# Stuff in the Bible you like



## brutally honest (Mar 22, 2022)

For the AA’s:  is there anything you like about the Bible?  For example:

Characters you admire?
Stories/parables you like?
Ethics/morality you agree with?

I know you don’t think it’s “God’s Word” but just wondered if it still had attributes you liked.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 22, 2022)

Putting aside the whole Is Jesus God or is Jesus just Jesus thing...
I would say I admire/like many of the character traits of Jesus.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Mar 22, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> For the AA’s:  is there anything you like about the Bible?  For example:
> 
> Characters you admire?
> Stories/parables you like?
> ...



Occasionally there will be a short bit of common sense & wisdom that can apply to any generation & any society, but I can't quote books/chapters/verses off the top of my head. Kind of biblical "fortune cookie" sayings I guess you could say.

I would say Job is a great example of "leaning into it" and dealing with life's adversity but hanging in there until things turn around for the better.


----------



## 660griz (Mar 22, 2022)

Since I like scifi, action, horror, drama movies, there are a lot of stories in the bible I like. Jonah, Noah, Moses, burning bushes, war...good stuff. I have to admire Mary for sticking with the "I am a virgin" thing. Turned out well for her and I am sure it beat the alternative. Feel bad for Joseph though. I wonder what year folks stopped falling for the virgin pregnancy thing. 
I also think that the Bible can be thanked for lowering illiteracy rates.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Mar 22, 2022)

Speaking of the virgin birth: isn't there a bible prophecy that the Messiah/Jesus would be from the lineage of David? If so, being born of a virgin would take David right out of equation. Explanation please!


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 22, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Speaking of the virgin birth: isn't there a bible prophecy that the Messiah/Jesus would be from the lineage of David? If so, being born of a virgin would take David right out of equation. Explanation please!


I thought you read the Bible 

I realize you don’t believe the story but just go with it for the sake of explaining the story.

1. This needed to be a sinless individual

2. The sins of the father is where sin enters. Born of a fleshly father  = born into sin by nature.

3.  Mary can be traced back to David. If a man had no sons then his “inheritance” can pass through his daughter. There’s the age old argument that this only includes land, cattle, etc. but no where is the right to any throne excluded from an inheritance. Another age old argument is that lineage can’t be traced through the mother. That’s false, it can be. The custom was to not name the woman. If an inheritance can pass through her due to not having brothers, lineage can and has to be traced for rightful passages.

4. Joseph can also be traced back to David.

5. The throne of David is actually God’s throne and the Son of God is Jesus so He is the rightful and only “individual” to ultimately reign and sit on His Fathers throne.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Mar 22, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I thought you read the Bible
> 
> I realize you don’t believe the story but just go with it for the sake of explaining the story.
> 
> ...



okay, point #4   Why would it count if Joseph can be tracked back to David if Joseph isn't Jesus actual father, since Mary got pregnant from the Holy Spirit? 
This whole line of reasoning sounds like a lot of tap-dancing and rationalizing to fit a preconceived (no pun intended) narrative.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Mar 22, 2022)

Oh wait I just remembered! One of the COOLEST most INSANE stories was when Elijiah was traveling and a bunch of kids were mocking him and making fun of his bald head (kids for ya! Am I right?) so he had bears come down out of the mountains to maul the kids.  That would be a great extra feature for The Ark Encounter in Kentucky! That will get the kids' attention.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 22, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> okay, point #4   Why would it count if Joseph can be tracked back to David if Joseph isn't Jesus actual father, since Mary got pregnant from the Holy Spirit?
> This whole line of reasoning sounds like a lot of tap-dancing and rationalizing to fit a preconceived (no pun intended) narrative.


The curse of Jeconiah in the male lineage before you get to Joseph. 

“Thus saith the Lord, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.”


----------



## DOUG 281 (Mar 22, 2022)

I read and study the KJV BIBLE. If you don't believe one thing in the BIBLE from the front to the back you don't believe any of it .


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 22, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> This whole line of reasoning sounds like a lot of tap-dancing and rationalizing to fit a preconceived (no pun intended) narrative.


When you take the entire Bible story and put it together……….ever thunk how much effort and thought between different writers to create such a book where it all ties together and makes perfect sense to some and has some completely baffled? And they didn’t have near the resources that we do today. Just sayin…………pretty good narrative …

They should go down in history as the worlds greatest writers.


----------



## dixiecutter (Mar 23, 2022)

DOUG 281 said:


> I read and study the KJV BIBLE. If you don't believe one thing in the BIBLE from the front to the back you don't believe any of it .


Why?


----------



## DOUG 281 (Mar 23, 2022)

BECAUSE IT IS THE ONLY TRUE BOOK THAT YOU WILL EVER READ.Pick one up and read it an study it try your best to live it. IF you don't have a KJV BIBLE sent me your mailing address i will send you one.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 23, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> When you take the entire Bible story and put it together……….ever thunk how much effort and thought between different writers to create such a book where it all ties together and makes perfect sense to some and has some completely baffled? And they didn’t have near the resources that we do today. Just sayin…………pretty good narrative …
> 
> They should go down in history as the worlds greatest writers.


The bible was not "in order" in its form as it is today. Until the councils chose what to include and what order they were to be in, the "bible" was a collection of stories in no particular order and it was not in a book.
There were many authors writing many stories but only 66 (or more depending upon denomination) made the final cut and order.
There were not 4 Gospels together during or shortly after Jesus's life which the Christians would read to each other after Jesus's death. They were written decades later and decades apart. The early Christians didn't know of Jesus's background/virgin birth etc. That was all written a lifetime (in those days) later. And then chosen by councils as to which stories they felt followed the stories they wanted told. There were many that were written that did not follow the "flow" and those were not included and destroyed.

This is a pro biblical site and itgives some accurate insight. 
https://instituteforbiblereading.org/bible-book-order/


----------



## bullethead (Mar 23, 2022)

https://people.howstuffworks.com/books-of-bible.htm


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 23, 2022)

bullethead said:


> The bible was not "in order" in its form as it is today. Until the councils chose what to include and what order they were to be in, the "bible" was a collection of stories in no particular order and it was not in a book.
> There were many authors writing many stories but only 66 (or more depending upon denomination) made the final cut and order.
> There were not 4 Gospels together during or shortly after Jesus's life which the Christians would read to each other after Jesus's death. They were written decades later and decades apart. The early Christians didn't know of Jesus's background/virgin birth etc. That was all written a lifetime (in those days) later. And then chosen by councils as to which stories they felt followed the stories they wanted told. There were many that were written that did not follow the "flow" and those were not included and destroyed.
> 
> ...



https://www.ministrymagazine.org/ar...d-which-books-should-be-included-in-the-bible

"The Old Testament canon was, for the most part, settled within Judaism by the second century B.C., though discussions concerning it continued for several centuries. From history we know that the final shape of the New Testament canon existed by the fourth century A.D. Although heretical movements and church councils played a role in the actual formation of the New Testament canon, *the church did not decide *which books should be included in the canon. *The church recognized and acknowledged the inspiration and self-authenticating authority of the 27 New Testament books and limited the canon to these books*"


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 23, 2022)

Links both pros and cons can be found all over the WWW. I am very familiar with the big C and it`s pull away from the original church as mentioned "added to the church daily" that was born in the Book of Acts. They don`t do things and operate like that church did.


----------



## RegularJoe (Mar 23, 2022)

The 1st time I read the Bible cover to cover (i.e., before I became Christian)
one of its characteristics that occurred _to me_ that
(i.e., Original Post: Stuff that one likes)
is probably (?) unique
is that it is sort of self-validating in the following sense:

1. The Old Testament authors offer numerous predictions that are eventually fulfilled / validated. Related to this ...  it is of value,_ to me_, to keep in mind that
many of _the same_ predictions were offered by different men,
few of whom knew one another or of the others men's writings / predictions,
few who were alive at the same time,
not all spoke the same language / dialect, &
were in different locations and frequently in different 'professions.'

2.  The New Testament references / quotes the Old Testament (retrospectively, of course) hundreds of time, hence validating by the New Testament authors as for real the writings of the Old Testament authors.

As general observation, I will also offer this
that I like (< Original Post) as well, and don't:

A.  What I liked:  It provided me with answers to _every_ question then, & still now, of what is, _to me,_ of eternal importance.

B.  What I found frustrating, & still do:  By the time I had read the Book the first time, and, now, more than once ... it raised more questions of non-eternal importance than I ever had in the first place.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 23, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> https://www.ministrymagazine.org/ar...d-which-books-should-be-included-in-the-bible
> 
> "The Old Testament canon was, for the most part, settled within Judaism by the second century B.C., though discussions concerning it continued for several centuries. From history we know that the final shape of the New Testament canon existed by the fourth century A.D. Although heretical movements and church councils played a role in the actual formation of the New Testament canon, *the church did not decide *which books should be included in the canon. *The church recognized and acknowledged the inspiration and self-authenticating authority of the 27 New Testament books and limited the canon to these books*"


With information being all over the place I tend to agree that in the 4th century the Councils basically finalized or made official what the followers were already using. 2 things stand out. The Church did organize them into an order. And 2, an example would be found in religious forums/here, the people used what they believed and disregarded the others.

I think the inspired by God is accurate but not that God talked to and told these writers what to say.
I believe that people are inspired by many things and religion is certainly one of them. It stands to reason that these OT and NT stories were written over 1500 years which means whoever wrote something was already inspired by what they had heard  previously(as in oral tradition) or read before they picked up the Quill and expounded upon it. There were things said in the Torah that obviously inspired someone to continue on with more stories. After that, more stories were wtitten that went along with what was previously said and some stories did not. The religious leaders chose, even if unofficial,  what they liked and wanted to include and didn't use others. This went on into the end of BC time with periods of deadness where no writing took place or wasn't accepted if it did. Surely the authors did not all sit down together and write it all at once. But the authors new of what was written before, they heard it and learned it. Then they added onto it and some of it was accepted and worked into services until word spread where it used in many services. It took decades and centuries for the writings to be done, make their rounds and be/not be accepted and used.
Then after Jesus, his followers decided to write. Some stories are almost word for word copies of an earlier writing which another author was familiar with and added something else. They were inspired by what they read previously.  Some authors were one hit wonders like the anonymous Gospels and some wrote many stories which became books or chapters like Paul.
Much of what Paul wrote was before the Gospels were written. Someone decided their order in the 4th century when the bible was assembled because you cannot read first what had not been written yet. The Gospels are the first 4 books in the NT but were written after a lot of what is also in the NT. So someone had to decide their place later on.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 23, 2022)

To answer the OP, I like much of what is written. I find it as a cultural timeline. I like the facts and embellishments equally as well. I enjoy the warriors but appreciate the peace.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Mar 23, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> The curse of Jeconiah in the male lineage before you get to Joseph.
> 
> “Thus saith the Lord, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.”



Jeconiah? Interesting name, but to be honest it sounds "made up" but obviously it isn't. Anyway I have no idea what that quote is saying. Is it anybody who descended from Jeconiah derails their chances of ruling in Judah?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Mar 23, 2022)

DOUG 281 said:


> I read and study the KJV BIBLE. If you don't believe one thing in the BIBLE from the front to the back you don't believe any of it .



Are you saying that if one part of the bible is wrong that the whole bible is wrong? I think (I could be wrong) that mindset is changing over time as christianity and society in general changes. In other words instead of just not believing something is wrong, many Christians alter their view from something being "wrong" or "false" to something being misinterpreted or not to be taken literally. 

This makes sense! Nobody wants to just throw out their whole belief system (throw the baby out with the bathwater). They likely have their whole lives invested in their beliefs, and that of their parents/family. So they rationalize rather than admit that the bible (or some small part of the bible) isn't accurate. It's basic psychology no matter what your religious beliefs.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 23, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Jeconiah? Interesting name, but to be honest it sounds "made up" but obviously it isn't. Anyway I have no idea what that quote is saying. Is it anybody who descended from Jeconiah derails their chances of ruling in Judah?


The quote is answering your question about Joseph. This is the David lineage, Jeconiah is a descendant. And yes, the quote says “Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah” the quote was about Jeconiah. From Jeconiah on in the male lineage shell not prosper sitting on the throne. So Jesus would have had to come prior to Jeconiah or either through a daughter with no brothers from the seed of David.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 23, 2022)

Regarding lineage in the bible isn't EVERYONE related to EVERYONE?
Start with A&E. 1 man, 1 woman begat, begosh, begolly, and then eventually David, 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon more and then everybody else. Who couldn't trace back?
Unless A&E were figurative but that is another wrench nobody wants to throw.
Add in the Jews who say the Messiah must be 100% human and Oy Vey vat a mess.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 23, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Regarding lineage in the bible isn't EVERYONE related to EVERYONE?
> Start with A&E. 1 man, 1 woman begat, begosh, begolly, and then eventually David, 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon more and then everybody else. Who couldn't trace back?
> Unless A&E were figurative but that is another wrench nobody wants to throw.
> Add in the Jews who say the Messiah must be 100% human and Oy Vey vat a mess.


True, we all should be able to trace back but we are limited to our own technology. But the more breeding going on the more lines there are. Out of the house of David was the line chosen.

Jesus was born of flesh by a woman. The Jews just can’t accept that He didn’t show up according to their plans / understanding.

The fallacy of their argument that He didn’t fulfill every prophecy is they’re still naming “Messiah’s” that they claim will bring peace and build a Temple. They pray to a God that they believe works miraculous unexplainable wonders and can’t comprehend that same God raising Jesus from the tomb to fulfill remaining prophecy that these new cats promise to fulfill in the future:


----------



## bullethead (Mar 23, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> True, we all should be able to trace back but we are limited to our own technology. But the more breeding going on the more lines there are. Out of the house of David was the line chosen.
> 
> Jesus was born of flesh by a woman. The Jews just can’t accept that He didn’t show up according to their plans / understanding.


"We are limited to our own technology "? Huh? 
Trace back Technology was better 2000 years ago?


Didn't god give the Jews understanding? The Messiah isnt a god. Christians believe God sent himself to be Messiah to deliver the Jews to himself but through another religion and other people. They use OT prophesy meant only for the Jews to confirm NT writings meant for others.

Sure it makes sense if one suspends the facts within scripture. It looks great as a whole until one realizes that the OT and NT were meant for two totally different audiences,  people and belivers of two different religions.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 23, 2022)

bullethead said:


> "We are limited to our own technology "? Huh?
> Trace back Technology was better 2000 years ago?
> 
> 
> ...


He gave us all understanding. Some are still are non believers.

Our technology begins at “must be a million years old”

My point is we are limited to our technology - meaning “if” this miracle working deity is out there, can we reasonably think we can trace and answer it’s work?


----------



## bullethead (Mar 23, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> He gave us all understanding. Some are still are non believers.
> 
> Our technology begins at “must be a million years old”
> 
> My point is we are limited to our technology - meaning “if” this miracle working deity is out there, can we reasonably think we can trace and answer it’s work?


I would say many people think the work of a miracle working deity can be traced. At least when convenient. Otherwise nobody would cite the bible as evidence.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Mar 23, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> The quote is answering your question about Joseph. This is the David lineage, Jeconiah is a descendant. And yes, the quote says “Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah” the quote was about Jeconiah. From Jeconiah on in the male lineage shell not prosper sitting on the throne. So Jesus would have had to come prior to Jeconiah or either through a daughter with no brothers from the seed of David.



So bottom line: did Jesus come prior to Jeconiah? I assume not. 
Was his flesh & blood mother (Mary) a daughter with no brothers from the seed of David? Does the bible say anything about Mary's brothers? 

In summary - according to the established rules, is Jesus eligible to be the Messiah?
I'm asking because I might be interpreting everything wrong.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 23, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> He gave us all understanding. Some are still are non believers.


That right there is the crux of the matter. Everyone with an "understanding" thinks everyone else isn't as capable or is capable but refuse to believe.
Lots of finger pointing and as far as miracles go, it would be easy to solve compared to some other miracles.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Mar 23, 2022)

bullethead said:


> "We are limited to our own technology "? Huh?
> Trace back Technology was better 2000 years ago?
> 
> 
> ...



And what really confuses things (to me anyway) is that until a hundred years or so (or maybe a few decades) Christianity and the NT - or the doctrine that would become the NT - the OT and Judaism were the only game in town. So to me it seems there is a mish-mash of Jesus being very much part of the Jewish world - which Jesus never denies nor disputes - yet the Jewish world (to this very day) sees Jesus in a different light. I don't know if such a thing is unique to major religions, but it is fascinating!


----------



## bullethead (Mar 23, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> And what really confuses things (to me anyway) is that until a hundred years or so (or maybe a few decades) Christianity and the NT - or the doctrine that would become the NT - the OT and Judaism were the only game in town. So to me it seems there is a mish-mash of Jesus being very much part of the Jewish world - which Jesus never denies nor disputes - yet the Jewish world (to this very day) sees Jesus in a different light. I don't know if such a thing is unique to major religions, but it is fascinating!


Throughout the Jewish culture they had many Jesus type figures. Some fulfilled many more prophesies than Jesus. But none filled them all and so they continue to watch and wait. But these various figures always had their own following of disciples and well followers.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 23, 2022)

bullethead said:


> I would say many people think the work of a miracle working deity can be traced. At least when convenient. Otherwise nobody would cite the bible as evidence.


I’m speaking more to explaining the unexplainable with our technology such as origin of life, things where science is still exploring. 

I’m not one that believes a person can trace everything biblically since the vast majority deals with faith. I can believe we are traced back to Adam and Eve and can argue using scripture but I can’t prove it.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 23, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> So bottom line: did Jesus come prior to Jeconiah? I assume not.
> Was his flesh & blood mother (Mary) a daughter with no brothers from the seed of David? Does the bible say anything about Mary's brothers?
> 
> In summary - according to the established rules, is Jesus eligible to be the Messiah?
> I'm asking because I might be interpreting everything wrong.


Jesus came after from the mothers side, a woman with no brothers. 

Who’s estimated rules? Remember it’s Gods throne.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Mar 23, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Throughout the Jewish culture they had many Jesus type figures. Some fulfilled many more prophesies than Jesus. But none filled them all and so they continue to watch and wait. But these various figures always had their own following of disciples and well followers.



Oh I see! I always wondered why the Jews didn't adjust course when Jesus came along. They just kept on going with the Judaism that was well established when Jesus came along.

So if I hear you right: Jesus type figures came and went throughout the Jewish world, but the Jesus movement happened to gain traction and eventually a new religion that uses & references The Torah which became (with some tweaking) the Old Testament and has it's own New Testament which of course means little to the Jewish world.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 23, 2022)

To me, I just dont see how being able to understand every twist and turn of a ~3400 year old group of writings assembled in a to a book proves "God" anyway.
Every religion has their stories whether written down or in oral form and it all proves nada other than thats what they believe about their god.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 23, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> And what really confuses things (to me anyway) is that until a hundred years or so (or maybe a few decades) Christianity and the NT - or the doctrine that would become the NT - the OT and Judaism were the only game in town. So to me it seems there is a mish-mash of Jesus being very much part of the Jewish world - which Jesus never denies nor disputes - yet the Jewish world (to this very day) sees Jesus in a different light. I don't know if such a thing is unique to major religions, but it is fascinating!


I personally think most of the rejection is due to it completely changing how they worship, sacrifice, etc. I’d be the same way if I was in the same position.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 23, 2022)

bullethead said:


> That right there is the crux of the matter. Everyone with an "understanding" thinks everyone else isn't as capable or is capable but refuse to believe.
> Lots of finger pointing and as far as miracles go, it would be easy to solve compared to some other miracles.


Very true, unfortunately. That’s how we roll.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 23, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I’m speaking more to explaining the unexplainable with our technology such as origin of life, things where science is still exploring.
> 
> I’m not one that believes a person can trace everything biblically since the vast majority deals with faith. I can believe we are traced back to Adam and Eve and can argue using scripture but I can’t prove it.


Scripture was meant to tell that story. It is the religious and spiritual history of how a god decided to make a race of people His people. Scripture backs up Scripture. It doesn't have to be true in order to work within its own pages.


----------



## Danuwoa (Mar 23, 2022)

WaltL1 said:


> To me, I just dont see how being able to understand every twist and turn of a ~3400 year old group of writings assembled in a to a book proves "God" anyway.
> Every religion has their stories whether written down or in oral form and it all proves nada other than thats what they believe about their god.


You boys and your proof are hilarious.  Has anybody here ever said they could prove any of it?  If they have Ive never seen it yet over and over it’s “WE DEMAND PROOF!”?


----------



## bullethead (Mar 23, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Oh I see! I always wondered why the Jews didn't adjust course when Jesus came along. They just kept on going with the Judaism that was well established when Jesus came along.
> 
> So if I hear you right: Jesus type figures came and went throughout the Jewish world, but the Jesus movement happened to gain traction and eventually a new religion that uses & references The Torah which became (with some tweaking) the Old Testament and has it's own New Testament which of course means little to the Jewish world.


Rome happened with Christianity.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Mar 24, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Rome happened with Christianity.



I find it interesting that Jesus never really disparages the Romans too much. But when I think about it, Christianity (and the stories that would become the New Testament) didn't get rolling until about a hundred years after Jesus' death. The Pax Romana and the extensive travel infrastructure (all roads lead to Rome, right?) would be a huge help to spreading & establishing Christianity. So would "biting the hand that feeds you" be a smart idea when you are developing your religion? In other words it would make sense if you are telling & writing stories about what Jesus did, would you write stories in which Jesus is busting on the Romans? I would think not.

Granted a few centuries later the Romans fed Christians to the lions and whatnot, but by then Christianity had achieved and the Romans were in a downward spiral, so it all worked out I guess.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 24, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> https://www.ministrymagazine.org/ar...d-which-books-should-be-included-in-the-bible
> 
> "The Old Testament canon was, for the most part, settled within Judaism by the second century B.C., though discussions concerning it continued for several centuries. From history we know that the final shape of the New Testament canon existed by the fourth century A.D. Although heretical movements and church councils played a role in the actual formation of the New Testament canon, *the church did not decide *which books should be included in the canon. *The church recognized and acknowledged the inspiration and self-authenticating authority of the 27 New Testament books and limited the canon to these books*"


So who authorized the 27 New Testament books as being THE 27 acceptable books?
I'm reading it was still MEN who decided.
Also found it interesting that Christian communities didnt all use the same texts prior.


> As Christian communities encountered and came into contact with each other, they evaluated each other as to whether they recognized this other community as a Christian community like their own, or whether this community was, in fact, something ‘other’.  One factor in this encounter was which texts that other community used as authoritative.


Regardless of who/what/where it sure seems the history of the NT is covered up in men making decisions


----------



## bullethead (Mar 24, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> I find it interesting that Jesus never really disparages the Romans too much. But when I think about it, Christianity (and the stories that would become the New Testament) didn't get rolling until about a hundred years after Jesus' death. The Pax Romana and the extensive travel infrastructure (all roads lead to Rome, right?) would be a huge help to spreading & establishing Christianity. So would "biting the hand that feeds you" be a smart idea when you are developing your religion? In other words it would make sense if you are telling & writing stories about what Jesus did, would you write stories in which Jesus is busting on the Romans? I would think not.
> 
> Granted a few centuries later the Romans fed Christians to the lions and whatnot, but by then Christianity had achieved and the Romans were in a downward spiral, so it all worked out I guess.


Christianity wasn't as outlawed as it is made to seem. And the Romans weren't too picky about who they fed to the lions and neither were the lions.
The early 4th Century is where Christianity really gained traction due to Constantine but it wasn't until the end of the 4th century until it became officially official due to a successor of Constantine along the line who was a Pagan.
Bart Ehrman is a good source to learn some history about it. There is a lot of information about it out there to click on but Bart gets deep into the history with in depth explanations and examples compared to most other sites.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Mar 24, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Christianity wasn't as outlawed as it is made to seem. And the Romans weren't too picky about who they fed to the lions and neither were the lions.
> The early 4th Century is where Christianity really gained traction due to Constantine but it wasn't until the end of the 4th century until it became officially official due to a successor of Constantine along the line who was a Pagan.
> Bart Ehrman is a good source to learn some history about it. There is a lot of information about it out there to click on but Bart gets deep into the history with in depth explanations and examples compared to most other sites.



Thanks! I'm going to check him out.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 24, 2022)

WaltL1 said:


> So who authorized the 27 New Testament books as being THE 27 acceptable books?
> I'm reading it was still MEN who decided.
> Also found it interesting that Christian communities didnt all use the same texts prior.
> 
> Regardless of who/what/where it sure seems the history of the NT is covered up in men making decisions


You can view it two ways:
1 - someone decided “what made the cut” most likely on biased opinion
2 - recognition of the inspired Word of God regardless of the content.

Since a lot of those 27 books contains things that Catholics do that differ from the church burn in Acts, I tend to believe they recognized the inspired Word of God.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 24, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> You can view it two ways:
> 1 - someone decided “what made the cut” mist likely on bussed opinion
> 2 - recognition of the inspired Word of God regardless of the content.
> 
> Since a lot of those 27 books contains things that Catholics do that differ from the church burn in Acts, I tend to believe they recognized the inspired Word of God.


Actually Im not going to choose either way to look at it because the more I read the more opinions there seems to be 
But I do question why it all seems to be so complicated, with differing Christian opinions (Im only reading Christian websites) etc.
It just seems TO ME with an omni - everything God involved it should be as simple as 1+1. And maybe it is that simple but when you get man involved nothing stays simple.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 24, 2022)

I trust my instincts. I am ok with following my version of a god as I understand it more than I trust an ancient culture's understanding of a god. I can skew whatever semblance of what may be the truth with my own understanding just as well as they or anyone else could.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 25, 2022)

bullethead said:


> I trust my instincts. I am ok with following my version of a god as I understand it more than I trust an ancient culture's understanding of a god. I can skew whatever semblance of what may be the truth with my own understanding just as well as they or anyone else could.


Every man has to have his proving ground and make it their personal experience.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 25, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Every man has to have his proving ground and make it their personal experience.


Have you known anyone to credit god for the bad in their life?


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 25, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Have you known anyone to credit god for the bad in their life?


Yup. Hear it all the time. Even on this forum God gets credited for the bad.

The believer will be thankful and give God credit that their tire was flat and possibly kept them from a bad wreck, or allowing something to happen that forced them to the doctor to find ……….just in time, and that it’s only one finger slammed in the door and not the whole hand.

It can leave a person being very positive in life about life and everything that’s thrown at them. And I realize you don’t have to be Christian to be that way, but it takes God (regardless if He’s there or not) for some to be that way.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Mar 25, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Have you known anyone to credit god for the bad in their life?



That may be true - let's take football for example:

"I want to first thank god for our victory today. All thanks to him!" 
Now contrast that with
"Oh yeah, we were on track to win this....and then GOD MADE ME FUMBLE!"


----------



## Madman (Mar 25, 2022)

Yes.  It it helps with my perspective.  Been going through a rough patch since the first of the year.

“
Thank you for the sunshine
Thank you for the light
Thank you for the moonshine
Thank you for the night
Thank you for the big climb
Thank you for the fall
Thank you for my life
Thank you for it all”
Beth Hart


----------



## OwlRNothing (Mar 26, 2022)

I best like the parts that are between the first page and the last.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 26, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Yup. Hear it all the time. Even on this forum God gets credited for the bad.
> 
> The believer will be thankful and give God credit that their tire was flat and possibly kept them from a bad wreck, or allowing something to happen that forced them to the doctor to find ……….just in time, and that it’s only one finger slammed in the door and not the whole hand.
> 
> It can leave a person being very positive in life about life and everything that’s thrown at them. And I realize you don’t have to be Christian to be that way, but it takes God (regardless if He’s there or not) for some to be that way.





> Hear it all the time. Even on this forum God gets credited for the bad.


Thats one of the inconvenient things about non-belief.
Can only blame yourself


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 26, 2022)

OwlRNothing said:


> I best like the parts that are between the first page and the last.


Gotta admit that was a pretty clever response.


----------



## 1gr8buildit (Mar 26, 2022)

For everything that might be pointed out, in a positive light, that one might like about a story, character, etc, there will be another to dislike. Like Lot ready to throw out his daughters to the mob, and many, many, more that I will not point out because I don't want to sound like I am against the bible, however, there are many terrible things within. But within this collection of books, old and new, is a profound simple story that has been effected by man's influence.


----------



## atlashunter (Mar 29, 2022)

Lot of wisdom to be found in Proverbs.


----------



## RegularJoe (Mar 31, 2022)

WaltL1 said:


> Regardless of who/what/where it sure seems the history of the NT is covered up in men making decisions


Walt - 100% shared in your healthy / logical skepticism till one day I said to God,
"_Okay, God, if you are allegedly for real, I am going to just give you a 3 day try ... and if it seems to me that you just might really be there, well, then, I_ 
(back to the Original Post) 
_will read the Bible cover to cover just to make more sense of what all this is, I guess, about._"
Fw/eiiw - Joe.


----------



## atlashunter (Mar 31, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> I find it interesting that Jesus never really disparages the Romans too much. But when I think about it, Christianity (and the stories that would become the New Testament) didn't get rolling until about a hundred years after Jesus' death. The Pax Romana and the extensive travel infrastructure (all roads lead to Rome, right?) would be a huge help to spreading & establishing Christianity. So would "biting the hand that feeds you" be a smart idea when you are developing your religion? In other words it would make sense if you are telling & writing stories about what Jesus did, would you write stories in which Jesus is busting on the Romans? I would think not.
> 
> Granted a few centuries later the Romans fed Christians to the lions and whatnot, but by then Christianity had achieved and the Romans were in a downward spiral, so it all worked out I guess.



It is interesting isn’t it? His actions and words read like a man who expected the world to soon come to an end and a new one to take its place.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 31, 2022)

RegularJoe said:


> Walt - 100% shared in your healthy / logical skepticism till one day I said to God,
> "_Okay, God, if you are allegedly for real, I am going to just give you a 3 day try ... and if it seems to me that you just might really be there, well, then, I_
> (back to the Original Post)
> _will read the Bible cover to cover just to make more sense of what all this is, I guess, about._"
> Fw/eiiw - Joe.


For ME - I break that down into 2 different subjects -
1. 





> "_Okay, God, if you are allegedly for real_


_
2. 



			will read the Bible cover to cover
		
Click to expand...

_#1 I can accept a God or god could actually exist.
#2 I am pretty much convinced is just one group of men's idea of what that God or god "is".


----------



## RegularJoe (Mar 31, 2022)

WaltL1 said:


> For ME - I break that down into 2 different subjects -
> 1.
> _2. _
> #1 I can accept a God or god could actually exist.
> #2 I am pretty much convinced is just one group of men's idea of what that God or god "is".


Roger / heard.


----------



## 1gr8buildit (Mar 31, 2022)

atlashunter said:


> It is interesting isn’t it? His actions and words read like a man who expected the world to soon come to an end and a new one to take its place.


A line of reasoning you may or may not find as interesting.... World and ages are most often translated the same in the new testament. Remove world from every use and something else begins to emerge. Our translations were written by Trinitarians. They have interjected their beliefs into the text. I would not say it was done with malice. It's just human nature when you have prior assumptions


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 29, 2022)

I think I may have a new favorite Bible story! Joshua was fighting/killing another tribe (Cannanites maybe?) and God stopped the sun from setting to give Joshua'a army more daylight to continue the successful battle. 

Think about this: the only way to make the sun not set is to STOP THE EARTH FROM SPINNING!    The centrifugal force from the Earth spinning at about 1,000 miles per hour then suddenly stopping would DESTROY MOST CIVILIZATION AS WE KNOW IT and cause catastrophic devastation across the planet. 

IMHO "miracles" are awesome. Turning water into wine (for example) would only affect the people at the party, so no harm done. But stopping the Earth from spinning might be problematic to say the least.

So I'll ask this question: does anybody really believe that the Bible wasn't written by bronze/iron age humans with almost zero knowledge of the solar system or science in general?


----------



## brutally honest (May 29, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> So I'll ask this question: does anybody really believe that the Bible wasn't written by bronze/iron age humans with almost zero knowledge of the solar system or science in general?



