguist? i still recommend King James version of the Bible, you can read the preface of it, then tell me what you think...
I have read it many times as I have said and I have also read the miss translations from people that are historians and translators. You really need to understand how translation works.

Originally posted by peejayd
* you're grasping ropes... i even gave verses to support my argument... if you're so down with it, prove to me that something holy is not pure and clean...
Very simple, baths back then were for the rich and privlaged and so many didn’t take baths all the time so that would mean that Christ walked around dirty and unclean. There you have it the definition of a holy man that is not clean.

Originally posted by peejayd
* irrelevant... they can drink water if they wanted to...
Nope it is not because if as you said they must remain pure drinking wine would be unclean.

Originally posted by peejayd
* why? scared to be owned and pawned? 😛
No I simply don’t want to bang my head against the wall with a Bible waiver who will not listen. The difference between you and me is that I’m not closed minded and open to the possibility that my idea or views maybe wrong.

Originally posted by peejayd * hah! "supposed to be all-knowing and all-seeing", eh? let me impart something, my friend:

"The eyes of the Lord are in every place, beholding the evil and the good."
Proverbs 15:3

* true, God sees all... but does He knows all? does God knows what decision you will make? why did you think God tested Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac as a burnt offering for Him? and then when Abraham is about to truly kill his son, God sent an angel to stop him? why, my friend?

"And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for [b]now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me."
Genesis 22:12

* God had known only when Abraham had made a decision... but prior to that, God does not know Abraham's decision...

* still think so? 😉 [/B]

Sorry you are not my friend, I don’t even know you. If God didn’t know what Abraham was going to do then he is not all seeing and all knowing. It is simple as that.

Originally posted by Robtard
Especially yo momma. Zing, *****.

I thought you completed therapy for your necrophilia. 😆

Don't bother arguing with peejayd. It's only a little less frustrating than arguing with Marchello. (Or me, yuk-yuk-yuk.)

Originally posted by Da Pittman
I’m not your “fella” so drop it,

* we are in a forum, don't be too personal about this...

Originally posted by Da Pittman
however Columbus did read and right. You can read his words and thoughts about his adventures and what he did in his logs. Christ is supposed to be the son of God and he can’t read and write, his words were supposed to inspire and be the teaching for all man kind and he can’t even write anything??? Give me a fricken break.

* weird logic right there... many people out there does not have books or epistles, but knows how to read and write...

Originally posted by Da Pittman
I have read it many times as I have said and I have also read the miss translations from people that are historians and translators. You really need to understand how translation works.

* tell me what is wrong with the King James version, mr. bilinguist...

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Very simple, baths back then were for the rich and privlaged and so many didn’t take baths all the time so that would mean that Christ walked around dirty and unclean. There you have it the definition of a holy man that is not clean.

Originally posted by peejayd
* if your body is holy, it is pure and clean... it is not dirty and evil... but it's still not my own interpretation, read this:

"Having therefore these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God."
II Corinthians 7:1

"That he might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing of water with the word,"
Ephesians 5:26

* the "pure and clean" i was talking about is not "dirty and evil"... isn't it very apparent that what i'm saying is not literal?

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Nope it is not because if as you said they must remain pure drinking wine would be unclean.

* not all wines... Christ introduced a good wine, and it's not alcoholic...

Originally posted by Da Pittman
No I simply don’t want to bang my head against the wall with a Bible waiver who will not listen.

* will not listen? but are YOU listening?

Originally posted by Da Pittman
The difference between you and me is that I’m not closed minded and open to the possibility that my idea or views maybe wrong.

* i'm not closed-minded, i have a basis - and that is the Bible... and you're right, you should be open to the possibility that you are wrong because you have no basis...

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Sorry you are not my friend, I don’t even know you.

* nice reply from an open-minded person...

Originally posted by Da Pittman
If God didn’t know what Abraham was going to do then he is not all seeing and all knowing. It is simple as that.

* God can see anything and everything... God had known only when Abraham had made a decision... but prior to that, God does not know Abraham's decision...

* the existence of free will is proven... 😉

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Don't bother arguing with peejayd. It's only a little less frustrating than arguing with Marchello. (Or me, yuk-yuk-yuk.)

* it's alright... i understand your frustration for not winning an argument...

Originally posted by peejayd
* we are in a forum, don't be too personal about this...

* weird logic right there... many people out there does not have books or epistles, but knows how to read and write...

* tell me what is wrong with the King James version, mr. bilinguist...

* the "pure and clean" i was talking about is not "dirty and evil"... isn't it very apparent that what i'm saying is not literal?

* not all wines... Christ introduced a good wine, and it's not alcoholic...

* will not listen? but are YOU listening?

* i'm not closed-minded, i have a basis - and that is the Bible... and you're right, you should be open to the possibility that you are wrong because you have no basis...

* nice reply from an open-minded person...

* God can see anything and everything... God had known only when Abraham had made a decision... but prior to that, God does not know Abraham's decision...

* the existence of free will is proven... 😉

* it's alright... i understand your frustration for not winning an argument...

How come everyone of your points is a footnote?

is john 3:16the one where it goes like this...
and god said go sox

Are you sure he was talking about sox? 😑

well it might be an old spelling of socks and really god is telling us to wear socks or he's a sports fan

Originally posted by dadudemon
How come everyone of your points is a footnote?

* if it's the asterisks you're talking about, well i just got used to it... 🙂

Originally posted by peejayd
* if it's the asterisks you're talking about, well i just got used to it... 🙂
How cute.

Originally posted by Quark_666
How cute.

If by cute, you mean irritating.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
If by cute, you mean irritating.
That's what women always say when they get irritated...thought I'd try it out.