What do you mean?

[ruck1b]

On ‎12‎/‎30‎/‎2016 at 2:36 PM, warrior12 said:

Well if the lines said "it is not the word of God" but "contains the word of God ", is that not like contradictory ?.  Did not reach far in english exams, so please forgive my misunderstandings if any. The reason i said i am asking. 

The cake is not sugar but contains sugar.  Is that a contradiction? 

[ruck1b]

On ‎12‎/‎30‎/‎2016 at 2:57 PM, The_Patriot2016 said:

my point is made. I gave you my answer, your still not accepting it. you not accepting it, doesnt  change my answer. The answer is, scripture is either the holy inspired word of God, or its heresy. There is no in between. If you dont accept that then there is no point to continue with the rest of the conversation.

So now you are adding more to it.  Its either the holy inspired word of God now, or its heresy....LOL.  The fact is you have no answer this is why you are making excuses about me accepting it.  No you want me to agree with it. I accept that this is what you believe.  I came into this knowing that many believe this.  I'm am asking you what do you mean?  You say because the Bible is inspired...so what does that mean to you?  What does that mean in relation to that are problematic issues like the one I gave as an  an example.   Please stop using me as an excuse for your not answering the actual question.   

[ruck1b]

On ‎12‎/‎30‎/‎2016 at 2:57 PM, Jayne said:

No, brother, you have not read the verse in question correctly nor in context of chapter or the Law, itself - which does not pertain to New Testament Christians anyway.

God is not "cool" with violent behavior at all and yes, these are the literal words of God to the Israelite people who just came for bondage in Egypt.

I am currently teaching Exodus at my community Bible Study and just typed up notes for chapters 21-31 this passed week.

The chapter you are citing from is the very first of the Law, other than the Ten Commandments that God gives to Moses.  It's no irony that this first word on the Law chapter is on slavery.  These people God is giving his word to WERE slaves in Egypt.  He doesn't want them to treat any of their servants in a manner that is unGodly.

First, did you know that slavery like American slavery in the Civil War days is condemned in that same chapter?

• Exodus 21:16 - "He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death."

So we are not even talking about slavery as you and I understand modern and vile slavery.  It's more along the lines of servants - indentured and otherwise. 

The verse that you have in question is not about a man beating a slave - servant - within an inch of his life and getting away with it.

Look further in that chapter and you will see this:

• If a man caused even the slightest permanent damage to a slave [servant], the servant was set free.  The man apparently did not deserve to have servants because he could not take care of them.  Exodus 21:26-27 - “If a man strikes the eye of his male or female servant, and destroys it, he shall let him go free for the sake of his eye. And if he knocks out the tooth of his male or female servant, he shall let him go free for the sake of his tooth.”
•  As for your verses - this is talking about corporal punishment of a servant.  It the man got out of line and the servant died because of it - the man [owner] was to be punished or "avenged".  A life for a life as it taught so many times in the law.  But what if the slave did not die? The man's punishment was the loss of his slave and the work he or she would have done.

No where is this teaching the Israelites could abuse their slaves and get away with it as long as they didn't die.

And, yes, this is the word of God.

Who's talking about slavery.  I'm talking about the treatment of a person.  You are saying God literally said, hey if you beat a slave and he dies you got to pay the price.  But if you beat a slave and that slave survives then it's all good.  There is no fancy wording there and doesn't need footloose footwork to get around it.  It says exactly what it says and you are saying God said that? Are you saying that or no.

[ruck1b]

 

On ‎12‎/‎31‎/‎2016 at 3:52 AM, Ezra said:

This statement shows that you have not really studied the Bible as it should be studied. As a matter of fact the Scripture quoted to you at the beginning (2 Tim 3:16,17) refutes your statement. The Bible also states dozens of times that it is the Word of God, and that the very words given to the original prophets (Hebrew) and apostles (Greek) were words from God.