And how much knowledge do we have now?  In my lifetime, Pluto’s status has changed.  It was a planet.  Then, it wasn’t a planet.  I think the consensus now is “not a planet”, but I don’t believe that is universally accepted.

My doctor once told me that medicine is a very humbling field.  What they “know” today can be thrown into doubt tomorrow.  Other sciences are similar.


----------



## Spotlite (May 29, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> I think I may have a new favorite Bible story! Joshua was fighting/killing another tribe (Cannanites maybe?) and God stopped the sun from setting to give Joshua'a army more daylight to continue the successful battle.
> 
> Think about this: the only way to make the sun not set is to STOP THE EARTH FROM SPINNING!    The centrifugal force from the Earth spinning at about 1,000 miles per hour then suddenly stopping would DESTROY MOST CIVILIZATION AS WE KNOW IT and cause catastrophic devastation across the planet.
> 
> ...


When do you believe the Bible was written?


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 29, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> And how much knowledge do we have now?  In my lifetime, Pluto’s status has changed.  It was a planet.  Then, it wasn’t a planet.  I think the consensus now is “not a planet”, but I don’t believe that is universally accepted.
> 
> My doctor once told me that medicine is a very humbling field.  What they “know” today can be thrown into doubt tomorrow.  Other sciences are similar.



I agree, what we "know" should change as science advances. But once we know something, and that idea can be proven as a fact, we rarely return to how we used to think about it. For example: we now know that the earth rotates on an axis, and that we perceive "night" and "day" by where we are located relative to our line of sight to the sun. Agree? And of course you understand how centrifugal force works. People understood centrifugal force in Bible days because they used slings (like David & Goliath for example) to harness leverage & centrifugal force to throw stones with greater force & range than you can just throw a stone. 

Thus, to believe that God "made the sun stay in the sky longer" we would have to forget (or ignore) the facts that we as humans have learned over thousands of years. Granted you could believe that the solar system operated under different laws of physics when the Bible was written, or when the story was originally told verbally.


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 29, 2022)

"When do you believe the Bible was written?" - spot light

Old Testament or New Testament? Writings that eventually became the Old Testament/Torah or the New Testament? About 3,500 years for the Old Testament, Second or Third Century A.D. for the New Testament. People didn't have a great grasp on science, but God did, right? And you would think God wouldn't inspire nor allow any story that would easily be proven false by modern science, yet the Bible is full of them.


----------



## Spotlite (May 29, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> "When do you believe the Bible was written?" - spot light
> 
> Old Testament or New Testament? Writings that eventually became the Old Testament/Torah or the New Testament? About 3,500 years for the Old Testament, Second or Third Century A.D. for the New Testament. People didn't have a great grasp on science, but God did, right? And you would think God wouldn't inspire nor allow any story that would easily be proven false by modern science, yet the Bible is full of them.


Ok So let’s just go with the old. Genesis  / Torah ? King version version written / translated / published in 1611.

1580 Palissy - credited as the discoverer of the modern theory of the water cycle.

Palissy's theories were not tested scientifically until 1674 and were not accepted in mainstream science until the early nineteenth century.

But the description is in the Bible in the Book of Genesis, and of course a few other Old Testament Books…….ahead of science.

Genesis - And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

It’s true that there are BC  theories but remember - your beloved science didn’t even test a theory until 1674 ?

So just for kicks and grins - if the God of the Bible exist (I believe He does) and He is the creator of all; including science and knowledge, then He isn’t subject to the limitations that He’s allowed science
And it’s impossible for science to prove its’ limiter false.

If He created the earth, the centrifugal force, and life He can certainly stop it from spinning and control everything He created.

So it’s not a matter of what He can do based on any man-known limitations as the creator of everything, it’s just a matter of if you believe it or not.

If you don’t believe it, it doesn’t take science too verify that. The question is how confident are you that the Bible God is fake? How close to 100% false would you say?

I read a fiction book about Superman, I don’t believe he can fly. It didn’t take a scientific study to prove that false for me.

Keep in mind, He said that he’d send a strong delusion and cause them to believe a lie. I know that is New Testament, but in the Old it speaks about the spiritually blinded / dead.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Ok So let’s just go with the old. Genesis  / Torah ? King version version written / translated / published in 1611.
> 
> 1580 Palissy - credited as the discoverer of the modern theory of the water cycle.
> 
> ...


But, like when you change unknowns to "ifs"....
IF planet Krypton existed (belief has nothing to do with it) and IF it's atmosphere was different than Earths, and IF Superman came here from Krypton = Superman can fly.

There is a lot of non fiction in fiction books. That blend allows the authors to make the unbelievable and impossible sound believable. Superheroes and Gods not only rely on it but have benefited from it......well at least their Agents have.


----------



## Spotlite (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> But, like when you change unknowns to "ifs"....
> IF planet Krypton existed (belief has nothing to do with it) and IF it's atmosphere was different than Earths, and IF Superman came here from Krypton = Superman can fly.
> 
> There is a lot of non fiction in fiction books. That blend allows the authors to make the unbelievable and impossible sound believable. Superheroes and Gods not only rely on it but have benefited from it......well at least their Agents have.


True. My point to old fella is if you’re going to connect science and God as science being the proving factor when you're not 100% sure that God isn’t real - then there’s a chance that science hasn’t discovered Him, yet. If He is real and creator of all, then certainly science can’t disprove that which created it.

Until then - it can’t be said that science has proven His miracles false, especially since some things that people of old wrote about long before science “proved it” and accepted it. 

As far as the miraculous - I’d go with hard to believe, don’t see the possibility, etc outside of a miracle working Deity.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> True. My point to old fella is if you’re going to connect science and God as science being the proving factor when you're not 100% sure that God isn’t real - then there’s a chance that science hasn’t discovered Him, yet. If He is real and creator of all, then certainly science can’t disprove that which created it.
> 
> Until then - it can’t be said that science has proven His miracles false, especially since some things that people of old wrote about long before science “proved it”.
> 
> As far as the miraculous - I’d go with hard to believe, don’t see the possibility, etc outside of a miracle working Deity.


That excuse literally works for everything. If/then/So.

I understand your point but I also think that a God should act like a God consistently. Instead of being praised for some things and a bind eye turned to others believers need to recognize the inconsistency. In Old Fellas example, IfGod clearly chooses to help one of his children to massacre others. A thousand + years later IfGod loves eeerrrrybody the same.
Apply IfMan wrote these stories and you may see them differently.


----------



## Spotlite (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> That excuse literally works for everything. If/then/So.
> 
> I understand your point but I also think that a God should act like a God consistently. Instead of being praised for some things and a bind eye turned to others believers need to recognize the inconsistency. In Old Fellas example, IfGod clearly chooses to help one of his children to massacre others. A thousand + years later IfGod loves eeerrrrybody the same.
> Apply IfMan wrote these stories and you may see them differently.


We do give Him praise / thanks for everything. We don’t turn a blind eye. We both (believer / non believer) see the death / destruction.

Loving everyone the same doesn’t equate to acceptance and condoning sin. If He’s real, He isn’t bound to our compassion, emotions and how we see things should be.


----------



## RegularJoe (May 30, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> ..... Another age old argument is that lineage can’t be traced through the mother. That’s false, it can be.


As is evidenced/documented by Luke ... he traced the lineage via the mothers, 'the blood line,'
while Matthew traced the lineage via the fathers, said to be the 'Jewish legal line.'


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> "We are limited to our own technology "? Huh?
> Trace back Technology was better 2000 years ago?
> 
> 
> ...


Incorrect. The New Testament wasn’t meant to exclude anyone.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> We do give Him praise / thanks for everything. We don’t turn a blind eye. We both (believer / non believer) see the death / destruction.
> 
> Loving everyone the same doesn’t equate to acceptance and condoning sin. If He’s real, He isn’t bound to our compassion, emotions and how we see things should be.


I am bothered anytime something that is supposed to be as real as a god has to be referred to as IF in order for the absurdities to work.

It isn't about just seeing the death/distruction. The work of God in the bible and supposed words coming directly from God as the Bible is flawed. Inserting IF in order to make it work doesn't help.

In the Bible God loves and hates the same people the OT Hebrew authors did. Again the inconsistency of killing some sinners to allow other sinners to thrive doesn't need an IF to make sense.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Incorrect. The New Testament wasn’t meant to exclude anyone.


In the OT did God give his people understanding so that they knew what he wanted?


----------



## Spotlite (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> I am bothered anytime something that is supposed to be as real as a god has to be referred to as IF in order for the absurdities to work.
> 
> It isn't about just seeing the death/distruction. The work of God in the bible and supposed words coming directly from God as the Bible is flawed. Inserting IF in order to make it work doesn't help.
> 
> In the Bible God loves and hates the same people the OT Hebrew authors did. Again the inconsistency of killing some sinners to allow other sinners to thrive doesn't need an IF to make sense.


I only used IF for mutual conversations with non believers here rather than be persuasive that He is real since we all know where we all stand. It only means IF He is real He isn’t subject to what either of us think and to argue our emotions on what is / isn’t fair is useless. 

God sees the heart of man. If there are those that will not turn to Him they can certainly be used in judgment to warn those that will eventually turn to Him what can happen if you go down certain paths.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I only used IF for mutual conversations with non believers here rather than be persuasive that He is real since we all know where we all stand. It only means IF He is real He isn’t subject to what either of us think and to argue our emotions on what is / isn’t fair is useless.
> 
> God sees the heart of man. If there are those that will not turn to Him they can certainly be used in judgment to warn those that will eventually turn to Him what can happen if you go down certain paths.


It isn't a strong argument to say, pretend it is real in order for it to work.

So, it is a warning to show non believers that they should believe in him out of fear rather than be compelled to believe out of truth, fairness and compassion?


----------



## Spotlite (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> It isn't a strong argument to say, pretend it is real in order for it to work.
> 
> So, it is a warning to show non believers that they should believe in him out of fear rather than be compelled to believe out of truth, fairness and compassion?



Saying IF doesn’t pretend in order to make it work. It only means we can’t possibly pretend to comprehend every aspect of everything God does or doesn’t do. Saying He can’t do something when you don’t know for sure He’s not real doesn’t work, either.


Using it as a warning can certainly be the case. But scripture is clear - there’ll be those that will not be compelled, they’ve been blinded by the god of this earth through their unbelief.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Saying IF doesn’t pretend in order to make it work. It only means we can’t possibly pretend to comprehend every aspect of everything God does or doesn’t do. Saying He can’t do something when you don’t know for sure He’s not real doesn’t work, either.


Until a guy from Krypton crash lands on our Earth what Superman can or cannot do is in our Imagination. You are in the same boat asserting a God's or any God's capabilities. 




Spotlite said:


> Using it as a warning can certainly be the case. But scripture is clear - there’ll be those that will not be compelled, they’ve been blinded by the god of this earth through their unbelief.


So in other words your God chooses who he wants to believe and punishes the ones who do not believe due to them being blinded by your God.
At what point does Scripture overrule itself? NT vs OT?


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 30, 2022)

Basically to me it seems like "faith" is the wildcard here when it comes to believing in miracles. Faith is a bulletproof excuse for overcoming any cognitive dissonance a believer may have. A believer's intelligence and knowledge allows his brain to accept that the earth's rotation suddenly stopping would end civilization as we know it. Faith that "God can do anything" circumvents what his brain tells him is impossible. 

Of course a person needs enough faith in the first place to believe the book (the Bible in this case) that describes the miracles. 

The Bible got a big "running start" over science of course. When the stories that would become the Bible were told, even the smartest minds of the time were ignorant to the deep well of knowledge needed to inspire any critical thinking about whether they were true or accurate or even close to reality. 

By the time science got established (geology, biology, geography, astronomy, etc) it was too late to turn the ship around. Judaism/Christianity was a huge, powerful, popular, profitable, and socially accepted religion. It was sewn into the fabric of society. 

But the concept of "faith" trumps ever being able to disprove the Bible or any religious book accepted as "fact" by it's members. Faith itself cannot be proven or disproven because it's an abstract concept that by it's very definition (belief in the unseen) cannot be scientifically tested. Well played, abstract reasoning by the highly evolved 
human brain!


----------



## brutally honest (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> In the OT did God give his people understanding so that they knew what he wanted?



Yes — again and again and again.


----------



## brutally honest (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Until a guy from Krypton crash lands on our Earth what Superman can or cannot do is in our Imagination.




I was actually reading this yesterday:

https://www.cbr.com/dc-comics-supervillains-darkseid-vs-antimonitor/amp/

My life is very sad.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> Yes — again and again and again.


So then why the makeover in both God and his word in the NT compared to the old?


----------



## Spotlite (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Until a guy from Krypton crash lands on our Earth what Superman can or cannot do is in our Imagination. You are in the same boat asserting a God's or any God's capabilities.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Who said He’s not capable?


----------



## Spotlite (May 30, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Basically to me it seems like "faith" is the wildcard here when it comes to believing in miracles. Faith is a bulletproof excuse for overcoming any cognitive dissonance a believer may have. A believer's intelligence and knowledge allows his brain to accept that the earth's rotation suddenly stopping would end civilization as we know it. Faith that "God can do anything" circumvents what his brain tells him is impossible. Outside if God yeah you’re right - it’s impossible.
> 
> Of course a person needs enough faith in the first place to believe the book (the Bible in this case) that describes the miracles.
> 
> ...


Faith isn’t a wild card. It don’t make stuff true just because you believe just for the sake of believing. Believing a broom is a car because it’s in the carport doesn’t make it a car.

I’ve said it before, once you have an experience in God - those stories aren’t really a hang up because you know that the only way they can happen is through a God such as the one described in the Bible. Y’all think we ignore logic, we’re saying God isn’t limited to your logic. If it can be done, only He can do it. Outside of God yeah you’re right, that stuff is impossible.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Who said He’s not capable?


I said capabilities not non capabilities. 

Anyone who does not believe in the God of Abraham, whether they be Agnostics,  Atheists or Believers in something else do not acknowledge the existence of your God therefore ruling out any claimed capabilities that Believers make about him. Since all that Believers have are those claims and assertions they in no way showcase a god let alone what it actually can or cannot do.


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 30, 2022)

A PROFOUND THOUGHT JUST HIT ME!  Caveat I don't mean any disrespect to anyone who may take what I have to say wrong. So, when I say "you" it's not directed at any individual person. Anyway, let me preach on it:

*Another definition of "faith" could be the ability to lie to yourself.* What do I mean by this? If you have no alternate theory to explain a claim somebody made, nobody can fault you for believing that claim. In other words if you truly believe that Noah fit every species of animal on his boat you are being honest with yourself.

However if you are an adult in 2022 with average intelligence you know that there are (and were at the time) MILLIONS of different species on the planet from vastly different environments. So "faith" that Noah's ark/the flood is real would entail lying to yourself, or finding ways to rationalize the story (maybe it was a metaphor! Yeah, that's the ticket!) or otherwise moving the goalposts. Regardless, you need to find a way to either overcome your cognitive dissonance until you honestly believe it, or lie to yourself. Another option is you have successfully filtered out all mathematical and scientific facts that you have encountered throughout your life, and honestly and truthfully believe it to be factual and accurate as it is written in the Bible.

My theory (and it's just a theory) is 99 percent of adult believers do not believe the Noah's ark story but will not admit it to other believers - in which case they are lying to themselves and other believers. Either way it's not a problem for believers, since Jesus forgives sin and lying is (of course) a sin.

Just something to think about! These threads bring out some deep questions and observations, no doubt about it.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Faith isn’t a wild card. It don’t make stuff true just because you believe just for the sake of believing. Believing a broom is a car because it’s in the carport doesn’t make it a car.
> 
> I’ve said it before, once you have an experience in God - those stories aren’t really a hang up because you know that the only way they can happen is through a God such as the one described in the Bible. Y’all think we ignore logic, we’re saying God isn’t limited to your logic. If it can be done, only He can do it. Outside of God yeah you’re right, that stuff is impossible.


Impossible except when a believer of a different God says the SAME thing you are saying. Now you have 2 God's that created everything and can stop the rotation of the Earth just by being God. Add in a thousand more because if your stance must be taken as valid the others deserve equal hospitality that they have also experienced their Gods.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> A PROFOUND THOUGHT JUST HIT ME!  Caveat I don't mean any disrespect to anyone who may take what I have to say wrong. So, when I say "you" it's not directed at any individual person. Anyway, let me preach on it:
> 
> *Another definition of "faith" could be the ability to lie to yourself.* What do I mean by this? If you have no alternate theory to explain a claim somebody made, nobody can fault you for believing that claim. In other words if you truly believe that Noah fit every species of animal on his boat you are being honest with yourself.
> 
> ...


It's even worse when they admit that some things in the Bible are wrong and say that they don't care, they believe anyway.


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 30, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Faith isn’t a wild card. It don’t make stuff true just because you believe just for the sake of believing. Believing a broom is a car because it’s in the carport doesn’t make it a car.
> 
> I’ve said it before, once you have an experience in God - those stories aren’t really a hang up because you know that the only way they can happen is through a God such as the one described in the Bible. Y’all think we ignore logic, we’re saying God isn’t limited to your logic. If it can be done, only He can do it. Outside of God yeah you’re right, that stuff is impossible.



And impossible things cannot be tested, so as long as the believer has faith it doesn't matter if what they believe in is true or not, as long as their belief doesn't have a negative impact upon others who do not share the same belief. One big reason why I believe in separation of church & state across the board for any society and any religion. If a potentially harmful belief gets so popular that it may indeed conflict with reality and this harmful belief can be enforced - that's a big, big problem IMHO.


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Impossible except when a believer of a different God says the SAME thing you are saying. Now you have 2 God's that created everything and can stop the rotation of the Earth just by being God. Add in a thousand more because if your stance must be taken as valid the others deserve equal hospitality that they have also experienced their Gods.



UNLESS....work with me here....there are countless DIMENSIONS/REALITIES so each religion can actually be right! 

Okay, hand me my Nobel prize now!


----------



## Spotlite (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> I said capabilities not non capabilities.
> 
> Anyone who does not believe in the God of Abraham, whether they be Agnostics,  Atheists or Believers in something else do not acknowledge the existence of your God therefore ruling out any claimed capabilities that Believers make about him. Since all that Believers have are those claims and assertions they in no way showcase a god let alone what it actually can or cannot do.


I hear what you’re saying, along with you, I’ve ruled out all of the other gods. The God of Abraham isn’t, hasn’t abs at least nit fully ruled out by non believers.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I hear what you’re saying, along with you, I’ve ruled out all of the other gods. The God of Abraham isn’t, hasn’t abs at least nit fully ruled out by non believers.


As an example, who doesn't believe in any God that has not ruled out the GoA?
With almost everything there are no absolutes but the few undecided are not a representation of the majority.

And because you've ruled those others out does not elevate the status of the one you have not ruled out to others who have ruled your god out for similar reasons.


----------



## Spotlite (May 30, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> And impossible things cannot be tested, so as long as the believer has faith it doesn't matter if what they believe in is true or not, as long as their belief doesn't have a negative impact upon others who do not share the same belief. One big reason why I believe in separation of church & state across the board for any society and any religion. If a potentially harmful belief gets so popular that it may indeed conflict with reality and this harmful belief can be enforced - that's a big, big problem IMHO.


So the Christian gets accused of trying label God’s capabilities. How’s the non believer able to assign His limitations? 

You never answered my question - how positive are you that God doesn’t exist?


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> So the Christian gets accused of trying label God’s capabilities. How’s the non believer able to assign His limitations?


One believes the character is real the other bases their answer on fiction.

Now if you want to constantly talk "according to Bible" that is another game. But it is no different than "according to DC comics"


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Christianity wasn't as outlawed as it is made to seem. And the Romans weren't too picky about who they fed to the lions and neither were the lions.
> The early 4th Century is where Christianity really gained traction due to Constantine but it wasn't until the end of the 4th century until it became officially official due to a successor of Constantine along the line who was a Pagan.
> Bart Ehrman is a good source to learn some history about it. There is a lot of information about it out there to click on but Bart gets deep into the history with in depth explanations and examples compared to most other sites.


Bart Ehrman is misleading a lot of people. I wouldn’t call him a good source.


----------



## Spotlite (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> As an example, who doesn't believe in any God that has not ruled out the GoA?
> With almost everything there are no absolutes but the few undecided are not a representation of the majority.
> 
> And because you've ruled those others out does not elevate the status of the one you have not ruled out to others who have ruled your god out for similar reasons.


If I’ve ruled them out it isn’t because of what the others said, didn’t, claimed or didn’t claim about their god. For me, if they’re ruled out - they’re out. 

For this conversation, you and I are supposed to be on the same playing field when it comes to ruling out god’s with one exception, you’ve “taking it one God further”.

I agree that a majority doesn’t represent all, but a teaspoon taste out of a big pot of soup will tell you if need a little salt or not. 

I find no fault in not completely ruling out God, I hope you haven’t. I just understand the mindset of limiting God or describing what He can’t do or how He should handle things unless you have ruled Him out. For me, Allah is a completely false and powerless god that doesn’t exist in the manner that the Muslim thinks he does - he’s a work of the adversary (Satan).

I realize they can say that about me. But I’m not hung up there.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Bart Ehrman is misleading a lot of people. I wouldn’t call him a good source.


A lot of people who say Bart is misleading people just do not like to hear what he has to say.
Point out some things Bart is misleading and counter them with amire reliable source.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 30, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> So the Christian gets accused of trying label God’s capabilities. How’s the non believer able to assign His limitations?
> 
> You never answered my question - how positive are you that God doesn’t exist?


H


WaltL1 said:


> So who authorized the 27 New Testament books as being THE 27 acceptable books?
> I'm reading it was still MEN who decided.
> Also found it interesting that Christian communities didnt all use the same texts prior.
> 
> Regardless of who/what/where it sure seems the history of the NT is covered up in men making decisions


I don’t get choosing the fact that the books were assembled into one by men as a hill to die on.  The Christian understands that every book was also written by men. The men who wrote it were inspired by the Holy Spirit and the men who assembled each of the books into the Holy Bible we know today were inspired by the same Holy Spirit.  God was going to make sure His word was written exactly the way He wanted it to be.  It’s absolutely perfect and has no rival.  
 No man can duplicate it’s impact.  I wonder why?


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> If I’ve ruled them out it isn’t because of what the others said, didn’t, claimed or didn’t claim about their god. For me, if they’re ruled out - they’re out.
> 
> For this conversation, you and I are supposed to be on the same playing field when it comes to ruling out god’s with one exception, you’ve “taking it one God further”.
> 
> ...


A beliver is entilted to think God is real and the capabilities have no bounds and has to make claims based off of their own beliefs.
The non believer is entiled to the opposite for similar but opposite reasons.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> H
> 
> I don’t get choosing the fact that the books were assembled into one by men as a hill to die on.  The Christian understands that every book was also written by men. The men who wrote it were inspired by the Holy Spirit and the men who assembled each of the books into the Holy Bible we know today were inspired by the same Holy Spirit.  God was going to make sure His word was written exactly the way He wanted it to be.  It’s absolutely perfect and has no rival.
> No man can duplicate it’s impact.  I wonder why?


Much like the Pope is chosen by the Holy Spirit guiding the Cardinals. 
Unsurprisingly the vote is never unanimous.


----------



## Spotlite (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> A beliver is entilted to think God is real and the capabilities have no bounds and has to make claims based off of their own beliefs.
> The non believer is entiled to the opposite for similar but opposite reasons.



So it’s NIL to further argue “Christians can’t possibly know what a God can think, wants, etc”.

Knowing that - it’s just as NIL to place limitations when you don’t know this God?


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> That excuse literally works for everything. If/then/So.
> 
> I understand your point but I also think that a God should act like a God consistently. Instead of being praised for some things and a bind eye turned to others believers need to recognize the inconsistency. In Old Fellas example, IfGod clearly chooses to help one of his children to massacre others. A thousand + years later IfGod loves eeerrrrybody the same.
> Apply IfMan wrote these stories and you may see them differently.


God isn’t inconsistent.  He loved every human being equally.  He suffered the punishment that everyone’s sin deserves so you and everyone else can avoid it and be with Him forevermore. Everyone must make the choice to stop living for their own self interest and trust Him enough to surrender your heart and life to Him. He pursues everyone, but there comes a point where you have made a firm rejection and you are never going to change.  All of those that were killed in the Old Testament had made their choice and their hearts were hardened. 

The problem here is that you and the other atheist and agnostics are completely in your own head.  God is after your heart.  If you ever get to the point where you fully surrender to Christ and allow Him to lead your life (I pray you do), your mind will be unlocked and you will be able to understand spiritual things.  Until then, you’ll keep coming here and making intellectual arguments that lack wisdom in a debate on spiritual matters.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> So it’s NIL to further argue “Christians can’t possibly know what a God can think, wants, etc”.
> 
> Knowing that - it’s just as NIL to place limitations when you don’t know this God?


His limitations are evident in the stories. Going off those is a good base.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> God isn’t inconsistent.  He loved every human being equally.  He suffered the punishment that everyone’s sin deserves so you and everyone else can avoid it and be with Him forevermore. Everyone must make the choice to stop living for their own self interest and trust Him enough to surrender your heart and life to Him. He pursues everyone, but there comes a point where you have made a firm rejection and you are never going to change.  All of those that were killed in the Old Testament had made their choice and their hearts were hardened.
> 
> The problem here is that you and the other atheist and agnostics are completely in your own head.  God is after your heart.  If you ever get to the point where you fully surrender to Christ and allow Him to lead your life (I pray you do), your mind will be unlocked and you will be able to understand spiritual things.  Until then, you’ll keep coming here and making intellectual arguments that lack wisdom in a debate on spiritual matters.


I tried it and it didn't work.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> So then why the makeover in both God and his word in the NT compared to the old?


What makeover?  You don’t understand anything at all about the Bible. You’re literally wrong every time.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Much like the Pope is chosen by the Holy Spirit guiding the Cardinals.
> Unsurprisingly the vote is never unanimous.


I don’t see a lot of evidence of the Holy Spirit operating in the leadership of the Catholic Church.  Not apples to apples.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> I tried it and it didn't work.


I’m sorry about that.  I’m praying for you and many others here.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> What makeover?  You don’t understand anything at all about the Bible. You’re literally wrong every time.


The God of Abraham IS the God of the Hebrews. You don't know religious history.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> I don’t see a lot of evidence of the Holy Spirit operating in the leadership of the Catholic Church.  Not apples to apples.



What you see has absolutely no bearing on what is supposed to take place.

"There are documents of the Holy See and of Ecumenical Councils stating, explicitly, that the Pope is chosen by Divine Providence. Examples:
* The Council of Trent, Decree of Justification: “Paul III, by divine providence Pope”
* “Encyclical Letter of His Holiness Pius XII by Divine Providence Pope”
* And documents of the Holy See often use the wording in this example: “The Most Holy Father by divine Providence, Pope John Paul II, approved the above mentioned responses at an Audience granted to the undersigned Secretary of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and ordered that they be published.”

It is entirely tenable, therefore, to say that the Holy Spirit chooses the Pope by Divine Providence, and also of course by grace working in the Cardinals. The opinion of Cardinal Ratzinger is not the teaching of the Church, and the contrary opinion is not so much doctrine, as it is the more common opinion, as attested by the above documents."


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> I’m sorry about that.  I’m praying for you and many others here.


Why would you be sorry about it? Your god may have done it purposely.


----------



## brutally honest (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> So then why the makeover in both God and his word in the NT compared to the old?



I also don’t see the makeover.  I know the popular view is “OT - God of Wrath, NT - God of Love”, but I don’t agree with that.

The God who wiped Sodom and Gomorrah off the face of the earth is the same God who will cast Satan and his angels into the lake of fire.

Likewise, the God who blessed Abraham for his faith will save me based on my faith.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> I also don’t see the makeover.  I know the popular view is “OT - God of Wrath, NT - God of Love”, but I don’t agree with that.
> 
> The God who wiped Sodom and Gomorrah off the face of the earth is the same God who will cast Satan and his angels into the lake of fire.
> 
> Likewise, the God who blessed Abraham for his faith will save me based on my faith.


Abrahamic Covenant


----------



## 1gr8buildit (May 30, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> So I'll ask this question: does anybody really believe that the Bible wasn't written by bronze/iron age humans with almost zero knowledge of the solar system or science in general?


In Genesis ch 1, for example... The moon, the writer got it wrong. He did not know what we know now. I ride a very slippery slope of saying , it is inspired and it's not inspired. I see both.


----------



## 1gr8buildit (May 30, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Basically to me it seems like "faith" is the wildcard here when it comes to believing in miracles. Faith is a bulletproof excuse for overcoming any cognitive dissonance a believer may have. A believer's intelligence and knowledge allows his brain to accept that the earth's rotation suddenly stopping would end civilization as we know it. Faith that "God can do anything" circumvents what his brain tells him is impossible.
> 
> Of course a person needs enough faith in the first place to believe the book (the Bible in this case) that describes the miracles.
> 
> ...


faith is somewhat of a wildcard. Abraham was willing to sacrifice Issac because he reckoned that God must be planning to raise him from the dead because he believed, had faith, considered fact,  that the promise of his seed becoming a great nation, would come to pass. I don't think faith exists without a perceived promise. The believers and I have chosen things to have faith in, taken from the bible. My point is the wildcard. Each assigns that which he will take a stand on in regards to perceiving as fact. They will say it's everything in the bible. However, they lie to themselves. None are handling snakes or drinking poison.


----------



## brutally honest (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Abrahamic Covenant



What about it?


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 30, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I hear what you’re saying, along with you, I’ve ruled out all of the other gods. The God of Abraham isn’t, hasn’t abs at least nit fully ruled out by non believers.



I didn't get that last sentence, but I think you're saying that the Abrahamic god hasn't been ruled out yet by non-believers. Fair enough, but just like the saying "you can't 
prove a negative" you also can't disprove a negative, because you cannot physically test or examine something that isn't there. You can however, disprove the written _claims of humans attesting to God's exploits _when those claims blatantly and grossly violate the physical laws of nature. I will go on record saying that the sun never shined on Joshua for a lengthy and noteworthy period of time longer than it should have on that day, so that he could keep on destroying his enemies. I'm calling that* myth* *debunked. *

Now I'm not saying that a supernatural being couldn't exist somewhere in the universe, but I am saying that many of the incredibly embellished/inaccurate/false stories in the Bible bear no witness to being written by anybody but the humans that existed at the time. No religions AFAIK were written by anybody but the humans alive at the time. 

Sidenote I am AMAZED that Mormonism ever got off the ground in the modern age! The stories about the "golden tablets" and other major supernatural events were supposedly witnessed by a great number of people, but where is the list of names?  *Where are the outside* *sources *corroborating these things? Many people could read & write in America in the 1800's, we had efficient ways of reproducing printed material, modern transportation systems, and "the scientific method" was already being used to some degree. My point is if God's angels actually came down to me and communicated with me and REVEALED GOD'S INSIGHTS AND PLANS I would *immediately *tell every single person and gather every single person to physically verify and testify to what I have found. I would have sworn testimony from everyone who witnessed all the supernatural proceedings just to get the ball rolling.
It would be the biggest news on the planet! However....... if I were making something up I would make sure that I covered my tracks, and only spoke to the gullible at first. Just sayin'


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 30, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> So the Christian gets accused of trying label God’s capabilities. How’s the non believer able to assign His limitations?
> 
> You never answered my question - how positive are you that God doesn’t exist?



The god of the Bible? 100 percent positive he doesn't exist. The god of other religions past & present worldwide? 99.9 percent positive he/it doesn't exist. ANY god, somewhere in the almost infinite universe, but hasn't been revealed yet to humans? 
I'd say a coin flip. 

So why not 100 percent on other gods around the world? Because I'm not familiar enough with them to consider the veracity of their stories. Granted I don't know every story in the Bible, but I know enough to bounce them up against my own knowledge of how the universe and humans operate. 

In other words, I do not know what "the absolute truth"* is *but I sure know what* isn't* the absolute truth.


