A Challenge to Anyone

[inc7]

Heres an illustration,

Take an algebraic equation, consists of variables and operations.

The variables are the *knowns and unknowns, the numbers and the letters.

The operations are the controlling factors the x or + or () etc etc.

Everyone is dwelling on the knows and unknowns, the variables, whereas im pointing to the operations, the ideas relations and concepts (that which govern the variables) as the important part.

All of life, the universe, Universal Truth can be communicated as an equation.


* knowns are variables as well, which are constant, within equation.(just a point to clarify)

[triplesix]

Let me explain something to you inc. Logic is a basic formula for truth. It is a mathematical deconstruction of communication, limiting it to clearly defined rules in which to formulate consistent results. Logic is as fundamental to the workings of the universe as gravity or entropy.

You assert the perfectly clear logical argument: "The KJV Bible is the Truth." No confusion there.

I, naturally, assert the opposite: "The KJV Bible is not the truth."

There can be no confusion here as well. So now I will prove my assertion, thereby denying (by negation) yours.

In order for the KJV Bible to be "the truth," the KJV Bible absolutely must not contradict itself.

The following is a (short) list of KJV Bible contradictions:

Quote:The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.

Quote:And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.

Quote:The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.

Quote:Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.

Quote:Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities.

Quote:The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

The last words of Jesus according to:
Matthew 27: "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"
Luke 23: "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit."
John 19: "It is finished."

Since the KJV Bible contradicts itself, as proven by these and other examples, the KJV Bible is not "the truth."

[inc7]

Triplesix, read my previous posts, you dwell on the variables, for such a smart person to be stuck on the lower levels of thinking is surprising to me, but i shouldnt be surprised, its one of the concepts related in the bible. Also prob the way in which population has been dumbed down. If you listen to my posts, you will see, u have the intellect. Work on the spirit. There is a concept of sin, there is opposing natures on a physical level within, not everything is ok, or perception.

[resonate]

inc Wrote:Usually kids have not been infected with disease of the mind, vanity and pride foremost.

Sinless, to me, is the state of innocence that a child dwells in. I think you will agree here.

How is the child able to be in this state without having read the bible? Which came first?, the bible or truth?
Since this answer is obvious, and the child is innocent, then would it not be fair to say that all life - that hasn't been infected by this "disease of mind", is truth?

And then could we not say that truth comes from within ALL life?... before words, and equations, and variables.

The number one can not be defined absolutely, but the image "1" implies an absolute amount. The image is only a pointer to the truth. The truth must therefore be experienced and not conceptualized. Conceptualization requires thinking, and thinking happens AFTER experience. This is why the child is innocent, and why deep down everyone shares this innocence.

So a person may understand or concieve of truth through the bible, but truth comes before words, and from everything, and therefore from within.

[triplesix]

Quote:Triplesix, read my previous posts, you dwell on the variables, for such a smart person to be stuck on the lower levels of thinking is surprising to me, but i shouldnt be surprised, its one of the concepts related in the bible.

Get your head out of your bible for a moment and you'd realize you just called a logical argument using concrete facts "dwelling on variables."

Quote:Work on the spirit. There is a concept of sin, there is opposing natures on a physical level within, not everything is ok, or perception.

You can discuss karmic effects, or lack of, perhaps, but sin is stupid. I've already discussed the paradox that destroys the concept of Hell.

There can be other constructs of morality outside of the KJV of the Bible.

What you seem to forget, inc, every time you deflect my criticisms, is that this is first and foremost a discussion about the King James Version of the Bible.

I'm beginning to think you don't give a fuck about the issues you bring up, you'd rather sit here and blindly toss about passive-aggressive euphemisms coupled with hollow sycophantic appeals to my intelligence.

What's the point to this?

[inc7]

Should i try to show you when the spirit have you not see, it is right in front of your face, as the truth always is.

If you can not see facts as constant variables, governed by operations, it dosnt mean there not, i stand behind all the logic i have laid out.

You are exactly the type of person who i thought would see, look up definition of terms especially in light of programming, and reread, honestly, there is such pure logic, i could not make it up.

[standvast]

Hi, i'll pretend you where talking about and i overheard...

Quote:Should i try to show you when the spirit have you not see,
it is right in front of your face, as the truth always is.

