Response to some Skeptics

-First of all, before reading through my own, rather “animositic”, forum discussion, I recommend viewing the following, ‘Versus Skepticism’ subject-matter related, presentation by Pastor&Apologist Mike Winger. It also serves as a summation for his 20-part series: "Evidence For the Bible"

[Note: In matters of prophetic interpretation I recommend to instead see the pertinent posts on this blog to get the Biblical and most accurate {i.e. non-Futurist-Dispensationalist} interpretation.[1] Namely for: (Daniel 2 here); (Part 3): Daniel 7 here & Daniel 8 here; (Part 9): Daniel 9 here; (Part 5): Daniel 11 here]

________________________

So I, myself, had recently gotten involved, contrary to my initially, logical thinking given the fact that all should have been easily resolved upon my initial, factual correction in regards to the Angus T. Jones story...but no, the vexed correctee had to resort to ad hominem attacks, no doubt thinking/assuming that I would just mindlessly take it and ‘turn the other cheek’, but he happened to have attacked me, and I just knew I was not going to let that stand. So we were having our discussion, however typically moronic, vacuous and quibbling there answers increasingly got, and as then also typical when such morons are defeated, they then resort to strong arming tactics such as there barring me from replying but them continuing to make their stupid claims and comments, -for that is the only way that they can be seen to be right. So here, since I have some time to burn, and given the Proverbs 26:4-5 imperative, I’ll, as succinctly as possible, be responding to those unanswered additional comments. Their comments are in bold with their name preceding them, mine (“NJK:”) are in normal font weight.

Post Link

Jim: Wow, still at it.

NJK: Why not, still more (moronicly) defamatory and libellous claims to duly address...simply for the record....

Jim: Yeah, not a troll. Just crazy.

NJK: ...such as this additional one...

Jim: Somehow he found his way here.

NJK: (1) It is called the internet, and (2) when someone make a posting on a topic that I am following, then it does generate a Google Alert. So it is nothing special with him, (as he fancifully/wishfully thinks), except for the substantive fact that he had made one of the dumbest and most ignorant comments that I had ever come across in the various internet postings and comments that I have read on this issue. I naturally thought that a simple correction would help him, but he decided to futilely “double down” in his moronic stance. Also given the amount of inherent “ignorant bias” involved as the premise for that posting, I just could not help to also “helpful”, point that out. But some either prideful or desperate people just cannot be corrected because they will then lose whatever had seemed to make them necessary/relevant...then what would their inconsequential existence mean!??

Jim: He must be so sad and lonely;

NJK: Just some more fanciful speaking...trust me...given what the internet is, it was/is always way much bigger than him...or else I would just not have bothered.

Jim: duty bound to speak until finally everyone quits.

NJK: It indeed is my duty to shut up all spurious claimants such as him, particularly when they are addressing/concerning me...and that by whatever means necessary/applicable.

Jim: Not because he’s right ...

NJK: Given the posted content of my comments, that any one without such an infantile, moronic mentality can readily discern and understand, Jim here could only wish this was true.

Jim: ...but because he argues so damned poorly he has to just get more and more vituperatively verbose till everyone shuts up.

NJK: When people start making quibbling, spurious and tangential excuses for not engaging the facts, then there is no other option left to get rid of them then to literally level the place. They had moronically just refused to have an informed discussion hiding behind all kinds of fanciful “conspiratorial” assumptions. In that case, then it is much more easier to ‘get rid of’ such people by just ‘giving them more string...’

Jim: So, if the bible speaks for itself, why do you keep defending it, reinterpreting it, or directing to other interpretations?

NJK: Now that has got to be the height of moronic ignorance. Alright Jim, go ahead and don’t involved any exegesis in Bible study...start by accurately translating the Bible starting with: Bérë'shiyth Bårå' 'èlòhiym...but of course from Hebrew characters, and if successful then you won’t even have to explain what it means. Then when you are done with all of the straightforward prose of the Bible, delve into its poetic parts, and then when all of that is does, engage the parts that God has said that He has deliberately veiled and concealed, mainly through cryptic symbolic language so that unrighteous infidels like yourself will not begin to understand (Dan 12:9-10) and will continue to head towards your ultimate judgement reward (Rev 22:11). Funny how unrighteous people think that God must come down to their level, yet when he relatively has (in Jesus Christ), they just refuse to believe it as preposterous.

Jim: You say the bible is inerrant...

NJK: Technically actually “infallible” however spiritually “inerrant” as you will find some technically factual errors in Bible.

Jim: ...and then you waste thousands of words interpreting it, ...

NJK: It is not a “waste”. It is all part of due and necessary exegesis for, e.g., English-speaking people living 2000+ years after those recorded accounts.

Jim: trying to convince highly educated and informed people that your interpretation is the most valid.

NJK: obviously those highly educated and informed people are not so in Theology. Hence the necessity of my work to explain and defend the Bible in the light of the various uninformed claims, from wherever they may originate, and even in regards to people who claim to believe the Bible.

Jim: Sadly, you interject constant insults,...

NJK:

(1) It is actually “necessary”

(2) Just duly responding in, any firstly manifest level of, “kind”

-so if you don’t want to be addressed in that way than don’t do so to begin with, in whatever applicable way...

(3) contrary to what such oblivious, prideful, ignorant/moronic mentalities can/will only accept, these are not “insults” but factual descriptions of your actions, statements and behavior. So try getting that into your thick skulls. And the proof is that I can easily prove that my characterization do descriptively, even clinically apply to your cases, wherever your insults are indeed mere attacking declarations.

Jim:  which is neither kind

NJK: It actually is, in the sense of “in kind”... You are just getting back what you are variously dishing out...It is Biblically called “reaping the whirlwind” and the sooner you are confronted with it, the better for then you have more time to correct and change your ways...but you typically chose to pridefully blow that opportunity.