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 30, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> God isn’t inconsistent.  He loved every human being equally.  He suffered the punishment that everyone’s sin deserves so you and everyone else can avoid it and be with Him forevermore. Everyone must make the choice to stop living for their own self interest and trust Him enough to surrender your heart and life to Him. He pursues everyone, but there comes a point where you have made a firm rejection and you are never going to change.  All of those that were killed in the Old Testament had made their choice and their hearts were hardened.
> 
> The problem here is that you and the other atheist and agnostics are completely in your own head.  God is after your heart.  If you ever get to the point where you fully surrender to Christ and allow Him to lead your life (I pray you do), your mind will be unlocked and you will be able to understand spiritual things.  Until then, you’ll keep coming here and making intellectual arguments that lack wisdom in a debate on spiritual matters.



I appreciate your concern, but IMHO if God really wants no "hearts to be hardened" then why does he inspire his holy book to be so chock full of contradictions, inaccuracies, inconsistencies, "do as I say, not as I do" mindset, and just plain outrageously false stories? You know you can google all of these things, right? Sorry but if MILLIONS of people concur that the Bible "sounds made up" I just don't believe it's because God "hardened their heart." It's because they read the Bible with an open mind. I just think it's counterproductive to give humans the most advanced, intelligent brains on the planet then expect them to believe (in 2022 especially!) the stories that are obviously fiction. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Spotlite (May 30, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> The god of the Bible? 100 percent positive he doesn't exist. The god of other religions past & present worldwide? 99.9 percent positive he/it doesn't exist. ANY god, somewhere in the almost infinite universe, but hasn't been revealed yet to humans?
> I'd say a coin flip.
> 
> So why not 100 percent on other gods around the world? Because I'm not familiar enough with them to consider the veracity of their stories. Granted I don't know every story in the Bible, but I know enough to bounce them up against my own knowledge of how the universe and humans operate.
> ...


I’m good with that. There’s no wrong / right answer to debate. Just wanting to know where you stood on it.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> The God of Abraham IS the God of the Hebrews. You don't know religious history.


Yes, he is the God of the hebrews and anyone else who chooses to follow Him. Ever heard of Rahab, Caleb, Ruth, etc…?  Where’s the makeover in the New Testament? He’s still the God of the Hebrews and anyone else who chooses to follow Him? Were the disciples, Paul, the Mary’s, etc not Hebrews?


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Why would you be sorry about it? Your god may have done it purposely.


Anyone heading to eternity in **** is not something I take lightly.  And God absolutely did not purposely send you there.  He gave His life so that you don’t have to go there and he pursued you (May still be pursuing you)  It’s 100% on you now.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Yes, he is the God of the hebrews and anyone else who chooses to follow Him. Ever heard of Rahab, Caleb, Ruth, etc…?  Where’s the makeover in the New Testament? He’s still the God of the Hebrews and anyone else who chooses to follow Him? Were the disciples, Paul, the Mary’s, etc not Hebrews?


https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/are-the-jewish-people-chosen/


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Anyone heading to eternity in **** is not something I take lightly.  And God absolutely did not purposely send you there.  He gave His life so that you don’t have to go there and he pursued you (May still be pursuing you)  It’s 100% on you now.


God hardens hearts and blinds eyes. Why do it if he doesn't mean it?


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> God hardens hearts and blinds eyes. Why do it if he doesn't mean it?


He doesn’t harden the heart of anyone who hasn’t already rejected Him.


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/are-the-jewish-people-chosen/



So Jews may not be the chosen people? That makes sense when you think about it:
Hitler killed 6,000,000 Jews, but I'll bet if Jews were truly God's chosen people, God would have pulled the plug on Hitler at about 2,000,000. Just a theory, I could be wrong!


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> He doesn’t harden the heart of anyone who hasn’t already rejected Him.


Pharoah and Judas would disagree. Free Will be darned.


----------



## bullethead (May 30, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> So Jews may not be the chosen people? That makes sense when you think about it:
> Hitler killed 6,000,000 Jews, but I'll bet if Jews were truly God's chosen people, God would have pulled the plug on Hitler at about 2,000,000. Just a theory, I could be wrong!


I think you are wrong on that one.


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> I think you are wrong on that one.



all I know is if I were Jewish of course I'd blame the Nazis, but I would probably be wondering "where is god?" "what is he waiting for?" and things of that nature.


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 30, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> He doesn’t harden the heart of anyone who hasn’t already rejected Him.



I'm confused here. If you've rejected him then your heart is already hardened. What would be the point of hardening it again? Kind of like cursing the snake so it has to crawl on it's belly - snakes do that anyway.


----------



## Spotlite (May 30, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> I'm confused here. If you've rejected him then your heart is already hardened. What would be the point of hardening it again? Kind of like cursing the snake so it has to crawl on it's belly - snakes do that anyway.




“And Pharaoh hardened his heart at this time also, neither would he let the people go.”

Eventually God hardens it in judgment.


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 31, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> “And Pharaoh hardened his heart at this time also, neither would he let the people go.”
> 
> Eventually God hardens it in judgment.



By judgement do you mean "judgement day"? I thought on judgement day that it's too late - you will be judged for what you did while alive on earth. Whether you heart is hardened or not, you don't get to change your mind anyway because it's too late. If we get a second chance then of course everyone will choose wisely, because they don't want to suffer. Perhaps I was misinformed about the concept of judgement day.


----------



## Spotlite (May 31, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> By judgement do you mean "judgement day"? I thought on judgement day that it's too late - you will be judged for what you did while alive on earth. Whether you heart is hardened or not, you don't get to change your mind anyway because it's too late. If we get a second chance then of course everyone will choose wisely, because they don't want to suffer. Perhaps I was misinformed about the concept of judgement day.


God can pass judgment on anyone at anytime. Some now, some later. Some of these “Christians” that are mentioned as “getting away with it” or “covering it up”………might be in for a rude awakening. A form of judgment  was passed down on Adam and Eve.

God looks at the heart and if someone has hardened their heart and will continue to reject Him they just might be written off in judgment right then as in turning them over to a reprobate mind and causing them to believe a lie.

Think of it as a court system. You’re found guilty today, come back in 3 months for sentencing.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Abrahamic Covenant


I’m sorry friend. I don’t understand the point you’re making with the Abrahamic covenant.  Abraham was God’s first revelation of faith. That’s yet another way that there is no separation of the Old and New Testaments. It’s one cohesive story.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Pharoah and Judas would disagree. Free Will be darned.


Go back and read Exodus again. Pharaoh hardened his own heart first. After that, God gave Him more of what he wanted. Judas was in the presence of Christ for a long time. He heard His words, saw Him live them, saw the miracles performed, and still never accepted Him in his heart. Money remained his God.  God have him more of what he wanted.  God is all loving and completely just. Justice didn’t come about from the evolution of animals, it’s from God.  God made a path for salvation for everyone and He pursues everyone to a point. You reject Him enough times and He eventually rejects you.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> I’m sorry friend. I don’t understand the point you’re making with the Abrahamic covenant.  Abraham was God’s first revelation of faith. That’s yet another way that there is no separation of the Old and New Testaments. It’s one cohesive story.


God made a deal/promises with Abram/the Jews. It was for them only.


----------



## Spotlite (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Go back and read Exodus again. Pharaoh hardened his own heart first. After that, God gave Him more of what he wanted. Judas was in the presence of Christ for a long time. He heard His words, saw Him live them, saw the miracles performed, and still never accepted Him in his heart. Money remained his God.  God have him more of what he wanted.  God is all loving and completely just. Justice didn’t come about from the evolution of animals, it’s from God.


And Judas even felt “convicted” (repented himself” after he betrayed Jesus. 

I’ve had at least one blast me here via PM when I made a statement that Judas could have repented into God. But, something dealt with him and ate his lunch - the same something that dealt with the very one that blasted me and caused them to repent.


----------



## Spotlite (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> God made a deal/promises with Abram/the Jews. It was for them only.





> It was for them only.


Based on what passage and what part of the covenant?


----------



## RegularJoe (May 31, 2022)

"Stuff in the Bible that I like?"  =   It reports with_out_ a bent on '_selling_ it to me.'
I see the overall context as 'take it or leave it,' it is up to me.
It offers information, even repeatedly presenting to the reader, 
that only _some_ will accept as true _and_ that _most_ will _not_.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Go back and read Exodus again. Pharaoh hardened his own heart first. After that, God gave Him more of what he wanted. Judas was in the presence of Christ for a long time. He heard His words, saw Him live them, saw the miracles performed, and still never accepted Him in his heart. Money remained his God.  God have him more of what he wanted.  God is all loving and completely just. Justice didn’t come about from the evolution of animals, it’s from God.  God made a path for salvation for everyone and He pursues everyone to a point. You reject Him enough times and He eventually rejects you.


https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/hardened-hearts-removing-free-will/


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Based on what passage and what part of the covenant?


*Land.* The land promised to Abraham formed the basis for the Exodus from Egypt: “And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob” (Ex. 2:24). Moses led Abraham’s descendants out of Egypt; and Joshua led them into the Promised Land: “And the LORD gave unto Israel all the land which he swore to give unto their fathers, and they possessed it, and dwelt in it” (Josh. 21:43).

Under the reign of Solomon, the land was extended to the largest area possessed in ancient times (1 Ki. 4:21–24). Even though the Babylonian exile forced the Israelites from their land, they returned because of God’s promise to Abraham (Neh. 9:8). And though they were exiled again by Rome, the nation of Israel was reborn in 1948 and now inhabits part of its ancient homeland.

A brighter day is coming for that land of turmoil. The prophets foretold that Israel will be restored like the Garden of Eden (Ezek. 36:35) with fertility and peace (Amos 9:13–15).

*Descendants.* God’s promise of descendants from Abraham was realized in the Israelites who came out of Egypt (Ex. 32:13). The next generation entered the land; became a nation; and, by Solomon’s time, were “as the sand which is by the sea in multitude” (1 Ki. 4:20), a clear reference to the Abrahamic Covenant (Gen. 22:17).

In or out of the Promised Land, Jewish people are always considered the children of Abraham: “Ye are the sons . . . of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed” (Acts 3:25).

Every Jewish person is living proof that God still keeps His promise to Abraham. Every attempt to persecute or eliminate the chosen line of Abraham is an attack against God and His eternal covenant. Despite Satan’s attempts to destroy the Jewish people, God will preserve them. A peaceful day is coming for this people, for their prophets envisioned a future gathering to the land of Israel when they will seek God and live in safety (Zech. 10:8–12).

*Blessing. *The promised blessing to and through Abraham is illustrated in the account of Abimelech, king of Gerar (Gen. 20). While Abraham journeyed in Gerar, he feared that Abimelech would kill him in order to take his wife, Sarah. As a defense, he lied and said Sarah was his sister.

Although Abimelech did not knowingly steal another man’s wife, God implicated him, disciplined him, and threatened him with death if he did not return Sarah. In the end, Abraham took back his wife, prayed for Abimelech, and received payment from him. Abraham told the lie, but God protected him by the covenant. Abimelech “cursed” Abraham and was cursed; he then blessed Abraham and was blessed.

Throughout history God has desired to bless His Chosen People Israel and, through them, all the world. However, God’s desire did not come to pass because Israel failed to obey Him and instead experienced His judgment.


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> God made a deal/promises with Abram/the Jews. It was for them only.



No, it wasn’t.  The promise was to Abraham _and his seed_, who is Jesus Christ.  The entire book of Galatians makes that point, as does Romans.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> No, it wasn’t.  The promise was to Abraham _and his seed_, who is Jesus Christ.  The entire book of Galatians makes that point, as does Romans.


Pssst, (Jesus was Jewish)


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/hardened-hearts-removing-free-will/


That’s an opinion piece. The writer’s opinion is wrong.  There are many more men who study and live the Bible and who most importantly have a relationship with God and therefore have the Holy Spirit living within them who disagree.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Pssst, (Jesus was Jewish)


Are you arguing with yourself?


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Pssst, (Jesus was Jewish)



Pssst, so am I … by faith.

“Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.  And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.  So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.” - Gal. 3:7-9

“That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.” - Gal. 3:14

“Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:  Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.” - Rom. 3:29-30

“For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:  But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.” - Rom. 2:28-29

“And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.” - Acts 10:45

“Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?  When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.” - Acts 11:17-18


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> That’s an opinion piece. The writer’s opinion is wrong.  There are many more men who study and live the Bible and who most importantly have a relationship with God and therefore have the Holy Spirit living within them who disagree.


Like your opinion piece above?


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Are you arguing with yourself?


No


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> Pssst, so am I … by faith.
> 
> “Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.  And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.  So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.” - Gal. 3:7-9
> 
> ...


You used Jesus as a representation of Abrahams seed to somehow insinuate that the covenant was not just for Jews. I pointed out that Jesus was Jewish.

Romans/Galatians and the NT were written in order to try to mesh the OT with a new religion and god.

In the OT God tried to make happy with all people and then he drowned them in displeasure.  After that he chose the Hebrews/Israelites/Jews


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> You used Jesus as a representation of Abrahams seed to somehow insinuate that the covenant was not just for Jews. I pointed out that Jesus was Jewish.
> 
> Romans/Galatians and the NT were written in order to try to mesh the OT with a new religion and god.
> 
> In the OT God tried to make happy with all people and then he drowned them in displeasure.  After that he chose the Hebrews/Israelites/Jews



“You err because you do not know the scriptures.”


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> You used Jesus as a representation of Abrahams seed to somehow insinuate that the covenant was not just for Jews. I pointed out that Jesus was Jewish.



Me?  I’m quoting Paul who was a Jew and a Pharisee.  

And he’s not insinuating.  He’s explaining God’s promise very plainly.


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Romans/Galatians and the NT were written in order to try to mesh the OT with a new religion and god.



The ignorant goat herders who didn’t understand basic astronomy did that?

Well, that’s convenient.


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> In the OT God tried to make happy with all people and then he drowned them in displeasure.  After that he chose the Hebrews/Israelites/Jews



And I am a Jew … by faith.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> God made a deal/promises with Abram/the Jews. It was for them only.


You are partially correct. It is true that there were was a covenant specifically between God and the Jews.  However, this is not “God loves the jews more than the rest of us”. It’s purpose was to reveal God to the entire world so that all could come to know Him. The covenant was essentially the jews were to follow the law and precepts given by God and by living His way they have true life and experience God. By living a God filled life, the jews stuck out like a sore thumb compared to the rest of the world.  They were to represent God on earth.  Through them came the values and justice system that most of the world enjoys today - gifts from God and not evolution.  This was an important part of God’s plan for us all.


----------



## Mars (May 31, 2022)

One of my favorite parts is when David picked up 5 stones. 1 for Goliath and 4 for his brothers. I think he planned to kill off of the giants.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> God made a deal/promises with Abram/the Jews. It was for them only.


Romans 1:16  For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one who believeth, to the Jew first and also to the Gentiles.  

Jews first, but also everyone.  I’m cool with that.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> “You err because you do not know the scriptures.”


ohhh but I do know them


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> Me?  I’m quoting Paul who was a Jew and a Pharisee.
> 
> And he’s not insinuating.  He’s explaining God’s promise very plainly.


Paul is using his writings to coincide with the OT in order to gain followers.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> The ignorant goat herders who didn’t understand basic astronomy did that?
> 
> Well, that’s convenient.


Why would act as if that is what I said?
You made your own statement and replied to it as if I said it.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> You are partially correct. It is true that there were was a covenant specifically between God and the Jews.  However, this is not “God loves the jews more than the rest of us”. It’s purpose was to reveal God to the entire world so that all could come to know Him. The covenant was essentially the jews were to follow the law and precepts given by God and by living His way they have true life and experience God. By living a God filled life, the jews stuck out like a sore thumb compared to the rest of the world.  They were to represent God on earth.  Through them came the values and justice system that most of the world enjoys today - gifts from God and not evolution.  This was an important part of God’s plan for us all.


Where along the way did God instruct anyone to deviate from Judiasm?


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> ohhh but I do know them



Post 150 demonstrates plainly that you don't.


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Paul is using his writings to coincide with the OT in order to gain followers.



So, to coincide with the OT, Paul (a Jew) says the law does not save and that GENTILES are part of God's plan?  

As Keith Moon said when he heard about Jimmy Page's new band, "That's gonna go over like a lead zeppelin."


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Why would act as if that is what I said?
> You made your own statement and replied to it as if I said it.



You didn't say it, but this is a recurring theme in some threads here.


----------



## Spotlite (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> *Land.* The land promised to Abraham formed the basis for the Exodus from Egypt: “And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob” (Ex. 2:24). Moses led Abraham’s descendants out of Egypt; and Joshua led them into the Promised Land: “And the LORD gave unto Israel all the land which he swore to give unto their fathers, and they possessed it, and dwelt in it” (Josh. 21:43).
> 
> Under the reign of Solomon, the land was extended to the largest area possessed in ancient times (1 Ki. 4:21–24). Even though the Babylonian exile forced the Israelites from their land, they returned because of God’s promise to Abraham (Neh. 9:8). And though they were exiled again by Rome, the nation of Israel was reborn in 1948 and now inhabits part of its ancient homeland.
> 
> ...


Tons of Bible tells us how and why we’re grafted in. Of course, lack of faith doesn’t agree. But that doesn’t mean the faithless is correct. I can tell you from experience, it does happen exactly how scripture says it will. And I’m not taking about a 5 minute feel good emotional trip that sone have never experienced it tries to describe it.


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 31, 2022)

Mars said:


> One of my favorite parts is when David picked up 5 stones. 1 for Goliath and 4 for his brothers. I think he planned to kill off of the giants.



Good observation! And who knows, there could have been a version of the story that does include killing all the giants, but it wasn't chosen when the Bible was edited & compiled into it's current form. Or maybe he gathered five stones in case he missed the target!


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Tons of Bible tells us how and why we’re grafted in. Of course, lack of faith doesn’t agree. But that doesn’t mean the faithless is correct. I can tell you from experience, it does happen exactly how scripture says it will. And I’m not taking about a 5 minute feel good emotional trip that sone have never experienced it tries to describe it.


Tons of the NT tells us how and why Gentiles are grafted in. The history of Christianity shows how Pegan traditions were merged in with traditional practices to entice people into a new religion. The NT writings were written to form a new religion around a man that was thought by some to be the Messiah. When that man did not meet the requirements of the Torah his followers continued on anyway. Had Jesus met the requirements there would be no Christianity. Judiasm would have accepted him as Messiah and not God and the history would have taken that route.
Nowhere in scripture does it say that God wanted anyone to start another separate religion and include him into it. Nowhere.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> Post 150 demonstrates plainly that you don't.


When Jesus was alive he did not refer to, cite or quote anything from Galatians or Romans. The reason is because it wasn't written yet. They were written after Jesus was dead.   Jesus referred to, cited and quoted the Torah. That is what he was taught. That is what he followed. That is what he studied. That is what he quoted. That is what he then taught.

Tell me when Jesus asked to have a new religion formed around him. Please post the scripture in the OT where God says to abandon Judiasm and incorporate something new.


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> When Jesus was alive he did not refer to, cite or quote anything from Galatians or Romans. The reason is because it wasn't written yet. They were written after Jesus was dead.   Jesus referred to, cited and quoted the Torah. That is what he was taught. That is what he followed. That is what he studied. That is what he quoted. That is what he then taught.
> 
> Tell me when Jesus asked to have a new religion formed around him. Please post the scripture in the OT where God says to abandon Judiasm and incorporate something new.










Nice Dodge.


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Please post the scripture in the OT where God says to abandon Judiasm and incorporate something new.



God’s promise to Abraham was based on his faith.  Faith predates the law.  The law is the “schoolmaster” that leads us to Christ.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> Nice Dodge.


I stated absolute facts. You didn't ask me a question,  I asked you some though.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> God’s promise to Abraham was based on his faith.  Faith predates the law.  The law is the “schoolmaster” that leads us to Christ.


Abraham’s faith led to becoming Hebrews/Israelites/Jews and promises made to those from God and Convents with God.


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> When Jesus was alive he did not refer to, cite or quote anything from Galatians or Romans. The reason is because it wasn't written yet. They were written after Jesus was dead.   Jesus referred to, cited and quoted the Torah. That is what he was taught. That is what he followed. That is what he studied. That is what he quoted. That is what he then taught.



And you think He didn’t understand God’s promise to Abraham?

“And he said unto her, Daughter, thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace, and be whole of thy plague.” - Mark 5:34

Her FAITH made her whole — just like Abraham — just like Paul says in his letters.


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Please post the scripture in the OT where God says to abandon Judiasm and incorporate something new.



“ … the just shall live by his faith.” - Han. 2:4

God rewards those who trust Him.


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 31, 2022)

Moving on, if I may, to other stories: *FATHER OF THE YEAR* AKA LOT 
Sodom is the location of this feel-good tale. God sent two angels down to one his favorite followers, Lot. They surrounded Lot's house and demanded that Lot send out the angels so they could "defile" them.  So of course Lot did what any dedicated father would do and said:
"_No, my friends. Don’t do this wicked thing. Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them._"

So *Lot offered up his daughters *rather than the angels. "Bros before ho's" before it was cool I guess!  *But wait, it gets even better!*
God rained down sulfur/destruction on Sodom while Lot & his daughters got out of Dodge. Lot's wife looked back at the destruction of Sodom, and got turned into a pillar of salt!  Don't you just hate when that happens? Anyway Lot's daughters got Lot drunk (They saved the booze! Ya gotta respect that) and had sex with him because at his age he wouldn't find another wife, and they wanted to preserve their family lineage. 

Okay kids, I gotta stop ya right there! Sodom isn't the only city on the planet. You two girls aren't the only females on the planet. Unless Lot is Clint Howard ugly, he'll find true love again. He obviously quickly got over the trauma of seeing his wife turned into a pillar of salt, so he'll be back in the saddle before you know it. 

Truly some Jerry Springer level of family dysfunction IMHO.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> And you think He didn’t understand God’s promise to Abraham?
> 
> “And he said unto her, Daughter, thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace, and be whole of thy plague.” - Mark 5:34
> 
> Her FAITH made her whole — just like Abraham — just like Paul says in his letters.


I think that you don't understand that the NT doesn't count for anything we are talking about in the OT. It was written after Jesus died. It was written by authors who were not there to witness anything Jesus said. It was written as a bridge to link the OT with a new religion. If the NT meant anything the Jews would be Christians.


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Abraham’s faith led to becoming Hebrews/Israelites/Jews and promises made to those from God and Convents with God.



I get that, but I’ll say it again:

“For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:  But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.” - Rom. 2:28-29


----------



## Spotlite (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Tons of the NT tells us how and why Gentiles are grafted in. The history of Christianity shows how Pegan traditions were merged in with traditional practices to entice people into a new religion. The NT writings were written to form a new religion around a man that was thought by some to be the Messiah. When that man did not meet the requirements of the Torah his followers continued on anyway. Had Jesus met the requirements there would be no Christianity. Judiasm would have accepted him as Messiah and not God and the history would have taken that route.
> Nowhere in scripture does it say that God wanted anyone to start another separate religion and include him into it. Nowhere.



What source is the history? OT is slam full of it.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> “ … the just shall live by his faith.” - Han. 2:4
> 
> God rewards those who trust Him.


Yea, you missed the first part of that. It has nothing to do with what you are trying to make it say.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> I get that, but I’ll say it again:
> 
> “For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:  But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.” - Rom. 2:28-29


Is that from the book of Romans that was in the OT?
Didn't think so


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> What source is the history? OT is slam full of it.


Sure, use it to show God wanted a new religion started.


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> If the NT meant anything the Jews would be Christians.



The early Christians _were_ Jews:  Paul, Peter, John, James, the 3,000 on Pentecost  — all of them.  Further:

“And a certain JEW named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.  This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.  And he began to speak boldly in the SYNAGOGUE …” - Acts 18:24-26

It wasn’t until Acts 10 that we see the first Gentile believer.


----------



## Waddams (May 31, 2022)

The stories relayed in the bible are excellent to show that people today aren't different from back then. We're all capable of just as much dishonesty, selfishness, lying, cheating, and causing hurt to others as people were back then. Today, we simply have improved means to pursue unimproved ends.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> The early Christians _were_ Jews:  Paul, Peter, John, James, the 3,000 on Pentecost  — all of them.  Further:
> 
> “And a certain JEW named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.  This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.  And he began to speak boldly in the SYNAGOGUE …” - Acts 18:24-26
> 
> It wasn’t until Acts 10 that we see the first Gentile believer.


Right. Jews who thought Jesus was the Messiah so much so that they worshipped him and couldn't accept that he was killed. That didnt align with the Torahs instructions on what the Messiah will be. So 30 40, 80, 100 years AFTER Jesus was dead,  men wrote him in order to take Judiasm into a different direction.  The history of Judiiasm is loaded with such fractions.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Where along the way did God instruct anyone to deviate from Judiasm?


We still worship the same God so to speak.  Obviously the orthodox Jews don’t accept Jesus yet and therefore miss the full view of God. 
  Jesus said that He didn’t come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. The Law’s purpose is to make us aware of our sun and need for Jesus.  That’s still in place.  These are the core of the similarities.  
On differences - The blood Jesus shed on the cross is a one-and-done sacrifice.  The whole sacrificial system is no longer needed per God.  
The curtain in the temple being torn from top to bottom means there is no separation between those who accept Christ. The Holy Spirit now lives within us.   There’s no longer a need for another man to speak to God for me. 
Peter was told that all food was now clean. No reason to follow that tenet of Judaism any more.  
Jesus (aka God) was furious with the religious leadership of the Jews as they completely missed the point of all of the laws and precepts. After His resurrection, He built His church. In the revelation to John, He spoke directly to seven churches of that day validating what they were doing right and correcting what was wrong.  We have a very clear and plain picture of how we are to operate as a Christian, follower of God, or Christ, or whatever else you want to call us.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> ohhh but I do know them


You can read the words my friend, but you do not understand them.  I don’t intend that to be a mean comment, but I don’t know any other way to say it.  Everything you post on the Word of God is misunderstood or misinterpreted.  You’re looking through the wrong lens.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> We still worship the same God so to speak.  Obviously the orthodox Jews don’t accept Jesus yet and therefore miss the full view of God.
> Jesus said that He didn’t come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. The Law’s purpose is to make us aware of our sun and need for Jesus.  That’s still in place.  These are the core of the similarities.
> On differences - The blood Jesus shed on the cross is a one-and-done sacrifice.  The whole sacrificial system is no longer needed per God.
> The curtain in the temple being torn from top to bottom means there is no separation between those who accept Christ. The Holy Spirit now lives within us.   There’s no longer a need for another man to speak to God for me.
> ...


"So to Speak" is not the same God.
Jesus didn't fulfill OT prophecy so he cannot be the Messiah. The Messiah will be of Man. Not degrade God to half man half God. The NT turned it into God-man. It is a spin-off religion to incorporate new believers.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> You can read the words my friend, but you do not understand them.  I don’t intend that to be a mean comment, but I don’t know any other way to say it.  Everything you post on the Word of God is misunderstood or misinterpreted.  You’re looking through the wrong lens.


Right, YOU understand them. You are definitely more special than me and somehow on the same level of the people who agree with you who also think THEY understand it. Such a joke.


----------



## Spotlite (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Right, YOU understand them. You are definitely more special than me and somehow on the same level of the people who agree with you who also think THEY understand it. Such a joke.


For clarification: 

There’s no levels or more special to it. It’s just a matter of being spiritually connected. 

You admit that you don’t have that. We study and sure we all differ but we get close enough to be totally opposite of the non believer. 

I think anyone on here that’s debated with you much would be foolish to question your comprehension level. All they’re saying with “You can read the words my friend, but you do not understand them”  - is you don’t understand the spiritual aspect of it and not getting the intent. For an example, cursing the fig tree was a lot more than cursing the fig tree.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> For clarification:
> 
> There’s no levels or more special to it. It’s just a matter of being spiritually connected.
> 
> ...


I was once where you and many others are but it didn't work for me. The more I studied to reaffirm my beliefs the more fault I found in the teachings.
I understand the references of a Fig Tree in the Bible. I understand the constant usage of certain numbers. I have studied and researched those things for 40+ years both Pro and Con.

I am here to give alternative views based off of my research. It doesn't mean that I do not understand scripture. It means that I don't believe it to be truthful as written....and I say why.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Tons of the NT tells us how and why Gentiles are grafted in. The history of Christianity shows how Pegan traditions were merged in with traditional practices to entice people into a new religion. The NT writings were written to form a new religion around a man that was thought by some to be the Messiah. When that man did not meet the requirements of the Torah his followers continued on anyway. Had Jesus met the requirements there would be no Christianity. Judiasm would have accepted him as Messiah and not God and the history would have taken that route.
> Nowhere in scripture does it say that God wanted anyone to start another separate religion and include him into it. Nowhere.





bullethead said:


> Tons of the NT tells us how and why Gentiles are grafted in. The history of Christianity shows how Pegan traditions were merged in with traditional practices to entice people into a new religion. The NT writings were written to form a new religion around a man that was thought by some to be the Messiah. When that man did not meet the requirements of the Torah his followers continued on anyway. Had Jesus met the requirements there would be no Christianity. Judiasm would have accepted him as Messiah and not God and the history would have taken that route.
> Nowhere in scripture does it say that God wanted anyone to start another separate religion and include him into it. Nowhere.


Literally all of this is wrong. The Old Testament is about Jesus. It’s lays out God as the creator of everything including life, man’s attempt to be like God - enter sin, and the remaining 98% is God’s plan for the redemption of mankind. Beginning with Genesis chapter 3 we see foreshadowing of Jesus throughout the Old Testament.  The Passover  Abraham’s almost sacrifice of his son, the snake lifted up for the Israelites to look at and be made whole, Jonah in the belly for three days, the scapegoat, the sacrificial system, etc.. 

 If you want say that was the messiah and not specifically Jesus, well Jesus Christ  fulfilled over 300 Old Testament prophesies about the messiah from when he and where he would born, that he would have to go down to Egypt for a period, how long he would be in the grave, the details of his death (hundreds of years before Rome invented crucifixion), the day and manner he would enter Jerusalem to be killed, that he would enter as a king, that his side would be pierced, in the lineage of David, and on and on. I don’t have time to list every single one of the prophesies, they are written in black and white for everyone to research.  Also, just pick three or four of the prophesies Jesus fulfilled that can easily be verified by secular historians and research the statistical odds of one man fulfilling just three or four of them.  It’s statistically impossible.

Those who actually understand the Bible, understand the Old Testament is about Jesus. Nobody had to write anything to make a connection.


----------



## Mars (May 31, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Good observation! And who knows, there could have been a version of the story that does include killing all the giants, but it wasn't chosen when the Bible was edited & compiled into it's current form. Or maybe he gathered five stones in case he missed the target!



That's quite possible but I like to think he had plans to kill Goliath's brothers as well. Everywhere else in the Bible that we encounter giants, God commands that they be killed.


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Right. Jews who thought Jesus was the Messiah so much so that they worshipped him and couldn't accept that he was killed. That didnt align with the Torahs instructions on what the Messiah will be.



It didn't align with what they expected the Messiah to be.   




bullethead said:


> So 30 40, 80, 100 years AFTER Jesus was dead,  men wrote him in order to take Judiasm into a different direction.



... a direction so different that it excluded the law and included Gentiles.  What would be the modern day equivalent of that?  It would be like the Anti-Defamation League naming Farrakhan "Man of the Year".  It would be like the NRA calling for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> I was once where you and many others are but it didn't work for me. The more I studied to reaffirm my beliefs the more fault I found in the teachings.
> I understand the references of a Fig Tree in the Bible. I understand the constant usage of certain numbers. I have studied and researched those things for 40+ years both Pro and Con.
> 
> I am here to give alternative views based off of my research. It doesn't mean that I do not understand scripture. It means that I don't believe it to be truthful as written....and I say why.


Thanks for sharing that. Does that mean that at some point you accepted Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior, repented, and began to follow Him?