Even the jots and tittles (minute Hebrew markings) were from God. As a result, the Hebrew scribes were extremely meticulous in transcribing the Scriptures, and counted every word and letter. Indeed, many believe today that the Torah has a "Bible code" hidden within it because the words are from God.  The Kabbalists gave a mystical significance to the words of the Torah.

At the very least, an honest individual will approach Scripture as the Word of God BEFORE he passes and judgment on it.  There are also multiple ways to establish and confirm that those 66 books were given by Divine inspiration, and in fact constitute one book with 66 divisions. For example, things mentioned in Genesis are also mentioned in Revelation, 

Furthermore, the Lord Jesus Christ -- who is God -- regarded the entire Hebrew Old Testament (Tanakh) as the Word of God. This was also the view of all the Jews of His day (even His enemies).  For those Jews, an appeal to Scripture was the final authority in any matter under discussion. The apostles (all Jews) then confirmed that the New Testament was also the Word of God.

What this means is that when you read the Bible, it is God telling you that what you are reading is from Him (regardless of the human writers).  Thus Scripture is regarded by conservative Christians as inerrant and also infallible -- God's truth.  But above and beyond the physical realm, the Bible is a spiritual book and can only be understood by the spirit, and through the Spirit of God.

Your first statement is plainly ridiculous. You have not clue how much I have studied, but carry on.

Your second statement is even more ridiculous.  No an honest individual will approach the Bible in what every way they approach it. 

Finally you are giving me the same rhetoric I swallowed for years.  Simply put if it is God's word then God's character, and who is through all of  the Bible.  Honest people will do that and then allow God to work that out for them.  You see...I trust the person. I trust him to show me what is and is not him in that Bible. 

[The_Patriot21]

8 hours ago, eileenhat said:

Is that like a death match?

Not truly afraid of death, just wonder how come you are offering.

And ps.  If you want to stay alive if you ever end up flying, do not, repeat do not deviate from the course you are given....I mean you will not, repeat not correct for Earth curvature.  They can lie all they want about the Earth being a globe, but reality is when you fly, you do not correct for a globe Earth.  You fly 'like' the surface is flat.

It's more of a civilized debate between the two of us. Oh, and speaking for someone who actually has flown, yea you do correct for curvature

 But like I said if you want to debate I'd be willing to see if the mods would set up a soapbox or we can start a new topic in conspiracy theories/controversial issues.

[The_Patriot21]

35 minutes ago, ruck1b said:

So now you are adding more to it.  Its either the holy inspired word of God now, or its heresy....LOL.  The fact is you have no answer this is why you are making excuses about me accepting it.  No you want me to agree with it. I accept that this is what you believe.  I came into this knowing that many believe this.  I'm am asking you what do you mean?  You say because the Bible is inspired...so what does that mean to you?  What does that mean in relation to that are problematic issues like the one I gave as an  an example.   Please stop using me as an excuse for your not answering the actual question.   

Not adding to it it's just the truth. Take it or leave it. If you can't accept the answer if doesn't mean the answer isn't true.

[ruck1b]

On ‎12‎/‎31‎/‎2016 at 4:02 PM, Sing40King said:

Why do I get the idea that ruck1b  and Zach are the same person? Writing style and arguementive spirit are identical.

You idea is completely  incorrect.  May I ask why you continue to post in this thread. You are not adding to it, but are now making baseless accusations.  If you have nothing to add discussion wise to the topic please refrain from responding. Thank you. 

[ruck1b]

4 minutes ago, The_Patriot2016 said:

Not adding to it it's just the truth. Take it or leave it. If you can't accept the answer if doesn't mean the answer isn't true.

LOL...again. My point stands. You don't want me to accept your answer you want me to agree to it.  The fact is you didn't answer.  Now please just drop it.  You don't want to answer that's fine, no need to reply any further. 

[warrior12]

58 minutes ago, ruck1b said:

The cake is not sugar but contains sugar.  Is that a contradiction? 

Well Truth can't also be a lie, can it ?

[ruck1b]

9 minutes ago, warrior12 said:

Well Truth can't also be a lie, can it ?

Is that "truth" objective or subjective?