Jim: nor Christian

NJK: Just more of you foundational mindset of shaping God/Jesus in whatever way is convenient for you...ever read Matt 23??! It may be helpful for Jim and others like him to (LOL) exegetically understand that the Bible’s height of love, even God’s Love, i.e., Agape, is not “unconditional love”, but ‘faithfully reciprocal Love’...or else Hell could/would never take place.

Jim: and by this provoking you get reactions to justify your initial insults.

NJK: As I said, and I it can indeed be easily seen and understood, that is by non-morons, I was simply responding “in kind” to your initial/initiating action/statement...You chose to continue and escalate this, then do not theatrically weep and cry that you are being treated in the same way...When you that psychologically and intellectually “wimpish” I think it is in your interest to avoid attacking other people in the first place...but of course you think/“know” that born again Christians are fair game and fully deserve it. What??? You don’t like the consequential reality and prefer you fantasy, shielded world/bubble?!!

Jim: How must it feel to live in a world where few understand the bible as well as you.

NJK: If you really meant to know, but yet will likely not begin to understand: Quite frustrating...yet you’d think, as you evidently expected, that I’d then be grovelling at your/those ignorant’s feet, to help/beg them to understand...As I know, there has got to be a much more satisfying reward in keeping you all in your callous, moronic rejection. (Hint: Isa 6:8-12). The Bible is, cover to cover, full of examples of this Divine resort, yet you still would not understand the beneficence in trying to actually first thoroughly deal with your real hampering problem first.

Jim: How ever can billions reach salvation when it requires your support.

NJK: Whoever said anything like that.. I just work to most transparently and documentedly point people to what the Bible actually says/teaches. Whether they believe it and/or what the Bible says is entirely up to them and does not require my support. And then, they can always invest the years, effort and various costs that it has cost me for themselves if they want to. Also not my problem.

Jim: If the bible made any sense at all it could stand on its own.

NJK: It does, indeed when even just basically, exegetically translated to make (Theologically/Doctrinally) coherent sense. Even for Apocalyptic Prophecy and re-applicable Classical Prophecy, the Bible does indeed interpret itself. In all of this one just has to be personally faithful to properly do this discerning work.

Jim: Supposedly, it doesn’t need your help.

NJK: As with any profession, my “help” as a person who is dedicated involved in Theological Studies and Research is only needed, when it is actually a “need”, i.e., when someone does not themself actually have the various resources needed to do the required research and study work to arrived at the transparently demonstrable Biblical evidence for a proof. However when someone refuses to click a link/visit a blog, as it typically was in your cases, then that evidently is not a “need”, and thus not a requirement that I will dignify. Do “help” yourself. Like I had said if you then had any valid/genuine questions comments then I would address them.

Jim: Rather you must be angry that even religious types don’t get it.

NJK: Yes indeed/so be it (A) “angry” at the level of indifferently revered moronism, which then tries to “gaslight” me, and (B) as seen with the first century Jews, even, in fact especially, “religious” types, can be (the comparatively greatest) morons, as Jesus informed them (Matt 23:17). In fact such people are really right at your own (inexistent/void) spiritual level.

Jim: You are more pure and perfect than anyone because you get it...

NJK: Truly spoken as that is the natural effect of heeding the Truth...

Jim: and the fools don’t.

NJK: No it quite readily demonstrably is that such “fools” (= “morons”) won’t...i.e., e.g., they refuse to read what is posted on my blog and website. Can’t begin to be responsible for that.

Jim: You rejected your own religious groups because they don’t get it like you do.

NJK: Indeed, as Bible/Church History shows, that ends up being the only option. Got to get rid of all of these “deadweights” or else they’ll just take you under.

Jim: Why don’t you join a new and different bible study group where you can argue to your heart’s content with people who already believe the fundamentals of the bible?

NJK: Well on one hand, such a group actually does not exist, especially now with SDAs being in their preferred darkness. And (B) in regards to your own forum, (unless you think that it makes any substantive difference with me that you try to litigate all of my other forum discussions, where in such a case, I would just advise you, beyond simply saying: ‘worry about your own business’, to speak on what you actually know enough to make any applicable sense), I did not comment on your blog for any religious discussion, you are the one who wanted to go that route and now you obviously regret it... yet are trying to paint it as it if this is also my false. Believe me, you will be held accountable for all such false statements about me.

Jim: Are you not able to have friends?

NJK: Matt 10:37-39; 12:46-50; John 15:12-14. Would/Am not at all responsible for the decisions of people, yet my friends do understand me and my preoccupation.

Jim: Have you pissed them off so bad you have to isolate yourself in intellectual masturbation?

NJK: Talk about mixed metaphors...but, in regards to the non-pejoratives here, that is not at all the developments case. And here is seen the foundational problem with you, “and also other pompous/brash/arrogant skeptics of your type). You shallowly/surfacely look at something and “surmisingly” presume to know what the truth on the matter is. Yet all you do is prove how you are drunk in moronic thinking and “reasoning”. I.e., you indifferently view and judge things only according to what you know and understand as if your level of knowledge and understanding is the highest that any man can/should ever get. It just does not get much worse than this “moronism mixed with pride” for that is equivalent to one being perpetually drunk! Just can’t pierce into that circular, fanciful fantasy.

Jim: Wouldn’t it be more useful to groom new religious soldiers that already believe some of it?

NJK: How, Yoda Jim??! By forcing them, tricking, and/or hypnotizing them. Even God doesn’t/won’t do that. And you are just speaking off the top of you empty mind...and just don’t know/understand/appreciate what it involved in this Theological Research work and so moronically think that it is just that simple. People are free to do whatever they want to or not and will always gravitate to what they love the most. That is not at all my fault. I am looking for people who actually want to do this and not at all interested in half-bakes for they cause much great damage later when they give up.

