When Will The End-Times Be And How Will We Know?

OK Phat, a question for you.In the Genesis 1 Creation story, are the stars among the first things created - as is claimed in the second video - or not?And if the answer is not how can you trust this guy?(Hint, it’s in verses 14-15 on the third day)

quote:

---

Why do people lie and deceive?

---

Perhaps you should ask that question about the apologists you promote here. I can’t call it anything other than promotion because you’re certainly not interested in discussing what they say. Perhaps because you know that they are engaged in deception.

quote:

---

honestly? No (at least in the case of Isaiah. I discern that he is honest.

---

He shouldn’t be citing Isaiah at all, since he’s supposedly trying to establish that Moses had knowledge that he shouldn’t. Isaiah was not written by Moses.He’s also repeating a standard apologetic falsehood equating a circle with a sphere (hint: a disc-shaped workd would be a circle) - and ignoring the fact that the whole thing is poetry. The Job reference he follows up with is even clearer that it isn’t referring to a sphere.Then again we have his clear misrepresentation of Genesis 1, and the whole framing of the episode. Does it really make sense to argue which myth is more accurate? When interpreted literally? Does it really make sense to avoid the issue that the science doesn’t support the idea that any of them are accurate? If he’s looking for hidden science the story he is trying to validate should be the first place to look - not going off to look at things written by other authors, hundreds of years apart. If that’s even relevant, it should be well down the list - after trying to establish the authorship and sources of the original account.So no, this is not honest at all. It is not an honest investigation, even without the obvious dishonesty in the evidence.

Well, no I didn’t expect you to start talking about someone else entirely. I guess I should have expected the diversion. Your continued attempts to cover up dishonesty among apologists does you no credit.

Anyway, does this Isaiah Saldivar offer any rational arguments that you’d care to discuss? If so, let’s hear them. I’m getting tired of being told to watch videos you won’t even talk about. It’s just a pointless waste of my time and contrary to the purpose of this forum.If you won’t talk about them don’t post them.

quote:

---

First of all, who are you to frame the purpose of this forum?

---

Someone who has a basic clue. Discussion IS what it’s here for.
Try reading the Forum Guidelines, for instance:

quote:

---

I feel that Isaiah makes a solid case for the reality of spiritual warfare.

---

I’m sure it’s a really great excuse.

quote:

---

... but when the Bible speaks clearly to me regarding the perfection of love and truth being made man and after having to suffer and die making a way for the rest of us, I become rather uninterested in logic-based arguments that critique scripture, attempt to dismantle the Living Word and reduce seekers to skeptics.

---

Which just means that you pick out the things you like and throw out the rest of the Bible. I think you will find that phrase is not in the Bible. But let us note that you have been promoting deceivers. So which side have you been working for - the God of Truth, or the Lord of Lies?

quote:

---

It takes two to make a connection. God speaks to all yet only a few hear His voice.

---

It may take two to make a connection but it seems that God is falling down on his part there.

quote:

---

This is not His fault unless you claim that His goal should have been to save everybody, free will be damned.

---

If I’m trying to communicate with a deaf person it’s my job to try to make myself understood. If I don’t make my best efforts that’s my fault. Free will has nothing to do with it.

quote:

---

Whose fault is that? Is God at fault because you somehow cannot hear Him?

---

Obviously. How could it be anyone else’s? God supposedly has the capability, so if he doesn’t use it that’s his decision.Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

quote:

---

If so, God would be forced to fix what He broke, which makes no sense.

---

It makes perfect sense. If God broke it, fixing it is his responsibility.

quote:

---

The whole point is that it is WE who must use our free will to fix what was broken, regardless of Who broke it.

---

And that sounds like a complete fraud. The whole point is for us to put our trust in men - many of whom are obviously dishonest.No, I’m not buying that scam.

quote:

---

Was the deaf person ever capable of hearing you or did they simply have their ears covered up?

---

In the analogy they are actually deaf. They aren’t trying to avoid hearing, they just can’t.

quote:

---

Obviously God owes it to every person a means of hearing. But lets play with some common dogma and analogies, shall we?

---

On the understanding that I reserve the right to say that dogma makes no sense.

quote:

---

First off, why was there a war in Heaven?