You say the more you researched, the less you believed.  I’ve had the opposite occur in my life.  I felt a pull in my heart and accepted Christ.  I’ve studied Biology at the college level, been through Invertebrate Zoology, Vertebrate Zoology, Chemistry, Plant Pathology and seen the faith required to believe in evolution.  There is not one single link that proves evolution.     Not one.  The Bible told us many things that science had to catch up to and verify. I love science because it reveals how absolutely incredible God is. Creation is perfect (except for the sin part). 
I’ve also studied statistics in college and practice stats every day as a lean six sigma master black belt. I understand the critical flaw in the calculations for carbon dating.

When I combine statistical odds with science, there is absolutely no way the DNA sequence, the perfect position of the earth, and the perfect qualities of the water molecule, to name just a few, can happen from chaos. It’s statistically impossible. Also, when I research the Bible, and statistics are used to compute the probability of the fulfillment of the prophesies Jesus fulfilled and see the continual archeological discoveries that support it’s authenticity, wow!  
Aside from all that, it’s the number of changed lives that I’ve seen including my own that makes my faith grow stronger every day. I’ve experienced God throughout my life. I know He’s real and He’s good.  I have hope and peace. I wish the same for you my friend.


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> It is a spin-off religion to incorporate new believers.



So, the plan was:

1)  Spin off new religion
2)  Incorporate believers
3)  Endure violent death because of #1 and #2.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Literally all of this is wrong. The Old Testament is about Jesus. It’s lays out God as the creator of everything including life, man’s attempt to be like God - enter sin, and the remaining 98% is God’s plan for the redemption of mankind. Beginning with Genesis chapter 3 we see foreshadowing of Jesus throughout the Old Testament.  The Passover  Abraham’s almost sacrifice of his son, the snake lifted up for the Israelites to look at and be made whole, Jonah in the belly for three days, the scapegoat, the sacrificial system, etc..
> 
> If you want say that was the messiah and not specifically Jesus, well Jesus Christ  fulfilled over 300 Old Testament prophesies about the messiah from when he and where he would born, that he would have to go down to Egypt for a period, how long he would be in the grave, the details of his death (hundreds of years before Rome invented crucifixion), the day and manner he would enter Jerusalem to be killed, that he would enter as a king, that his side would be pierced, in the lineage of David, and on and on. I don’t have time to list every single one of the prophesies, they are written in black and white for everyone to research.  Also, just pick three or four of the prophesies Jesus fulfilled that can easily be verified by secular historians and research the statistical odds of one man fulfilling just three or four of them.  It’s statistically impossible.
> 
> Those who actually understand the Bible, understand the Old Testament is about Jesus. Nobody had to write anything to make a connection.


3 or 4 prophesies and more have been fulfilled by many men throughout the history of the Jewish people. There are men who fulfilled even more than Jesus did. But NONE have fulfilled ALL of the prophesies of the requirements in the Torah to be Messiah.
You read too many Creationist websites that try to link anything with everything no matter how vague and unrelated.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Thanks for sharing that. Does that mean that at some point you accepted Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior, repented, and began to follow Him?


For over 20 years


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> So, the plan was:
> 
> 1)  Spin off new religion
> 2)  Incorporate believers
> 3)  Endure violent death because of #1 and #2.


There is no plan.
New religions are spun all the time.
Those religions ,all religions have and need followers.
Judiasm (and all religions) was constantly having sects spin away.  You call them denominations in Christianity and only want to be associated with one of them.

"Endure violent deaths because of 1&2"
You REALLY need to study the history the history of the World and the history of religion. People were prosecuted FOREVER for many reasons one if which is because of beliefs. The Romans were equal opportunity torturers. They abused everyone equally. Often times it wasn't specific because of someone's beliefs but it just so happened they were of a specific belief. Half of your Disciples are credited dying multiple times and multiple ways in different countries. Your writers wrote things without knowing what someone else was writing. And you believe all the ways without questioning it. Don't take my word for it, research the deaths. Your Martyrs aren't that special.


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> There is no plan.
> New religions are spun all the time.
> Those religions ,all religions have and need followers.
> Judiasm (and all religions) was constantly having sects spin away.  You call them denominations in Christianity and only want to be associated with one of them.
> ...



I have read at least as much history as you and have just come to a different conclusion.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> I have read at least as much history as you and have just come to a different conclusion.


Yeah, " at least as much"
If you ignore the evidence and facts you have to come to different conclusions. There is no other way.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> There is no plan.
> New religions are spun all the time.
> Those religions ,all religions have and need followers.
> Judiasm (and all religions) was constantly having sects spin away.  You call them denominations in Christianity and only want to be associated with one of them.
> ...


So what was their endgame? What possible reason could they have had to invent this religion?  Money, power, or fame?


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> There is no plan.
> New religions are spun all the time.
> Those religions ,all religions have and need followers.
> Judiasm (and all religions) was constantly having sects spin away.  You call them denominations in Christianity and only want to be associated with one of them.
> ...


I don’t think anyone is lifting up the Disciples’ death as being more than they are.  All but one died due to persecution. That’s it. What really matters is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus.


----------



## brutally honest (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Yeah, " at least as much"



How would you know how much I read or don't read?  In addition to the DC Universe, I've been reading history and church history for decades.




bullethead said:


> If you ignore the evidence and facts you have to come to different conclusions. There is no other way.



I disagree.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> So what was their endgame? What possible reason could they have had to invent this religion?  Money, power, or fame?


Because like within Christianity it is comprised of people who believe in God but in reality not all.of them believe exactly the same way. So at some point they branch off and start their own gatherings with like minded people until it grows to a congregation and grows to a Church and grows to many then becomes its own denomination. 
Christianity and Islam are spin offs of Judaism. The God of Abraham is all the same God. They just put their own spin on it and today there are thousands of splinters of each that branch off. 

A group of guys were convinced that Jesus was the Messiah. They followed him until they convinced themselves he was a God. I am not so sure that even they thought he was God at the time. The writers of 30+ years later may have made Jesus into a God and wrote the embellished stories to suit.
The Roman church made a pretty good business decision if you ask me if you are curious about a motive.
I never knew God needed so much wealth...but man gets a kick out of it huh?


----------



## Waddams (May 31, 2022)

I saw a Pastor recently make this comment (I'm paraphrasing):

-That all of the Christian Bible hinges on if the claim of the gospels that Jesus was executed and then was resurrected is true or not.  If it's not true, the rest of the book is pretty much meaningless.

-If it wasn't true, if it was one big mass con or made up thing, why were so many willing to be tortured and killed for it? Generally, people trying to pull a fast one aren't willing to die for it. It wasn't just the 12 apostles. It was them plus a rather large following (some estimates as many as 3000) that were exposed to saw the resurrected Jesus. One thing is for certain - they experienced something after the crucifixion where they were willing to endure what they did.  (said pastor's further comment - they were willing to suffer and die as they did because they saw a man executed and then resurrected, and then later ascend to Heaven, then had the Holy Spirit fall on them at Pentecost just as it's all reported in the gospels and Acts, they were not delusional en masse or one big cult trying to act deceitfully).

-Jesus was a leader of a small, fringe group that we'd call a cult today. And yet his group grew into what it is today. How, with the Romans trying to stamp it out a few hundred years, was it able to survive and grow anyway? (said pastor's answer - it was divine inspiration and providence at work).

The faith starts with the simple point that Jesus died and was resurrected. You won't get the rest of it unless you accept that and let the Holy Spirit show you the rest.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> I don’t think anyone is lifting up the Disciples’ death as being more than they are.  All but one died due to persecution. That’s it. What really matters is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus.


So  "Endure violent death" was a reference to Jesus?
Or
Was it in reference to his followers?

Brutally Honest brought it up in  3 part sections and I was addressing the Followers who started a new religion. 

This is directed at you Carolina Dawg,
Did Jesus want a new religion?
Did he ask or even command anyone to start a new religion around him?


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

Waddams said:


> I saw a Pastor recently make this comment (I'm paraphrasing):
> 
> -That all of the Christian Bible hinges on if the claim of the gospels that Jesus was executed and then was resurrected is true or not.  If it's not true, the rest of the book is pretty much meaningless.
> 
> ...


By that Pastor's way of thinking, the Branch Davidians endured the same deaths for the truth then. I mean, they certainly would not have burned to death for a lie right?


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

@Waddams , over 4 million German soldiers died in WWII. Does that mean they were "right" and Hitler's cause was "true"?
Or in your opinion and that pastors opinion, thise soldiers died for a lie?

I am curious to know if this system only applies for Christianity and not everything else?


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Because like within Christianity it is comprised of people who believe in God but in reality not all.of them believe exactly the same way. So at some point they branch off and start their own gatherings with like minded people until it grows to a congregation and grows to a Church and grows to many then becomes its own denomination.
> Christianity and Islam are spin offs of Judaism. The God of Abraham is all the same God. They just put their own spin on it and today there are thousands of splinters of each that branch off.
> 
> A group of guys were convinced that Jesus was the Messiah. They followed him until they convinced themselves he was a God. I am not so sure that even they thought he was God at the time. The writers of 30+ years later may have made Jesus into a God and wrote the embellished stories to suit.
> ...


I won’t argue with you about the Catholic Church and your views on man made religion.  But let’s unpack your assertion that Christianity is just like every other man-made religion.   Can we agree that anything created by man can be copied or reproduced?  Please explain why no man-made religion has been able to have the impact that Christ has had on the world. Christ split the world’s calendar with His birth. There are over 25,000 manuscripts of the Bible, The Iliad is in second place at less than 1,000. The greatest country in the history of the world was built on Christian principles, millions upon millions of followers who have shaped world history for centuries. Why in over 2,000 years hasn’t some man invented something better since mankind is constantly evolving and improving?  I mean this is all just a bunch of ignorant, gullible people right? Easy to improve on this.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> 3 or 4 prophesies and more have been fulfilled by many men throughout the history of the Jewish people. There are men who fulfilled even more than Jesus did. But NONE have fulfilled ALL of the prophesies of the requirements in the Torah to be Messiah.
> You read too many Creationist websites that try to link anything with everything no matter how vague and unrelated.


Please provide one example - just one will do - of a man who fulfilled more than one prophesy of Christ. One man and just two or more prophesies.


----------



## Waddams (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> @Waddams , over 4 million German soldiers died in WWII. Does that mean they were "right" and Hitler's cause was "true"?
> Or in your opinion and that pastors opinion, thise soldiers died for a lie?
> 
> I am curious to know if this system only applies for Christianity and not everything else?



The Branch Davidians did not decide to volunteer to die in that fire. It was inflicted on them by the government raid against their will.

Answering the call of a homeland and going to war is not even close to the comparable to joining a small, hopeless, lost cause of a sect of cultists that leads to certain persecution and high probability of death. Volunteering for war is always done with the hope and even anticipation of a victorious return home.

You're making strawman arguments. You're distorting my post, then attacking YOUR distortions as if they are claims I made. I also believe you know exactly what you are doing as well, simply trying to trip people up. It's intellectually dishonest.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> So  "Endure violent death" was a reference to Jesus?
> Or
> Was it in reference to his followers?
> 
> ...


Jesus doesn’t want a religion, He wants a relationship with you.  That’s it. None of the other stuff comes close to the fact that He gave you the life you have now and that He wants to spend eternity with you. You were born into sin and there was nothing you could do about it, so He laid down His life for you. All you have to do is accept that and your work is done from a salvation standpoint.
However, unless you are on your deathbed like the thief on the cross, after salvation, it’s time to work on that relationship. Salvation then sanctification.  He commands us not to keep salvation as s secret to ourselves, but to go out and make disciples and to care for those who need help. As God is the God of order, a division of labor was prescribed that these things may be done efficiently and this is where church as we know it today comes from.   Jesus spoke to seven specific churches in Revelation and validated some things and corrected others to provide further clarity.  Any “church” that is practicing a religion in Christ name is doing church wrong.  Again, it’s a relationship with Him first and then other people.   
I think some of what has gotten you so against Christianity is all of many ways  Christianity was done wrong. When it’s right, there’s nothing like it nor will there ever be.


----------



## GT90 (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> I won’t argue with you about the Catholic Church and your views on man made religion.
> 
> Is there any religion not man made?  Serious question.  Aren't religions man describing a deity and all that comes with/from following that deity?  Without man starting that action would there be a religion?  Maybe I missed something earlier.


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 31, 2022)

Mars said:


> That's quite possible but I like to think he had plans to kill Goliath's brothers as well. Everywhere else in the Bible that we encounter giants, God commands that they be killed.



Weird because giants were among those taken aboard Noah's Ark.  They must have been, because every human not on the ark was killed in the flood, and David & Goliath occurred well after the flood. So from whom did the giants descend? I'm sure there isn't a "plot hole" in the Bible!


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

Every religion but Judaism and Christianity can be traced back to one single man that just thought it up. I see zero value in joining in with that.  I’m a Christian because I believe God has revealed Himself to many, many people and everything that I and most of my family and friends have experienced lines up what God has revealed.  I know the atheist and agnostics will laugh at my post because you believe that Christianity and Judaism are made up.  However I challenge you to contrast their origins with other religions (although Christianity is a relationship rather than a religion) and contrast the Bible with writings of other religions.  They are vastly different.


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 31, 2022)

Yes all religions are man made. They are products of the cultures/societies that produced them. That's why there are thousands of religions. Religions die out just like societies die out, though there is much overlap. But eventually, both will die.


----------



## Mars (May 31, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Weird because giants were among those taken aboard Noah's Ark.  They must have been, because every human not on the ark was killed in the flood, and David & Goliath occurred well after the flood. So from whom did the giants descend? I'm sure there isn't a "plot hole" in the Bible!



Gen 6 does say there were Giants on the earth in those days and also after that. It's not explained in detail in the bible but many believe that the fallen angels had children with human women which created the nephilim/giants. Noah was spared because he was "pure in his generations"(no fallen angel genetics). Im thinking those genes were brought on board the ark by one of Noah's daughter in laws.


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Every religion but Judaism and Christianity can be traced back to one single man that just thought it up. I see zero value in joining in with that.  I’m a Christian because I believe God has revealed Himself to many, many people and everything that I and most of my family and friends have experienced lines up what God has revealed.  I know the atheist and agnostics will laugh at my post because you believe that Christianity and Judaism are made up.  However I challenge you to contrast their origins with other religions (although Christianity is a relationship rather than a religion) and contrast the Bible with writings of other religions.  They are vastly different.



Yes, religions are vastly different just like societies are vastly different.


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 31, 2022)

Mars said:


> Gen 6 does say there were Giants on the earth in those days and also after that. It's not explained in detail in the bible but many believe that the fallen angels had children with human women which created the nephilim/giants. Noah was spared because he was "pure in his generations"(no fallen angel genetics). Im thinking those genes were brought on board the ark by one of Noah's daughter in laws.



That would be one interesting DNA test result!


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> @Waddams , over 4 million German soldiers died in WWII. Does that mean they were "right" and Hitler's cause was "true"?
> Or in your opinion and that pastors opinion, thise soldiers died for a lie?
> 
> I am curious to know if this system only applies for Christianity and not everything else?



Goodness, you are playing hardball!


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

Be


CarolinaDawg said:


> I won’t argue with you about the Catholic Church and your views on man made religion.  But let’s unpack your assertion that Christianity is just like every other man-made religion.   Can we agree that anything created by man can be copied or reproduced?  Please explain why no man-made religion has been able to have the impact that Christ has had on the world. Christ split the world’s calendar with His birth. There are over 25,000 manuscripts of the Bible, The Iliad is in second place at less than 1,000. The greatest country in the history of the world was built on Christian principles, millions upon millions of followers who have shaped world history for centuries. Why in over 2,000 years hasn’t some man invented something better since mankind is constantly evolving and improving?  I mean this is all just a bunch of ignorant, gullible people right? Easy to improve on this.


Before Christianity many religions lasted 2000+ years. Some still going are much older. The timing was right for Christianity in the Western world with the Romans adopting it while in power and making it law.
History is a marvelous tool.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Be
> 
> Before Christianity many religions lasted 2000+ years. Some still going are much older. The timing was right for Christianity in the Western world with the Romans adopting it while in power and making it law.
> History is a marvelous tool.


Agree. It’s amazing how God chose that exact point in history for Christ to go to cross and begin His church.  The Roman system of roads really facilitated the early growth of Christianity.  God has a plan for sure.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Be
> 
> Before Christianity many religions lasted 2000+ years. Some still going are much older. The timing was right for Christianity in the Western world with the Romans adopting it while in power and making it law.
> History is a marvelous tool.


I stated a lot more than the one fact that you picked to respond to with a generalized answer. Can you list these religions that have changed millions of lives? Which man has had the impact that Christ has had? Which man has come close?


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Agree. It’s amazing how God chose that exact point in history for Christ to go to cross and begin His church.  The Roman system of roads really facilitated the early growth of Christianity.  God has a plan for sure.



The mud puddle conforms exactly to the shape of the hole in the road! God has a plan for sure.


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> I stated a lot more than the one fact that you picked to respond to with a generalized answer. Can you list these religions that have changed millions of lives? Which man has had the impact that Christ has had? Which man has come close?



I might say that_ the belief _in Christ has changed millions of lives. _Belief _in Mohammed runs a pretty close second.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Please provide one example - just one will do - of a man who fulfilled more than one prophesy of Christ. One man and just two or more prophesies.



This link tells of a man who accomplished more than Jesus. I will let you do the research.
https://www.jewfaq.org/mashiach.htm

This link tells what actual prophesy is to be fulfilled.
https://whatjewsbelieve.org/jesus-was-not-the-messiah/


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

Waddams said:


> The Branch Davidians did not decide to volunteer to die in that fire. It was inflicted on them by the government raid against their will.
> 
> Answering the call of a homeland and going to war is not even close to the comparable to joining a small, hopeless, lost cause of a sect of cultists that leads to certain persecution and high probability of death. Volunteering for war is always done with the hope and even anticipation of a victorious return home.
> 
> You're making strawman arguments. You're distorting my post, then attacking YOUR distortions as if they are claims I made. I also believe you know exactly what you are doing as well, simply trying to trip people up. It's intellectually dishonest.


It isnt Intellectually dishonest.
There isnt a single Disciple or follower of Jesus that willingly turned themselves in and asked to be killed because they belive in Jesus. They died for what they thought was the truth.
You have seen the stupidity in the logic of that Preacher and want to make what he is trying to sell different than what has happened all the other believers in other religions and or within sects like the Branch Davidians.
Those Davidian followers had been asked to willingly leave. Some did and most didn't. The ones that didn't felt that what Koresh told them was true. 
It is absolutely no different than your preacher logic.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Jesus doesn’t want a religion, He wants a relationship with you.  That’s it. None of the other stuff comes close to the fact that He gave you the life you have now and that He wants to spend eternity with you. You were born into sin and there was nothing you could do about it, so He laid down His life for you. All you have to do is accept that and your work is done from a salvation standpoint.
> However, unless you are on your deathbed like the thief on the cross, after salvation, it’s time to work on that relationship. Salvation then sanctification.  He commands us not to keep salvation as s secret to ourselves, but to go out and make disciples and to care for those who need help. As God is the God of order, a division of labor was prescribed that these things may be done efficiently and this is where church as we know it today comes from.   Jesus spoke to seven specific churches in Revelation and validated some things and corrected others to provide further clarity.  Any “church” that is practicing a religion in Christ name is doing church wrong.  Again, it’s a relationship with Him first and then other people.
> I think some of what has gotten you so against Christianity is all of many ways  Christianity was done wrong. When it’s right, there’s nothing like it nor will there ever be.


If Jesus didn't want a religion then why start one?
He definitely did not start one. He came to fulfill the Torah law.
Decades after his death the stories began to be written. Not during his life.
Jesus was unaware of most of the things that is bestowed upon him in embellishments by these later writers. The majority of writers never knew him, never talked to him, never saw him.
You have absolutely no idea what Joshua wants from me. You follow a writers version of an embellished character that they built upon a normal preacher.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Agree. It’s amazing how God chose that exact point in history for Christ to go to cross and begin His church.  The Roman system of roads really facilitated the early growth of Christianity.  God has a plan for sure.


Only what can happen will happen. A believer would say that God chose that point in time and shy away from the 10,000+ years in modern humanity God was a no show.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> I stated a lot more than the one fact that you picked to respond to with a generalized answer. Can you list these religions that have changed millions of lives? Which man has had the impact that Christ has had? Which man has come close?


Changed Millions of lives?
How so?
Christiis comprised of over 2 billion people within 40,000 different denominations that all want their own version. Within all those denominations how many people are hard core, by the book, as close to pure Christians as a human can get?
5? 1?
How many fill in the Christian blank on the form and pretend like they are Christian? Id say only 99.9+ percent.

Most religions before, during and after Christianity has contained millions of followers. I cannot tell you who was "changed" ( as nobody knows what that means) any more than you can tell me how I was changed or if I even was changed.
You are generalizing and thinking it is facts.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> I might say that_ the belief _in Christ has changed millions of lives. _Belief _in Mohammed runs a pretty close second.


Belief in any of worlds major religions during their peak reigns are no different.  Flavor of the month until the next rolls in.


----------



## Spotlite (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> This link tells of a man who accomplished more than Jesus. I will let you do the research.
> https://www.jewfaq.org/mashiach.htm
> 
> This link tells what actual prophesy is to be fulfilled.
> https://whatjewsbelieve.org/jesus-was-not-the-messiah/


The Jews for Jesus tells us that Jews not for Jesus missed it. 

1. No one can die for another man’s sins. True. Jesus wasn’t just a man.

2. Sins not forgiven through blood sacrifice. Misleading. Sins were pushed aside, the Jews themselves brought their sacrifices to the Temple for a reason - to push sins aside for a year. But in a sense they’re right, there was never any atonement for the sins. Certain sins could not be pushed to the side. 

3. God never had a plan for the Jews to be without a high priest. That’s why the Temple was destroyed. The Jews would continue to go there. 

4. Jews not for Jesus had their own ideology about the Messiah. Jews for Jesus experienced the Book of Acts just like it says. Before the Catholic Church broke off abs chained to be “the church”. They aren’t “the church” that was born in Acts because they have a completely different doctrine. 

That’s coming from Jews that know their history better than you and I know their history.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> The Jews for Jesus tells us that Jews not for Jesus missed it.
> 
> 1. No one can die for another man’s sins. True. Jesus wasn’t just a man.
> 
> ...


Ask them if God condones human sacrifice

Are you saying the Jews who just started believing differently less than 2000 years ago know better than the Jews who followed the Torah for 6000 years?


----------



## Spotlite (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Ask them if God condones human sacrifice
> 
> Are you saying the Jews who just started believing differently less than 2000 years ago know better than the Jews who followed the Torah for 6000 years?


Jesus was more than human. 

I’m saying Jews know Jewish history. They might have followed the Torah for 6,000 years but God made a new covenant. Interesting how their old covenant isn’t making any ground. They can’t even sacrifice according to their own law.


----------



## Spotlite (May 31, 2022)

> God made a new covenant. Interesting how their old covenant isn’t making any ground. They can’t even sacrifice according to their own law.


@bullethead I just noticed something - I left myself open to your point that that’s ^^^ because a new religion started. I’m getting slack lol.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Jesus was more than human.
> 
> I’m saying Jews know Jewish history. They might have followed the Torah for 6,000 years but God made a new covenant. Interesting how their old covenant isn’t making any ground. They can’t even sacrifice according to their own law.


Ask them if God condones the sacrifices of half god and half man people. Or if God condones sacrificing himself. Or whatever combination you think Jesus is for this part of the conversation.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> This link tells of a man who accomplished more than Jesus. I will let you do the research.
> https://www.jewfaq.org/mashiach.htm
> 
> This link tells what actual prophesy is to be fulfilled.
> https://whatjewsbelieve.org/jesus-was-not-the-messiah/


So a couple of things:
1) You are very obviously heavily influenced by this website. Almost every one of your retorts are found in the links you provided. 
2) Almost everything I read is incorrect 
3) Why do you so easily place your faith this website as an authority? I would love to see some consistency in your application of the standards you judge Jesus, the Bible, and Christianity by. Eternity is at stake and you are placing your faith in this kind of resource?  
4) This guy who no one has ever heard of accomplished more than Jesus? That’s not even close to being intellectually honest.  
5) Come on man


----------



## CarolinaDawg (May 31, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Jesus was more than human.
> 
> I’m saying Jews know Jewish history. They might have followed the Torah for 6,000 years but God made a new covenant. Interesting how their old covenant isn’t making any ground. They can’t even sacrifice according to their own law.


Yep. A practicing Jew is rare today. Most are Jew by blood and not by religion.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> @bullethead I just noticed something - I left myself open to your point that that’s ^^^ because a new religion started. I’m getting slack lol.


Let me ask you something and I know among other things you of all people in here will answer with thought and honesty.
Isn't Christianity a different religion than the one Jesus followed? Jesus said he was there not to abolish the law of the prophets but to fulfill them. 
Who then took it beyond the Torah and Mosaic law and the law of the Prophets and made it into a new religion?


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> So a couple of things:
> 1) You are very obviously heavily influenced by this website. Almost every one of your retorts are found in the links you provided.


They tell with accuracy about what the Jews believe and go by.


CarolinaDawg said:


> 2) Almost everything I read is incorrect


You make that claim but back it up with nothing to support it. Because you don't believe it does not make it incorrect.


CarolinaDawg said:


> 3) Why do you so easily place your faith this website as an authority? I would love to see some consistency in your application of the standards you judge Jesus, the Bible, and Christianity by. Eternity is at stake and you are placing your faith in this kind of resource?


If there is a god I beg it to not let me exist in any form for eternity. That would be beyond torturous in any environment. 
I do not just use that website. I have posted a few. You just cherry pick one, ignore what it says, refuse to reseaech it and then make claims about things you will not educate yourself about because you think that what you think you know is correct.


CarolinaDawg said:


> 4) This guy who no one has ever heard of accomplished more than Jesus? That’s not even close to being intellectually honest.


There is plenty of information about "this guy" and others like him throughout the history of the Jews. I have absolutely no doubt that you have never heard of him/them. It is blaringly apparent.


CarolinaDawg said:


> 5) Come on man


I am giving you information.  I am pointing you in the right directions to research for yourself. I am not just making claims without giving you information that backs it up. I say it, back it up, show you and you don't take a second to find out more. If you didn't hear about it they don't exist or it never happened or the people who have practiced it for 6000 years are wrong. 
It's on you Man.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

@CarolinaDawg , here is another link that says the same things. These reasons are why Jesus did not and has not fulfilled the messanic prophesies and why the Jews cannot believe he is the Messiah. Jesus didn't meet the requirements while he was alive and the writers couldn't even embellish the stories enough to make him fulfill them when he was dead because the things just did not happen. There is no "wait".
https://aish.com/48892792/


----------



## oldfella1962 (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Let me ask you something and I know among other things you of all people in here will answer with thought and honesty.
> Isn't Christianity a different religion than the one Jesus followed? Jesus said he was there not to abolish the law of the prophets but to fulfill them.
> Who then took it beyond the Torah and Mosaic law and the law of the Prophets and made it into a new religion?



IMHO Jesus really didn't have much say in how "Christianity" was headed since he was long gone by the time enough of his followers documented anything. Correct me if I'm wrong, but two of the four Gospel characters only started documenting their stories decades after the death of Jesus, when they would have been elderly men. Waiting until they were almost dead (short life expectancy back then) to share the good news was cutting it kind of close for something so important as saving countless souls, don't you think? Factor in aging memories aren't the most accurate! 
Combined with an almost total lack of outside (non biblical) sources documenting any key exploits of Jesus, Christianity veers heavily towards a busted myth.


----------



## bullethead (May 31, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> IMHO Jesus really didn't have much say in how "Christianity" was headed since he was long gone by the time enough of his followers documented anything. Correct me if I'm wrong, but two of the four Gospel characters only started documenting their stories decades after the death of Jesus, when they would have been elderly men. Waiting until they were almost dead (short life expectancy back then) to share the good news was cutting it kind of close for something so important as saving countless souls, don't you think? Factor in aging memories aren't the most accurate!
> Combined with an almost total lack of outside (non biblical) sources documenting any key exploits of Jesus, Christianity veers heavily towards a busted myth.


John may have been the only actual author to have known Jesus and his version differs from the others.


----------



## Spotlite (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Let me ask you something and I know among other things you of all people in here will answer with thought and honesty.
> Isn't Christianity a different religion than the one Jesus followed? Jesus said he was there not to abolish the law of the prophets but to fulfill them.
> Who then took it beyond the Torah and Mosaic law and the law of the Prophets and made it into a new religion?



There are a lot of years in Jesus's young life that either wasn’t written at all, or just simply not important enough to write about.

His ministry was built around the preaching of the Kingdom of God, forgiveness, righteousness, holiness, redemption, justification, sanctification, salvation, glorification, faith, He’s the way to the Father, etc. We would have to certainly believe that’s the “religion” he followed. That’s not different than what’s preached by Christianity today other than teaching / preaching how to accomplish all of that.

Fulfilling the law and not abolishing has always been a key point of argument because some say He did abolish it by doing away with certain aspects  - an example would be the Jews “changing their process” by no longer taking sacrificial animals to the High Priest. Jesus didn’t do away with that “law”, he fulfilled it by becoming the sacrifice to be offered for sins, His blood is the atonement and He became the High Priest (not a quote but No man comes to the Father but by me),

The law said thou shall not commit adultery.

Jesus didn’t abolish that. His purpose was to establish the Word, to embody it, and to fully accomplish all that was written. Now it’s “the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind”

He fulfills it by reinforcing it and holding all sexual impurities accountable.

Since the message that Jesus preached (or at least the Writers say He preached) wasn’t welcomed with open arms by the Jews, either He really preached it, or the Writers just said He preached it. But, I would have to believe that the Writers are correct because the message of Jesus is still rejected by the Jews. I would also have to believe the Writers when it comes to the crucifixion - it’s just ironic that the Writers say Jesus was rejected then and accused of blasphemy and is still viewed that way by the Jews.

Obviously, it appears that the Writers took it further but if they were instructed by the “spirit” to write, then they didn’t, they only obeyed.

In short, even if they took His message out of context, Jesus didn’t tell them to create a new religion. Without the “spirit” moving on them to write, the Writers created a new religion with their own writings.


----------



## 1gr8buildit (May 31, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Ask them if God condones the sacrifices of half god and half man people. Or if God condones sacrificing himself. Or whatever combination you think Jesus is for this part of the conversation.


I think the Jews of that day saw Jesus as a potential possible Messiah. They were watching, looking for anything that might show him to be. Expectant of a coming Messiah. A Moses type figure. They were thinking of a rebellion against their perceived oppressor, the Romans. Someone who would lead them to over throw all that opposed them. And the chief priest also saw this in him, thus were worried that everyone might flock to him. Up until one point. He died. This was never in their expectation. Thus they quickly moved on to expecting another. What they overlooked was the role of the firstborn son. The ritual of the firstborn son making atonement for the remainder of the family. You would think that they would not be so quick to forget that these burdensome yearly rituals were not sufficient but merely a reminder of their inadequacy. However, as clear as this is to me.... I find myself pondering if it was designed that way. I think the scriptures allude to this.


----------



## 1gr8buildit (May 31, 2022)

I read through one of the links. Interesting. I've seen it before, just provokes new, or, the same thoughts of the past. I don't agree with their downplay of miracles. I think this was well established that "this is how they will know that I have sent him" referring to Moses, referring to Jesus. When they hang on almost every word for doctrine, yet overlook a few more equally non ambiguous words.... Additionally, the bible speaks of an anti christ, a messiah imposter whom will deceive the nations in the end times. I expect that the Jews of today  will fall hook line and sinker for his debut. Mostly because of their long wait. But, once he claims to be God, they will not accept this. That will be a deal breaker. Thanks for the link. As you can see, it got me pondering.... rambling...