Look here man, this is a pretty empty riddle and it comes after you refuse
or simply ignore to entertain / respond to people's questions, what gives?

Quote:If you can not see facts as constant variables, governed by operations, it dosnt mean there not

Ok , imho.
facts are commonly shared opinions / observational truths derived from HUMAN models.
So assume i'll agree on your notion of a "fact" , i'll just call those- Universal Laws -,
what now ? how does that make the KJV =Truth ?

I think you haven't convinced anyone yet,
i don't think anyone not previously holding that -KJV is Truth- notion was slightly persuaded even,
you could try a different approach , being halfway on a long thread to nowhere 'n all.
i assume you're building towards a great revelation ?

Quote:You are exactly the type of person who i thought would see, look up definition of terms especially in light of programming, and reread, honestly, there is such pure logic, i could not make it up.

"In the light of programming" consider your "fallen man nature"-outlook
a prime tool of mindfuckery / mental supression ?

peace'

[triplesix]

FACTUAL EVIDENCE against the Nativity:

Quote:One little snag, though, is that the Roman census would not have affected Nazareth in any case, as Galilee was not under Roman rule but had its own ruler, the "tetrarch" Herod Antipas, son of King Herod.

But that is not the only problem connected with the census. Luke is obviously very anxious for us to accept his story about Jesus being born in Bethlehem, so he gives us a lot of detail in explaining it. He actually goes so far as to specify the name of the Roman governor under whom the census was held: Cyrenius. There certainly was a governor of that name (or Quirinius, to put it in its proper Latin form) and, what is more, he is known from Roman sources to have held a census. But the mention of him by Luke in connection with the birth of Jesus creates more problems than it solves. Above all, there is the problem of date. Quirinius certainly conducted a census--but at a time when Jesus would have been ten years old. As it happens, Quirinius' census can be precisely dated by means of the very detailed account given by the historian Josephus. According to him, Quirinius was sent to conduct his census shortly after Judea had been annexed by Rome, which occurred in the year 6 or 7 of the current era. This census was obviously intended to be an initial "stock-taking" now that Judea was to be governed directly by Roman officials...

Aided by an inscription describing an unnamed Roman military official, apologists have rushed to suggest that perhaps Quirinius had an earlier--and totally unrecorded--tour of duty in the area and that the anonymous official was none other than himself in this role, conveniently dating to the time of Jesus' birth. Besides the total lack of evidence for jumping to so improbable a conclusion, there is another little snag: the generally accepted date of Jesus' birth was at a time when Rome had no jurisdiction either in Bethlehem or in Nazareth, so there could have been no census to coincide with Jesus's birth.... This is because Jesus was born during the lifetime of King Herod "the Great." Herod died in 4 B.C.E. (Arnheim, 1984, pp 10-11)

I've brought up issues with the Passion before, but here's another criticism:

Quote:The usual approach to Mark's so-called passion narrative has been to regard it as a historical account of what really happened, but then to fret about features of it that are difficult to accept. The list of improbable features is quite long and includes such things as the trial by night, which would have been illegal; the basis for the charge of blasphemy, which is very unclear if not completely trumped up; the failure of the witnesses to agree, which would have called for a mistrial; the right of the Sanhedrin to charge with death, a sanction that they probably did not have at the time; the insinuation of crucifixion taking place on Passover, which would have been an outrage; Jesus' anticipation of his death as a covenant sacrifice, which might be all right for a bacchic god, but hardly for the historical Jesus; the disciples falling asleep in the midst of it all; Pilate's having Jesus executed as the "king of the Jews" without a good reason to consider him so; the high priests (in the plural!) joining in the mocking; and so on. The better approach is to recognize the whole story as Mark's fiction written forty years after Jesus' time in the wake of the Roman-Jewish war. If we first read Josephus' account of the war, we can see that Mark's retrospective on Jesus in Jerusalem would not have sounded a bit far-fetched. (Mack, 1995, p. 158)

The resurrection, besides being an obvious fairytale, is rife with errors within the Bible itself:

Quote:Acts 13:29 states simply that Jesus was buried by those Jews who had asked Pilate to execute him, i.e., representatives of the Sanhedrin. Their motivation would hardly have been charity; rabble-rousing blasphemers and troublemakers deserved no such consideration. In their eyes Jesus was a criminal who had been executed in the most shameful possible way. The burial was done to prevent the pollution of the Sabbath by the public exposure of the corpse (as John 19:31 attests). There is no reason to think that Jesus's body was treated any differently than any other executed criminal's--probably unceremoniously dumped in a common grave. The next verse (Acts 13:30) is "But God raised him from the dead." So the tradition recorded by the Acts author contrasts the dishonor of Jesus's burial with the glory of his resurrection.

