Why do the Gospel accounts vary so much? They seem to disagree!

[oldbadger]

The gospel accounts don't agree with each other, or so it seems to me.

For example: Why did the Gospel of Mark tell of the 'Temple clearance' happening in the last week of his mission when the Gospel of John tells us that it happened in the first weeks? ........most strange.

...............and more to come.

[TRANSPONDER]

I'm not trolling and I'm willing to get defs from Websters and the Like (they are inconvenient because of 'sign up' option pop - ups.

Why are you in denial that Deism is a kind of Theism. You have been from the start, and I'm curious why.

So you think that you can pick and choose what you like from the definition of theism, do you?

If you cannot understand the simplicity of 'aware of' or 'involved in' our world then you get no marks.

Theism and Deism are quite different from each other, as shown to you days ago with a simple equation.

I think you might be ignoring simplicity because you're such a complex and intellectual being, maybe? But remember what Einstein wrote.

Very well

Deism: a movement or system of thought advocating natural (see NATURAL entry 1 sense 8b) religion, emphasizing morality, and in the 18th century denying the interference of the Creator with the laws of the universe . (Wedbster) it does not say that the difference means non -belief in the [intelligent] creator). If you think I'm reading too much into that we can get further clarification.

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, the word Deism was used by some theologians in contradistinction to theism, the belief in an immanent God who actively intervenes in the affairs of men. In this sense, Deism was represented as the view of those who reduced the role of God to a mere act of creation in accordance with rational laws discoverable by man and held that, after the original act, God virtually withdrew and refrained from interfering in the processes of nature and the ways of man. (from Britannica)

deism
noun [ U ] RELIGION (also Deism)
the belief in a single god who created the world but does not act to influence events:,(cambridge)

deism
Belief in a god who created the universe but does not govern worldly events, does not answer prayers, and has no direct involvement in human affairs. deist n. One who espouses deism. Compare agnosticism, atheism, pantheism, theism. deistic or deistical adj. [From Latin deus a god + Greek -ismos indicating a state or condition (Oxford)

[oldbadger]

Very well

Deism: a movement or system of thought advocating natural (see NATURAL entry 1 sense 8b) religion, emphasizing morality, and in the 18th century denying the interference of the Creator with the laws of the universe . (Wedbster)

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, the word Deism was used by some theologians in contradistinction to theism, the belief in an immanent God who actively intervenes in the affairs of men. In this sense, Deism was represented as the view of those who reduced the role of God to a mere act of creation in accordance with rational laws discoverable by man and held that, after the original act, God virtually withdrew and refrained from interfering in the processes of nature and the ways of man. (from Britannica)

deism
noun [ U ] RELIGION (also Deism)
the belief in a single god who created the world but does not act to influence events:,(cambridge)

deism
Belief in a god who created the universe but does not govern worldly events, does not answer prayers, and has no direct involvement in human affairs. deist n. One who espouses deism. Compare agnosticism, atheism, pantheism, theism. deistic or deistical adj. [From Latin deus a god + Greek -ismos indicating a state or condition (Oxford)

At last!
Oxford even wanted to compare agnosticism, atheism, theism and deism.........they can be compared from one another.

Make sure you separate us in future.....
So different.

[TRANSPONDER]

Very well

Deism: a movement or system of thought advocating natural (see NATURAL entry 1 sense 8b) religion, emphasizing morality, and in the 18th century denying the interference of the Creator with the laws of the universe . (Wedbster)

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, the word Deism was used by some theologians in contradistinction to theism, the belief in an immanent God who actively intervenes in the affairs of men. In this sense, Deism was represented as the view of those who reduced the role of God to a mere act of creation in accordance with rational laws discoverable by man and held that, after the original act, God virtually withdrew and refrained from interfering in the processes of nature and the ways of man. (from Britannica)

deism
noun [ U ] RELIGION (also Deism)
the belief in a single god who created the world but does not act to influence events:,(cambridge)

deism
Belief in a god who created the universe but does not govern worldly events, does not answer prayers, and has no direct involvement in human affairs. deist n. One who espouses deism. Compare agnosticism, atheism, pantheism, theism. deistic or deistical adj. [From Latin deus a god + Greek -ismos indicating a state or condition (Oxford)

At last!
Oxford even wanted to compare agnosticism, atheism, theism and deism.........they can be compared from one another.

Make sure you separate us in future.....
So different.

Your confusion can be seen by t your use of the term 'compared from' rather than 'compared to'. Which means we compare one with another to see how they compare. We do not 'compare to', to try to make them look the same. I am well aware of the differences, but you seem confused.

Oxford dictionary of course makes it clear that Deism is belief in a god, (I am even less fussy and will accept crediting on evidence, not just faith) but a non - intervening one, where the more common theism (god - belief) sees it as intervening.