Jim: What kind of sadist enjoys beating up others?

NJK: Well simply lexically speaking...a sadist!! And if you are claiming that this is me, then you just have one more defamatory thing to be held responsible for. What lawless planet do you delusionally think you live on??

Jim: I’m sure when you get to your heaven...

NJK: not mine..but the one of the God of the Bible...

Jim: ...no one else will be there but you...

NJK: Since there is Free Will, that could be a possibility, but really not the case given the many righteous/saved people that have lived before our day.

Jim: ...because you’re the only one that gets it...

NJK: Fully getting God’s Truth is indeed what it takes to get into His Kingdom, especially for those today who have the feasible opportunity to fully do so....

Jim: Lonely fool.

NJK: Interesting choice of words, but of course you have no clue what this actually complimentingly entails for I would then/thus still be reckoned amongst the many other “lonely “fools”” (e.g., 1 Cor 1:22-29) who have lived before and had also chosen to fully follow after the God of the Bible...no matter what the cost is. In the end, we are all only responsible for our own decisions.

December 22, 2012

My initially cursorily responding comment was cowardly not posted by them, but of course they isolatively posted their own response to it. Here is that initial response of mine which led to the response below:

Right and you are the type who suffers a spell of amnesia every couple hours or so... Just read back in your initial blog post. You think you have a right to mischaracterize people at will and without impunity...well welcome to the free world’s consequences where there is an equal right to respond in kind and to whatever applicable level/extent. Those are “threats” is a due consequence. If you think you are going to get away with attacking me personally and our my project/website, then you need to snap back into real world reality.

Me describing your baseless attack on Angus Jones and Sarah M as the product of biased ignorance is a factual statement based on reality...you ensuing, and continuing vexed and moronic personal attacks on me and irrelevant claims about my website/project is a legally  actionable offense. Deal with it, and you will, or, for your helpless good, get out of the publishing business!!

I don’t have to answer you as you would like or prefer and like I have clearly said...I could not careless what you like, want or prefer. You chose to engage me on tangential issues well... I guess you never got the expected exploitable “other cheek”!!!

Post Link

Jim: No, it’s just sad.

NJK: Not for me since I still managed to accomplish what was subsequently necessary. (Isa 6:8-13). You didn’t want to either back down, nor back off, then don’t blame me if you just could even factually vindicate you stance!!

Jim: Sad that every discussion you have degenerates to anger and insults.

NJK: Just didn’t have to (a) start this and (b) expect that I just take it. The problem is that you all are just pridefully full of yourselves.

Jim: It would be great to learn something new from you as it is from any person but you don’t allow for it.

NJK: Really...then why won’t you just read what is posted on my blog??? I mean “I, myself” wrote it!! How am I ‘not allowing’ this??? If you think I must be your slave who silently takes whatever you throw at me, then you made a seriously wrong assumption, of, at least me personally. So save all of that smokescreen pseudo-flattery for people who pridefully think the world, universe, revolves around them...like you/you all!! Clearly that mindless, whitewashing excusing of yours is not at all the actual issue with you all here!!

Jim: There is no dialog, no discussion, no exchange–just blind and angry assertions, mostly personal. You are responsible for how you present yourself.

NJK: I present myself as due. As I said if you can’t take it or understand it, indeed thinking that I must just take it, then that is your own problem and you are responsible for how you choose to respond. What you have stated and claimed about me are all, legally-actionable mischaracterizations, all most evidently stemming from you revered moronic mindset. That you will duly answer for.

Jim: You intend to generate anger,

NJK: No I don’t. Just stick to the posted facts if you actually can. Responding to you in kind when you are advocating doing violence to people, indeed right in the blog post’s title, who have similar beliefs as I do is a due consequence, even a necessary one so that people reading your implicitly inciting blog post will not act on what you advocate.

Jim: first with threats of libel,

NJK: Just calling it like it is...and, unlike you, I can and will prove that is it a factual description vs. your defamatory and libellous claims about me or my websites. And that is the only needed burden of proof in any libel/defamation case...if you can’t prove that what you claim/said about someone else it the actual case, then you lose.

And, stop fancying yourself, these are not threats, but binding legal warnings. You chose to ignore them and moronically push forward, then don’t be surprised when those added, and now most knowing, actions will likewise also be held against you.

Jim: then constant assertions of stupidity.

NJK: As they say: “Stupid is as stupid does” and one would have to be stupid to ignore or not call it for what it indeed is. Quite easy to prove with/about you especially since you, et al. Think that sticking your head in the sand vindicates you. LOL!!

Jim: You have no empathy, no compassion.

NJK: I repeatedly told you where to get the info you wanted and you just indifferently refused...why should I care (for you) since you evidently just don’t. Are you in clinical need of someone to pyschologically care/look out for you!??

Jim: Sociopathic,

NJK: If you are requiring that I become a moron like you, then I just can’t allow myself to do that. Waaayyyy too costly...

Jim: paranoid

NJK: No... I myself could clearly see what your issue was, and dealt with it. You just pridefully can’t see this about yourself.

Jim: schizophrenic,

NJK: I dealt with the facts of the issue here and not what you fancifully and pridefully preferred to see, or thus could only see. Talk about a patient trying to diagnose and treat a doctor...of course they’ll just be projecting their own mental/psychological disorder.

Jim: devoid of feelings,

NJK: If you don’t care about yourself, then why should I, unless of course if you are/were actually helpless sick. I was actually paramountly more concerned with the people you were attacking and endangering and also those who your wrongful actions may unknowingly influence.

Jim: of the ability to empathize.

NJK: You demonstrated no rational desire for empathy...why do I have do then extend this to you as if I owed you something. Take responsibility for your own decisions and actions.

