blackbird

No. The Bible is made of 66 books written by 40 different authors over 1500 years. So the prophecy I quoted from Zechariah was written by a prophet who lived centuries before Christ. It was fulfilled during the life of Christ on earth as recorded in the gospel of Matthew in the New Testament. Two different books; one records the prophecy (Zechariah) and a different book maybe 400 years later or more record the fulfillment (Matthew). So I'm not sure why you say it would need something outside the Bible. That doesn't make sense. These are not made up stories. The fact that a number of the apostles were martyred for what they believed is strong evidence that what they believed was true. People do not die for a lie. Some of them were tortured and died brutal deaths. The four gospels record different things in some cases about Jesus and what happened. There would be no point in them deliberately creating a false story. So when Matthew records that Judas was paid 30 pieces of silver that makes sense. The fact that Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus is also recorded in all four gospels although they may not all give the exact same details in the same way. The prophecy in Isaiah 7:14 KJV "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." This is recorded as fulfilled in Matthew and Luke.

" 12 And I said unto them, If ye think good, give me my price; and if not, forbear. So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver. {If ye…: Heb. If it be good in your eyes} 13 And the LORD said unto me, Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prised at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of the LORD. " Zechariah 11:12, 13 KJV This was written by the prophet Zechariah centuries before Christ. "15 And said unto them, What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you? And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver. 16 And from that time he sought opportunity to betray him. " Matthew 26:15, 16 KJV This fulfillment of this prophecy was written centuries later by the author of the gospel of Matthew. Judas betrayed Christ for 30 pieces of silver.

quote Over 300 direct prophecies in question, like, Is. 7:14 He would be born of a virgin Lk. 1:7 it happened! Micah 5:2 born in Bethlehem Lk. 2:4 that happened! Gen. 49:10 born of tribe of Judah Mt. 3:3 that happened! Psalm 78:2 speak in parables Mt. 13:34 that happened! Zech. 9:9 ride on colt of a donkey Mt. 21 that happened! Is. 61 heal broken-hearted Lk. 4:18 that happened! Is. 53:3 rejected by own Jn. 1:11 that happened! Is. 53:7 stand silent before accusers Mk. 15:5 that happened!’ Ps. 22:18 cast lots for His robe Jn. 19:23 that happened! Ps. 22 (hundreds of years before crucifixion ever invented or thought of) prophets said they would pierce His hands and feet, and it happened! Ps. 22:1 “my God, why forsaken me?” Mt. 27:46 that happened! v. 5 tongue cleave to jaw Mt. 26:15 that happened! Zech. 11:2 sold by enemies for 30 silver Mt. 26:15 that happened! Is. 53:9 buried w/ rich Mt. 27 that happened! Unquote

Many prophecies were written down by the Hebrew prophets who lived many centuries before Christ came into the world. They were written down in the Hebrew Scriptures centuries before they were fulfilled. Their fulfillment was recorded in the gospels which was written down after Christ lived on earth. The Hebrew Scriptures became known as the Old Testament in the Bible we have today. The books in the Bible were written by 40 different authors. The authors in Old Testament times were not the same authors of the New Testament. So these prophecies are evidence of the supernatural working of God.

I won't bite. Jesus is LOrd and the Bible is authentic. Says nothing about mother's contraception in the Bible. I am not Roman Catholic. I believe the Bible You make a lot of assumptions. But if you were honest you would look into it before condemning everything. I never condemned you to anything. I have hope for you and prefer civilized conversation without the name calling. Here is a site that gives a lot of information about the authenticity of the Bible. Compelling Evidence of the Authenticity of the Bible – peterpilt

I debated whether to even answer you because you have a serious attitude problem. Maybe you have serious personal problems; I don't know. But God does care about you. God (Jesus) is there for you if you ever change your mind. Will pray for you. We must love our neighbours as God says. Hate is not the answer. God is merciful and can help you.