They are both colours of Theism and belong in the theism drawer.

Atheism as compared, is Not crediting a god, intervening or not.

If you don't credit the god - claim, you are atheist, or non - theist will do. Agnosticism is of course an overrused and pointless lack of knowledge of whether a god is real or not as nobody really knows, even if they think they do.

I have have saying this all along and for all to see. You have been denying what has been made plain in repeated and from the start. The readers must be staring and wondering why you point to Oxford comparing Theism, deism atheism and Agnosticism and pretending I'm unaware of the differences and ignoring that it says plainly that Deism is a form of God - belief.

They must wonder, as do I, why you are trying to insist that Deism is a non - belief in the god - claim and not Theism. As I say, I have seen before that people cannot sustain their Godfaith, but cannot bear to be called atheist, so find various ways of evading this simple thing: Non - belief in a god = atheism.

[oldbadger]

Oxford dictionary of course makes it clear that Deism is belief in a god, (I am even less fussy and will accept crediting on evidence, not just faith) but a non - intervening one, where the more common theism (god - belief) sees it as intervening.

They are both colours of Theism and belong in the theism drawer.

I read so far......but the rest just droned on.......

Remember.......... simplicity!

Don't take my word for it........ just read what yet others offer us:-

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Philosophical models not falling within established religious structures, such as Daoism, Confucianism, Epicureanism, Deism, and Pandeism, have also been considered to be nontheistic religions.
Nontheistic religion - Wikipedia
Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Nontheistic_religion

Oh dear! For all that writing and waffle, yet another :-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Deism = A NON THEISTIC religious structure.
In fact Deism, Non Theism and Atheism don't sit so far apart from each other.

But you want what you want, I guess, you want your ideas to rule all, maybe?
Good luck with that.

[TRANSPONDER]

Oxford dictionary of course makes it clear that Deism is belief in a god, (I am even less fussy and will accept crediting on evidence, not just faith) but a non - intervening one, where the more common theism (god - belief) sees it as intervening.

They are both colours of Theism and belong in the theism drawer.

I read so far......but the rest just droned on.......

Remember.......... simplicity!

Don't take my word for it........ just read what yet others offer us:-

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Philosophical models not falling within established religious structures, such as Daoism, Confucianism, Epicureanism, Deism, and Pandeism, have also been considered to be nontheistic religions.
Nontheistic religion - Wikipedia
Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Nontheistic_religion

Oh dear! For all that writing and waffle, yet another :-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Deism = A NON THEISTIC religious structure.
In fact Deism, Non Theism and Atheism don't sit so far apart from each other.

But you want what you want, I guess, you want your ideas to rule all, maybe?
Good luck with that.

Have also been considered to be...is not overturning a consensus of the definitions you asked for that make Deism a god- belief. And I like how you take one other and claim it is 'others'.

And where did that other quote come from? It looks like you wrote it yourself, frankly.

In fact Confucianism itself is theistic in that it regards earthly actions in accordance with the will of heaven, and Buddhism as regarding the gods themselves as on the wheel of rebirth. Wiki is handy as we know, but is not authoritative, and I think your quote might have a bit more context. After all, Humanism is non theistic, but god- believers can also be humanists.

Never mind your quotemine from Wiki, look at how Wiki defines Deism.
Deism (/ˈdiːɪzəm/ DEE-iz-əm [1][2] or /ˈdeɪ.ɪzəm/ DAY-iz-əm; derived from the Latin term deus, meaning "god")[3][4] is the philosophical position and rationalistic theology[5] that generally rejects revelation as a source of divine knowledge and asserts that empirical reason and observation of the natural world are exclusively logical, reliable, and sufficient to determine the existence of a Supreme Being as the creator of the universe.[11] More simply stated, Deism is the belief in the existence of God (often, but not necessarily, a God who does not intervene in the universe after creating it),[8][12]

Your own quotemined source refutes you and supports me. You try to muddy the waters with In fact Deism, Non Theism and Atheism don't sit so far apart from each other. I;ve already said that non theism and atheism are effectively the same. Deism is much like irreligious theism for that matter, but both still hold to a god - belief and are thus theism.

Oh dear, as you say. Isn't it time to be honest with yourself? For some reason you want to use Deism as a synonym for atheism, and I'm wondering why.

[oldbadger]

Have also been considered to be...is not overturning a concenss of the definitions you asked for that make Derism a god- belief.

Derism?
Are you becoming confused?
Concenss?
What is that?

Look....for this my last post.... Deism is by definition a non-theistic pov.
If you think it belongs in the theism drawer rather than the beliefs/opinions drawer then I'll leave you to waffle away about your opinion.

