The version of Jesus where he is a failure

@kellyjay said
We are either forgiven because of Christ or not; forgiven, we strive to serve Him; it isn't a matter of living right to get right; it is being made right to live right.

So you agree with the post you are replying to?

@fmf said
Excellent debating, KellyJay! I have lost my faith and no longer find what I once believed to be coherent or credible. Fancy that!

You ask questions you know the answers to, then? You'd be better off expressing why those answers are not good; simply having someone tell you what you once believed without being able to say why it is not coherent isn't credible.

@kellyjay said
You ask questions you know the answers to, then?

I ask you questions to see what you have to say and to see if you are capable of making your beliefs coherent.

@kellyjay said
You'd be better off expressing why those answers are not good; simply having someone tell you what you once believed without being able to say why it is not coherent isn't credible.

Gosh. Where on Earth have you been during the 250 or so discussions we've supposedly had these last ten years?

@fmf said
Gosh. Where on Earth have you been during the 250 or so discussions we've supposedly had these last ten years?

You ask questions you know what the scripture says, and you get a Biblical answer you know you will get. Reality doesn't bend to our wills; it will remain constant if we accept it or not; what you are not doing is showing why the Biblical answers are wrong! Simply saying something is faith speech or some such nonsense is claiming without reason, with no justification of why anything said that you came is 'faith speech' is wrong, only that it is faith speech as if that alone says it is wrong. Every notion stands are falls on the truthfulness of the comment, not if it is a matter of faith or not.

We can and do the same thing other ways with science; we can accept everything anyone says in science as truth because it is in science, that too would be equally absurd and fly in the face of science; questioning is foundational.

If you see flaws in logic or inconsistency, bring them forward, holding them in your back pocket and making blanket claims about as if everyone should know is lazy.

@kellyjay said
If you see flaws in logic or inconsistency, bring them forward, holding them in your back pocket and making blanket claims about as if everyone should know is lazy.

Where have you been during the hundreds and hundreds of discussions we've had over the last decade? What next, KellyJay? Come on FMF, why have you never explained your beliefs about morality?'

@kellyjay said
Every notion stands are falls on the truthfulness of the comment, not if it is a matter of faith or not.

What "truthfulness" are you referring to?

@fmf said
Where have you been during the hundreds and hundreds of discussions we've had over the last decade? What next, KellyJay? Come on FMF, why have you never explained your beliefs about morality?'

What do you think I've not addressed in our hundreds of discussions?

@fmf said
What "truthfulness" are you referring to?

Truth isn't a matter of human opinion, human opinions can be based on truth, or we can be mistaken for something not true and base our beliefs on that. Simply because we have beliefs isn't of itself right or wrong; it is what is it we believe in, is that true or false.

@kellyjay said
What do you think I've not addressed in our hundreds of discussions?

You have misunderstood me. Deliberately perhaps?

@kellyjay said
Truth isn't a matter of human opinion, human opinions can be based on truth, or we can be mistaken for something not true and base our beliefs on that. Simply because we have beliefs isn't of itself right or wrong; it is what is it we believe in, is that true or false.

So the "truthfulness" that you are referring to = your personal opinions about supernatural things, as I suspected, right?

@kellyjay said
We can and do the same thing other ways with science; we can accept everything anyone says in science as truth because it is in science, that too would be equally absurd and fly in the face of science; questioning is foundational.

I haven't mentioned "science".

@kellyjay said
I'm not the one cherry-picking the verses of scripture I like and ignoring what I don't; that is you. Then you turn around and quote the verses you do like as if those would hold some importance for everyone after you savaged the whole of scripture. Do you deny using your moral compass to decide what scriptures are good and what ones are bad? Have you ever jumped on people h ...[text shortened]... l points at once, ignoring the context with a sweeping generation without addressing a single point?

This thread is not about cherry picking or morality.

This thread is about your version of Jesus who, despite being the all powerful all knowing and all loving God, has lost billions and billions of souls to his enemy Satan.

It’s your gospel not mine old chap.

@fmf said
You have misunderstood me. Deliberately perhaps?

If I misunderstood how can that be deliberate? You may mean I could have suppressed the truth that would be deliberate, that would be a specific example of happiness over truth!

@fmf said
I haven't mentioned "science".

And?