The gospels, on the other hand, tell a charming story about Joseph of Arimathea and how he gave Jesus's body a decent burial. However, this story contradicts the tradition, preserved in Mark and Luke, of women going to the tomb on the Easter morning for the purpose of anointing the corpse. This story presupposes that the body had been dishonorably buried, i.e., without the proper rites and ceremonies. Had Joseph of Arimathea buried the body honorably in accordance with Jewish custom, as the gospel burial pericopes imply (and as John states outright, 19:40), there would have been no reason for the women to undertake such a task. Such considerations lead noted NT scholar Reginald Fuller to argue that the bare-bones Acts account is an older stratum than the gospel elaborations and that the tales about Joseph of Arimathea were pious legends invented by Christians ashamed at the disciples' failure to treat Jesus's body more honorably (Fuller, 1971, pp. 54-56)

More "variables" I'm sure. Nonetheless, I provide it. There can be no "King James Version is the Truth" as long as evidence like this exists against it.

Unless you can prove these wrong, as countless far more studied theologians have speciously or failed entirely to do, your position is wrong.

You can believe in God, Jesus, all that shit. I don't care. Believing that the King James Version is the truth, though, is just naive. As tired as I've already grown on the subject, there is considerably more arguments to present against you. For the sake of posterity I've got all the time in the world to assemble and post them here. So the ball is once again in your court. Bore me with more Christian psychobabble, please.

[SerialExpLain]

Can't you see that no Change Agents for Freemasonic-Rosicrucian-Templar-Gnostic-Synarchy can influence Christians one iota?

Why? Because everybody knows its a political agenda. It is the NWO religious agenda. It is heinous. It is totally unhealthy. So, again. You have people who are more interested in throwing THEIR WILL around. Their will to power, money....because I am so sorry nobody spends their life trying to convince 2 billion people that they have been duped at this late date. Its the piss poor cult crap and why don't you talk about your piss poor cult crap? I'll tell you why, it is too vile for public consumption. Back under your rocks serpent.

Francis Bacon told the world how he would go to any lengths at all to defraud people in their beliefs in the New Atlantis. And that is all I can see is the knights that have ridden out to do the same. What, the dig of the week produce some astounding new discovery.:rolleyes: Those Europeans have an awful lot of money and think that all their Gnostic crap is going to fly! It stinks. The more you read about it on the internet, the more it stinks.

If Christians are not welcome here, just say the word and away we will all go, I am sure. My self included.

But I am sick of the same people again and again just slinging shit. For all I know, you are highly paid lawyers employed by some Crowley foundation, ok. (The OTO head in my local is a Jewish (by birth) female lawyer.)

This topic is old and stale. How dare you tell anybody how to worship. Worship however you want, but allow others the same freedom. You have a problem with that? Proud to be anarchists but you have a problem with another person's religion? I have a problem when CULTS become criminal. And all the aforementioned cults are CRIMINAL, so if someone can't talk openly about what they believe or who they are affiliated with, then they obviously are hiding something from you and not being honest. So, for the gang of Christian bashers, I ask who is paying you to do this? Christians only have issues with you people of no religion that you can openly speak of, when you are all up in someone elses face.

Want people to open with you? Try being open with what you are about. Want to be all mysterious and secretive, then certainly don't use your only energy expenditure to bash someone else trip. Because I am sure if we knew the trip of all the non-Christians on this thread we just might have plenty of shit to sling back at you, hence all the mystery. That is a no-brainer.