Jim: Please seek help.

NJK: I have found all the help I need in proper Bible Study. And I would have recommended the same ‘help-seeking’ to you, but I know all you need to do is sober up and get over your “skeptic” self. You factually are just not as quip/cute, intelligent, and even sure, as you inebriatingly think you are. Get to know why and then you’ll begin to both sober up and quite your skeptic addiction.

Jim: After you do please return as you are smart

NJK: I do not have to go any where, nor won’t be returning to you blog, especially not for any Religious/Theological discussion, which was not even my initial intent. You can just go and read my online postings whenever you become even basically smart enough to do so. And if you also moronically thinking that throwing out a couple of (substantively) mindless/disingenuous compliments warrant you respect, then you are really more idiotic, being moreover also self-serving, than I first thought. Everything you do is just to whitewash and worship yourself.

Jim: and could have something interesting to say

NJK: ohhh if only you could read...read my blog of course. But you just have this mental block...Way beyond my doctoral expertise. Like I said and linked to, go consult someone who actually specializes in those spurious intellectual psychosis of atheists/agnostics/skeptics.

Jim: but for now you bury...

NJK: Indeed I bury it, as deep as possible from moronic mindsets as yourself.

Jim: it in your dispassionate,

NJK: I am actually quite “passionate”, but as involved in the “passion” mentioned in Rev 14:10 only in regards to truth, and not in catering to pompous and prideful antagonists.

Jim: irrational hate

NJK: Hard for me to love what/who does not love themselves, nor especially me and that makes perfect rational “agape” since to me...Study it out for yourself...if you actually/really care.

Jim: and fear.

NJK: It is always sane to fear people who prefer to act moronically because such “jack-ass” will just take you out when they engage in their oblivious, lawless ways. And I do fear God much more than you...you should learn to do the same (Matt 10:28; Rev 14:7)

December 22, 2012

Post Link

Darrel: NJ was given a simple task: provide an example of a prophecy, then establish that it was fulfilled. As is typical, he doesn’t have the courage to even attempt to do it. Pitiful. I’ll be brief.

NJK: Ohhh I long ago did. Anybody with a functioning brain can see and understand that. You just won’t click a link. It all demonstrates you complete ignorance of what is involved here and why just reading my blog or even viewing an hour long presentation is much more efficient here. What is worst than having a discussion with someone who is that moronically ignorant is someone who tries to justify that moronic ignorance with moronic reasons. Just no room for any informed nor intelligent discussion here...and then they are trying to engage spiritual issues (1 Cor 2:6-16). But as typical with the unbeliever, they think the world must revolve around them.

NJ: “What wrong spot…It supposedly was “awaiting moderation”…”>>

Darrel: No. You put it in the wrong spot. Best to begin by being honest.

NJK: I don’t recall that being a, nor the, issue here, so there is not issue of “honesty” with me.  So reach for other quibbling straws.

NJ: “whenever” you would have read my blog post…”>>

Darrel: Saying “go read my blog,” is not an argument or a demonstration of a prophecy example.

NJK: LOL. I wasn’t meant to be an argument, just a reference to that example... And I supposed posting exactly what is said there, and in context would be for you. If you really believe this than you just validate that you are indeed quite obliviously moronic, and thus not even worth entering into a substantive discussion with...indeed you moronically were refusing to...

Funny how you here want mere assertions, and if/when would be done would then just cry out for “details”. Quite an impenetrable self-shielded bubble you have going for you and you “skeptic” world.

NJ: “Doesn’t seem at all to me that you’ve read my blog posts.”>>

Darrel: I don’t care about your blog.

NJK: Ohhhh I knew that. Problem is I do, and I contextualizing know and understand why so.

Darrel: Hey NJ, here is a forum I administrate: http://fayfreethinkers.com/forums/index.php

NJK: How typical with the people here...: ‘He does care’..but I should.

Darrel: I have about 7,000 posts or so,

NJK: Just cursorily browsing through it, it is interesting to see all of the self-serving mindlessness that is aggregated there, e.g., this post, as if God had not created Man himself from the elements found in the ground (Gen 2:7). As typically you skeptic just are uniformed and/or just don’t know what you are talking about or opposing.

Darrel: much of it instruction for and extensive debate with Christians of your ilk.

NJK:

(1) Most basically, ‘Christians of my actual “ilk”’, according to what that factually entails, can at the very least be limited to only ca. 17,000,000 or so people (i.e., SDAs)

(2) And since for a long time now, I have moved on beyond SDAs, then that factually, and most demonstrably, leaves very little people who are in my ilk, and

(3) You won’t know what my ilk is since you won’t read my blog or websites. So here too, you just don’t know what you are talking about... but of course just think you do.

Darrel: Some of them, unlike you, even have the courage to stand up for what they believe and defend their assertions.

NJK: Characterize it as junevilely as you obliviously need to to appease your conscious, it just does not affect nor change those inherent facts. I just won’t waste my time engaging a preferringly uniformed person.

Darrel: Can you imagine how stupid it would be if you asked for a specific example of prophecy fulfillment and I told you to “go read my blog?”

NJK: No...can’t begin to since I know what is involved here and why that is the best option.

Darrel: Good grief. When will I find a Christian with some courage to defend their convictions?

NJK: I thought you already had??? And as Christians typically do so with people, then just perhaps they most politely just don’t mind that you just keep on going where, according to their “convictions”, you are actually already heading... Christians don’t owe you, or any other such mindless, brash and pompous attackers anything.

NK: “So deal with my own view and/or the ones of others…”>>

Darrel: I’ll deal with your view when you have the courage to state it. Here. Now. Or you can tuck tail and run.

NJK: Right because copying and pasting them here vs. clicking on a link is really the validly substantive hang up with you...then suit yourself for you are not fooling me...quite to the contrary indeed.

