• Jackie's Fridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    Bats don’t belong on that list.

    As for talking donkeys, you can’t bring obvious fiction or superstition into the real world by proclaiming “MIRACLE”. That’s now how reality works.

    And “hey the slave didn’t die so by all means carry on owning another human being as property” is not the moral flex you think it is.

    You haven’t proven the bible is accurate or moral. You’ve only proven that you are brainwashed by your religion into justifying atrocities and need to work on bettering yourself.

    Finally, why are you explaining your holy book? A book that supposedly contains the infallible word of a god should not need mere mortals to explain it. God should have hired a holy ghost writer.

    • HM King Charles III DG FD@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 days ago

      As for talking donkeys, you can’t bring obvious fiction or superstition into the real world by proclaiming “MIRACLE”. That’s now how reality works.

      That’s literally what a miracle is. You’re using circular reasoning here. “Miracles that defy natural explanation did not happen because they defy natural explanation, and nothing can defy natural explanation because we have never seen it happen, therefore miracles cannot and did not happen”

      • Jackie's Fridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        You are typing the words yourself and not getting it. That is definitely some sort of talent.

        If there is a claim that something supernatural happened, it better have rock solid evidence to support it. Calling something a miracle because you want it to be true does not make it true. Proving it does. And the only proof of any “miracle” in the bible is - guess what? - cited using the bible. That’s what circular reasoning is.

        If you make a claim with no objective, testable, flasifiable proof, all you have is a claim. And until you provide robust proof, I will dismiss your claim.

    • IAMgROOT@lemmy.wtf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 days ago
      1. 13 And these ye shall have in detestation among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are a detestable thing: the great vulture, and the bearded vulture, and the ospray;

      Direct Hebrew translation.

      It wasnt listing birds nor fowls it was telling you that you shall not eat fowls NOR those things

      1. There are a bunch of modern documented miracles, the Lord works in mysterious ways

      2. As I said, most of that does not apply to us anymore as Christ fulfilled it

      3. Define “accurate” or “moral”

      4. Infallible ≠ Simple

      • Jackie's Fridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago
        1. Choose your own translation doesn’t matter if the “word of god” is so malleable.
        2. Nope.
        3. Cop out. Jesus said he wasn’t there to invalidate the old stuff.
        4. I’m not your dictionary.
        5. Did not make that claim.

        Bonus 6. I’m tired of you.

        • IAMgROOT@lemmy.wtf
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          19 days ago
          1. Different translations on directness, not completely different iterations. You can read the original hebrew scriptures
          • Jackie's Fridge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            19 days ago

            You haven’t provided proof, only claims. It doesn’t make me uncomfortable, juat disappointed that some people are so credulous.

              • Jackie's Fridge@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                17 days ago

                Dude. The shroud of Turin was a known fake in the 1300s when it was made. The church decided to adopt it anyway because it was a great money maker with tourists, even though according to your other reply they don’t mix money and faith. I do love that you lead with the most thoroughly debunked religious fraud in Christian history as your strongest evidence though. That genuinely gave me a laugh.

                Witnesses are notoriously unreliable and easily swayed. And you never said witnesses of what. Just vague “miracles” of the trust-me-bro variety? Which Roman officials? Were the letters corroborated by contemporary evidence and writings from reliable scholars?

                Magic does not exist. Ghosts and the Easter Bunny are fake too, sorry to ruin that for you.

            • IAMgROOT@lemmy.wtf
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              19 days ago

              Matthew 5:17 Do not think that I have come to loosen the law or the prophets. I have not come to loosen, but to fulfill.

              He has not come to loosen the laws but to fulfill them

              This statement is told because the Pharisees were claiming that he was teaching people to ignore the law of Moses

              By fulfill, he means completely live a sinless life that no Israelite had managed, becoming the first and last to do so.

              This is also why the sacrificial system was abolished too, because Jesus’ sacrifice was enough to the Lord for eternity.