The intent of christ

Campbell

Nice try.

But humans have 'taken' the world.
Without a compass.

A compass helps on the high seas. You colonial bigot.
England needed a compass
No one else did.

And to skip the analogy.
Occam has ever needed the bible as a compass.
He has reason
And has often been called more a christian than christians.
Thus reason is a far better 'compass' that any book.
All you have to do,, is take the effort to think.

Yes,, too hard for most.

Occam

 

Well im not sure what ocean you have crossed, but I would not venture out on any sea without a good compass or GPS. Once you lose your landmarks, you tend to get stupid very quickly. And without navigational aids, only a fool will tell you he knows where he is. And I don't care how much thinking you do.

 

Really.

So all sea men before compasses and GPS were fools.
There were no stars and sun to guide them.

And the explorers on land needed no such thing

Dont make the bible out to be more than a book.
that is all it is. a book.

Not some great thing we need.
We need nothing but out minds.

Occam

 

Actually I believe some kind of navagational aids were used from the very begining. So know they were not fools. And I was not speaking of explorers on land.

And if the Bible is just a Book, how can it describe the future before it happens?
And if you really are useing your mind, you would not ignore a Book that knows the future. And how can the Bible speak of an astroid that will strike the sea and destroy one third of the ships in that sea, when astroids would not be discovered for another 1500 years?

 

Technically, Occam wasn't there either, so any 'knowledge' this theory is based off is also off the Bible...
But whereas Christians choose to accept the information the Bible presents as a whole, this theory of Occam simply chooses select pieces of the bible to support the theory, while ignoring the rest.
That's fine, but since both theories use the same source - Occam's argument that the Bible isn't an acceptable source for the argument is null, and hence his entire argument and theory crumble.

Sorry, he loses this round.
This does not prove Jesus was more than a man, but Occam has failed to create an acceptable argument or theory suggesting otherwise.

 

campbell

It does not.

Occam

 

The angel of the Lord went forth and struck down one hundred and eighty-five thousand in the Assyrian camp. Early the next morning they were there, all the corpses of the dead. (Isaiah 37:36 NAB)

these things be not ashamed, lest you sin through human respect;…Of constant training of children, or of beating the sides of a disloyal servant; or of a seal to keep an erring wife at home. (Sirach 42:1,5-6 NAB)

So the Sovereign LORD says: "I will pour out my terrible fury on this place. Its people, animals, trees, and crops will be consumed by the unquenchable fire of my anger." (Jeremiah 7:20 NLT)

"He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him takes care to chastise him" (Proverbs 13:24 NAB)

"Make ready to slaughter his sons for the guilt of their fathers; Lest they rise and possess the earth, and fill the breadth of the world with tyrants." (Isaiah 14:21 NAB)

"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property." Exodus 21:20-21 NAB

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her." Deuteronomy 22:28-29

The last quote is especially pertinant..
It's who you are.

Occam