NJ: “I seen and experienced advanced, even now, computer-aided, Biblical Scholarship rescue and/or correct many of the beliefs of the past, and also discard the ones which did not pass the presently available greater exegetical scrutiny testing.”>>

Darrel: That sentence is so awesome I am going to make it religious Quote of the Day on our forum. I’ve posted it here: http://fayfreethinkers.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=25976#p25976

NJK: Yes because you obviously think that it validates your skeptic stance/views.. That just demonstrates how moronically ignorant you are...and you claim to know what my (even basic) “ilk” is!! LOL It indeed is really not hard to deal with people like you...just keep giving you more string...

NJ: “God also does not do convincing/convicting things just to cater to doubters, unbelievers and/or rebels….”>>

Darrel: Actually, as the story goes, he does and has repeatedly. Let me walk you through a few examples:

Darrel: When Thomas doubted he said, let’s do a test, lets see these wounds then I’ll believe. Then, as the story goes, Jesus participated in the test and evidence was provided.

NJK: As I said, you just don’t know what you are talking about. Start with basic exegesis which involves letting the entire context of a passage determine what a single statement/verse is meaning vs. your surface reading and construing, Spiritually devoid, naturalistic prooftexting approach. (=1 Cor 2:6-16):

John 20:24-29 - Since Thomas did not have the same opportunity to see the resurrected Christ as the other disciples did then that is the only reason why Jesus granted that request, and that only 8 days later, which all means that this was not a special granting for Thomas, as he probably had to make that latter appearance/visit to the disciples then anyway. And as Jesus did not pat Thomas on the back for his unbelief but instead rebuked him, (as He had previously done for the priorly similarly slow to believe disciples (Mar 16:9-14)), then it can be seen that he was here mainly concerned about stating a principle for others who would follow that they should have faith and believe even if they cannot see for themselves.

Darrel: At Malachi 3:10 Yahweh says to the doubters, test me:

“Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Test me in this,” says the LORD Almighty, “and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that there will not be room enough to store it.”

NJK: Interesting quoting here as it most tangential. God had already made that tithing promise by Law to His People. (E.g. Num 18:21/Deut 12:6; Lev 26:3-10), so the statement in Mal 3:10 was just a reminder of what He had said He would do it, inclusively also in regards to that law, for it always had to be all or nothing (Cf. Matt 5:23-24; 23:23-24) So God was not here laying a new promise or test but just calling His people to see whether or not He would not be faithful as He said.

Darrel: 1 John 1:4 says test God’s spirits to make sure they are legit:

“Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.”

NJK: Uhhhh???!!! What does that verse [actually 1 John 4:1] have to do with anything here??? “Testing” the Spirits here, and that with the already revealed and ascertain word of God (Isa 8:20), and not LOL another revelation, is just to see if they are from God or Satan as the context of that passage clearly shows 1 John 4:1-6. (=1 Thess 5:19-22) Indeed the Bible knows that every spirit is not defaultly from God but can just as easily be from Satan.

Darrel: At 1 Kings 18, Elijah, does a classic test any bronze age goat herder can understand:

“I will prepare the other bull and put it on the wood but not set fire to it. 24 Then you call on the name of your god, and I will call on the name of the LORD. The god who answers by fire—he is God…

Elijah said to the prophets of Baal, “Choose one of the bulls and prepare it first, since there are so many of you. Call on the name of your god, but do not light the fire.”

What happens? The LORD participates in the test:

“Then the fire of the LORD fell and burned up the sacrifice, the wood, the stones and the soil, and also licked up the water in the trench. When all the people saw this, they fell prostrate and cried, “The LORD—he is God! The LORD—he is God!”

NJK: Funny how you so “ignorantly” think that this is a great example, and also how you keep saying that God “participates”. First of all, when God bothers to do something it is only because there is a wider and larger most crucial implication involved. And typically it is just to establish a lasting object lesson. Indeed as in this case. What does the fuller context of that story reveal when God answered Elijah’s prayer?!! God then instructed Elijah, (when He was finally able to get Elijah to stop fleeing), to set up the various forces which would punish and eventually obliterate those who had been worshipping Baal. (1 Kgs 19:15-17) and only 7000 (from millions) would ultimately be “spared” (1 Kgs 19:18) That is not at all God catering to unbelievers and rebels, but Him serving them the irrefutable damning evidence to seal their doom as they had refused to fully believe in what they already knew to be true. And these judgement actions that Elijah went on to do which gave for the first time a foothold into the Kingdom/affairs of Israel to surrounding foreign powers and enemies of theirs, went on to contribute to the eventual complete Assyrian takeover of Israel which has lasted to this day. I do not even see where how, 7000 were spared... Perhaps God was not able to manage to convince these ones He thought would be faithful to Him. No wonder that utter destruction is a prophetic emblem (Rev 11:13).

Darrel: So spare me this nonsense about God not stepping up to be tested or providing evidence for doubters. In your story book, he does it all the time, but that’s *conveniently* unavailable evidence and completely useless to us now.

NJK: Yes, like I said, when you begin to have any spiritual sense, starting with basic exegesis which involves reading things in their full context, (which you evidently just can’t/won’t do) then you can begin to think that you can determine what is Biblical sense or non-sense. Otherwise save yourself the confirming embarrassment and stay in your league of the ‘“naturally” clueless’ (1 Cor 2:6-16).

NJ: “since we are, at least effectively being Biblical here,…”>>

Darrel: The word “biblical” isn’t capitalized.

NJK: According to my reverencing view fothe Bible as “the Word of God” and it only should be... Deal with it.

Darrel: Not unless you are reading fundie literature, which of course is what you feed on.

NJK: Whatever “fundie” means in your world. You obviously wouldn’t understand Biblical Truth even if you read it... because you have the desperately guarded mindset that it just can’t be true.

Darrel: You’re rather new at this aren’t you?

NJK: At delving into Theological Truth...certainly not...You are the one who is just that clueless. Like I said, stay in your mindless league/world then.

NJ: “I believe that Satan exists…”>>

Darrel: I haven’t the slightest interest in what you believe, but rather what you can show. And apparently, that ain’t much. Typical.

NJK: Yet you keep pestering me to state what I believe, which I know has all come from what I have shown. You are the one who needs any kind of excuse to avoid confronting it. Keep sticking your head in the sand.

D.

—————

NJK: Obviously, as also seen with you here below, just quoting someone who happens to assert the same thing you think proves you are correct. Quite naive:

Darrel’s Quoting: “The Sin of Silence

There is a sin among a large segment of the Christian clergy that I find despicable. It is the sin of omission, the sin of silence. It is the sin of promoting falsehoods in order to hold your job. It is the sin of not sharing with a congregation what you know to be true about the bible and Christianity.

NJK: Unless of course that preacher knows that what they are preaching is the satisfactorily ascertained truth, as proper research and exegesis provided for.

Darrel’s Quoting: Those graduating in religious studies from every major university in America, as well as every major theological seminary that is independent of Christian financial pressure, know certain facts to be true.

NJK: Those typical disbelieving, skeptical and critical arguments just don’t hold up under proper exegetical and historical scrutiny.

Darrel’s Quoting: They know that:

1. The entire bible is saturated with common mythological themes, from the creation and flood myth to virgin birth and resurrected hero mythology.

NJK: The Biblical accounts are demonstrably sound claims, as many dedicated studies and presentation have rationally, logically shown. Indeed when you actually fundamentally believe in an All-Powerful God, then all of that is not impossible.

Darrel’s Quoting: 2. The stories of the patriarchs in the Old Testament are known as ‘temple legends’ to enhance the history of the Hebrew people and are mostly fictional.

NJK: Says the non-believer. I have ample available corroborating spiritual knowledge that the Biblical accounts are truthful and factual, indeed starting with fulfilled prophecy...but that is way beyond the league of skeptics like Darrel.

Darrel’s Quoting: 3. The gospels were not written by anyone who knew Jesus personally.

NJK: I guess one first must biasedly “believe” that Matthew and John were not the said Gospel writers.

Darrel’s Quoting: 4. The ‘Christ’ myths and formulas are direct copies of Zoroastrian myths adopted by the Jesus sect.

NJK: The Prophetic Book of Revelation, and it many hisotrically fulfilled prophecies, even reaching to our times, confirm that what is said about Jesus in the Gospels is most credible. My suggestion to uniformed skeptics like Darrel is to take a basic Revelation Seminar for SDA. As I had said, start by looking up, among others, David Asscherick - Discover Prophecy and viewing those presentations... Then you’ll be informed enough to make a Biblically/Spiritually intelligent comment.

Darrel’s Quoting: 5. These facts, with others, have been known for years, and taught by internationally respected scholars from major universities world wide.

NJK: Of course by being carefully guarded, however necessary, as in Darrel spurious excusing case, from any competent exposure or scrutiny.

Darrel’s Quoting: Religiously educated clergy, through the sin of omission and silence, continue to promote superstition.”

–William Edelen. An active ordained Presbyterian and Congregational minister for 30 years. Adjunct professor of Religious Studies and Anthropology, University of Puget Sound Tacoma, Washington

http://www.infidels.org/kiosk/article723.html

NJK: Says the indifferently non-informed...

December 22, 2012

How patently typical of at least the “skeptics” (really “unsighted ones”) which I met on that blog to claim to want to know the Truth about something, here a Bible prophecy, but then blindly refuse to engage the evidence/proof establishing that Bible Prophecy. In their naturalistic mindset, they believe that God owes them proof for everything not begin to comprehend that such proof would most likely just instantly doom them as several instances in the Bible demonstrate. And so in a blog post posted on the day after I was banned from replying on their blog, the writer, the above-encountered moron Jim Newman, claims:

“In dealing with a supporter of Seventh Day Adventism (SDA) it became clear that two things relate in their faith. One is the belief satan causes people to go to church on Sunday and this must be overcome, and two that biblical prophecy (Daniel) foretold when Christ would evaluate for salvation. Originally 2300 days, it was changed to 2300 years. Not only that but that it was happening in heaven so we, here on Earth, hadn’t the slightest clue or means of evaluating whether it was happening or not. I suppose it[sic] we knew a start date for the event we could divide 2300 into it and recalculate the necessary translation of the interval. It was clever to say so many days away as just when is that, from when to when, and just what is a day? A day but I guess not.”

Hopefully he was not referring to me because (1) I had made it clear that I was not a “supporter” of  SDAdventism, see here, just what they teach which is Biblical, just like supporting the virgin birth of Christ and His Divinity would not make me a supporter of Catholicism, but I guess Newman would just not begin to understand the actual difference here; (2) I myself never had mentioned the issue of Sunday-keeping, especially not in any ‘Mark of the Beast’ context as is evidently involve there; and (3) I had emphasized the 70 Weeks prophecy and only mentioned the 2300 Days (Dan 8:14) in a comment which was, typically cowardly, not posted by them for they need to sustain their chief claim that ‘I would not provide any prophetic evidence’, (that response is posted in its entirely below this one here), and those two prophecies do not focus on the same issues. So merely for Jim’s Legal sake, I sure hope that he was not claiming that this person he had ‘dealt with’ was me, for it just further his defamatory course all stemming from his fanciful, quasi-delusional, wildly and factlessly or facts-indifferent “surmising”.