I gave you the definition of faith from the Bible in Hebrews ch11. That is the faith we are talking about. I accept the Bible and it answered your questions or comments better than I ever could. I will stick with the King James Bible because it is God's inspired word. Your argument is really with the Bible and with God. I can't really add to his description of what faith is. As I said it is necessary to look at the subject through a supernatural viewpoint or eyes, as it says in 1 Corinthians ch2. There is no other way.

According to your definition and liberal definition, whatever government legalizes is moral. Therefore according to that reasoning, abortion or killing of unborn babies is moral. But this is still killing humans and is shown in the Holy Scriptures to be against God's teaching on the sanctity of life and command "thou shalt not kill". So your argument that whatever man or government decrees is moral falls down flat. Likewise, in Nazi Germany in the 1930s, and early 1940s the Jews were considered evil and worthy of the final solution. Society in general accepted that although probably not everyone. But the Nazi government approved. Did that make it good or righteous. Of course not. It was still a great evil in God's sight. Your argument falls flat in that example as well.

God has chosen the vehicle of faith for man to come to him. You are asking to have proof in scientific terms which is not how God has chosen to operate. God has said he spoke creation into existence in Genesis Chap. 1. Other than that there is no explanation given of how he did that or how he created atoms. But it is reasonable to believe atoms, molecules could not have created themselves. They required a Creator who we call God. Therefore we accept it on faith that it was a supernatural act of God. The Bible says "1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. {substance: or, ground, or, confidence} 2 For by it the elders obtained a good report. 3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. " Hebrews 11:1-3 KJV So you see here it says the worlds were framed by the word of God. That tells me he simply spoke the creation into existence. "11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." 1 Corinthians 2:11-14 KJV Here we see that the natural man cannot know these things or accept them. It says they are foolishness unto him. So they must be spiritually discerned. The only way to believe in God and what he did is through a spiritual viewpoint. "6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. " Hebrews 11:6 KJV

I have explained without God, there is no such thing as true morality. Man does what he wishes. That is called humanism. The definition of humanism is: an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. Humanist beliefs stress the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasize common human needs, and seek solely rational ways of solving human problems. Atheism or humanism which is closely related means one has a purely materialistic outlook on the world and there is no such thing is good and evil, or right and wrong, with the exception of what humanists deem is right or wrong. But this type of morality is man centered or hedonistic. It is wrong because there is no ultimate accountability and one can in theory do whatever he can get away with. Whatever feels good in the here and now is all that matters. That kind of world leaves no hope for the future or eternity. The Bible is about eternity because it teaches God created man with a soul and a spirit and with the possibility of sharing eternity with God in heaven. He created man in his own image, with an eternal plan. He teaches that life does not end at death. But also said that man belongs to God and therefore it is God's decision when one dies, not man's decision. To back that up God says in the Bible "thou shalt not kill". He also gives other commandments the central ones being he commands man to love the Lord thy God and to love thy neighbour as thyself. Therefore, atheism has no foundation and opens the door to other diabolical ideologies such as Socialism (which is stealing from those that have something to give to others), Marxism, and liberalism / progressivism. These ideologies are diabolical because they contradict the teachings which God has given us in his written revelation, in English, the King James Bible. The Bible says without faith it is impossible to please him (God). Without God there is no meaning in life. The central message of the Bible is that man fell from a good relationship with God when Adam and Eve rebelled against God and inherited a fallen, corrupt nature. He is separated from God. But God sent his Son to be the Savior for all those who believe in him and accept his sacrifice on the cross as an atonement for their sin and believe that he rose from the dead. That is man's only hope salvation. One must be redeemed.

Yes, I recall we had the conversation. You are incorrect in saying that I presented no evidence. I presented lots of evidence. The evidence is in the creation. You just don't accept it as evidence.

No, I think it was just a passing news report about the number of people in hospital, in ICU and the number that died. Don't think they were deliberately leaving out information about the number of people who were vaccinated and the number who were not. We get some of that on some news reports but new reports are not necessarily official reports meant to cover every detail about the pandemic in an area.