----------



## Waddams (Jun 1, 2022)

bullethead said:


> It isnt Intellectually dishonest.
> There isnt a single Disciple or follower of Jesus that willingly turned themselves in and asked to be killed because they belive in Jesus. They died for what they thought was the truth.
> You have seen the stupidity in the logic of that Preacher and want to make what he is trying to sell different than what has happened all the other believers in other religions and or within sects like the Branch Davidians.
> Those Davidian followers had been asked to willingly leave. Some did and most didn't. The ones that didn't felt that what Koresh told them was true.
> It is absolutely no different than your preacher logic.



You're wrong. They died because they experienced the Risen Jesus and knew the truth that it represented. It was more important to them than their lives, and they knew the peril they were facing.  There was a certainty to it. They had a hope for life, but not the lives they had at the time. They sacrificed those lives because they believed they'd have everlasting life at later time, glorified life restored to them.

There was not the same certainty for the Davidians that wouldn't come out. They had no idea the government would burn down their compound around them. Of course they wanted to continue to live at that moment. Anyone that enlisted in WWII - they all had a hope to come home and live. 

And yet again - you put words in my mouth, then rail against them. 

I'll have no further response to you. You aren't here to talk, debate, discuss. You're simply trying to agitate against people of faith and call it by another name. Nothing more.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

1gr8buildit said:


> I think the Jews of that day saw Jesus as a potential possible Messiah. They were watching, looking for anything that might show him to be. Expectant of a coming Messiah. A Moses type figure. They were thinking of a rebellion against their perceived oppressor, the Romans. Someone who would lead them to over throw all that opposed them. And the chief priest also saw this in him, thus were worried that everyone might flock to him. Up until one point. He died. This was never in their expectation. Thus they quickly moved on to expecting another. What they overlooked was the role of the firstborn son. The ritual of the firstborn son making atonement for the remainder of the family. You would think that they would not be so quick to forget that these burdensome yearly rituals were not sufficient but merely a reminder of their inadequacy. However, as clear as this is to me.... I find myself pondering if it was designed that way. I think the scriptures allude to this.


The Jews of then, before then and after have always seen various men as Messiah candidates. Some men have been closer to fulfilling prophesy than others but none have actually done it.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

Waddams said:


> You're wrong. They died because they experienced the Risen Jesus and knew the truth that it represented. It was more important to them than their lives, and they knew the peril they were facing.  There was a certainty to it. They had a hope for life, but not the lives they had at the time. They sacrificed those lives because they believed they'd have everlasting life at later time, glorified life restored to them.
> 
> There was not the same certainty for the Davidians that wouldn't come out. They had no idea the government would burn down their compound around them. Of course they wanted to continue to live at that moment. Anyone that enlisted in WWII - they all had a hope to come home and live.
> 
> ...


_The Fabricated Deaths of the Apostles_

1. Peter (aka Simon, Cephas).

"Beheaded by Nero?" No, not really. This legend was dreamed up by the mid-2nd century pope *Anicetus* (156-166) when he became locked in a conflict with the venerable _Polycarp of Smyrna_. Polycarp had tried to win the argument (over the dating of Easter) by insisting that he spoke with the authority of the apostle _John_. In response, Anicetus staked a claim to _Peter,_ and _Peter_, "Prince of the Apostles", trumps _John_.

2nd century texts known as the _"Clementines"_ had made Peter the "first Bishop of Rome" and 3rd century invention gave him a 25-year pontificate – which made it a tad tricky for him to have died at the hands of Nero but, hey, this is "tradition."

3rd century Church Father _Origen _dreamed up a colourful flourish: Peter, feeling himself unworthy to be crucified the same way as his Lord, chose option 'B' – _crucifixion upside down!_



2. James, son of Zebedee (_James the Greater?_)

_Acts_ 12.1,2 says simply:
*"Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church. And he killed James the brother of John with the sword."*​
Later legend adds the truly extraordinary nonsense that the Roman officer guarding James converted on the spot and elected to be beheaded beside him! Even later fabrication has James traipsing around northern Spain before he dashes back to Judaea for martyrdom.



3. John, son of Zebedee.

This guy has to be kept alive long enough to take care of Mary, lead the church in Ephesus, write the Book of Revelation and write his own gospel. He even survives being boiled in oil_ and is given a natural death!_

Actually, John bar Zebedee disappears from the yarn in _Acts_ at the same time his brother James is more dramatically removed from the story. The last reference to John is also verse 12.2. From _Acts_ 12.12 onward we are dealing with another John "whose surname was Mark" – a lightweight character who nonetheless is credited with authorship of the first gospel.

The impending demotion of the thunder brothers is actually prefigured in _Mark's _gospel (and is embellished in _Matthew,_ where Mrs Zebedee does the talking). The boys ask for front seats in the hereafter. JC is having none of it:

"And James and John, the sons of Zebedee, come unto him, saying, Master, we would that thou shouldest do for us whatsoever we shall desire. And he said unto them, What would ye that I should do for you? They said unto him, Grant unto us that we may sit, one on thy right hand, and the other on thy left hand, in thy glory.
"Jesus said unto them ... to sit on my right hand and on my left hand is not mine to give; but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared. And *when the ten heard it*, they began to be *much displeased with James and John*." – Mark 10:35-41.​
Thus while the earthly career of Jesus features prominently brothers James and John, "the sons of thunder" (_Mark_ 3.7), the story of the early church features a _new_ James, "the brother of Jesus", and a _new_ John, a sidekick to Paul and Barnabas (see below). We know little about either, although the death of _James bar ****eus_ (Josephus, _Antiquities_ 20.9) provides a basis for the colourful martyrdom of brother James beloved of Christian apologists.



4. Andrew, brother of Peter.

Pious invention gives Andrew a wonderful career covering everywhere from Scythia to Greece, from Asia Minor to Thrace. This guy, it seems, took option 'C' on the crucifixion menu: on an x-shaped cross. Apparently this allowed him to continue preaching for 2 days.



5. Philip.

Fable places this guy in Phrygia, Carthage and Asia Minor. The fairy tale has a proconsul crucifying him for converting his wife. _Perhaps the love feast got a bit out of hand._

Somewhat confusingly, there are actually _two_ Philips. The original apostle disappears from the tale after witnessing Jesus rise to Heaven from the Mount of Olives. Philip and the rest of the gang return to the upper room in Acts 1.13. But in Acts 6.5 a second Philip is chosen as one of the seven given responsibility for feeding widows



6. Bartholomew (Nathanael)

What a traveller – India, Persia, Armenia, Ethiopia and southern Arabia! Miraculously he managed to get himself crucified (flayed alive and beheaded!) in both India and Armenia. Pretty impressive stuff. Even when dead his bits got about: a church in Rome claimed most of his corpse but 11th century Canterbury did a roaring trade with his arm! His emblem is the flaying knife. Cool.

This guy has to be kept alive long enough to write his gospel – at least 20 years after the supposed death of Christ. Credited with 15 years in Jerusalem, then missions to Persia and Ethiopia and, of course, martyrdom in both places. According to Medieval iconography he worn spectacles, the better to count his tax money.

If Matthew, aka Levi, is a _son of Alphaeus_ (_Mark_ 2.14) then presumably he is also the _brother of James son of Alphaeus_ (Mark 3.18)? And yet we are told the lesser James is a _son of Mary_, sister of the Blessed Virgin and wife of_ Cleophas_ (_John_ 19.25). In which case, the evangelist Matthew is a cousin of Jesus himself! However, _Acts_ 1.13 tells us that the lesser *James* has a brother called *Judas* (_aka Jude_) whereas _Mark_ (15.40) and Matthew's "own gospel" (27.56) both say that James has a brother named *Joses*. So we now have a regular band of brothers: James, Joses, Judas – plus Matthew/Levi ... which comes mightily close to the supposed four brothers of Jesus himself!

"Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, *James*, and *Joses*, and Simon, and *Judas*?"
– Matthew 13.55.​8. Thomas Didymus (the Twin) aka Judas Thomas or Jude Thomas

Another grand traveller, seen everywhere from Parthia to Kerala in south India. 4th century invention, appropriately enough, gives this 'twin' two martyrdoms, one in Persia and one in India. He even gets a burial in Syria to boot! Yet another resting place, Mylapore, was claimed by the Portuguese in 16th century. Most famous for his "doubt", Thomas inspired a whole raft of pious flimflam: the _Acts of Thomas_ (he built a palace for an Indian king, would you believe), the _Apocalypse of Thomas_, the _Gospel of Thomas_, and the _Infant Gospel of Thomas_.

_Now, have you still got any doubts ...?_



9. James son of Alphaeus _(James the Less – or is James the Just?_)

The myth-makers really go to town for this guy. Thrown down over 100 feet from the pinnacle of the Temple by "scribes and Pharisees", he actually survived only to be stoned, have his brains dashed out with a fuller’s club and have his body "sawn asunder" – all this at the age of 90!

Of course, if we don't conflate _James the Less_ with _James the brother of Jesus_ (an identification made by Jerome and later Catholics) all this mayhem belongs with the _righteous James_ and the fate of the_ lesser James_ is unknown.

_Perhaps it's the being sawn in half which causes the confusion?_



10. Jude/Thaddeus /Lebbaeus /Daddaeus

Either a serious clubbing or crucifixion for this mixed up guy in the city of Edessa or Persia. Apparently his fan-club suffered because his name sounded too much like Judas.

Jude the apostle is often conflated with Jude the brother of Jesus and also with Jude the writer of the epistle of Jude (_pay attention, there will be a test_). Yet Jude (the letter writer) identifies himself as the brother of James and as a _servant_ of Jesus, not his brother (Jude 1.1). He also speaks of the apostles in the past tense, not as if he was one of them (verse 17), so he cannot be identified as one of "the twelve" either.



11. Simon the Canaanite/ the Zealot.

Invention came late for this guy. When it did, it was a beauty – crucifixion in Persia and also crucifixion thousands of miles away in Britain. He also managed to preach in Africa. Quite an act to follow.



12. Matthias.

Fantasy sends this guy to Syria, Cappadocia, the shores of the Caspian and the "City of Cannibals" (_Acts of Andrew and Matthias_). Death by burning. Also death in Jerusalem by stoning – and beheading. Really just makes up the numbers, sometimes merging with Matthew and sometimes swapped out to let Paul into "the twelve."


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

13. Judas, son (or is that brother?) of James.

Nothing yet. Feeling inspired?



14. Levi, son of Alphæus.

Refer to his _alter ego_ Matthew.



Mark (John Mark).

Though neither _Clement of Alexandria_ (?153-215), nor _Origen of Alexandria_ (182-251) seem to have noticed, _Eusebius of Caesarea_ (c.263-339) relays the news that the apostle Mark had been "first bishop" of Alexandria and had suffered martyrdom in the "eighth year of Nero." This would have been 61 AD – rendering the apostle dead before the death of Peter whose memoirs Mark supposedly wrote up as the _Gospel of Mark_. "Dragged to death", or maybe not. His bones – well, someone's bones – turned up in 9th century Venice.



Luke.

"Hanged on an olive tree." Or, "lived to the age of 84 and died unmarried." Body parts claimed by both Padua and Constantinople.



Paul.

"Beheaded by Nero." No, not really, but legend tells us he shared the same fate as Peter, even dying on the same day. Pious romances scribbled between the 2nd and 4th centuries – _Acts of Paul_, the _Apocalypse of Paul_, the _Martyrdom of Paul_ and the _Acts of Paul and Thecla_ – provide all the fabulous nonsense you could ever wish for.



*Multiple deaths – a biblical motif for making sure the bad guys get it REALLY bad*
*The 4 very different deaths for King Saul.*
*1 Samuel (31:4) says that Saul "Took a sword, and fell upon it".*
*2 Samuel (1:2-10) says Saul, at his own request, was slain by an Amalekite.*
*Later in 2 Samuel (21:12) we read that Saul was killed by the Philistines on Gilboa.*
*But then in 1 Chronicles (10:13-14) we learn that Saul was slain by God!*


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 1, 2022)

bullethead said:


> The Jews of then, before then and after have always seen various men as Messiah candidates. Some men have been closer to fulfilling prophesy than others but none have actually done it.


I think they had one announced as the Messiah last year if I remember correctly.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I think they had one announced as the Messiah last year if I remember correctly.


You may be right. Tough to keep up on.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 1, 2022)

bullethead said:


> John may have been the only actual author to have known Jesus and his version differs from the others.



John! That's who I was thinking of. For some reason I thought there were two who actually knew him.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 1, 2022)

he managed to get himself crucified (flayed alive and beheaded!) in both India and Armenia. 

Thrown down over 100 feet from the pinnacle of the Temple by "scribes and Pharisees", he actually survived only to be stoned, have his brains dashed out with a fuller’s club and have his body "sawn asunder"  

*America's Got Talent* really needs to pump the brakes on these novelty acts! 

Seriously though, I didn't know that Saul died four different ways! 
That said I can explain it: 

one death was real
one death was metaphor
one death was allegory
one death was "seen in a vision"

side note what is a "fuller's club"?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> he managed to get himself crucified (flayed alive and beheaded!) in both India and Armenia.
> 
> Thrown down over 100 feet from the pinnacle of the Temple by "scribes and Pharisees", he actually survived only to be stoned, have his brains dashed out with a fuller’s club and have his body "sawn asunder"
> 
> ...


Here's a problem.
The Bible mentions the death of two of the Disciples. 
Believers such as Waddam hear about all these claims of Martyrdom and run with it. Then abruptly decide to "end the conversation" claiming that I am not here to discuss only because he cannot back up his own assertions and bails before he is called out to tell us all what he knows about how,when and where these "heroes" died


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> he managed to get himself crucified (flayed alive and beheaded!) in both India and Armenia.
> 
> Thrown down over 100 feet from the pinnacle of the Temple by "scribes and Pharisees", he actually survived only to be stoned, have his brains dashed out with a fuller’s club and have his body "sawn asunder"
> 
> ...


A Fuller's club is usually a heavy piece of wood used to smack debris out of raw wool.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 1, 2022)

"A Fuller's club is usually a heavy piece of wood used to smack debris out of raw wool."
bullet head

Oh I see! Well now I don't feel ignorant for not knowing, since my knowledge of the wool industry is minimal at best.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 1, 2022)

bullethead said:


> John may have been the only actual author to have known Jesus and his version differs from the others.



Now I'm finding out that John might have been around 70 when he offered up his version.* To be honest most 70 year olds are not very accurate when they describe events that happened decades ago. They often conflate characters, times, or even entire events in general. It's a natural part of aging.  

* scholars have different opinions (as would be expected) since there are no exact dates to confirm his age


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 1, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Now I'm finding out that John might have been around 70 when he offered up his version.* To be honest most 70 year olds are not very accurate when they describe events that happened decades ago. They often conflate characters, times, or even entire events in general. It's a natural part of aging.



It’s a good thing the Apostle John was not a US president.  Imagine what it would be like to have an aging, mentally-declining person as president.

Just imagine …


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Now I'm finding out that John might have been around 70 when he offered up his version.* To be honest most 70 year olds are not very accurate when they describe events that happened decades ago. They often conflate characters, times, or even entire events in general. It's a natural part of aging.
> 
> * scholars have different opinions (as would be expected) since there are no exact dates to confirm his age


And why wait so long?
Might be a  good idea to let  few decades pass and some eyewitness with them.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (Jun 1, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Here's a problem.
> The Bible mentions the death of two of the Disciples.
> Believers such as Waddam hear about all these claims of Martyrdom and run with it. Then abruptly decide to "end the conversation" claiming that I am not here to discuss only because he cannot back up his own assertions and bails before he is called out to tell us all what he knows about how,when and where these "heroes" died


Can you back up anything from your website? If not, we have to assume you are taking false claims and running with it.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Can you back up anything from your website? If not, we have to assume you are taking false claims and running with it.


If you bothered to read the post, the outside sources are included within the text.
But here ya are:
_Sources:
The Good Bible – in all its Goodly Versions_
Thomas Sheehan_, The First Coming _(Crucible, 1986)
David Farmer_, Oxford Dictionary of Saints _(OUP,1997)
Bruce Metzger, Michael Coogan (Eds) _The Oxford Companion to the Bible_ (OUP, 1993)
Edward Gibbon, _The Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire_ (1799)
Michael Walsh, _Roots of Christianity_ (Grafton, 1986)
Robin Lane Fox, _The Unauthorized Version_ (Penguin, 1991)
Helen Ellerbe, _The Dark Side of Christian History_ (Morningstar & Lark, 1995)


----------



## NCHillbilly (Jun 1, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> When I combine statistical odds with science, there is absolutely no way the DNA sequence, the perfect position of the earth, and the perfect qualities of the water molecule, to name just a few, can happen from chaos. It’s statistically impossible.



My only question to that is, it's statistically impossible for a simple water molecule to form on its own, but an all-powerful, omnipotent God can arise from nothing? everything gotta start somewhere.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

Things exist because the conditions allow it. Humans were not around for billions of years because conditions were not conducive for human life.
Water formed because the correct mix of hydrogen and oxygen were available. Hydrogen and Oxygen were available because conditions allowed for those also.
No mastermind had to think them into existence anymore than that mastermind had to be thought into existence.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 1, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> It’s a good thing the Apostle John was not a US president.  Imagine what it would be like to have an aging, mentally-declining person as president.
> 
> Just imagine …



it would make anything from Revelation seem like a cakewalk.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 1, 2022)

NCHillbilly said:


> My only question to that is, it's statistically impossible for a simple water molecule to form on its own, but an all-powerful, omnipotent God can arise from nothing? everything gotta start somewhere.


Its interesting how we pick and choose according to what we want or dont want to believe.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (Jun 1, 2022)

bullethead said:


> And why wait so long?
> Might be a  good idea to let  few decades pass and some eyewitness with them.


There are over 500 eye witnesses of the resurrected Jesus, but does it really matter in this debate? You have formed your worldview.  You are leading with your head and Jesus is after your heart.  From the head standpoint,  you’re searching for or demanding  some irrefutable proof and that is extremely rare, so we are left with faith.  You a seem to apply your standards in one dire


WaltL1 said:


> Its interesting how we pick and choose according to what we want or dont want to believe.


Yes it is. I provided a concrete example and here comes an abstract **** that someone actually thinks is a comparative point.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Jun 1, 2022)

There are thousands of eyewitnesses who saw bigfoot and black panthers. 
And fervently believe it in their hearts.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 1, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> There are over 500 eye witnesses of the resurrected Jesus, but does it really matter in this debate? You have formed your worldview.  You are leading with your head and Jesus is after your heart.  From the head standpoint,  you’re searching for or demanding  some irrefutable proof and that is extremely rare, so we are left with faith.  You a seem to apply your standards in one dire
> 
> Yes it is. I provided a concrete example and here comes an abstract **** that someone actually thinks is a comparative point.


Are you sure its not a comparative point?
I took his point simply as you are not applying the same criteria to the existence of a god and in particular a specific God, that you are applying to water drops, the position of the earth etc.
Seems like a valid point to me.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 1, 2022)

NCHillbilly said:


> There are thousands of eyewitnesses who saw bigfoot and black panthers.
> And fervently believe it in their hearts.


And we still can’t say they didn’t actually see a Bigfoot even if we believe they were smoking crack at the time and never saw one ourselves.

Black panthers are real ?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 1, 2022)

NCHillbilly said:


> My only question to that is, it's statistically impossible for a simple water molecule to form on its own, but an all-powerful, omnipotent God can arise from nothing? everything gotta start somewhere.


Who said God rose from nothing? 

Hmmm, that almost sounds as ridiculous as that science stuff explaining how we got here from nothing ?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 1, 2022)

bullethead said:


> If you bothered to read the post, the outside sources are included within the text.
> But here ya are:
> _Sources:
> The Good Bible – in all its Goodly Versions_
> ...


Beyond the names, what’s their history? 

Biden explaining the Constitution is going to be biased.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> There are over 500 eye witnesses of the resurrected Jesus, but does it really matter in this debate? You have formed your worldview.  You are leading with your head and Jesus is after your heart.  From the head standpoint,  you’re searching for or demanding  some irrefutable proof and that is extremely rare, so we are left with faith.  You a seem to apply your standards in one dire


Over 500 witnesses?
Were they so not impressed that it took someone 5 decades later to record it?
Who were these witnesses? They could not have all been illiterate.  Some had to be educated enough to write it down or at least tell someone who could write it down. Some had to be from foreign lands and different cultures. Where is the historical record outside of scripture? Was resurrection so common back then that people gazed upon it, shrugged, and went about their merry ways?

It matters because the evidence does not back up the claims.
Most of the things in the bible, especially the embellishments occur only in the Bible.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 1, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Things exist because the conditions allow it. Humans were not around for billions of years because conditions were not conducive for human life.
> Water formed because the correct mix of hydrogen and oxygen were available. Hydrogen and Oxygen were available because conditions allowed for those also.
> No mastermind had to think them into existence anymore than that mastermind had to be thought into existence.



*At a basic level*, both Christianity and "the big bang" start the universe with a blank slate, and yada yada yada we have the complexity that we humans experience all around us. The main difference is science posits that the universe started out very simply and graaaaaaaaaadually got more complex, to eventually result in one planet - Earth - developing the conditions for very simple life and graaaaaaaadually evolving into millions of different species (generally more complex but not necessarily) as environmental conditions changed.

Christianity/the Bible just jams the entire process (with almost zero percent accuracy) into six days. 

Here's my take on creation, based on common sense as I define common sense.
Bear in mind I have a learning disability, but AFAIK it doesn't affect my common sense in any significant way:

1. There are no "shortcuts" in life. You have to put in the legwork. Thus, a long hard grind from a simple beginning to the complex human brain just makes sense to me.

2. I can see evolution all around me. Music, technology, living creatures, etc. all start out simply, not fully formed. The first car off the assembly lines was not a Porsche. The first music was not a Mozart symphony. The first apes were not Homo Sapiens with the modern abilities we all have. 

3. People in all cultures just loooooove to tell stories! We are the only species (that we know of) with the mental capacity for a very vivid imagination and abstract reasoning, which is needed to make up complex stories, and the speech capacity to successfully pull it off. 

4. All cultures have religions and creation stories. Many of these stories share the same themes & tropes, thus they borrow from or are influenced by each other. Regardless, every creation story can't be the "right one" so the only alternative IMHO is *NONE OF THEM ARE TRUE*! All the creation myths were developed prior to modern astronomy, biology, geology, etc.etc.

5. Let's assume that ONE of these creation stories is true. The odds of the Bible creation story being the one right one out of all the other stories (despite being filled with what are proven mistakes, inaccuracies, embellishments and outright fabrications just like all the other religious creation stories) would be stacked astronomically against the Bible story being true. 

6. The Bible is ONE BOOK. Holy though it may be, it is but one book, written many centuries ago by the knowledge of the time, with no outside scientific sources to dispute the claims. Science contains MILLIONS OF BOOKS (undergoing peer review) with millions more coming, written by humans with the same level of intelligence as the Bible writers, just with a deeper well of scientific knowledge from which to draw. You can spin/interpret the Bible in many ways, but there is nothing "new" in the Bible. The Bible *is what it is, *but *science is not finished *because science is_ a process _and scientific knowledge evolves and corrects itself when proven wrong, because real science is always searching for _the absolute truth _and to find that you have to keep searching, because once scientists state "here it is!" their first priority should be to prove themselves wrong. Just my 2 cents!


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 1, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Over 500 witnesses?
> Were they so not impressed that it took someone 5 decades later to record it?
> Who were these witnesses? They could not have all been illiterate.  Some had to be educated enough to write it down or at least tell someone who could write it down. Some had to be from foreign lands and different cultures. Where is the historical record outside of scripture? Was resurrection so common back then that people gazed upon it, shrugged, and went about their merry ways?
> 
> ...



I have researched (and will continue to research) the 500 eye witnesses story, and one source said that Paul might have seen this "in a vision". 
Some truth: when my wife had her second mental health breakdown a few years ago, she had some religious Jesus "visions" too! One delusion/hallucination had Jesus coming back and knocking out the power grid, spoiling all the food in our refrigerator.

I could go on, but the visions get kind of weird after that, and you get the gist of it. 

Even if 500 people who witnessed the resurrected Jesus over 40 days had conflicting reports (which would be expected, as it would when 500 people experience the same amazing event even today) it would be SOMETHING to hang your hat on. But there is NOTHING reported. Seeing somebody resurrected would be a pretty big deal no matter what your religious belief. And with 40 days to meet & greet Jesus to prove it actually happened, it would be about the biggest news on the planet. In other words OUTSIDE SOURCES would have at least mentioned it, but we have nothing.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Jun 1, 2022)

WaltL1 said:


> Are you sure its not a comparative point?
> I took his point simply as you are not applying the same criteria to the existence of a god and in particular a specific God, that you are applying to water drops, the position of the earth etc.
> Seems like a valid point to me.


And that was exactly how I meant it. Everything had to start at some point.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Jun 1, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> And we still can’t say they didn’t actually see a Bigfoot even if we believe they were smoking crack at the time and never saw one ourselves.
> 
> Black panthers are real ?


I'll give bigfoot at least a fraction of a percent of existing somewhere, maybe. Black panthers, no.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 1, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> There are over 500 eye witnesses of the resurrected Jesus, but does it really matter in this debate? You have formed your worldview.  You are leading with your head and Jesus is after your heart.  From the head standpoint,  you’re searching for or demanding  some irrefutable proof and that is extremely rare, so we are left with faith.  You a seem to apply your standards in one dire
> 
> Yes it is. I provided a concrete example and here comes an abstract **** that someone actually thinks is a comparative point.



Hmmm......this makes me wonder: why does God (through his word) have to lie/embellish/contradict himself if he is after your heart? Why should you have to abandon all common sense and perhaps your own standards of morality to have salvation? Should you have to abandon all critical thinking & reasoning, trick yourself into believing what you know is false & abandoning what you know is true to keep from getting eternally tortured? *Does this sound even remotely sane *if any other religion _but _Christianity was trying to pitch it to you? So why does Christianity get a pass? Nobody has ever answered these questions to my satisfaction so far.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 1, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Who said God rose from nothing?
> 
> Hmmm, that almost sounds as ridiculous as that science stuff explaining how we got here from nothing ?



Science doesn't say that the universe "came from nothing". The leading theory is that the universe started out as a small, dense singularity of energy. Where did that energy come from? Scientists can only speculate at this point.

Christianity also doesn't say that the universe "came from nothing" because God existed, and God is something. I guess Christians can speculate where God came from.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Science doesn't say that the universe "came from nothing". The leading theory is that the universe started out as a small, dense singularity of energy. Where did that energy come from? Scientists can only speculate at this point.
> 
> Christianity also doesn't say that the universe "came from nothing" because God existed, and God is something. I guess Christians can speculate where God came from.


Sadly, I've only ever heard believers use the "came from nothing" statement when they are trying to assert that Non Believers use the line.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Beyond the names, what’s their history?
> 
> Biden explaining the Constitution is going to be biased.


I post, you can do the homework.
Nobody takes my word for it anyway and then they attack the source after they ask for it.
I read what is given to me by you guys and look into it. I don't expect us all to be biblical scholars, historians, archeologists or be able to recite everything from memory. 
In fact, I had to find a post that I made in 2016 to get the link.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 1, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Sadly, I've only ever heard believers use the "came from nothing" statement when they are trying to assert that Non Believers use the line.



It could be the believers are quoting earlier believers who mocked scientists that used to say (sort of) that the big bang came from nothing. Scientists have since cleared that up of course. It's kind of like believers who say it's silly that humans came from chimps, when no scientist ever claimed that! Humans and chimps have a common ancestor further back in evolution of course and are a 98 percent genetic match (or thereabouts) with chimps. 

Also, many believers say science claims that humans cave from "cave men" but scientists haven't claimed that for decades, if they ever have. Early hominids rarely occupied caves. That said some humans have up to 4 percent Neanderthal DNA which is pretty cool!  I think some people have Denisovan DNA too.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 1, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Science doesn't say that the universe "came from nothing". The leading theory is that the universe started out as a small, dense singularity of energy. Where did that energy come from? Scientists can only speculate at this point.
> 
> Christianity also doesn't say that the universe "came from nothing" because God existed, and God is something. I guess Christians can speculate where God came from.


For evolution to work - something living evolves into something living. Life wasn’t just out there waiting to evolve.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 1, 2022)

bullethead said:


> I post, you can do the homework.
> Nobody takes my word for it anyway and then they attack the source after they ask for it.
> I read what is given to me by you guys and look into it. I don't expect us all to be biblical scholars, historians, archeologists or be able to recite everything from memory.
> In fact, I had to find a post that I made in 2016 to get the link.


I think what they’re looking for is how much more reputable are those links than any the he (Carolina) could post? 

You know me, I’m not disputing you.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> For evolution to work - something living evolves into something living. Life wasn’t just out there waiting to evolve.


Where was it,life?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I think what they’re looking for is how much more reputable are those links than any the he (Carolina) could post?
> 
> You know me, I’m not disputing you.


I have yet to see a link with sources from him or anyone that claims the Disciples/ Apostles died as Martyrs. I am dying to see historical documents. I can find various claims about how they died but also different deaths in different places and some died multiple times. All from pro religious sites but only a few list a couple sources like a Pope without proof of where that information came from. 

I don't just search con. I read pro and con and follow the evidence not claims.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 1, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Where was it,life?


Christian says God.

But I admit, the earlier question raised of where did God come from - pretty tough. I know what the Bible says abs I believe it, but that don’t mean it’s not a tough question.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 1, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> It could be the believers are quoting earlier believers who mocked scientists that used to say (sort of) that the big bang came from nothing. Scientists have since cleared that up of course. It's kind of like believers who say it's silly that humans came from chimps, when no scientist ever claimed that! Humans and chimps have a common ancestor further back in evolution of course and are a 98 percent genetic match (or thereabouts) with chimps.
> 
> Also, many believers say science claims that humans cave from "cave men" but scientists haven't claimed that for decades, if they ever have. Early hominids rarely occupied caves. That said some humans have up to 4 percent Neanderthal DNA which is pretty cool!  I think some people have Denisovan DNA too.


The biggest problem with science for believers is that everything discovered must be millions of years old. Most Christians don’t care if the earth is older than we can calculate in the Bible - the Bible was clear, in the beginning God created the heaven and earth. From the beginning to what’s called the first day, how much time is in there? It doesn’t say.

The came from nothing slogan is a sarcastic pitch back to science meaning “you want to sell me on evolution but evolution says something living evolves into something else living” and the question is raised where did that first “living” start? I’m ok coming from a microorganism because scripture says He formed us from the dust of the ground ?

I’m ok sharing DNA with primates but I am not sold on the millions of years stuff. All of that is built on an assumption that they eventually agreed on. If it was factual, there’d be no changing in the scientific theories. I’m good with “best known” but leave it there and out of the “facts” stage.

Think about it, if they found a skull right now it’d be 3 million years old. I think the earth is a lot older than Christianity thinks but not as old as science thinks.

You and I can watch a tree grow for a year and agree that it must be 100 years old because…….but truth is unless we planted it we don’t know the facts. And when we learn something new, all of what we thought we knew changes into other possibilities.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 1, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> For evolution to work - something living evolves into something living. Life wasn’t just out there waiting to evolve.



You are right that "life wasn't out there" during the very beginnings of the universe. 
But eventually if the chemistry & conditions were right at any given location (Earth for example) very simple life started. In the case of Earth, life evolved for a long enough time (and the conditions for more advanced life never became so extreme as to be hostile to life) to eventually develop humans. If this occurred once (obviously it did) then there's no logical reason why life wouldn't develop on other planets, considering there are billions of galaxies each with billions of solar systems. Not every planet is suitable to hold life of course, and no doubt evolved differently because it's conditions are different. But life exists here and there throughout the incredibly vast universe, and I have zero doubt about that. The math alone demands it.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> The biggest problem with science for believers is that everything discovered must be millions of years old. Most Christians don’t care if the earth is older than we can calculate in the Bible - the Bible was clear, in the beginning God created the heaven and earth. From the beginning to what’s called the first day, how much time is in there? It doesn’t say.
> 
> The came from nothing slogan is a sarcastic pitch back to science meaning “you want to sell me on evolution but evolution says something living evolves into something else living” and the question is raised where did that first “living” start? I’m ok coming from a microorganism because scripture says He formed us from the dust of the ground ?
> 
> ...