            On more substantive issues here, to want to understand what happened at the end the 2300 day prophecy without understanding the 70 Weeks is laughably futile. Indeed the 70 Weeks provide that supposed “start date” (whatever Jim actually meant by that statement as he immediately lost me in his ignorant suppositions of ‘dividing the 2300 days/years into it’ and ‘recalculate the necessary translation of the interval’, etc... His ramblings, which he tries to pass off, probably as best he could, as having understood the prophecy here, just makes no, even linguistic/syntactical, let alone cogent/rational, sense. The facts here rather are that:

(1) The day-year principle is a Biblically attested one, which Jesus Himself even used (Luke 13:31-33ff), and is all part of God having concealed apocalyptic fulfillments, from tellingly enough, “skeptics” and other unrighteous persons (Dan 12:9-10). So it is no surprise here that Jim just does not begin to get things here.

(2) The 70 Weeks involve Christ`s New Covenant and the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple and the book of Hebrews go on to explain how Jesus is now functioning as the High Priest for believers in what the OT also states was the original Sanctuary in Heaven, of which the Earthly one ins Israel was merely a conceptual copy. So Dan 8:14 referring to that Heavenly Sanctuary to be cleanse in an anti-typical day of Atonement is nothing that anyone with spiritual sense could not see and comprehend. But Jim is certainly not on that spiritual level, but merely on his humanistic natural, skeptical one. (1 Cor 2:6-16). Its all like a child in kindergarten claiming that Calculus is impossible...first get through your Grades 1-12 Math and then you’ll be able to make an informed and even cognitive comment.

(3) Those who initially accepted the Biblical interpretation of the 2300 days in faith in and around 1844, when it was fulfilled, were soon thereafter, as it is typical with God, given sufficient spiritual and prophetic manifestations and confirmations that they were correct in their Biblical understandings. These people went on to form the SDA Church, and those Divine confirmations are the reason why that one group of originally ca. 5000, from the prior larger group of about 500,000 Millerites themselves went on to become the most populous and prolific, and also global, denomination, because their understandings were both Biblically and Divinely ratified. But that too is way beyond Jim Newman’s level of comprehension, and as typical with skeptic, he’ll probably just summarily dismiss it, with spurious knee-jerk vacuous objections and  without any valid consideration.

To try to make some sense of Jim non-cogent statement that: “It was clever to say so many days away as just when is that, from when to when, and just what is a day? A day but I guess not.”

            Time prophecies in the Bible are indeed God’s greatest and most “clever” proofs of His existence and All-Mighty Power, so Him clearly saying that it would be 2300 days in the future which are to be understood, as priorly involved and attested in Dan 7:25 and also the related 70 Weeks, are quite satisfactory revelations for the spiritual in tune and initiated, as God deliberately intended for (Dan 12:10). So, as far as God is concerned in regards to Jim’s complete and/or moronically preferred non-comprehension here...Mission Perfectly Accomplished!!...but Jim’s Divine-ward arrogant pride just won’t let him accept that...(Matt 11:25-26; 1 Cor 1:18-25; Psa 19:7)

December 16, 2012

D: Went to see the movie Life of Pi, in 3D. Very nice. Highly recommended. I read the book too.

Not sure that statement was pointedly meant for me, but it nonetheless is quite telling to me of the “I like my own fantasies” mentality/mindset I have to deal with here.

NJK: I’ll answer Darell,”>>

D: Excellent. That’ll be two “r’s” and one “l” please. If you do attempt to back up your prophecy claims we will need to have you learn how to pay attention to some details. You may learn that you’ve gotten off in the intellectual bushes due to your learned habit of not taking care and attention to specifics and the details. Bad habit.

So by those same parameters so have you with your “NKJ”. And I originally did indeed not bother to ascertain the proper spelling of your name. [Do take that to whatever tangent you need to.] It just didn’t seem to be worth the time.

D: Next post:

NJK: “Darrel, in case you are actually serious/sincere in your views…”>>

D: Oh, I’m very serious. I would like to see you try to establish a supernatural fulfillment of a Bible prophecy. Begin.

Read on...

NJK: “I’ll recommend you to someone who,…”>>

D: Oh no, that won’t do. Don’t tell me to go read a book, watch a movie or study something at some link. It’s your claim, you need to back it up. Provide your supposed example, make your case. I am not going to do your job for you, set up your case and then knock it down to. I could do that for you, but I’m not going to. Let’s see what you’ve got in support of your claim. Get to work.

My basic views are the same as Asscherick’s on this topic and as I said, in regards to engaging a skeptic/atheistic mind he (cares) to do a better job than myself. If that is what you prefer than see his presentation. If not, then read my blog posts, as is....I won’t bother taking the time of restating what is already posted there just to cater to you.

And if you choose to view Asscherick’s presentation and do come across something which you have a valid objection to, then I may consider (distinctly) addressing it myself. After all, as stated and done on my blog, “fixing, furthering and “finishing”” the teachings of, particularly SDAs is part of my ministry work.

NJK: “I’ll recommend you to someone who, unlike me, has had the burden of engaging skeptics of the Bible as yourself.”>>

D: You have the burden of backing your claims. When are you going to do this? Why don’t you begin now. Now would be good. I suggest starting with a good one. How about now?

I have already given you the indication to have this done from my blog post. Do so if you want. If you won’t, then at least be honest enough with yourself and stop obliviously/asininely asking for this.

NJK: “(Perhaps it is because he himself was a skeptic/atheist earlier in his life.)”>>

D: Sure he was.

Indeed...You should hear his testimony: http://vimeo.com/53153417; also here (2010 -with friend Nathan Renner’s related testimony) [joint book]. If however this cannot be the case because you won’t believe it, then do let me know of such subjective mental block in advance.