---

Probably because pagan ideas crept into Christianity, and Christians misunderstood older scripture.
Seriously we are already at the point where dogma doesn’t make sense. Why would there be a war in heaven? Is God mismanaging things so badly that one third of the angels - who are all perfectly aware that God exists - rebel? Or is it intentional on God’s part?Do angels even have free will? That’s something I’ve seen denied. If they don’t then your question becomes problematic - but if they do then free will is just fine with knowing God exists,

quote:

---

Indeed. Everything is His decision. Perhaps one can argue that it was His decision to allow us to make our decision(s).

---

A decision of which men to worship? Seriously we aren’t talking about our decisions here.

quote:

---

Did God create Lucifer with the ability to rebel and seek autonomy? If so, is it still God's fault? And what court could possibly indict Him? He who is without sin cast the first stone. The court would not possess a moral high ground.

---

There is considerably more to it than that. Assuming - for the sake of argument that Lucifer did rebel. Did God create Lucifer such that Lucifer would inevitably rebel? If God is all he’s cracked up to be that’s the way it would have to be. Did Lucifer rebel because he had a bad character? Whose fault would that be? If Lucifer did not have a bad character why would he rebel? As Lucifer’s creator and direct superior God has to at least take a good part of the responsibility. Was it by mistake or design?

quote:

---

I always believed that Angels had free will but no opportunity for repentance. Once you decide, the decision is forever yours.

---

And I’ve seen it said that angels don’t have free will.

quote:

---

This scripture mentions God's Word. My side says that His Word was in the beginning, before all stars,planets, galaxies, and ideas of ancient goatherders were even conceived.
An opponent might claim that humans wrote, edited, redacted, and defined any and all Bibles and that in fact words are spoken only by and through humans, as far as we currently know.

---

Much of the Bible makes no claim to be God’s Word and much of it is explicitly or implicitly the work of humans. Even the words attributed to God are reported by humans.

quote:

---

I know you will point out that it was the King of Tyre and not Satan, but the apologists claim the "type and shadow" argument.

---

Which is fairly obviously an excuse for a misinterpretation.

quote:

---

After all, if you can successfully argue that the Bible is simply a product of human belief and intelligence, You certainly can make a case that God is also such a human creation. Which you do. This is your world view.

---

You just have to read the Bible to see that is IS a creation of human belief and intelligence, it indicates as much and the many errors confirm it,

quote:

---

How is the stated behavior of the King of Tyre any different than what one would expect from satan?

---

How is it any different than we might expect from an ancient monarch ? And what does that have to do with taking satirical images as literal truths ?

quote:

---

Professors who preach that evolution is a fact
should put up or shut up.

---

They have. If you don’t know about it that’s really your problem.Evolution explains why taxonomy produces a nested tree, the observed patterns of biogeography as well as the order of the fossil record - and the many transitional fossils found. (You may prefer “morphological intermediates” for the last, but I’ve used the more common term) as well as much other evidence.

quote:

---

Observable science supports creation. Animals and
humans produce their own kind

---

Which is also the case if gradual evolution is true. Hardly a support for creationism.

quote:

---

There is no fossil record

---

There certainly is.

quote:

---

There is just piles of
bones that were deposited in great heaps by a
global flood.

---

If that were true it would still be a fossil record. However we know that it is not true. The order in the fossil record - identified in the early 19th Century, when Charles Darwin was still a child - has no viable explanation in the Flood.

quote:

---

Also, "gradual evolution" is not observable.

---

Mutation and natural selection have both been observed. Also, it is necessary only that the evidence be observable. Nobody has observed a complete orbit of Pluto around the Sun, but nobody doubts the orbit, or that Pluto had completed many such orbits.
(Pluto’s orbital period is close to 250 years, but it was first observed in 1909)

quote:

---

"Kind" of animal reproducing the same "kind"
is observable--again, again, and again.

---

And we know that offspring can be different from their parents, and that that change can accumulate over time. If “kind reproducing the same kind” is compatible with that, then it is compatible with evolution.

Reply in Message 761

quote:

---

I cant believe how dense you are concerning this hypothesis.

---

He’s not being dense, he’s just following the common Christian view that God has perfect foreknowledge.

quote:

---

If GOD created Angels initially and in some way there was the knowing possibility that these Angels could choose whether or not to do His bidding, is He evil at the point that He knowing created the possibility for Angelic rebellion?

---

With perfect foreknowledge it’s not just a possibility - it’s an inevitability. A deliberately chosen inevitability.Now deal with that.