Have you ever wondered that in the beginning if God created Heaven and Earth.......where was God at before he created Heaven?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> The biggest problem with science for believers is that everything discovered must be millions of years old. Most Christians don’t care if the earth is older than we can calculate in the Bible - the Bible was clear, in the beginning God created the heaven and earth. From the beginning to what’s called the first day, how much time is in there? It doesn’t say.


Why wouldn't a Christian care that timeline in the Bible works for roughly 6000 years, which coincides with Historical knowledge of the race/culture/people who the Bible focuses on, but gets the time of the Earth wrong by 13point-something Billion years?



Spotlite said:


> The came from nothing slogan is a sarcastic pitch back to science meaning “you want to sell me on evolution but evolution says something living evolves into something else living” and the question is raised where did that first “living” start? I’m ok coming from a microorganism because scripture says He formed us from the dust of the ground ?


That pitch might be used by you in that way, but we have all seen in here people who flat out base their arguments on it.



Spotlite said:


> I’m ok sharing DNA with primates but I am not sold on the millions of years stuff. All of that is built on an assumption that they eventually agreed on. If it was factual, there’d be no changing in the scientific theories. I’m good with “best known” but leave it there and out of the “facts” stage.
> 
> 
> Think about it, if they found a skull right now it’d be 3 million years old. I think the earth is a lot older than Christianity thinks but not as old as science thinks.


Science uses systems that all reinforce each other.  They know how soil is layered and lengths of time it takes to form. When something is found in those layers it is a good indicator of age.



Spotlite said:


> You and I can watch a tree grow for a year and agree that it must be 100 years old because…….but truth is unless we planted it we don’t know the facts. And when we learn something new, all of what we thought we knew changes into other possibilities.


We know certain plants and trees etc grow at certain rates. So many inches or feet per year. Some gave annual rings that coincide with the years of growth. It may fool you and I by looking at it but scientists don't look at it and guess.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 1, 2022)

"I’m ok sharing DNA with primates but I am not sold on the millions of years stuff."
Spotlight

That's a fair & reasonable statement. So do you believe in evolution, even if at a sped up rate that might not play out over millions of years? That would be the only way that millions of different species could emerge from the small diversity of species on Noah's Ark, correct? The reason I'm asking is some believers don't believe in evolution as pitched by science, but they do believe that animals "adapted" into millions of species after the Ark hit dry ground a  few thousand years ago. IMHO this theory is having your cake and eating it too.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 1, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Have you ever wondered that in the beginning if God created Heaven and Earth.......where was God at before he created Heaven?



Yes I have wondered that. Some people speculate that God and the universe began simultaneously. Also some speculate that God was a universe that contracted into the singularity that launched the "big bang" that expanded into our current universe. That would be one way to explain God existing outside of space & time, since most scientists think that space & time (as we know them) didn't exist until the big bang occurred.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> "I’m ok sharing DNA with primates but I am not sold on the millions of years stuff."
> Spotlight
> 
> That's a fair & reasonable statement. So do you believe in evolution, even if at a sped up rate that might not play out over millions of years? That would be the only way that millions of different species could emerge from the small diversity of species on Noah's Ark, correct? The reason I'm asking is some believers don't believe in evolution as pitched by science, but they do believe that animals "adapted" into millions of species after the Ark hit dry ground a  few thousand years ago. IMHO this theory is having your cake and eating it too.


Its hard to feed carnivores meat when there is only One male meat and One female meat of each animal on board and the loss of either one results in the loss of an entire species.
Times that by all the carnivores on board vs all the meals they would need and Noah would be lucky to make it to dry land himself without being a snack.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Yes I have wondered that. Some people speculate that God and the universe began simultaneously. Also some speculate that God was a universe that contracted into the singularity that launched the "big bang" that expanded into our current universe. That would be one way to explain God existing outside of space & time, since most scientists think that space & time (as we know them) didn't exist until the big bang occurred.


God holding his breath and inflating then exploding like the one guy in Big Trouble in Little China sounds about right.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 1, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Have you ever wondered that in the beginning if God created Heaven and Earth.......where was God at before he created Heaven?


Yes I have. I think every Christian does. I don’t think it’s enough to challenge their belief in God, but I’m sure it’s crossed their mind - “where did God come from”


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 1, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Its hard to feed carnivores meat when there is only One male meat and One female meat of each animal on board and the loss of either one results in the loss of an entire species.
> Times that by all the carnivores on board vs all the meals they would need and Noah would be lucky to make it to dry land himself without being a snack.



Noah's Ark is opening up a can of worms of biblical proportions!   That story is wrong on so many levels it just...has...to...be...metaphor. Engineering, biology, zoology, geology, geography, physics, math - did I miss any aspects of the natural world that are torn asunder by the Ark story?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 1, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Why wouldn't a Christian care that timeline in the Bible works for roughly 6000 years, which coincides with Historical knowledge of the race/culture/people who the Bible focuses on, but gets the time of the Earth wrong by 13point-something Billion years?
> 
> 
> That pitch might be used by you in that way, but we have all seen in here people who flat out base their arguments on it.
> ...


Christians really don’t care that much about the timeline as far as age of earth from in the beginning until God formed man because theres indication of a time frame given there. But yeah it does matter once man was made because it dies start establishing a timeline of people that affect who we say we are today as a Christian.

Agree on the rest.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 1, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Noah's Ark is opening up a can of worms of biblical proportions!   That story is wrong on so many levels it just...has...to...be...metaphor. Engineering, biology, zoology, geology, geography, physics, math - did I miss any aspects of the natural world that are torn asunder by the Ark story?


Hey!!! Careful. We’re taking a road trip to see it soon. I don’t want to research nothing about it until I get back lol


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Yes I have. I think every Christian does. I don’t think it’s enough to challenge their belief in God, but I’m sure it’s crossed their mind - “where did God come from”


Not even where did he come from but he had to be somewhere before he created Heaven.
On one hand we are told God lives in Heaven and then we are told God is everywhere at all times. Jesus sits at the right hand but doesn't everyone if God is everywhere ?
Where was God before Heaven and Earth and this Universe if none of it existed?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 2, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Not even where did he come from but he had to be somewhere before he created Heaven.
> On one hand we are told God lives in Heaven and then we are told God is everywhere at all times. Jesus sits at the right hand but doesn't everyone if God is everywhere ?
> Where was God before Heaven and Earth and this Universe if none of it existed?


Where He was isn’t that hard since Christians believe He is a spirit and is omnipresent. He’s everywhere. Naturally yes our first instinct is heaven or at least encompassing what we know as our atmosphere.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Christians really don’t care that much about the timeline as far as age of earth from in the beginning until God formed man because theres indication of a time frame given there. But yeah it does matter once man was made because it dies start establishing a timeline of people that affect who we say we are today as a Christian.
> 
> Agree on the rest.


Well,  they can't care or must not want to think about it at all because there are accurate answers that they just don't want to hear or believe.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 2, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Yes I have. I think every Christian does. I don’t think it’s enough to challenge their belief in God, but I’m sure it’s crossed their mind - “where did God come from”



Any truthful answer to a question like that is so beyond the level of human comprehension that it would be like trying to explain algebra to a garden snail.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Where He was isn’t that hard since Christians believe He is a spirit and is omnipresent. He’s everywhere. Naturally yes our first instinct is heaven or at least encompassing what we know as our atmosphere.


There must be a place to be present in it. Heaven is the go to answer. But the Bible says God created Heaven so where was his presence at before everywhere was created?
If something existed that a presence can reside in it, then that place must be where the Universe spawned from too.

Edited to add:
It's starting to sound like God had an address and it was on Nothing Lane in the town of Nowhere, N/A. 00000


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Noah's Ark is opening up a can of worms of biblical proportions!   That story is wrong on so many levels it just...has...to...be...metaphor. Engineering, biology, zoology, geology, geography, physics, math - did I miss any aspects of the natural world that are torn asunder by the Ark story?


Yea, you missed Psychology.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 2, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Where He was isn’t that hard since Christians believe He is a spirit and is omnipresent. He’s everywhere. Naturally yes our first instinct is heaven or at least encompassing what we know as our atmosphere.



I get freaked out wondering what exists beyond the edge of the universe. 
If the universe is "everything" but the universe is expanding (which it is) then it is expanding into the nothingness beyond it.  Space and time in legit "nothingness" would be meaningless, because what is "time" but the distance between events happening, and "space" is the distance between the subjects of the events that aren't happening in the first place because there are no subjects to form events around. 

Okay I'm off to bed now! Sleep tight everybody!


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 2, 2022)

bullethead said:


> There must be a place to be present in it. Heaven is the go to answer. But the Bible says God created Heaven so where was his presence at before everywhere was created?
> If something existed that a presence can reside in it, then that place must be where the Universe spawned from too.
> 
> Edited to add:
> It's starting to sound like God had an address and it was on Nothing Lane in the town of Nowhere, N/A. 00000



Universally speaking, His dwelling place encompassed and still encompasses everywhere. A “cosmical” place to dwell wasn’t created for Him, it was created for the believers.

Now you see how ridiculous it sounds when science says we evolved from a life………that originated??????????  on Nothing Lane in the town of Nowhere, NA 00000??????

I’ll buy life evolving into life. But don’t take me back to the point of just poof there was life started with a chemical reaction or by microbes left in rocks for 3 million years.

We’re too complexed of a creature and we’ve had the same form of brain / learning capabilities for at least 6,000 years and we’ve advanced too much in just the last 200 years as compared to those “undeveloped” for several hundred thousands of years. We went from horses to airplanes and look how far we came with just airplanes in just a 100 years. They expect us to believe we sat idle half naked on a rock in the desert from sun up to sun down doing absolutely nothing for hundreds of thousands of years? It’s starting to sound like we aren’t as old as science wants us to be, if we are, that learning curve 10,000 years and beyond was on pause.

I’ll catch y’all later - making my South Georgia run this morning.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Universally speaking, His dwelling place encompassed and still encompasses everywhere. A “cosmical” place to dwell wasn’t created for Him, it was created for the believers.


Where is everywhere outside of the Cosmical?



Spotlite said:


> Now you see how ridiculous it sounds when science says we evolved from a life………that originated??????????  on Nothing Lane in the town of Nowhere, NA 00000??????


It only sounds ridiculous when a believer keeps asserting that Science and Non Believers say life originated from Nothing. Please show me where science says that.
Science goes back to a point and then says we don't know what was taking place one second before that. The believer somehow translates that into "nothing".



Spotlite said:


> I’ll buy life evolving into life. But don’t take me back to the point of just poof there was life started with a chemical reaction or by microbes left in rocks for 3 million years.


Try 10 BILLION years. An amount of time we cannot grasp. Here is a basic grade school breakdown where you can take the key points and research further for more in depth scientific lingo and explanations.
https://evolution.berkeley.edu/from-soup-to-cells-the-origin-of-life/when-did-life-originate/




Spotlite said:


> We’re too complexed of a creature and we’ve had the same form of brain / learning capabilities for at least 6,000 years and we’ve too advanced in just the last 200 years as compared to those “undeveloped” for several hundred thousands of years. We went from horses to airplanes and look how far we came with just airplanes in just a 100 years. They expect us to believe we sat idle half naked on a rock in the desert from sun up to sun down doing absolutely nothing for hundreds of thousands of years? It’s starting to sound like we aren’t as old as science wants us to be, if we are, that learning curve 10,000 years and beyond was on pause.


Fire is the difference and then Agriculture. Each allowed humans to develope and evolve.
https://www.amnh.org/explore/science-topics/microbiome-health/fire-cooking-human-evolution

Agriculture kick started the modern human phase. It happened about 10,000 +/- . Which is when you are stuck on thinking human life started. Agriculture was the catalyst for immense growth in civilization and advancement in every other category because we no longer had to be Hunter/Gatherers who didn't just sit around as you seem to think, but spent every moment trying to get our next meal.
Once we were able to congregate evolution in all areas advanced more quickly. Once a breakthrough discovery happened in one area it unleashed potential solutions in other areas. We didnt know about germs in the Civil War, that is why there were more deaths from infections than killed in battle. Once we figured it out we advanced tremendously.  Same for inventions, medicine,  Industrial revolution and on and on and on. When a new method was used many times it was able to be incorporated into other fields that advanced them tremendously.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/scienc...-maps/early-agriculture-and-rise-civilization

The answers you are confused about are available,  you have to look for them.



Spotlite said:


> I'll catch y’all later - making my South Georgia run this morning.


Be safe


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 2, 2022)

The thing about evolution, or human technological advancement, or pretty much any process of change is this: nothing is linear! In other words if you were to graph improvements or changes or complexity rates of change over time it would not be a straight, steady line. 

For example, humans 40,000 years ago may have gone MANY GENERATIONS between new technological advancements. In other words one tribe may have figured out how to make a crude boat to better reach & harvest fish. That tribe may have used that style of boat for 150 years before somebody in the tribe developed a slightly better style of boat. Perhaps they ran across a more advanced tribe who had this improved boat, who knows? Maybe the tribe increased in size so they needed to reach and harvest a bigger or more plentiful species of fish, who knows? 

Once large scale agriculture was developed that would be an ENORMOUS jump in the rate of change in technology & advancement! Agriculture led to writing and advanced math which led to easier access to new ideas that led to new advancements, etc.etc.

But back to primitive microbes not changing much for millions of years at a time:
evolution means future generations of any living, reproducing species adapt to a changing environment. If the environment barely changes, evolution occurs at a slower pace. Factor in the early Earth DIDN'T EVEN HAVE MUCH OXYGEN! 
Not a lot of variety can develop in such an atmosphere. Oxygen levels eventually increasing was a HUGE GAME CHANGER in Earth's evolution! Google how an oxygen enriched environment was essential - it's very interesting! Or just google primitive life on earth evolving and it will explain the whole process.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> The thing about evolution, or human technological advancement, or pretty much any process of change is this: nothing is linear! In other words if you were to graph improvements or changes or complexity rates of change over time it would not be a straight, steady line.
> 
> For example, humans 40,000 years ago may have gone MANY GENERATIONS between new technological advancements. In other words one tribe may have figured out how to make a crude boat to better reach & harvest fish. That tribe may have used that style of boat for 150 years before somebody in the tribe developed a slightly better style of boat. Perhaps they ran across a more advanced tribe who had this improved boat, who knows? Maybe the tribe increased in size so they needed to reach and harvest a bigger or more plentiful species of fish, who knows?
> 
> ...


The answers are available and the amount of time and changing conditions are almost too great to conceive. The gradual and subtle changes that didn't work out are far more than the ones that did but all of them require the ability of understanding that things as we see them now are not as they were millions and billions of years ago. Things now couldn't survive then and vise-versa.
Organic matter that got buried and had hundreds of millions of years of more sediment on top created forces to turn it into coal. That just does not happen in short amounts of time like tens or even hundreds of thousands of years. And certainly not in a Biblical timeline.  The excuse that God Did It in 6 days because he is God to counter in total disregard of what Science does understand is the worst excuse ever.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (Jun 2, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Why wouldn't a Christian care that timeline in the Bible works for roughly 6000 years, which coincides with Historical knowledge of the race/culture/people who the Bible focuses on, but gets the time of the Earth wrong by 13point-something Billion years?
> 
> 
> That pitch might be used by you in that way, but we have all seen in here people who flat out base their arguments on it.
> ...


The method for dating the earth is flawed. One of the great things about science is that it’s constantly evolving. There is very little true “settled science”.  Nuclear decay rates have been demonstrated to not remaining constant. There are also a lot of issues with parent and daughter atom decay rates. The variation is abundant.  To get the answer that supports your worldview, you have to plug in the decay rate as a constant in the calculation.  A lot of people who think they hold the intellectual high ground look silly when you dig deep enough.  Way too many people think they can just through out the word science and 99.9% of them don’t know how to tell good science from bad.  Historical science is the faith-based religion of those who think they’re non-religious. 

Secular science has completely jumped the shark.  There is actually a movement to change the definition of theory so that theory can be taught as fact and just blindly accepted.  You can google this and read it for yourself.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> The method for dating the earth is flawed. One of the great things about science is that it’s constantly evolving. There is very little true “settled science”.  Nuclear decay rates have been demonstrated to not remaining constant. There are also a lot of issues with parent and daughter atom decay rates. The variation is abundant.  To get the answer that supports your worldview, you have to plug in the decay rate as a constant in the calculation.  A lot of people who think they hold the intellectual high ground look silly when you dig deep enough.  Way too many people think they can just through out the word science and 99.9% of them don’t know how to tell good science from bad.  Historical science is the faith-based religion of those who think they’re non-religious.
> 
> Secular science has completely jumped the shark.  There is actually a movement to change the definition of theory so that theory can be taught as fact and just blindly accepted.  You can google this and read it for yourself.


Did you let the Scientific community know that the method is flawed?
And, How old is the Earth?

I know you can back it up or you wouldn't say it.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (Jun 2, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Not even where did he come from but he had to be somewhere before he created Heaven.
> On one hand we are told God lives in Heaven and then we are told God is everywhere at all times. Jesus sits at the right hand but doesn't everyone if God is everywhere ?
> Where was God before Heaven and Earth and this Universe if none of it existed?


No one can answer this. There are things that make him God and the fact that He has always existed is one of those things. I know He exists because I have experienced Him. So has my Wife, Mother, Grandmother, Brother, Sister, my Dad on His deathbed, many of my friends, and people I respect and have a relationship with.  You can’t experience someone who isn’t there.  We can debate who wrote what when, but me and many people close to me have a personal relationship with Christ. There is a clear before Christ and after Christ in my family and many (not all) of my friends. There’s no way I can accurately type on the little phone what a relationship with Jesus Christ is like, but He’s very real even if He hasn’t revealed everything about Himself yet.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (Jun 2, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Did you let the Scientific community know that the method is flawed?
> And, How old is the Earth?
> 
> I know you can back it up or you wouldn't say it.


Oh look, an insulting remark when we don’t know what to say.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (Jun 2, 2022)

bullethead said:


> The answers are available and the amount of time and changing conditions are almost too great to conceive. The gradual and subtle changes that didn't work out are far more than the ones that did but all of them require the ability of understanding that things as we see them now are not as they were millions and billions of years ago. Things now couldn't survive then and vise-versa.
> Organic matter that got buried and had hundreds of millions of years of more sediment on top created forces to turn it into coal. That just does not happen in short amounts of time like tens or even hundreds of thousands of years. And certainly not in a Biblical timeline.  The excuse that God Did It in 6 days because he is God to counter in total disregard of what Science does understand is the worst excuse ever.


Research polystrate trees. How can a tree that is a less than a hundred years old be fossilized through “millions” of years of rocks?  They’ve been found all over the world.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (Jun 2, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Research polystrate trees. How can a tree that is a less than a hundred years old be fossilized through “millions” of years of rocks?  They’ve been found all over the world.



Edit - it doesn’t have to be trees, you can just research polystrate fossils.

Historical science is a religion with a cult following who NEVER EVER question it or even just hold it to it’s own standards.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Oh look, an insulting remark when we don’t know what to say.


If you took anything in there as an insult that is on you.
I didn't call you a name.
I asked you direct questions to which you apparently have no answers for.

It is impossible to claim I had nothing to say when I asked you two direct questions.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> Research polystrate trees. How can a tree that is a less than a hundred years old be fossilized through “millions” of years of rocks?  They’ve been found all over the world.


Most trees that protrude through various strata have certain things in common.


They have a root system in clay. This was once river sediment and was the ground when the trees were growing. Later the trees either were immersed in water by the river and slowly covered with river sediment, or they were rapidly buried in a river flood or mudslide.
The layer above the clay, the hardened river sediment, is usually a coal seam, formed by the plant life that grew there with the trees.
Above that is more hardened sediment, where part of the trunks of trees and a lot of foliage was buried by a river flood.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2022)

bullethead said:


> If you took anything in there as an insult that is on you.
> I didn't call you a name.
> I asked you direct questions to which you apparently have no answers for.
> 
> It is impossible to claim I had nothing to say when I asked you two direct questions.


https://infidels.org/library/modern/dave-matson-young-earth-geologic-column-out-of-place/


----------



## CarolinaDawg (Jun 2, 2022)

bullethead said:


> If you took anything in there as an insult that is on you.
> I didn't call you a name.
> I asked you direct questions to which you apparently have no answers for.
> 
> It is impossible to claim I had nothing to say when I asked you two direct questions.


You asked one legitimate question and one that doesn’t deserve a response. I believe every single word of the Bible to be the inherent, infallible word of God. Therefore I believe the earth is exactly as old as the Word of God says it is - 6,000+ years old.  I’ve laid out my experience with science in a previous post and I have seen nothing that proves the God’s word wrong. From my perspective, more faith is required to believe in the Big Bang and evolutionary theories than the intelligent design of Almighty God.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (Jun 2, 2022)

bullethead said:


> https://infidels.org/library/modern/dave-matson-young-earth-geologic-column-out-of-place/


I’m not sure if you read the whole article, but the first half is him explaining, not proving, and then he actually used radiological dating as support. The Historical Science community as largely devolved into leftist social engineers.  This guy’s anger was palpable.  They no longer follow the scientific method.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (Jun 2, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Most trees that protrude through various strata have certain things in common.
> 
> 
> They have a root system in clay. This was once river sediment and was the ground when the trees were growing. Later the trees either were immersed in water by the river and slowly covered with river sediment, or they were rapidly buried in a river flood or mudslide.
> ...


All polystrate fossils are not trees. What’s the problem with the others?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> You asked one legitimate question and one that doesn’t deserve a response. I believe every single word of the Bible to be the inherent, infallible word of God. Therefore I believe the earth is exactly as old as the Word of God says it is - 6,000+ years old.  I’ve laid out my experience with science in a previous post and I have seen nothing that proves the God’s word wrong. From my perspective, more faith is required to believe in the Big Bang and evolutionary theories than the intelligent design of Almighty God.


My man, I didn't ask you what you believe. 
I asked you how old the Earth is and hoped that you had evidence to prove it.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> All polystrate fossils are not trees. What’s the problem with the others?


If YOU read the article it explains a whale standing on end as a fossil and how that happens.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> I’m not sure if you read the whole article, but the first half is him explaining, not proving, and then he actually used radiological dating as support. The Historical Science community as largely devolved into leftist social engineers.  This guy’s anger was palpable.  They no longer follow the scientific method.


I guess you skipped over the parts that explain in detail how the trees and fossils happen.


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 2, 2022)

This thread has gotten so off topic -- but at least everybody seems to be enjoying themselves.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Jun 2, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> You asked one legitimate question and one that doesn’t deserve a response. I believe every single word of the Bible to be the inherent, infallible word of God. Therefore I believe the earth is exactly as old as the Word of God says it is - 6,000+ years old.  I’ve laid out my experience with science in a previous post and I have seen nothing that proves the God’s word wrong. From my perspective, more faith is required to believe in the Big Bang and evolutionary theories than the intelligent design of Almighty God.


If you believe that and it brings you comfort, and relying on one human-assembled composite book for all the knowledge you ever need to live your life with all curiosity about the truth of things stifled, then good for you. I have lots of projectile points that are over 6,000 years old.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 2, 2022)

"I know He exists because I have experienced Him. So has my Wife, Mother, Grandmother, Brother, Sister, my Dad on His deathbed, many of my friends, and people I respect and have a relationship with. You can’t experience someone who isn’t there. We can debate who wrote what when, but me and many people close to me have a personal relationship with Christ. There is a clear before Christ and after Christ in my family and many (not all) of my friends. There’s no way I can accurately type on the little phone what a relationship with Jesus Christ is like, but He’s very real even if He hasn’t revealed everything about Himself yet." - Carolina Dawg

I have no doubt that you are sincere in your belief, and your personal experiences mean a great deal to you. But from my point of view, there are many other followers of many other religions across the world. Thousands of these followers could have testimonies very similar to yours, except giving the credit to *a different god.* 

Not to attack your faith - you have the right to believe what you want - but how can you prove that your god is the only god? Or the only right god? What about the sincere followers of all the other faiths that exist across the world, that existed in the past, 
or may exist in the future? Doesn't their god seem very "real" to them? 

So personally I can only see two choices: either every god exists, or none of them do.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 2, 2022)

NCHillbilly said:


> If you believe that and it brings you comfort, and relying on one human-assembled composite book for all the knowledge you ever need to live your life with all curiosity about the truth of things stifled, then good for you. I have lots of projectile points that are over 6,000 years old.



6,000 years old IF you believe that dating is accurate. 
I think I read that even old fashioned carbon-14 dating is pretty accurate up to about 50,000 years, but there are several other methods that can date things back much further. 

Regardless, anybody who can sincerely believe that the bible (or any holy book from any other religion) is 100 percent true & accurate has some dedication & tenacity, and I tip my hat to them for that, even if I disagree with them. It takes A LOT OF FAITH to do this in 2022 with mountains of testable, empirical data to disprove their claims.

It takes MORE than faith it takes SUPER FAITH and here is why:
FAITH is the belief in what is unseen. So if I told you something that you hadn't seen but sounds relatively believable and_ could _be possible, that is faith. You may have some doubt, but a nominal bit of faith can help you overcome that doubt.

But *SUPER FAITH* (by my definition) is disbelief in what is seen. I'll say it again, disbelief in what is seen. Thousands of years ago miracles and myths and tall tales could not be disproven as easily as they could in 2022. Nowadays a believer (or potential believer) is BOMBARDED with *mountains* of evidence DIRECTLY CONFLICTING with any ideas or stories that are "unseen" that take faith to believe in. 
Now you have a heavy, heavy extra burden on your faith, which is DISBELIEVING the contradictory proof you have just seen with your own eyes! 
Is it any wonder that fewer & fewer young people are believers in god? They are much more informed about the big, diverse, complicated, science driven world they live in. It's harder to "pull the wool over their eyes" than it used to be.


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 2, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Please post the scripture in the OT where God says to abandon Judiasm and incorporate something new.



I know this thread has gone way past this, but I just read this scripture in a book I’m reading by Michael Brown, a Messianic Jew:

“Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:  Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:  But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.  And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” - Jer. 31:31-34


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 2, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> I have no doubt that you are sincere in your belief, and your personal experiences mean a great deal to you. But from my point of view, there are many other followers of many other religions across the world. Thousands of these followers could have testimonies very similar to yours, except giving the credit to *a different god.*
> 
> Not to attack your faith - you have the right to believe what you want - but how can you prove that your god is the only god? Or the only right god? What about the sincere followers of all the other faiths that exist across the world, that existed in the past,
> or may exist in the future? Doesn't their god seem very "real" to them?
> ...


Any other way and deception would not exist. 



> Thousands of these followers could have testimonies very similar to yours, except giving the credit to *a different god..*



They could. How’s that dispute one over the other? The believer doesn’t have insecurities in “what if’s”. Our Bible is clear as to why the above happens. We’re not concerned about the others because we’ve ruled them out, completely. There’s nothing to consider and compare. They feel the sane about us - ok. 


> So personally I can only see two choices: either every god exists, or none of them do.


Your perception and parameters are just yours, though.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 2, 2022)

NCHillbilly said:


> If you believe that and it brings you comfort, and relying on one human-assembled composite book for all the knowledge you ever need to live your life with all curiosity about the truth of things stifled, then good for you. I have lots of projectile points that are over 6,000 years old.





> relying on one human-assembled composite book for all the knowledge you ever need .



I don’t think you understand the Christian audience.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> I know this thread has gone way past this, but I just read this scripture in a book I’m reading by Michael Brown, a Messianic Jew:
> 
> “Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:  Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:  But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.  And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” - Jer. 31:31-34


https://www.workingpreacher.org/com...y-in-lent-2/commentary-on-jeremiah-3131-34-17


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I don’t think you understand the Christian audience.


The Christian Audience differs greatly a few floors up. I am having a hard time believing that 2+ billion are all like you. Many of your replies are suited to a Christian audience of one.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> I know this thread has gone way past this, but I just read this scripture in a book I’m reading by Michael Brown, a Messianic Jew:
> 
> “Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:  Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:  But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.  And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” - Jer. 31:31-34


It takes modern Christianity to work backwards in order to try to connect dots that just aren't there.

https://www.ancient-hebrew.org/studies-interpretation/covenants-from-a-hebrew-perspective.htm

https://aish.com/jeremiah-31-and-th...gh it,place His Torah upon our hearts (v. 32).


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 2, 2022)

bullethead said:


> The Christian Audience differs greatly a few floors up. I am having a hard time believing that 2+ billion are all like you. Many of your replies are suited to a Christian audience of one.


We’re not all alike.

Here’s the way things should be based on scripture and these are not quotes but close enough that someone can look up the scriptures if they chose to research it.

1. Study to show yourself approved.
2. Line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little, there a little.
3. In the mouths of two or three witnesses let every word be established (what did Paul say? What did Luke say? What did John say? What did Peter say?)

As an example only lets take baptism; that’s a constant argument amongst Christians, when someone takes one scripture and establishes baptism on that they’re getting truth but not getting the whole truth and they’re not following the unquoted scriptures above. You have to find every scripture in the Bible pertaining to baptism and you’ll get the whole truth.

I don’t go up there much because a lot of doctrinal debates result from not studying. You can’t debate that.

Churches baptize differently based on one scripture yet there is not one single scripture that instructs us to favor / ignore one scripture concerning baptism over another concerning baptism.

It’s a lack of study and because “Grandma said”.

And after typing that - @NCHillbilly is partially right…….just don’t tell him


----------



## bullethead (Jun 3, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> We’re not all alike.
> 
> Here’s the way things should be based on scripture and these are not quotes but close enough that someone can look up the scriptures if they chose to research it.
> 
> ...


I would bet when asked that the leaders within the Churches who all do things differently would say that they also studied scripture and their interpretation is the correct one.

As far as "In the mouths of witnesses"....
These authors certainly were not witnesses except for *maybe* John. 2 gospels used Mark as a source and copied or wrote based off his writing.
It's like saying that 3 students got 100s on the test and praising it as good teaching but in reality 2 kids copied off of 1 to get their answers.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 3, 2022)

bullethead said:


> I would bet when asked that the leaders within the Churches who all do things differently would say that they also studied scripture and their interpretation is the correct one.
> 
> As far as "In the mouths of witnesses"....
> These authors certainly were not witnesses except for *maybe* John. 2 gospels used Mark as a source and copied or wrote based off his writing.
> It's like saying that 3 students got 100s on the test and praising it as good teaching but in reality 2 kids copied off of 1 to get their answers.


As far as witnesses - that`s subjective. I have no argument there.



> I would bet when asked that the leaders within the Churches who all do things differently would say that they also studied scripture their interpretation is the correct one.


That is exactly what they would say. The problem is there is no private interpretation. In the case of baptism since that was the example - when their interpretation conflicts with another scripture, I would bet their interpretation is just their stinking thinking. 

NOTE*** I have nothing specific to argue on the example, just used that as example only it because I know that .


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 3, 2022)

bullethead said:


> It takes modern Christianity to work backwards in order to try to connect dots that just aren't there.
> 
> https://www.ancient-hebrew.org/studies-interpretation/covenants-from-a-hebrew-perspective.htm
> 
> https://aish.com/jeremiah-31-and-the-new-covenant/#:~:text=Jeremiah 31:30 follows this same pattern. Although it,place His Torah upon our hearts (v. 32).



I read these and the other link, but I just disagree.  I agree with Peter, Paul, Apollos, and the other JEWS who accepted Jesus as messiah.


----------



## brutally honest (Jun 3, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> As an example only lets take baptism; that’s a constant argument amongst Christians …



Really?  Who knew?


----------



## RegularJoe (Jun 3, 2022)

If it is OK for esteemed scientists to thoughtfully disagree with one another, 

wouldn't it also be OK for well studied theologians to do the same 

(e.g., as example: above on baptism)?

Don't both arrive at 'truth' thru the same intellectual process?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 3, 2022)

RegularJoe said:


> If it is OK for esteemed scientists to thoughtfully disagree with one another,
> 
> wouldn't it also be OK for well studied theologians to do the same
> 
> ...