The evidence for God is all around in the creation. There are many good articles and videos on that subject at creation.com website. God cares about everyone, but he has given everyone the freedom of choice to choose which way they are going and what they will believe. The evidence is there. The choice is yours. He created man and woman, male and female. Those are the only two sexes he created and told them to go forth and multiply in the earth. Other man-made inventions of sexuality cannot multiply and were not part of his plan. They developed out of a corrupt human nature after the fall of man. But he still cares about everyone and wishes they would turn to him in faith. Without God there is nothing and no meaning.

No, don't think they mentioned vax status.

An Toronto ICU nurse on CBC just said the people she is seeing coming into the ICU are sicker and sicker. Some are dying and some are in a medically-induced coma. It is very serious. Sadly 21 died in Ontario in the past day and there are about 400 people in the ICU. That appears to be about 5% of the people in the ICU die. Many others will have ongoing medical problems. So Covid is something to avoid. A healthy fear is a good idea.

Lack of faith in the God of the Bible has serious consequences. It means young people are taught and imbibe a different world view. The world view they are taught is secular or humanist. When God is absent, the individual becomes focused entirely on what humanism teaches them, which is completely contrary to what God teaches about how we came to be here and what the meaning of life is. It becomes strictly a materialistic world view and their minds then become open to humanist political ideologies like Socialism, progressivism, LGBT rights, Marxism, etc. For some they worship Mother Earth, another false religion that relegates man to being just another animal. Such thinking is very prevalent now as we see on social media. According to mother earth worshipers, man was not a special creation and so has no special value in God's eyes, which is totally contrary to Biblical revelation. God created everything for a purpose and has a special place for man in his plan. According to humanism, the creation was just some kind of cosmic accident and there is no purpose to it all.

As Michael Crichton said, “Consensus is the business of politics. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.” A biblical and scientific approach to climate change - creation.com "In the USA, the Global Warming Petition Project has garnered the signatures of some 31,500 scientists resident in the USA alone, including over 9,000 with PhDs, who dispute the claim that CO2 will cause serious problems.29 This alone casts serious doubt on the 97% figure. The justification for ‘97%’ has been a 2013 paper that, based on the abstracts of nearly 12,000 climate science papers published from 1991 to 2011, concluded that 97% of those who expressed an opinion endorsed the consensus view that “humans are causing global warming”.30 Based on this, former President Obama’s twitter account declared, “Ninety seven percent of scientists agree: climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.” Note how the paper’s claim morphed from humans are causing some global warming into all climate change is man-made and dangerous. This is deceitful (an activist group called Organising for Action posted the Tweet). Moreover, the study was conducted by members of another activist group, Skeptical Science, which exists to promote public acceptance of AGW. When the raw data are examined, according to the authors’ own ratings, only 64 of the nearly 12,000 papers actually claimed that most of the warming is caused by human activity. In a follow-up analysis of the same papers, other researchers found that only 41 of those 64 papers endorsed the position that most of global warming was man-made.31 Taking into consideration that ⅔ of the papers expressed no view, that amounts to less than 1% of the papers that expressed a view. How did the authors get their 97%? They amalgamated all views that human-generated greenhouse gases are causing some warming. However, even most skeptics of the alarmism, including many who signed the Global Warming Petition (above) agree that human-generated CO2 causes some warming. This is a trivial finding. The survey did not address the question of climate change being ‘dangerous’ or a ‘crisis’ or anything like that. Such claims are made by politicians and actors-cum-activists. So, the 97% figure is a dishonest twisting of statistics, and the activists’ own raw data show that very few scientists agree even that most of the warming is due to human activity, let alone that it is dangerous.32" A biblical and scientific approach to climate change - creation.com Yet the Greta Thunberg crew and millions of young people have been panicked into believing mankind is in some kind of climate crisis and if drastic action is not taken we are all doomed. They have obviously been fed a false narrative by fear mongers such as Greta and politicians such as Obama, Trudeau, Elizabeth May's Green Party, environmental organizations, and many others and activists who are milking the issue for all it's worth.