NJK:”Try looking up on Youtube:”>>

D: Nope. I don’t do argument from “go watch a movie and try and figure out what I think about Bible prophecies.” Again, I am not going to do your work for you. You’ve claimed the existence of Bible prophecy shows the existence of God. Provide your first example. Let’s see it. Pick a good one.

Already have. Deal with it.

NJK: “David Asscherick”>>

D: I’m not interested in him, I’m interested in you backing up the claim you made. What have you got?

Really too bad that I just don’t reciprocally so “care” for (skeptic) “you”... and won’t make such an “expenditure”, indeed, as Asscherick generally does...

NJK: “The priorly posted entirely philosophical series of Clifford Goldstein…”>>(-see his ‘Science vs/& God’ Series) 

D: If Mr. Goldstein has an example that *you* think *you* can set up, put together and defend, let’s see it. I am not going to do your job for you. Make sure your example can get through the seven basic and very sensible rules I’ve set up, saves me time.

He does also cover the 2300-day prophecy in his book 1844 Made Simple. As already linked to, I deal with establishing the first 70 Weeks part of that prophecy on my blog. However I referenced Goldstein for more general studies on faith and belief and not prophecy itself. And though he was priorly atheist/agonistic, -even if he is a Jew. (See/hear his testimony here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_PQHykzjso

or http://www.audioverse.org/sermons/recordings/2956/called-by-name.html )

NJK: “If you also look his name up on Google and Youtube you’ll find other…”>>

D: Oh, the internet and youtube have a great variety of information, and also a great pile of utter nonsense. I’m not interested in being directed to someone else.

Focus Darrel....I didn’t ask you to random search the internet...but to search for Clifford Goldstein to find his other presentations, which I find convincing on such philosophical issues.

D: I am interested in seeing if you can get off of your bottom and back up your claim by attempting to establish a specific example in support of your claim. The truth is in the details, and the details are my specialty.

-It is much better for me if I remain seated to type on my computer...so “if you don’t mind” I’ll do that... and, most conveniently keep referring you to, at the very least, my blog post(s). Plenty of details there.

NJK: “It is just an operational fact that I do not have that ministry burden of engaging skeptic of the (entire) Bible per se.”>>

D: You don’t need to engage a “skeptic of the entire Bible,” (whatever that means)

I.e., Jews and Muslims (in part) are skeptics of only the New Testament...

D: you just need to establish an example of a truly supernaturally fulfilled Bible prophecy in order support your extraordinary claim that Bible prophecy shows the existence of God (which is a non sequiter anyway). Stop avoiding your burden of supporting your claim and begin.

Already have posted a link...

NJK: “also, quite seriously stated, people have engaged and experience Satan through witchcraft, voodoo, wicca, etc.”>>

D: Sure they have. Hey NJ, once you’ve nailed down a prophecy or two, then we’ll move on to your other basic cognitive errors in the area of critical thinking.

Uhhhh a Freudian slip Darrell...If I will have ‘nailed down a couple of prophecies’ then that should settle the Cosmic reality of God and thus the Bible and also the history, existence and actions of Satan (which certain devotees do experience, as the Bible reveals is possible)...or do you really plan to selectively doubt despite any “nailed down” evidence/demonstration. Let me know...like I said, I don’t have time for “skeptics”, especially oblivious ones.

..and indeed 'they have': see e.g., in the testimony of former evolution professor Walter J. Veith here|here, (expanded account: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3; also more expandingly related in 6 parts here||here). Relatedly, [P.S.: the late (but not {so/wholly} “great” [except, mercifully, if: James 5:19-20; cf. 1 Cor 9:27])] Ravi Zacharias, of RZIM (media), also has many great presentations (samply this segment) on this, conversely-applicable, issue/claim of: “basic cognitive errors in the area of critical thinking”.

NK: “just depends how serious sincere you actually are about believing in, and following him because he actually does not want to spook anyone into believing in God/Jesus instead.”>>

D: Sure He doesn’t.

Indeed. As one preacher illustrated: ‘just like the Mafia...they work better when you don’t/won’t believe they exist.’

D: That’s why He’s just so darn sneaky about what He does. Just the Boogie Man. Some people don’t believe in the Boogie Man either, but they’re just not serious enough “about believing in, and following him because he actually does not want to spook anyone into believing in” a God of Boogie Man Land.

Well, compared to Satan, the “Boogie Man” has much less documented and experiential evidentiary support going for him indicating that he does exist.

D: (I bet they play a lot of disco music there)

I think you are confusing the meanings for “boogie”, hopefully intentionally...

D: Enough with the introductions, the singing and dancing,

You’d be surprise just what I’ll, even sacrificingly, make the “time” for.

D: let’s see your first example of Bible prophecy, or perhaps you would like to admit you don’t have the courage back up your claim.

See my referenced post.

__________________________

Notes

[1] To be accurate, Mike Winger declares that: “he is not a Dispensationalist, but merely a Futurist”...Which does not begin to be Theologically/Prophetically valid to me...as in the: “half pregnant” ‘throwing out the baby...and the bath basin...in order to futilely attempt to hold on to the bathwater’ way because, there is no Futurism without Dispensationalism....I.e. Claiming that ‘the Jews will have their distinct “Dispensational/Age” in the “Future” is indeed what has forced this heretical: novel, “future-remitting”, eisegetical, man-made construct into Protestant Prophetic Interpretation...

...And the Factual/Historical Truth is that Futurism (as well as Preterism) came into being long before Darby and Schoefield...Indeed from two Roman Catholic Jesuits trying to discredit the Protestant Reformation by bypassingly inoculating the entire (Catholic) Church Age from being Prophetically exposed as the “Mother/First” “Spiritual Babylon” that it is, through this (pun-intended) “Secret Rapture”-launched heretical scheme....So nice going “Protestants” for effectively completing their objective....