Exactly! And a-lot of times folks appearing to argue / disagree are just looking for truth. Everyone does not share the same level of "learning /  knowledge", some are still on babes milk, some are on meat, some are in between growing.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 3, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> I read these and the other link, but I just disagree.  I agree with Peter, Paul, Apollos, and the other JEWS who accepted Jesus as messiah.


The core group of a new religion, who would ever guess that thier versions differ from the Original with stories written decades afterwards to suit? Not surprising at all.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 3, 2022)

RegularJoe said:


> If it is OK for esteemed scientists to thoughtfully disagree with one another,
> 
> wouldn't it also be OK for well studied theologians to do the same
> 
> ...


What could there be to disagree about the Word of God?
Now, man-made stories about a God, yep, disagree when when discrepancies are found.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 3, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Exactly! And a-lot of times folks appearing to argue / disagree are just looking for truth. Everyone does not share the same level of "learning /  knowledge", some are still on babes milk, some are on meat, some are in between growing.


The good conversation is worth it


----------



## CarolinaDawg (Jun 3, 2022)

bullethead said:


> What could there be to disagree about the Word of God?
> Now, man-made stories about a God, yep, disagree when when discrepancies are found.


There is someone called Satan who actively works to keep as many people as


bullethead said:


> The core group of a new religion, who would ever guess that thier versions differ from the Original with stories written decades afterwards to suit? Not surprising at all.


Several times you’ve used the dates of New Testament texts as a reason to support your view of their being invalid? If you apply your standards and logic consistently, many historical figures never existed and countless historical events never occurred.  You’re an intelligent person, but I would love to see where you would land if you were completely inflexible with the application of your standards and logic.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 3, 2022)

bullethead said:


> What could there be to disagree about the Word of God?
> Now, man-made stories about a God, yep, disagree when when discrepancies are found.


Bingo.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (Jun 3, 2022)

bullethead said:


> The core group of a new religion, who would ever guess that thier versions differ from the Original with stories written decades afterwards to suit? Not surprising at all.


Several times you’ve used the dates of New Testament texts as a reason to support your view of their being invalid? If you apply your standards and logic consistently, many historical figures never existed and countless historical events never occurred.  You’re an intelligent person, and I would love to see where you would land if you were completely inflexible with the application of your standards and logic.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 3, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Exactly! And a-lot of times folks appearing to argue / disagree are just looking for truth. Everyone does not share the same level of "learning /  knowledge", some are still on babes milk, some are on meat, some are in between growing.


I agree with you and RJ on this except....
when we are talking about an omni-everything God whos word it is that He wants everyone to follow.
My expectation in that case is that you shouldnt have to search for "truth", it should undeniably slap you in the face. Everybody.
And yes I acknowledge that is just my expectation.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 3, 2022)

bullethead said:


> The good conversation is worth it


Yes Sir, agreed.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 3, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> There is someone called Satan who actively works to keep as many people as
> 
> Several times you’ve used the dates of New Testament texts as a reason to support your view of their being invalid? If you apply your standards and logic consistently, many historical figures never existed and countless historical events never occurred.  You’re an intelligent person, but I would love to see where you would land if you were completely inflexible with the application of your standards and logic.


The boogyman is just an excuse for unexplainable bad things. If Satan is so bad why does a loving God allow it to exist?

Imagine our conversations on here but happening in person.
Now 30 to 80 years later someone who wasn't there writes a story about what we've said. How accurate do you think it will be?
The Victors write the history.  When an organization destroys any and all accounts that tell different stories from the same time period which do not coincide with what the organization is trying to sell, then I smell a rat.
The War between the States was taught differently above and below the Mason Dixon Line. The truth, as always, lies somewhere in the middle.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 3, 2022)

WaltL1 said:


> I agree with you and RJ on this except....
> when we are talking about an omni-everything God whos word it is that He wants everyone to follow.
> My expectation in that case is that you shouldnt have to search for "truth", it should undeniably slap you in the face. Everybody.
> And yes I acknowledge that is just my expectation.


I can agree but that’s why I have a hard time with those that reject the thought that man is allowed to simply say “I don’t want that”. They somehow confuse God allowing / giving man that choice as man having power over God. God’s don’t need any specific man for His Will to be done.

But I’m content if that’s how they think it is because at the end of the day it really don’t change much. 

So for me the idea of “it should undeniably slap you in the face” kind of makes doubt and deception non existent. 

But I don’t disagree with you.


----------



## RegularJoe (Jun 3, 2022)

bullethead said:


> What could there be to disagree about the Word of God?
> Now, man-made stories about a God, yep, disagree when when discrepancies are found.


I am not omniscient and, personally, need to work thru the process of finding truth ... whether it be scientific or it be theological.


----------



## 660griz (Jun 6, 2022)

WaltL1 said:


> ...we are talking about an omni-everything God whos word it is that He wants everyone to follow.
> My expectation in that case is that you shouldnt have to search for "truth", it should undeniably slap you in the face. Everybody.
> And yes I acknowledge that is just my expectation.


But, but...the flood, the impregnation of a married woman, crucifixion?  You mean God knew all that was gonna happen and did it anyway?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 6, 2022)

Israel said:


> Though you may be being facetious (if I even understand that word at all), to me I find a fine point being made...if this God is as omni as omni everything (and even there we may find disagreement as to what omni means for inclusion...and probably more so among what calls itself christian)...there's a kinda question I find inherent in (what may be) your facetiousness.
> 
> 
> Then, why?


So in summary:
Griz MAY be something that you don't understand,  there is disagreement as to what Omni even means all based on a "kinda" question. 
Based on the above Yes, WHY!?!


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 6, 2022)

WaltL1 said:


> I agree with you and RJ on this except....
> when we are talking about an omni-everything God whos word it is that He wants everyone to follow.
> My expectation in that case is that you shouldnt have to search for "truth", it should undeniably slap you in the face. Everybody.
> And yes I acknowledge that is just my expectation.



addressing the last sentence in your comment:
God can do anything....but he won't do everything. 

Sort of like the US military! They can put a missile through a window of a building 100 miles away, but they can't get your paycheck straightened out.


----------



## 660griz (Jun 6, 2022)

Israel said:


> Though you may be being facetious (if I even understand that word at all), to me I find a fine point being made...if this God is as omni as omni everything (and even there we may find disagreement as to what omni means for inclusion...and probably more so among what calls itself christian)...there's a kinda question I find inherent in (what may be) your facetiousness.
> 
> 
> Then, why?



Just so we are on the same page, the one of the 'omni everthing' definitions I was using was, omniscient: *having complete or unlimited knowledge, awareness, or understanding; perceiving all things*


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 7, 2022)

Israel said:


> That's pretty close except for two things. I had hoped it would be clear disagreement was not assumed (between he and I) but could be present.
> 
> And that even if the question of "Then, why" was construed rightly in the statements...it itself was not the necessary source of possible disagreement regarding any understanding of "omni evertyhing".
> 
> But it might eventually come to that. Just not yet in the present exchange.



Okay, I think I'm omniconfused at this point!


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 7, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Okay, I think I'm omniconfused at this point!





> I'm omniconfused


Lol ?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 8, 2022)

This throws a wrench into the Omniscient and Omnipresent claims.

The first recorded question that God asked man (Adam) was, “where are you?”.

_“And they heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool [afternoon breeze] of the day, so the man and his wife hid and kept themselves hidden from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. But the Lord God called to Adam, and said to him, “Where are you?” Genesis 3:8,9 AMP_


----------



## NCHillbilly (Jun 8, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I don’t think you understand the Christian audience.


  

Really? I was raised by a Baptist preacher. I was in church several days a week every time the doors were open from the time I was a baby until I was grown and able to make my own decisions about religion. My whole life revolved around Christianity for the first 16-18 years of my life. I think I very, very, very, very, very much understand the Christian audience to a degree that you can't comprehend, because you've never looked at it from the outside, only the inside. I have looked at it from both perspectives. A lot.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

NCHillbilly said:


> Really? I was raised by a Baptist preacher. I was in church several days a week every time the doors were open from the time I was a baby until I was grown and able to make my own decisions about religion. My whole life revolved around Christianity for the first 16-18 years of my life. I think I very, very, very, very, very much understand the Christian audience to a degree that you can't comprehend, because you've never looked at it from the outside, only the inside. I have looked at it from both perspectives. A lot.



I don’t know your history on that but when you say this - “relying on one human-assembled composite book for all the knowledge you ever need” says you don’t. Not in an argumentative way, just saying maybe what you were exposed to that was all there is but it doesn’t represent the entire Christian audience. We believe the Bible is accurate but we’re not relying solely on it for all the knowledge we ever need.

And I have been exposed to both sides. There’s a side to Christianity that you never understood / got so understanding it to a degree that I can’t comprehend is questionable and debatable and I’m basing that solely on your posts made on this forum.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Jun 8, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I don’t know your history on that but when you say this - “relying on one human-assembled composite book for all the knowledge you ever need” says you don’t. Not in an argumentative way, just saying maybe what you were exposed to that was all there is but it doesn’t represent the entire Christian audience. We believe the Bible is accurate but we’re not relying solely on it for all the knowledge we ever need.
> 
> And I have been exposed to both sides. There’s a side to Christianity that you never understood / got so understanding it to a degree that I can’t comprehend is questionable and debatable and I’m basing that solely on your posts made on this forum.


Oh, I got to understanding it just plenty fine. I just realized over time that I didn't agree with a lot of it.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

NCHillbilly said:


> Oh, I got to understanding it just plenty fine. I just realized over time that I didn't agree with a lot of it.





> I just realized over time that I didn't agree with a lot of it.


Now that I can understand and respect. 

The rest is subjective to what you were exposed to from both sides.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 8, 2022)

"Oh, I got to understanding it just plenty fine. I just realized over time that I didn't agree with a lot of it." - NC Hillbilly

I see this happen a lot! The more people really, really, really study the Bible they eventually start to realize that things aren't "adding up" in ways that the reader can't deny or explain away.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> "Oh, I got to understanding it just plenty fine. I just realized over time that I didn't agree with a lot of it." - NC Hillbilly
> 
> I see this happen a lot! The more people really, really, really study the Bible they eventually start to realize that things aren't "adding up" in ways that the reader can't deny or explain away.


Adding up on who’s calculator??? Not a trick question.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 8, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Adding up on who’s calculator??? Not a trick question.



The calculator of anyone who reads it with an open mind/without an agenda even if your "believer" guard is only dropped temporarily. There are countless examples of contradictions, mistakes, fabrications, plot holes, continuity breaks, falsehoods, etc. that cannot be chalked up to mistranslation/metaphor/poetic license/etc. 

In other words, if you could somehow find an adult who had no concept of religion or any deity (completely unbiased as you can get) and had them read the bible, I would wager they wouldn't get too far without them immediately saying "wait a minute! Is this a rough draft? Is this a finished product? None of it makes any sense!"


----------



## NCHillbilly (Jun 8, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Adding up on who’s calculator??? Not a trick question.


Anybody who doesn't completely suspend their common sense and logic for the sake of "faith." It's from one end to the other. We can start with plants being created before the sun was, talking snakes, and an old dude rounding up every animal on earth and getting them on a homemade boat when most of the earth wasn't even known at the time. We can end with the psychedelic shroomfest of Revelations, and the stars (which are much bigger than the earth) falling light years out of the sky to earth, seven-headed dragons appearing from the heavens, and such. And apply it to about everything between.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 8, 2022)

NCHillbilly said:


> Anybody who doesn't completely suspend their common sense and logic for the sake of "faith." It's from one end to the other. We can start with plants being created before the sun was, talking snakes, and an old dude rounding up every animal on earth and getting them on a homemade boat when most of the earth wasn't even known at the time. We can end with the psychedelic shroomfest of Revelations, and the stars (which are much bigger than the earth falling lightyears out of the sky to earth, seven-headed dragons appearing from the heavens, and such. And apply it to about everything between.



I am currently binge-watching a you tube series about Genesis. They had cities that were named after people that hadn't even been born yet!   Grandparents that were YOUNGER than their grandchildren! 
Anyway, check this out:

*Genesis 10:4-5
English Standard Version*
4 The sons of Javan: Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim. 5 From these the coastland peoples spread in their lands,* each with his own language,* by their clans, in their nations.

Okay, each group spoke their own language. Nothing unusual I suppose. But wait, there's more!

*Genesis 11
English Standard Version*

*The Tower of Babel*
11 Now* the whole earth had one language and the same words*. 2 And as people migrated from the east, they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there.

 Literally on the *very next page* the bible contradicts itself! We go from speaking different languages to the whole earth having one language. A few sentences later we see God crumbling their tower and confounding their one language to speaking many languages and thus not being able to work together on a big project again. 

Forget "literal versus metaphor" this is just a blatant mistake or contradiction that cannot be ignored. It jumps right out at the reader! How can any writer "inspired by god" not notice this? Are things like this just a "test of faith" to see just how much a believer can tolerate or ignore? That's the only reason I can fathom.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> The calculator of anyone who reads it with an open mind/without an agenda even if your "believer" guard is only dropped temporarily. There are countless examples of contradictions, mistakes, fabrications, plot holes, continuity breaks, falsehoods, etc. that cannot be chalked up to mistranslation/metaphor/poetic license/etc.
> 
> In other words, if you could somehow find an adult who had no concept of religion or any deity (completely unbiased as you can get) and had them read the bible, I would wager they wouldn't get too far without them immediately saying "wait a minute! Is this a rough draft? Is this a finished product? None of it makes any sense!"







NCHillbilly said:


> Anybody who doesn't completely suspend their common sense and logic for the sake of "faith." It's from one end to the other. We can start with plants being created before the sun was, talking snakes, and an old dude rounding up every animal on earth and getting them on a homemade boat when most of the earth wasn't even known at the time. We can end with the psychedelic shroomfest of Revelations, and the stars (which are much bigger than the earth) falling light years out of the sky to earth, seven-headed dragons appearing from the heavens, and such. And apply it to about everything between.





> None of it makes any sense!





> plants being created before the sun was, talking snakes, and an old dude rounding up every animal on earth..............



You two seem to forget that you are still not able to say that God does not exist.

You "think" He does not and admit that if He does then you certainly "can`t know what He knows, thinks, wants, etc" yet you place His limitations and capabilities based on yours.

If this God that is the Creator of all things including the impossible and miraculous that you cant comprehend the happenings of can do those things............do you really think He is going to allow YOU to figure it out based on parameters that you set? You see these as "impossible" and think the Christian suspends logic and common sense. The Christian isn`t that foolish and naive, that is something the non believer tells himself hoping his buddy backs him up.

We see the impossible and recognize that the only possible way for those things to happen is by a God such as the one described in the Bible. We don`t explain it away the way you have told yourself. We are left with nothing but if it can be done, only he can do it.

And, your boat comment is jacked up royally and a perfect example of what I meant by your view of Christianity is subjective. A little research will show you that a study was performed on the design of that "homemade boat" and the conclusion was it best hull design for safety..........of course the other side says that is because the story used designs of existing water crafts. Amazing how advanced we are now with technology and still limited and these folks way back then were kind of high tech with their writing and stealing stories to build one like the Bible that affected the world.


Yea if you stood in the desert and saw a falling star miles away that fell out of sight before you knew that the earth was bigger than your village, I am sure would have known beforehand what science discovers 100's of years later, that was not the hitting the ground and that was not the edge of the earth. Been out on a deep sea fishing boat? Does the sky really touch the water? When did you find that out?

This "Book" says there will be those that will follow God and there will be those are blinded because of their non belief. It also says He will cause some to believe a lie.

Who is all this not making sense to and who is questioning the Bible for accuracy?

Your argument based on the "impossible God" is a moot point if God does not exist. All you gotta do is just say you don`t believe it. There is no justification needed.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

bullethead said:


> This throws a wrench into the Omniscient and Omnipresent claims.
> 
> The first recorded question that God asked man (Adam) was, “where are you?”.
> 
> _“And they heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool [afternoon breeze] of the day, so the man and his wife hid and kept themselves hidden from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. But the Lord God called to Adam, and said to him, “Where are you?” Genesis 3:8,9 AMP_


The math teacher does not ask the student the sum of 4 + 4 because the teacher does not know the answer. There is a lesson to be taught.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Jun 8, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> You two seem to forget that you are still not able to say that God does not exist.
> 
> You "think" He does not and admit that if He does then you certainly "can`t know what He knows, thinks, wants, etc" yet you place His limitations and capabilities based on yours.
> 
> ...


I have never said that God doesn't exist. I have said that I don't know. I definitely feel that there is a higher power, personally. I also don't believe that it is anywhere nearly as described in any of a plethora of ancient writings or religions that purport to explain it according to their particular culture. I think most religions were organized to control people. I would tend to agree more with most pagan religions that emphasize a personal relationship with a higher power, not a set of contradictory doctrines defined in a book written centuries ago. I view the Hebrew religious texts in the same light as I do the Qoran, Hindu scriptures, Buddhist writings, Greek and Roman mythology, a book of Cherokee creation myths, or any number of other similar tomes that attempt to explain how we got here and what our purpose is defined through the lens of one culture.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

NCHillbilly said:


> I have never said that God doesn't exist. I have said that I don't know. I definitely feel that there is a higher power, personally. I also don't believe that it is anywhere nearly as described in any of a plethora of ancient writings or religions that purport to explain it according to their particular culture. I think most religions were organized to control people. I would tend to agree more with most pagan religions that emphasize a personal relationship with a higher power, not a set of contradictory doctrines defined in a book written centuries ago. I view the Hebrew religious texts in the same light as I do the Qoran, Hindu scriptures, Buddhist writings, Greek and Roman mythology, a book of Cherokee creation myths, or any number of other similar tomes that attempt to explain how we got here and what our purpose is defined through the lens of one culture.


If there’s a chance He’s there then it’s possible that He can perform the impossible stories that you read about.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 8, 2022)

"You two seem to forget that you are still not able to say that God does not exist." - spot lite

And you would be correct! I for one cannot prove that God does not exist. I cannot disprove a negative. I cannot disprove what doesn't exist - I cannot test or compare "nothing" to similar known things. This applies not just to God but to everything that seems to exist so far only in the human imagination.

*IF *everything in the Bible (no matter how outrageous it sounds) were true and accurate then *OBVIOUSLY* only a supernatural deity could do these impossible things! Filling a book with outrageous claims and plot holes wouldn't be taken seriously unless everything could be explained through supernatural abilities. 
And if you say that the book is the story of a supernatural being, then of course the book has to "live up to the hype" by being filled with outrageous stories. 
It's circular reasoning. 

Now I'm not saying that a deity of some type couldn't exist, but I am saying that IMHO the Bible is not by a long shot true and accurate. Anybody that can read the Bible can discern this, even without having to get into all the science that can certainly, empirically, disprove many of the claims. 

Here's an example of what I'm talking about:
1. Noah (and other Bible characters) used to live to be 900+ years.
2. God put a stop to this, saying "man's years shall be limited to 120."
3. A few chapters later people are living to 400+ years.
Sorry, but this isn't nitpicking - this kind of jumps right out at me as a contradiction! 

However, I have heard this partially explained as "people lived to be 900 because their bodies were more pure and not so full of sin (which of course causes death). 
As they became more impure, they didn't live as long." 

Fair enough! But what about God saying man's years should be limited to 120, but then man living to 400+ years? I'm seeing a continuity problem here. 

Lifespans in years:
900
120
400
80 or so in developed countries

Putting science aside, let's talk about God's character:
1. Humans have become too evil and* VIOLENT!* 
2. I will* KILL* 99.99 percent of all living things! That will teach them *violence is bad*!


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 8, 2022)

"If there’s a chance He’s there then it’s possible that He can perform the impossible stories that you read about." - spot lite

I'll play along. Let's say there is a God of the Bible and he can do impossible things.
Is that a reason for his "inspired" book to PACKED FULL of contradictions?

1. The tribes & nations spread out, each speaking their own different language.
2. The whole world spoke one common language.
3. The Tower Of Babel upsets God so we are back to speaking different languages.

Bottom line: God can part the Red Sea, but he can't "inspire & guide" humans to
write a cohesive book, or even a cohesive _story_ much of the time?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> "You two seem to forget that you are still not able to say that God does not exist." - spot lite
> 
> And you would be correct! I for one cannot prove that God does not exist. I cannot disprove a negative. I cannot disprove what doesn't exist - I cannot test or compare "nothing" to similar known things. This applies not just to God but to everything that seems to exist so far only in the human imagination.
> 
> ...


So a few chapters later is it possible that those folks were already 300 years old before the 120 deal came?

The difference in you and a deity such as God is life itself that was created by Him is His. If this story is true your life here is isn’t as valuable as your soul. Violence to you and violence to a deity probably aren’t the same.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> "If there’s a chance He’s there then it’s possible that He can perform the impossible stories that you read about." - spot lite
> 
> I'll play along. Let's say there is a God of the Bible and he can do impossible things.
> Is that a reason for his "inspired" book to PACKED FULL of contradictions?
> ...


Well here again was the United States part of the whole earth until someone discovered it? The whole earth to them was probably a 100 mile radius.

I’m sure they all spoke one language. Their goal was to reach the heavens and make a name for themselves.

Speaking the same language isn’t an issue. Dividing the language’s was a barrier at that time to separate that “knowledge”. Once we get the bright idea to the same work as they tried then He might shave our heads and make us walk backwards.


Knowing that this Book says some will believe a lie, and some will be blinded because of their non belief……..remind me one more again, who is finding this story contradictory?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 8, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> You two seem to forget that you are still not able to say that God does not exist.
> 
> You "think" He does not and admit that if He does then you certainly "can`t know what He knows, thinks, wants, etc" yet you place His limitations and capabilities based on yours.
> 
> ...


----------



## bullethead (Jun 8, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> The math teacher does not ask the student the sum of 4 + 4 because the teacher does not know the answer. There is a lesson to be taught.


The students do not keep themselves hidden from the presence of the math teacher.
The bible says that they kept themselves hidden from the presence of the Lord.
Not they tried to hide but couldn't.
It is right from scripture. 

The lesson is "Make up whatever answer or excuse you want as to why 4+4 does not equal 8, but it equals 8 anyway"


----------



## bullethead (Jun 8, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> "If there’s a chance He’s there then it’s possible that He can perform the impossible stories that you read about." - spot lite
> 
> I'll play along. Let's say there is a God of the Bible and he can do impossible things.
> Is that a reason for his "inspired" book to PACKED FULL of contradictions?
> ...


It seems that some gods can do everything except write their own books and make themselves known to all. Other than that,....


----------



## bullethead (Jun 8, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> So a few chapters later is it possible that those folks were already 300 years old before the 120 deal came?
> 
> The difference in you and a deity such as God is life itself that was created by Him is His. If this story is true your life here is isn’t as valuable as your soul. Violence to you and violence to a deity probably aren’t the same.


Were they "grandfathered" in?
See what I did there?


----------



## NCHillbilly (Jun 8, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> If there’s a chance He’s there then it’s possible that He can perform the impossible stories that you read about.


It's also a whole lot more possible that snakes and donkeys can't talk, and Noah didn't come here to my county in 2,000 BC and catch a pair of southern Appalachian endemic bog lemmings and a pair of Jordan's red-cheeked salamanders and two American black bears, and then head out west and grab a pair of grizzlys, then head up to the arctiv and get some polar bears and muskoxen, , then down to the Amazon Basin to get howler monkeys, jaguars, tapirs, and a thousand other species, etc. I wonder how all these trees and plants kept from dying underwater, too?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 8, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Well here again was the United States part of the whole earth until someone discovered it? The whole earth to them was probably a 100 mile radius.
> 
> I’m sure they all spoke one language. Their goal was to reach the heavens and make a name for themselves.
> 
> ...


So, for instance,a flood 100mi or even 1000mi in radius would also be considered the world correct?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 8, 2022)

NCHillbilly said:


> It's also a whole lot more possible that snakes and donkeys can't talk, and Noah didn't come here to my county in 2,000 BC and catch a pair of southern Appalachian endemic bog lemmings and a pair of Jordan's red-cheeked salamanders and two American black bears, and then head out west and grab a pair of grizzlys, then head up to the arctiv and get some polar bears and muskoxen, , then down to the Amazon Basin to get howler monkeys, jaguars, tapirs, and a thousand other species, etc. I wonder how all these trees and plants kept from dying underwater, too?


"Anything Is Possible In The World Of Make Believe"


----------



## NCHillbilly (Jun 8, 2022)

bullethead said:


> "Anything Is Possible In The World Of Make Believe"


Yep. Bugs Bunny ties Elmer Fudd's gun barrels in a bow knot on tv.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 8, 2022)

NCHillbilly said:


> Yep. Bugs Bunny ties Elmer Fudd's gun barrels in a bow knot on tv.


Great example because even when we have ruled out all other Cartoon characters...IF Bugs and Elmer DO exist then tying twice barrel shoot guns in knots is not only possible but inevitable by their own powers.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 8, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Well here again was the United States part of the whole earth until someone discovered it? The whole earth to them was probably a 100 mile radius.
> 
> I’m sure they all spoke one language. Their goal was to reach the heavens and make a name for themselves.
> 
> ...



*You missed my point.* I'll lay it out again, in the chronological order of the Bible:

1. Tribes & nations EACH SPOKE THEIR OWN (DIFFERENT) LANGUAGE - on the very next page we have:
2. The whole world HAD ONLY ONE LANGUAGE - the exact OPPOSITE of what was just said! No explanation given of course. 
3. God brings down the Tower of Babel and once again PEOPLE SPEAK DIFFERENT LANGUAGES! 

I'll break it down again: Different languages for different nations, which makes sense. Then with NO EXPLANATION we have only ONE language! 
Now god brings down the tower and confounds (causes confusion) their one language and all the tower builders speak different languages and cannot communicate. This has an actual explanation at least.

I'll review the exact verses so it's easier to follow:


*Genesis 10:4-5
English Standard Version*
4 The sons of Javan: Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim. 5 From these the coastland peoples spread in their lands,* each with his own language,* by their clans, in their nations.

Okay, each nation spoke their own language. Thus MANY DIFFERENT LANGUAGES WERE SPOKEN! Get ready, here comes THE VERY NEXT PAGE:

*Genesis 11
English Standard Version*

*The Tower of Babel*
Now* the whole earth had one language and the same words*. And as people migrated from the east, they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there.

With me so far? First there are several DIFFERENT languages, then suddenly there is only ONE language throughout the entire world. So which is it? 

So the people built the Tower Of Babel and God isn't happy and confounds their SINGLE COMMON LANGUAGE and now the world reverts to SPEAKING DIFFERENT LANGUAGES. Here we go:

*Genesis 11:6-9
English Standard Version*

"And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of man had built. 6 And the Lord said, “Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us go down and there confuse their language, so that they may not understand one another's speech.” 8 So the Lord dispersed them from there over the face of all the earth, and they left off building the city. 9 Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the Lord confused[a] the language of all the earth. And from there the Lord dispersed them over the face of all the earth."

So is expecting a story (fiction or factual) to follow a clear and coherent timeline
"believing a lie"? Please explain.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 8, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Great example because even when we have ruled out all other Cartoon characters...IF Bugs and Elmer DO exist then tying twice barrel shoot guns in knots is not only possible but inevitable by their own powers.



I would expect nothing less from omnifunny beings!


----------



## bullethead (Jun 8, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> I would expect nothing less from omnifunny beings!


All Funny, Yes!
All Knowing and Present everywhere, No!. I remember a verse,err, line where E.Fudd asks " Werwe is dat Wasckally Wabbit?" And Bugs was right there, just a few feet away in his hole eating a carrot! Thats when I knew things were starting to not make sense.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 8, 2022)

bullethead said:


> All Funny, Yes!
> All Knowing and Present everywhere, No!. I remember a verse,err, line where E.Fudd asks " Werwe is dat Wasckally Wabbit?" And Bugs was right there, just a few feet away in his hole eating a carrot! Thats when I knew things were starting to not make sense.



Bugs was invisible (for Elmer's own protection) because anyone looking into the face of Bugs would surely be struck dead and their offspring cursed  for the next 14.6 generations! Oh, and something to do with foreskins, if memory serves.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 8, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> So a few chapters later is it possible that those folks were already 300 years old before the 120 deal came?
> 
> The difference in you and a deity such as God is life itself that was created by Him is His. If this story is true your life here is isn’t as valuable as your soul. Violence to you and violence to a deity probably aren’t the same.



I stand corrected! I researched the "120 year" pronouncement. Turns out it wasn't an actual lifespan, it was 120 years _to repent_. So you could live to be 400+ but if you don't repent by the time you are 120, you're on your own and God gives up on you.

"Bible scholars" doing what they do.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

bullethead said:


> The students do not keep themselves hidden from the presence of the math teacher.
> The bible says that they kept themselves hidden from the presence of the Lord.
> Not they tried to hide but couldn't.
> It is right from scripture.
> ...



Yea and they think they’re hidden. A lot of people think they’re hiding today, too.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

NCHillbilly said:


> It's also a whole lot more possible that snakes and donkeys can't talk, and Noah didn't come here to my county in 2,000 BC and catch a pair of southern Appalachian endemic bog lemmings and a pair of Jordan's red-cheeked salamanders and two American black bears, and then head out west and grab a pair of grizzlys, then head up to the arctiv and get some polar bears and muskoxen, , then down to the Amazon Basin to get howler monkeys, jaguars, tapirs, and a thousand other species, etc. I wonder how all these trees and plants kept from dying underwater, too?


You just don’t get it lol. My point is you think we ignore logic. We’re saying we’re not ignoring anything, if it can be done only He can do it.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

bullethead said:


> So, for instance,a flood 100mi or even 1000mi in radius would also be considered the world correct?


I have kin folk that’s never been out of Georgia. The whole world as they know it is a pine thicket.

The non believer is too focused on challenging the Christian intellect, all we’re saying is yea all this stuff sounds impossible but if if it can be done it can only be done by the one that’s not limited to scientific parameters.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Were they "grandfathered" in?
> See what I did there?



If they were already 300 they’ve exceeded the “new shorter lifespan” so to say it’s contradictory that they were 400 is just a drowning man reaching for a straw.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

bullethead said:


> "Anything Is Possible In The World Of Make Believe"





NCHillbilly said:


> Yep. Bugs Bunny ties Elmer Fudd's gun barrels in a bow knot on tv.





bullethead said:


> Great example because even when we have ruled out all other Cartoon characters...IF Bugs and Elmer DO exist then tying twice barrel shoot guns in knots is not only possible but inevitable by their own powers.


Funny thing is I don’t think y’all have ruled them or the make believe world out. Y’all have on this forum placed God in the same boat with those ^^^ characters yet you still won’t / can’t say God does not exist. If He’s in the same boat and you can’t rule Him out…….
Just sayin……


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 8, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> You just don’t get it lol. My point is you think we ignore logic. We’re saying we’re not ignoring anything, if it can be done only He can do it.



Sorry but I'm still seeing circular reasoning. God is all powerful, he can perform miracles beyond our understanding. This is a miracle beyond our understanding! Only an all powerful God could have done this. 

But the "miracles" are only for personal consumption, written about by believers for believers a long time ago. Nobody who made up (or just passed along) the stories ever thought that the miracles would be debunked thousands of years later - who would expect them to know? So here we are, not quite fully convinced that *MILLIONS* of species of animals (and the food to sustain them) from seven continents could assemble and be loaded onto a boat (so big that the laws of physics prevent it from being seaworthy) for a journey lasting months. 

So yes, anyone believing this could happen would have to believe it would take one really incredible deity to pull it off.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> *You missed my point.* I'll lay it out again, in the chronological order of the Bible:
> 
> 1. Tribes & nations EACH SPOKE THEIR OWN (DIFFERENT) LANGUAGE - on the very next page we have:
> 2. The whole world HAD ONLY ONE LANGUAGE - the exact OPPOSITE of what was just said! No explanation given of course.
> ...



As with many books the cause is told in one chapter and the affect on another - an overview is given in one chapter and detail is given in another.