quote Nearly all of this GHG effect is due to water vapour, and only about 3.3°C is due to CO2. unquote If 3.3C of global warming is due to CO2, and man contributes 3% of the CO2 in the atmosphere, is it reasonable to believe man changed that temperature by 3% of 3.3 C? That seems insignificant. So even if man could cut his GHG emissions in half, it would make practically no difference to the atmospheric temperature, correct? That is, if we were able (which is unlikely) to reduce our man-made emissions from 3% of the atmospheric CO2 to 1.5%, that would equate to such a small change of temperature. It would equate to 1.5% of 3.3 degrees C. That looks like 0.05 degrees C change. Does that make sense? So what would be the use of mankind destroying the economies of the world when it would make absolutely no difference to climate change. A change in the order of 0.05 degrees C is nothing. The article on this link says nearly all of the global warming is caused by water vapour, not CO2 as everyone has been led to believe by our political leaders and so-called experts. A biblical and scientific approach to climate change - creation.com

Has it been proven that man is the cause of global warming or excessive climate change? What is the proof?

In the minds of many climate change leaders, climate change is not about saving the planet at all. quote Statements by the leaders of the climate change lobby show that the core issue is political/philosophical, rather than about saving the planet. For example: The German economist and IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) official Ottmar Edenhofer (that is, this is a mainstream view): “But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.” (said in 201011) For a non-mainstream view, we have Extinction Rebellion (XR) co-founder, Stuart Basden (2019): “And I’m here to say that XR isn’t about the climate. You see, the climate’s breakdown is a symptom of a toxic system that has infected the ways we relate to each other as humans and to all life.” He goes on to use neo-Marxist rhetoric criticising “heteronormativity”, “patriarchy”, “white supremacy”, and “class hierarchy”. He says XR is about fixing the system; that is, destroying Western society.12 Furthermore, there is an inconsistency between the ‘walk’ and the ‘talk’ about a ‘global’ concern. If the concern was truly about saving the planet from global warming due to human-generated CO2, surely the greatest sources of the CO2 should be the main target for the action? Then why, when China is the world’s largest CO2 producer, is no one protesting outside Chinese embassies? Australia (for example) contributes just 1.2% of the world’s emissions, and yet is a target for activism. Yet if its emissions disappeared completely (with Australia reduced to a pre-industrial age), it would not make a detectable difference in world CO2 levels. unquote A biblical and scientific approach to climate change - creation.com

Man contributes a total of about 12 PPM of the earth's CO2 in the atmosphere or 3%. The other roughly 338 PPM of CO2 or 97% is natural. Canada contributes about 0.18 PPM or 1.5% of man's contribution. That is 1.5% of 12 PPM. Negligible or next to nothing. So tell me how is man the cause of climate change? It has been likened to Canada throwing a cup of water into an Olympic-sized swimming pool. It will make no difference. Since scientists admit it is impossible to prove that man is causing excessive global warming because it cannot be repeated in a lab, why do you accept man is the cause? Because somebody else says so or because a poll of people who have no proof and everyone thinks so because somebody else says so. That's not science. Popularity contests and polls are not science. Neither is speculation science. Ask Winston. He says he is a scientist. Winston, tell us if man-made climate change is speculation. or science. If it is science, what is the proof?

Still don't know the difference between western democracies and Communist dictatorships I see.

Mandatory vaccination for everyone may be coming to Canada or to the provinces as a last ditch effort to head off a continuing and spreading pandemic. It could be imposed by the provinces under Emergency measures Act because seven million Canadians are holding out and refusing to be vaccinated and the health care system could be heading for disaster. Like many other Canadians, I do not accept that thousands of Canadians in need of heart and cancer surgeries must die waiting while hospitals are overloaded with unvaccinated Covid patients.

She could easily have had an 8-1/2 month pregnancy. There is nothing to prove she got pregnant in March. That argument has no merit. I don't think it is that far from the topic because it just demonstrates the Liberal PMs close ties and affection for Communist countries.

Possible new flag: