Bible2


 * Multiple eyewitness accounts of something we’ve already been expecting to happen occurring is really good evidence for it.

Prosecution: "Where did you first see the risen Lord?"

Eyewitness #1 (Matthew): "We first saw Him at a mountain in Galilee."

Eyewitness #1 (John): "No, we first saw Him in the upper room in Jerusalem."

Judge (bringing down his gavel sharply): "Case dismissed.  Next!"


 * You haven’g provided any reason to believe that someone made up the account of Paul seeing Jesus found in Luke. We’re pretty confident that this account was written by the doctor who was a companion to Paul. We have every reason to believe he is a reliable source.

"Luke" contradicts Paul himself.

Acts 9:28 And [Paul] was with them coming in and going out at Jerusalem.

Galatians 1:22 And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ

And that pretty much wraps it up for "Luke".


 * “Why isn't the resurrection of Lazarus anywhere but in the Gospel of John” Argument from silence

Colossians 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning,  𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑖𝑟𝑠𝑡𝑏𝑜𝑟𝑛 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑑; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

St. John call your office!


 * Apostle just means one who was sent. It doesn’t necessarily have the same status as the 12.

Rev. 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

Revelation teaches that in the age to come there will only be "twelve apostles of the Lamb".

If Paul is one of these twelve, what of the ministry of Matthias?


 * Paul believes Jesus really appeared to him. It wasn’t his imagination in his opinion because otherwise he wouldn’t have converted. And if Jesus had never died, there would be no reason to not believe him. It’s only because there is a bias against miracles here.

Christ's soteriology:

Repentance, water baptism, keeping the commandments, forgiving others, and faith in who he was

Paul's soteriology:

Faith in the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. Adding the law nullifies the grace of the first.

Looks like Paul met an imposter.


 * What’s the Church position on veganism?

That eating meat cannot be a sin because Christ did not sin (Hebrews 4:15), yet he ate of the Passover lamb (Luke 22:15) and also barbecued fish (Luke 24:42).


 * Consensus denies traditional authorship for, Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, Psalms, Song of Songs, Job, Isaiah, Daniel, Chronicles. I actually don’t know if consensus would say they know with probable reasoning any of the authors of the OT. As per NT we have Fake Pauline.

True Paul (1 Thes 5:2) : "The day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night."

Fake Paul (2 Thes.2:3):"That day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition."

Bonus Fake Paul (2 Thes.2:2): "True Paul is fake!"


 * Why Do Atheists Reject God’s Moral Law?

Num 15:32-35 And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day...And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.


 * He's not quite right on that though. Historically speaking, the bible is true (to be trusted as the word of God) because the Church says so.

And when the Bible says some of Christ's disciples would live to see the Day of the Lord the Church simply redefines the Day of the Lord to mean the Pentecost event, which means Christ said "Some of you standing here will still be breathing in forty days." Oh boy!


 * Christians believe they exist. We just think they are demons.

Jude 1:6 "And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day."


 * He does go in depth on the word, showing that it allows a Trinity, yet one could still reconcile that doctrine with a divine simplicity.  Norman Geisler goes over many such objections to divine simplicity in his book "Systematic Theology Volume 2" (chapter 2).

Taken as a trinity God's divine simplicity fails from a quick examination of scripture. The Father has knowledge that the Son does not. The Holy Spirit has a dignity protected by unforgivability that the Father and Son do not. The Son must honor a human being (Mary) to avoid sin.


 * The god of the Bible stands up to all skepticism.

God (Psalm 147:5): "Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite."

Also God (Exodus 4:2): "And the LORD said unto him, What is that in thine hand? And he said, A rod."


 * Which one isn’t important. We all know God exists. But when one critically understands the evidence the conclusion is Christianity

Bible evidence rules out the Christian claim the Son of Man is divine:

Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?


 * Well god is not a person. But I wouldn’t care what color God was. Jesus probably resembled a modern middle eastern person. So what?

If God is not a person, then Jesus is not God.

2 Corinthians 2:10 To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ


 * I believe in the God that comports to reality and is confirmed by the evidence.

That's not the God of the Bible, of course.

Psalm 147:5 Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite.

Genesis 3:9 And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?


 * The "context" of the poem shows Israel speaking and the Servant as an individual. The "context" does not help you at all.

Isaiah 53:3 He was despised, and forsaken of men, a man of pains, and acquainted with disease...

Deuteronomy 15:21 And if there be any blemish therein, as if it be lame, or blind, or have any ill blemish, thou shalt not sacrifice it unto the LORD thy God.

Case closed.


 * “In fact, according to the law of Moses, nearly everything was purified with blood. For without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness.” - Hebrews 9:22 NLT

Luke 5:24 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power upon earth to forgive sins, (he said unto the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy couch, and go into thine house.

Forgiveness without animal sacrifice and before the cross. Imagine that!


 * How is saying Mary wasn't sinless limiting the power of God? Mary's sin or lack thereof has nothing to do with God's power. I don't have a problem with Mary at all. I'm just pointing out that literally the only person in the history of the world who was sinless was Jesus.

How is saying Mary wasn't sinless limiting the power of God? Mary's sin or lack thereof has nothing to do with God's power. I don't have a problem with Mary at all. I'm just pointing out that literally the only person in the history of the world who was sinless was Jesus.


 * Aquinas argues that the only "perfection" that is good enough to attract God's will necessarily is the divine perfection; and that anything God creates will be less than this, and hence cannot determine God's will. I think this seems right or at least plausible

On the contrary, it is written (Hebrews 5:9): "And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him."