[TRANSPONDER]

Have also been considered to be...is not overturning a concenss of the definitions you asked for that make Derism a god- belief.

Derism?
Are you becoming confused?
Concenss?
What is that?

Look....for this my last post.... Deism is by definition a non-theistic pov.
If you think it belongs in the theism drawer rather than the beliefs/opinions drawer then I'll leave you to waffle away about your opinion.

I of course corected my typos."Have also been considered to be...is not overturning a consensus of the definitions you asked for that make Deism a god- belief. And I like how you take one other and claim it is 'others'".

You must be getting desperate to be jumping on typos that I correct in hopes to show t I'm 'confused' about everything else,.

Now you want to run away with a last shot. And an evasive one, as well. Arguably (like humanism) a pov that does no bother about a god or gods, but Deism by the definitions given is a god - belief or credits the claim at least. Like humanism it may encompass religion or not.

I'd still like to know where you got that penultimate definition from. i still think it looks like you write it yourself. I googled the line and couldn't find anything but a string of definitions like this:

"de·ism /dē-izəm/
Noun
Belief in the existence of a supreme being, specifically of a creator who does not intervene in the universe." (world Union of Deists)

Where did your definition come from?

[TRANSPONDER]

No response as yet, and this debate seems over, and should never have been. So we might get back to the only topic that really matters in the context - Gospel veracity and the questioning of it, mainly through contradictions and inaccuracies.

But this was an interesting, if futile, debate,. bringing up rhetoric and epistemology, various approaches to religions and god - belief and popular misconceptions about them, and how a totally unimportant disagreement can become an attempt at Bamboozlement that would would shock Trump's legal team.

First, of course, my wretched typing. My eyes are dim, my knees are old and grey, as the Silly Person says in Life of Brian, and I tend to submit my writ, warts and all before my Computer (which has a mind of its' own, and hates me) makes it vanish, and I check for typos later. Sorry for that and not seeming to understand the quote function, but I am an old crock who dates from a time we wondered what the back of the moon looked like. Now we know and nobody cares. I saw the first satellite go up and the moon landing live. I do my best and my failings should not have been a pretext for pretending that I was not fit for presidential office. An old bumbler I may be, but my brain is still ok.

But no more about personals, but the debate behind the debate. It was darn obvious that Deism was a god - belief and the nature of the denial and the fishing for anything that even looked like it said it wasn't (even to misrepresenting or quotemining) was so strikingly like Bible apologetics fiddling the evidence to fit the faith. And Faith (1) in a god (or gods) is not the Real basis - it is faith in what the god Revealeths unto the believer; which is whatever is in they - thems' heads. In O/w, it is Faith in ones' own Rightness,elevated to celestial level, and you may quit Brics and put your savings into that.

It is spoofed, I may say in the old Top Gear debates about the merits of cars - but for comic effect; minor details made winning points, personals, and very bad analogies. look up a compilation of clips and you'll get the idea.



It is a human trait, and is a personal place in society ("Street Cred") instinct that apparently fears to Lose Face as is so important in Asia. At worst it leads to
you partner refusing to admit they are wrong (when they clearly are) because it means they or you gain power in the relationship. Passport Bros. note; this is what sent you abroad looking for company. Warning; this instinct is universal, so you can't escape it, though it is not a socio -political movement in Asia yet.

And worse than worse, it becomes religious and political denial, from denial of evolution (which is not actually relevant to the god - debate) to election denial, and trust me folks, Maga and Creationism have a common ancestor.

But enough of that, or of how the last debate was Theistic in nature, if not in purpose. and the point I hinted at about non - theistic religions. Taoism is an odd one. Originally atheistic, with a Nature that was even less godlike than Karma (which has to be intelligent to even sort good from bad deeds and is therefore a god), and for some reason, it invented a while raft of gods to Rival Tibetan Buddhism...and in fact that appears to be why; people did not Get the atheist oblivion of Tao (though atheism promises it for Free, with no need to spend your life wandering the mountains in rags). So it had to invent loads of gods, loud music and fancy rituals, which is also a human instinctive need - religion, in fact. Point is; these atheistic religions are such because gods do not need to intervene; they are humanistic. But gods are not denied or disbelieved in. They are not needed to intercede for the religion to work, is the idea, and that is Confucianism, Taoism and indeed Humanism.

(1) Oh I do love me foopnotes and Faith in the godclaim explains everything about religious apologetics - and that goes for all religions. It explains why evidence only serves to prop ip the Faith, and lies are ok if it supports the argument. Faith explains, misquotes, quotemining and invention, Denial of evidence, logic and even what the Bible (or a dictionary) says, and why the Godfaith is considered the default theory when logically, it isn't.