[inc7]

Once again in your own words you keep proving my point, its actually inspiring a new branch of thought within, on how the holy spirit reveals and how the "learned men, and Kings of the time can be so ignorant while the truth be made available". A gift for the sheep that the wolves can not see, for had they, surely, there goal would be never having it be written. All who dont see my simple relations, and call it psycho babble only attest to the truth within the bible, beyond even my ability to communicate as succinctly as i might, the spirit is your withholder of truth, as it states it is, and i do no wrong stating the truth in the way the lord has shown me, in terms of the "intellectuals". To believers, i assure you i believe even the smallest principals within the bible as literal truth, and all these words do me no more benefit then understanding simply, rather simply, and with great humility was needed first.

If i change, a name of a person, a place or setting, things that may be present or not, can i not stay true to the laws within the story, being that it is a story of laws and not personalities places or things. I have tried to explain these concepts to you over and over. Truth, that is, is more then a fact but an idea, a concept illustrated with operators, that is relations, both in the physical world and beyond. That is you need to see Universal Truth as more then a thing, a fact, but the laws that comprise it, operators, and on earlier pages i have illustrated, and believe by the spirit did very well and stand by it. I would have loved to fool the kings and high minded of the time, there pride, changing this or that to conform to there request, however unbeknownst to them, staying within the bounds of the truth and the laws therein.(they did not see) That is listen to the message not the contrivances of a weak mind, to defend there ignorance, in only seeing the variables and not the message. The message being the operators governing the variables. (read past posts till you get it, you prob wont, that is, till you think there is something there, hence your pride preventing you from real study). I surprise myself as it very good writing, inspired i believe, and is edifying to me, as i hope others.

I would implore everyone to read from page one, for im very sure now as to not go against the spirit in trying to communicate truth as i have, as the law stated by the spirit holds true, in spite of how im saying it, the proud and vain will not see the truth, but the humble, as again a requisite of humility is turning from sin on a physical, psychological level, you will be humbled if you do, there by able to see, as its you pride and vanity that keep you from. Humbling can be communicated in terms of biology, but if you have yet to understand so far, why go on.

You might think i repeat myself, but if your questions and statements are on the same level, i feel i must, hoping youll "get it".

[inc7]

Do i sound like the typical Christian to you. That is only your attempt to understand me in your terms, i ask you to rise above that. Seems no one here has even left the door a jar, that i, that is truth may win this argument, as your all as you point me out to be, closed minded. High minded and proud in what you think you know.

Its not from a lack of exposure to new age polytheistic, pagan, religions, science or psychology, that is not because of somethin i have not seen, or read or understood, hard as it might be for you to accept, but because of something that has been revealed, like a switch goin off.

[inc7]

On the subject of all pagan, new age, polytheistic religions being the same(equal in message to the bible), demonstrating the same laws within truth, just different variables, i would very much disagree, as within are lies, and point to two symbols, as symbols can speak beyond the realm of variables and convey meaning, or a picture is worth a thousand words, and these two symbols if understood will show the contrast of the bible quite clearly. Those two symbols, the obelisk(any idol, but obelisk particularly) and the serpent swallowing its own tail.

[triplesix]

You can jerk yourself off with religious rhetoric all day but it doesn't make you any more correct, or anyone else here any less.

You managed to filibuster a thread with nonsense.

Congratulations.

[resonate]

The topic is a challenge by title.

This thread was put up to instigate a debate (which we all know will turn to arguing)... where's the humility in that? Right off the bat.

inc Wrote:Humility is a requisite, turning from sin is a requisite for humility

If humility is a requisite to be rid of sin, then please show me how insults and refusal to answer a persons questions is "walking the walk". (not to mention serials "us vs. them" posts (more division).

Answer peoples questions and skip the insults please, out of respect, especially because we are all sacrificing our time for your challenge.

[inc7]

Actually, my argument is truth, i made it, i wait for further inspiration in form of dialog at least showing sound reflecting in what i said, till then i point you to previous posts.

I say to you tho, do i not show you i at least understand you?

Anyways, its true this tread my be at an end, i await further inspiration, not wanting to talk in circles, needing a different tone, iv answered, you have listened but can not hear, I have shown, but you can not see.

If you think i have insulted, again misunderstanding, nothing personal. Saying you dont understand, or thinking on a lower level i dont say to hurt, but as instruction, and with hope, you will look again, and see. Its there, i promise you.

you see my conviction in the truth pride, but not, its assurance, that is confidence in it, not myself.