A clear man made timeline is what you complain about the most, the New Test Vs the Old Test. 

Genesis 10 and 11 parallel one another. 10 gives you a geology of nations and 11 drives it down to Abraham. 

Remember, these “nations” are all kin folk so to think they’d be speaking different languages prior to being “divided” is jumping the gun. 

If you’re going to find contradictions you gotta dig deeper than what most Sunday School kids know?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Sorry but I'm still seeing circular reasoning. God is all powerful, he can perform miracles beyond our understanding. This is a miracle beyond our understanding! Only an all powerful God could have done this.
> 
> But the "miracles" are only for personal consumption, written about by believers for believers a long time ago. Nobody who made up (or just passed along) the stories ever thought that the miracles would be debunked thousands of years later - who would expect them to know? So here we are, not quite fully convinced that *MILLIONS* of species of animals (and the food to sustain them) from seven continents could assemble and be loaded onto a boat (so big that the laws of physics prevent it from being seaworthy) for a journey lasting months.
> 
> So yes, anyone believing this could happen would have to believe it would take one really incredible deity to pull it off.



Just for a second go out on a limb……God is real. He’s the Creator of everything and has no limitations. How is He bound to the laws of anything? 

The reason I say the non believer doesn’t understand the Christian audience is because these “impossible” works and stories have y’all at a stop sign and telling us that we’ve suspended common sense and logic.

Once you have a real experience in God and I’m not talking about feel good tear jerking moment, you’re able to see the impossible stories and say don’t know how but if it can be done only He can do it. 

We’re just not stuck at the stop sign because we’re not concerned about trying to wrap our heads around it. We’ve already acknowledged there’s only one way it can happen and moved on.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

NCHillbilly said:


> I have never said that God doesn't exist. I have said that I don't know. I definitely feel that there is a higher power, personally. I also don't believe that it is anywhere nearly as described in any of a plethora of ancient writings or religions that purport to explain it according to their particular culture. I think most religions were organized to control people. I would tend to agree more with most pagan religions that emphasize a personal relationship with a higher power, not a set of contradictory doctrines defined in a book written centuries ago. I view the Hebrew religious texts in the same light as I do the Qoran, Hindu scriptures, Buddhist writings, Greek and Roman mythology, a book of Cherokee creation myths, or any number of other similar tomes that attempt to explain how we got here and what our purpose is defined through the lens of one culture.


I for one do not support organized religion so I can agree with you here.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 8, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> If they were already 300 they’ve exceeded the “new shorter lifespan” so to say it’s contradictory that they were 400 is just a drowning man reaching for a straw.



I explained that. According to the tap dancers AKA "biblical scholars" when God said he had lost his patience with humans and from now on he would only tolerate humans for 120 years, that meant a human had 120 years to stop sinning and start acting right, before God gives up on them. 

Otherwise since god proclaimed the 120 year rule just before The Flood - and everybody except Noah and the ark crew would be killed - only Noah and his crew (assuming they were all grandfathered and exempt) would live past 120. But people not in Noah's crew had ages of 400+ years, thus a 120 year "lifespan" would mean there's a contradiction/mistake in the Bible so the plot hole had to be filled - Biblical scholars to the rescue!


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 8, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Funny thing is I don’t think y’all have ruled them or the make believe world out. Y’all have on this forum placed God in the same boat with those ^^^ characters yet you still won’t / can’t say God does not exist. If He’s in the same boat and you can’t rule Him out…….
> Just sayin……View attachment 1156514


 
I know I can't rule out a deity of some sort, but IMHO the Bible is obviously written by man for man, so the god of the Bible is man-made. Of course, nobody can disprove what doesn't exist, all people can do is disprove * what humans have written.

* disproving the Bible is way, way easier in 2022 than it was in 1022 (for example) 
Disproving miracles in general is easier, and sure enough the number of miracles experienced has gone down proportionately with the rise of technology, education, and critical thinking in general.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 8, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Just for a second go out on a limb……God is real. He’s the Creator of everything and has no limitations. How is He bound to the laws of anything?
> 
> The reason I say the non believer doesn’t understand the Christian audience is because these “impossible” works and stories have y’all at a stop sign and telling us that we’ve suspended common sense and logic.
> 
> ...



or maybe we aren't at a stop sign so much as a yield sign. The yield sign means slow down, engage that highly evolved brain and try to find out the real truth, and then get a second opinion from an even higher evolved brain. And when what we thought was the truth is debunked, you repeat the process.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 8, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> I know I can't rule out a deity of some sort, but IMHO the Bible is obviously written by man for man, so the god of the Bible is man-made. Of course, nobody can disprove what doesn't exist, all people can do is disprove * what humans have written.
> 
> * disproving the Bible is way, way easier in 2022 than it was in 1022 (for example)
> Disproving miracles in general is easier, and sure enough the number of miracles experienced has gone down proportionately with the rise of technology, education, and critical thinking in general.


I get what you’re saying. Although we disagree on God at least you can have a civil conversation with the non believers here on this forum (I think I can anyway ?).

I overheard a conversation from another table today at lunch and this fella was just downright rude and he’s the one that brought up God and politics. But that seemed to be his arrogant personality and not just because he was a non believer or a democrat. He was just one of those that wanted to make sure everyone knew where he stood on God and politics and he’s done the math - he’s 100% correct and everyone else is wrong.

There was nothing civil about him.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Just for a second go out on a limb……God is real. He’s the Creator of everything and has no limitations. How is He bound to the laws of anything?
> 
> The reason I say the non believer doesn’t understand the Christian audience is because these “impossible” works and stories have y’all at a stop sign and telling us that we’ve suspended common sense and logic.
> 
> ...


In my opinion thats^ a really good post.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I get what you’re saying. Although we disagree on God at least you can have a civil conversation with the non believers here on this forum (I think I can anyway ?).
> 
> I overheard a conversation from another table today at lunch and this fella was just downright rude and he’s the one that brought up God and politics. But that seemed to be his arrogant personality and not just because he was a non believer or a democrat. He was just one of those that wanted to make sure everyone knew where he stood on God and politics and he’s done the math - he’s 100% correct and everyone else is wrong.
> 
> There was nothing civil about him.


Yep. Non believer, believer, democrat/republican really doesnt come into play. He's just one of those know it all people that you can find in just about any group.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 9, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> or maybe we aren't at a stop sign so much as a yield sign. The yield sign means slow down, engage that highly evolved brain and try to find out the real truth, and then get a second opinion from an even higher evolved brain. And when what we thought was the truth is debunked, you repeat the process.


That can take years/decades/forever or even never. So really at a stop sign.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Yea and they think they’re hidden. A lot of people think they’re hiding today, too.


Where does scripture say that they think that they were hidden?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I have kin folk that’s never been out of Georgia. The whole world as they know it is a pine thicket.
> 
> The non believer is too focused on challenging the Christian intellect, all we’re saying is yea all this stuff sounds impossible but if if it can be done it can only be done by the one that’s not limited to scientific parameters.


That doesn't make it actually done though.
We know what you are saying. That angle solves nothing except to open the door even wider for:
 If = Pretend.
The One = Anything someone wants to use.
Can = In a reality of one's imagination 
Done = No evidence of it outside of what an individual conjures up.
Not Limited to Scientific Parameters = The World of Make Believe


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> If they were already 300 they’ve exceeded the “new shorter lifespan” so to say it’s contradictory that they were 400 is just a drowning man reaching for a straw.


You did NOT see what I did there!
At 300+ they'd likely have a lot of grandchildren......
So, "grandfathered" in.....


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Funny thing is I don’t think y’all have ruled them or the make believe world out. Y’all have on this forum placed God in the same boat with those ^^^ characters yet you still won’t / can’t say God does not exist. If He’s in the same boat and you can’t rule Him out…….
> Just sayin……View attachment 1156514


How haven't we ruled the specilfic God that you believe in out?
Over and over many of us have said that whatever version that is supposed to be a god that is portrayed in the bible has been ruled out along with saying so are all of the versions of gods that man has conjured up.
We aren't saying that all, any or one of those gods exist and we reject them. We are saying that if some sort of force is out there, intelligent or not, we don't know what it is. My best guess is Energy.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Sorry but I'm still seeing circular reasoning. God is all powerful, he can perform miracles beyond our understanding. This is a miracle beyond our understanding! Only an all powerful God could have done this.
> 
> But the "miracles" are only for personal consumption, written about by believers for believers a long time ago. Nobody who made up (or just passed along) the stories ever thought that the miracles would be debunked thousands of years later - who would expect them to know? So here we are, not quite fully convinced that *MILLIONS* of species of animals (and the food to sustain them) from seven continents could assemble and be loaded onto a boat (so big that the laws of physics prevent it from being seaworthy) for a journey lasting months.
> 
> So yes, anyone believing this could happen would have to believe it would take one really incredible deity to pull it off.


Right, not only did they think a small area within their location was the entire world but they also thought that whatever religion they were a part of was exclusive to them and whatever god they believed in favored them. When they met other believers it often resulted in war over Who's god was the better IF.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Just for a second go out on a limb……God is real. He’s the Creator of everything and has no limitations. How is He bound to the laws of anything?
> 
> The reason I say the non believer doesn’t understand the Christian audience is because these “impossible” works and stories have y’all at a stop sign and telling us that we’ve suspended common sense and logic.
> 
> ...


There is not a lot of room on the Pretend Gods are real limbs. There are so many choices perched on that limb that all do the same things according to their fans that I feel the need to pretend a longer limb is needed so there is room to go and pretend on.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Where does scripture say that they think that they were hidden?


A read of the entire Bible and what happens to people when they sin against God……

I’m not one that takes one verse or chapter and sums it up that that’s the whole story.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> There is not a lot of room on the Pretend Gods are real limbs. There are so many choices perched on that limb that all do the same things according to their fans that I feel the need to pretend a longer limb is needed so there is room to go and pretend on.


Not for me. I’ve ruled them all out except the one. I don’t have to consider the others.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> That doesn't make it actually done though.
> We know what you are saying. That angle solves nothing except to open the door even wider for:
> If = Pretend.
> The One = Anything someone wants to use.
> ...


Or I created it and you (man) and I’m only allowing you to get this close with your own knowledge. Remember Genesis 11 that old fella went to???? 

This Book actually tells you why you view it the way you do.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> You did NOT see what I did there!
> At 300+ they'd likely have a lot of grandchildren......
> So, "grandfathered" in.....


I’m slow but got it that time lol


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> How haven't we ruled the specilfic God that you believe in out?
> Over and over many of us have said that whatever version that is supposed to be a god that is portrayed in the bible has been ruled out along with saying so are all of the versions of gods that man has conjured up.
> We aren't saying that all, any or one of those gods exist and we reject them. We are saying that if some sort of force is out there, intelligent or not, we don't know what it is. My best guess is Energy.



Because when asked how certain you are that God doesn’t exist yall leave a small window of opportunity. I’ve even asked what percentage is it, 100, 99.9999999, etc. If it’s not 100 it’s not ruled out. 

My opinion of being ruled out is just that - 0% chance that bugs bunny is going to be found.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> A read of the entire Bible and what happens to people when they sin against God……
> 
> I’m not one that takes one verse or chapter and sums it up that that’s the whole story.


Each verse says what it says individually. As a whole is what convinced me that the contents are a collection of various works in a religious Genre that do not mesh but in fact contradict. 
We can take 66 Western Novels written by different authors and piece together a timeline of America from the Revolutionary War to the 1950s when we became 50 States. A reader could get an overall sense that as a country the USA is a Nation made up of fearless adventurers who battled the evil foes and despite the odds managed to expand their country and set the tone to be the Worlds Superpower.
The reader wouldn't be wrong.
But
The reader should also notice the contradictions, fabrications, biased views, embellishments and inaccuracies that individually lead other readers off on trails in search of finding out more about the them piece by piece. The story as a whole ends the same as the highlights compliment each other. The facts about how we got there do not paint such a feel good picture about what really took place in between and absolutely taints the images and actions of people and groups that were involved. It just isnt as pretty or as truthful a picture the Dime Store Authors wrote. No different than the mesh of stories you follow.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Not for me. I’ve ruled them all out except the one. I don’t have to consider the others.


But IF they are who they say they are then you have to acknowledge and consider their existence and powers no matter if you've ruled them out.
(See how that game is played?)
You want us to consider a god we have ruled out using your same criteria for gods that you do not give the same consideration to.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Or I created it and you (man) and I’m only allowing you to get this close with your own knowledge. Remember Genesis 11 that old fella went to????
> 
> This Book actually tells you why you view it the way you do.


That would be a fair point if over 2 Billion supposed believers in the same God all didn't come up with different interpretations.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Each verse says what it says individually. As a whole is what convinced me that the contents are a collection of various works in a religious Genre that do not mesh but in fact contradict.
> We can take 66 Western Novels written by different authors and piece together a timeline of America from the Revolutionary War to the 1950s when we became 50 States. A reader could get an overall sense that as a country the USA is a Nation made up of fearless adventurers who battled the evil foes and despite the odds managed to expand their country and set the tone to be the Worlds Superpower.
> The reader wouldn't be wrong.
> But
> The reader should also notice the contradictions, fabrications, biased views, embellishments and inaccuracies that individually lead other readers off on trails in search of finding out more about the them piece by piece. The story as a whole ends the same as the highlights compliment each other. The facts about how we got there do not paint such a feel good picture about what really took place in between and absolutely taints the images and actions of people and groups that were involved. It just isnt as pretty or as truthful a picture the Dime Store Authors wrote. No different than the mesh of stories you follow.





> Each verse says what it says individually


Per the story - no, there are no stand alone scriptures. 




> As a whole is what convinced me that the contents are a collection of various works in a religious Genre that do not mesh but in fact contradict.


I find no fault in a man for coming to conclusions after study. 


> contents are a collection of various works in a religious Genre that do not mesh but in fact contradict.


The collection itself explains why it appears "contradictory" to some. Since it explains why and how, it is not me that can open the eyes of the non believer so I do not focus on trying to dissect "contradictions". All I can do is give my understanding of it.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> That would be a fair point if over 2 Billion supposed believers in the same God all didn't come up with different interpretations.


But.................there is no private interpretation. All of them are not right.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Because when asked how certain you are that God doesn’t exist yall leave a small window of opportunity. I’ve even asked what percentage is it, 100, 99.9999999, etc. If it’s not 100 it’s not ruled out.
> 
> My opinion of being ruled out is just that - 0% chance that bugs bunny is going to be found.


I am sure for myself, and pretty sure others in here are on the same page when I say that we have placed all gods who have been written about by man in the 0% category. When we say that it includes the God of Abraham also.
When we say were are 99.99999% sure that no god of any sort exists but leave that sliver of a fraction of a small percent we are saying that NONE of us know for certain despite what we have ruled out. That is not taking the God you worship into account. It is allowing for some force in the cosmos that nobody knows of, thought of or can conceive may be somewhere that we cannot comprehend and this force os as clueless to us as we are to it.
Is that possible?
All I can do is guess.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Per the story - no, there are no stand alone scriptures.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Then why do believers use individual scripture verses of they mean nothing on their own?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> But.................there is no private interpretation. All of them are not right.


You realize that you are included in that group?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> But IF they are who they say they are then you have to acknowledge and consider their existence and powers no matter if you've ruled them out.
> (See how that game is played?)
> You want us to consider a god we have ruled out using your same criteria for gods that you do not give the same consideration to.


Based on the criteria I used, if they are ruled out there is no existence or powers to consider. That is the difference in "most likely not" and "not". 

I am not asking you to consider a god that you have ruled out, and we have both supposedly ruled them all out except you have taken it one God further. Since I believe in the God described in the Bible I can only assume that is the only God at question when I say consider God. 

But when asked what is that percentage level that this God does not exist the answer I get is not 100%. I am asking you to consider a God that has a small chance of actually being there.  

If the non believer has placed all of them (God, other gods, bugs bunny, etc) as comparable characters in a make believe world and can say they are 100% confident that bugs bunny does not exist they should be just as confident that God does not exist if they applied the same criteria? Or, have they really taken it one god further if they applied the same criteria but still not 100% sure that God does not exist? 

Seems they have not actually taken it one God further. 

Ruled out means out. For me, I am 100% confident that bugs bunny and Allah do no exist. There is nothing there for me to consider. I don`t find anything in them that makes me think they might exist. That is my criteria. Now that is how the game is played.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Then why do believers use individual scripture verses of they mean nothing on their own?


They should not use single verses. I get using one to make a point at something but to use it is "doctrine"...........no.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> You realize that you are included in that group?


I don`t have a private interpretation. I am not an island of my own. I am sure I am considered wrong by believers on this forum because when I put every scripture regarding baptism together I (along with many many others) see a difference in using just one - that is how other doctrines are born. I find no scripture telling me to dis-regard one concerning baptism so my first question to them is why did they? I am ok if they don`t agree with me, I am not walking this walk for them and they are not my judge. 

And I only used baptism as an example.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Based on the criteria I used, if they are ruled out there is no existence or powers to consider. That is the difference in "most likely not" and "not".
> 
> I am not asking you to consider a god that you have ruled out, and we have both supposedly ruled them all out except you have taken it one God further. Since I believe in the God described in the Bible I can only assume that is the only God at question when I say consider God.
> 
> ...


I am 100% on all Gods not existing that are known to man through man. Man's involvement has ruled those Gods out for me.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I don`t have a private interpretation. I am not an island of my own. I am sure I am considered wrong by believers on this forum because when I put every scripture regarding baptism together I (along with many many others) see a difference in using just one - that is how other doctrines are born. I find no scripture telling me to dis-regard one concerning baptism so my first question to them is why did they? I am ok if they don`t agree with me, I am not walking this walk for them and they are not my judge.
> 
> And I only used baptism as an example.


The above is the very definition of having a private interpretation and an individual interpretation.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> The above is the very definition of having a private interpretation and an individual interpretation.


Scripturally speaking, no it is not.


----------



## CarolinaDawg (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> I am 100% on all Gods not existing that are known to man through man. Man's involvement has ruled those Gods out for me.


You’ve firmly established that you reject Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and any and all gods.  Now that we know what you reject, can you articulate what it is
you accept? What’s your worldview? I’m interested in learning what makes the atheists and agnostics tic and what’s your true north.  
How did we get here?
What is the purpose of YOUR life? What’s your primary motivation for living life?
Does it really matter if you exist or not?
Where are we going/what happens when you die?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> I am 100% on all Gods not existing that are known to man through man. Man's involvement has ruled those Gods out for me.


Ok be specific because I have been down the road of playing on words with others (known to man - man cannot possibly know God)................ the God of Abraham, the God described in the Bible - exist or not?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I get what you’re saying. Although we disagree on God at least you can have a civil conversation with the non believers here on this forum (I think I can anyway ?).
> 
> I overheard a conversation from another table today at lunch and this fella was just downright rude and he’s the one that brought up God and politics. But that seemed to be his arrogant personality and not just because he was a non believer or a democrat. He was just one of those that wanted to make sure everyone knew where he stood on God and politics and he’s done the math - he’s 100% correct and everyone else is wrong.
> 
> There was nothing civil about him.



Religion (or lack of) rarely changes your basic personality too much. If people are unpleasant in general they just shift their focus of what to be unpleasant about!


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Scripturally speaking, no it is not.


Who else agrees with you on every single point of your understanding?

The way you are presenting this is that you have read Genesis to Revelation once, ten a hundred times and have come away the most absolute 100% understanding as meant to be had by your God.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> You did NOT see what I did there!
> At 300+ they'd likely have a lot of grandchildren......
> So, "grandfathered" in.....



yes, I saw what you did there - not too shabby!


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Ok be specific because I have been down the road of playing on words with others (known to man - man cannot possibly know God)................ the God of Abraham, the God described in the Bible - exist or not?


No.
I laid it out quite specifically in post #434


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> I am sure for myself, and pretty sure others in here are on the same page when I say that we have placed all gods who have been written about by man in the 0% category. When we say that it includes the God of Abraham also.
> When we say were are 99.99999% sure that no god of any sort exists but leave that sliver of a fraction of a small percent we are saying that NONE of us know for certain despite what we have ruled out. That is not taking the God you worship into account. It is allowing for some force in the cosmos that nobody knows of, thought of or can conceive may be somewhere that we cannot comprehend and this force os as clueless to us as we are to it.
> Is that possible?
> All I can do is guess.


Ok I can understand that. My criteria is going to be different because I ruled other gods out completely based on the one I did find somethin in.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> No.
> I laid it out quite specifically in post #434


Just saw it - sorry, you know I am slow dude.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Or I created it and you (man) and I’m only allowing you to get this close with your own knowledge. Remember Genesis 11 that old fella went to????
> 
> This Book actually tells you why you view it the way you do.



Okay, without simplifying things too much I'll put it like this:

Millions - if not billions - of people believe and can demonstrate to me that 2 + 3 = 5.
If I doubt them, I can even run an experiment and prove it for myself.
So if there's a book that states (and people believe that book) 2 + 3 = 6 and that the reason I don't see that 2 + 3 = 6 is because I choose to "believe the lies"?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

CarolinaDawg said:


> You’ve firmly established that you reject Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and any and all gods.  Now that we know what you reject, can you articulate what it is
> you accept?


I am alive for a very short period of time and I try to be a decent person a good husband and a great father.


CarolinaDawg said:


> What’s your worldview?


Be passionate about the things that affect me and my family. Try to change what I can and accept what I cannot.


CarolinaDawg said:


> I’m interested in learning what makes the atheists and agnostics tic and what’s your true north.


We are similar to believers in most ways except we don't need a god to be the same people believers are.


CarolinaDawg said:


> How did we get here?


I Don't Know for sure. I don't make up stories to fill that void.


CarolinaDawg said:


> What is the purpose of YOUR life? What’s your primary motivation for living life?


Live it day by day and leave a lasting impression positively to the people who know me. 


CarolinaDawg said:


> Does it really matter if you exist or not?


No. The Earth made it 13.8 billion years without me and will continue on once I am gone.


CarolinaDawg said:


> Where are we going/what happens when you die?


I will cease to exist except in the memories of those who knew me. Those memories will last until those people are gone. I do not know of a place where I would have resided before I was born and I have no recollection of a single memory before a certain age. Once my lights are out I won't know anything or be anywhere yet again.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Who else agrees with you on every single point of your understanding?
> 
> The way you are presenting this is that you have read Genesis to Revelation once, ten a hundred times and have come away the most absolute 100% understanding as meant to be had by your God.


Actually we are asked by the Pastor to read the entire Bible from Genesis to revelation every year. So, yes, I have read it at least 45 times. His philosophy is you should be ashamed to call yourself a Christian and cannot find stuff in the Bible or always asking "where does it say..........".

Do I think I have an absolute 100% understanding as meant by God? I am still reading my Bible and studying.

As an example of what I am talking about - people argue over baptism in Jesus name, in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit or not baptized at all............

Considering you are a believer and if you read the entire Bible you know what he name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is, you know what name you are told to do ALL things in, and you are commanded to be baptized. And all of this is in more than one place. And you know that scripture says here a little, there a little, and in the mouths of two or three witnesses let every word be established. For the Christian, Peter was just as much of a witness as Paul - you can not overlook what one says and when you put them all together you should not be arguing over something as simple as baptism. 

So when I see the argument over it there is no need in joining, you cant argue with lack of study.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Okay, without simplifying things too much I'll put it like this:
> 
> Millions - if not billions - of people believe and can demonstrate to me that 2 + 3 = 5.
> If I doubt them, I can even run an experiment and prove it for myself.
> So if there's a book that states (and people believe that book) 2 + 3 = 6 and that the reason I don't see that 2 + 3 = 6 is because I choose to "believe the lies"?


Faith verses tangible. You have no faith how can you call it a lie?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> I am sure for myself, and pretty sure others in here are on the same page when I say that we have placed all gods who have been written about by man in the 0% category. When we say that it includes the God of Abraham also.
> When we say were are 99.99999% sure that no god of any sort exists but leave that sliver of a fraction of a small percent we are saying that NONE of us know for certain despite what we have ruled out. That is not taking the God you worship into account. It is allowing for some force in the cosmos that nobody knows of, thought of or can conceive may be somewhere that we cannot comprehend and this force os as clueless to us as we are to it.
> Is that possible?
> All I can do is guess.



Good point! Without stealing your thunder, please allow me to add my 2 cents:
If that .1 percent chance of a "real deal" deity appears and seems to offer explanations and demonstrations we cannot yet understand HOWEVER comes with a full load of OBVIOUS CONTRADICTIONS would we become "believers" in this deity? 

My personal bugaboo with the Bible isn't necessarily about miracles or other "supernatural" claims that only a supernatural being can do. There very well might be things & forces in the universe that humans cannot understand. But I am able to spot obvious contradictions and inaccuracies (I gave an example or two but there are dozens if not hundreds in the Bible) so that means IMHO:

1. The God of the Bible doesn't have the power to ensure (and enforce) that his holy book/guide to how we should live was written, edited & published accurately.
2. God _does _have the power to make a bullet-proof book but doesn't care, or is just testing our faith. That seems like a cruel thing to do, but morality (or lack of) never seems to be a big concern to God. He does things that would send humans to prison, but that falls under the "works in mysterious ways" umbrella.
3. The Bible was written by humans thousands/hundreds of years ago with no "divine guidance" as is just one of many books that are foundations of their respective religions.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Okay, without simplifying things too much I'll put it like this:
> 
> Millions - if not billions - of people believe and can demonstrate to me that 2 + 3 = 5.
> If I doubt them, I can even run an experiment and prove it for myself.
> So if there's a book that states (and people believe that book) 2 + 3 = 6 and that the reason I don't see that 2 + 3 = 6 is because I choose to "believe the lies"?


What if you have been lied to the whole time? What if what they are telling you is a 3 is really a 5 but they just agreed it was a 3? 

You do have a little faith but only because you can see that representation of the thing they are telling you.

Now go prove to a blind man that the warmth he feels is the sun sitting in a blue sky. If he is persistent that it is a heater close by and the sky is black because he can`t see it does that make it is all a lie?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Faith verses tangible. You have no faith how can you call it a lie?



You totally lost me here. I have no idea of what you are trying to convey.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> What if you have been lied to the whole time? What if what they are telling you is a 3 is really a 5 but they just agreed it was a 3?
> 
> You do have a little faith but only because you can see that representation of the thing they are telling you.
> 
> Now go prove to a blind man that the warmth he feels is the sun sitting in a blue sky. If he is persistent that it is a heater close by and the sky is black because he can`t see it does that make it is all a lie?



So, if _you _believe it then it isn't a lie? Fair enough, but there is only one truth when we deal with reality. But if the blind man got medical care and could suddenly see, and found out that there is a sun (his sudden exposure to reality) should he still believe it was only a heater nearby and the sky is black?  And if he does insist on saying that there is no sun, *does he not lie to himself* and others? 

I find it very interesting that in the Bible "original sin" is eating the fruit of the * KNOWLEDGE* of good and evil.  Curiosity and wanting to know why things are the way they are is (to me, just my interpretation) like saying the original sin is* BEING* *HUMAN. *


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> You totally lost me here. I have no idea of what you are trying to convey.


Tangible - you can see two = 4. Faith is when you can`t see.. See post 457.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> So, if _you _believe it then it isn't a lie? Fair enough, but there is only one truth when we deal with reality. But if the blind man got medical care and could suddenly see, and found out that there is a sun (his sudden exposure to reality) should he still believe it was only a heater nearby and the sky is black?  And if he does insist on saying that there is no sun, *does he not lie to himself* and others?
> 
> I find it very interesting that in the Bible "original sin" is eating the fruit of the * KNOWLEDGE* of good and evil.  Curiosity and wanting to know why things are the way they are is (to me, just my interpretation) like saying the original sin is* BEING* *HUMAN. *


No, just because you believe it does not mean it is not a lie, and neither is your lack to find it or see it mean it is a lie. If his eyes were opened then they were opened and if he continues to deny it then yes he lies to himself and others.

Bigger than that - man can be "just like God" and "make a name for himself".


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Tangible - you can see two = 4. Faith is when you can`t see.. See post 457.



Huh? two = 4 ? I still don't follow you.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Actually we are asked by the Pastor to read the entire Bible from Genesis to revelation every year. So, yes, I have read it at least 45 times. His philosophy is you should be ashamed to call yourself a Christian and cannot find stuff in the Bible or always asking "where does it say..........".
> 
> Do I think I have an absolute 100% understanding as meant by God? I am still reading my Bible and studying.
> 
> ...


Some people watched Top Gun 2 and they think that Maverick is dead and it is all a dream. That is how they interpreted the movie. They can watch it 45 more times and come away with the same confirmation bias that they got with the the first viewing.
Reading the bible is not different.
Studying from one source in and of itself is not really studying.
Truth does not mind scrutiny.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 9, 2022)

"If his eyes were opened then they were opened and if he continues to deny it then yes he lies to himself and others." - spot lite

So are you comfortable with lying to yourself if you come across something that you just cannot believe? Yes, I understand you can't just throw the baby out with the bathwater and give up your faith completely. But if somebody finds_ fifty _things that are factually or morally wrong, should they just blow it off? I'm just curious.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Good point! Without stealing your thunder, please allow me to add my 2 cents:
> If that .1 percent chance of a "real deal" deity appears and seems to offer explanations and demonstrations we cannot yet understand HOWEVER comes with a full load of OBVIOUS CONTRADICTIONS would we become "believers" in this deity?
> 
> My personal bugaboo with the Bible isn't necessarily about miracles or other "supernatural" claims that only a supernatural being can do. There very well might be things & forces in the universe that humans cannot understand. But I am able to spot obvious contradictions and inaccuracies (I gave an example or two but there are dozens if not hundreds in the Bible) so that means IMHO:
> ...


Right, if the things we know about through research, observation, testing, study and repeatable outcomes is incorrect in the bible, the miraculous additions to those inaccurate stories are insignificant.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Some people watched Top Gun 2 and they think that Maverick is dead and it is all a dream. That is how they interpreted the movie. They can watch it 45 more times and come away with the same confirmation bias that they got with the the first viewing.
> Reading the bible is not different.
> Studying from one source in and of itself is not really studying.
> Truth does not mind scrutiny.



Biased is where we all land. I can research outside of the Bible for Genesis 10 and find just as many pros as I can cons. No different than two scientists. 

At the end of day I gotta go with what is evident to me.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> "If his eyes were opened then they were opened and if he continues to deny it then yes he lies to himself and others." - spot lite
> 
> So are you comfortable with lying to yourself if you come across something that you just cannot believe? Yes, I understand you can't just throw the baby out with the bathwater and give up your faith completely. But if somebody finds_ fifty _things that are factually or morally wrong, should they just blow it off? I'm just curious.


Actually I’ve changed a little over the years based on new learning. I don’t expect and no one should expect you or any other non believer to take my out alone. This is something you gotta find for yourself. It’s only a revelation that God can give you. We’re just saying don’t be sold against because one day you just might get it.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Biased is where we all land. I can research outside of the Bible for Genesis 10 and find just as many pros as I can cons. No different than two scientists.
> 
> At the end of day I gotta go with what is evident to me.


But you can find Cons.
That to me is where the claims of an All Everything entity fall short. Two scientists are not a God. They are human. They act human. 
If ya gonna be God-like then be God-like. Not suspend natural law and order for one verse and then you are unable to write yer own book or choose people who can accomplish the task for you and use words that mean the same thing during interpretation into all languages.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> But you can find Cons.
> That to me is where the claims of an All Everything entity fall short. Two scientists are not a God. They are human. They act human.
> If ya gonna be God-like then be God-like. Not suspend natural law and order for one verse and then you are unable to write yer own book or choose people who can accomplish the task for you and use words that mean the same thing during interpretation into all languages.



You realize for that to be true the pros tell you it doesn’t fall short?? But that is how being biased works.

Sure there cons, there are cons here. That doesn’t make them correct.

I’m sure you’ve eaten in a restaurant with negative reviews and found those to not be the sane experience you found? Most times they just didn’t get their way.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> You realize for that to be true the pros tell you it doesn’t fall short?? But that is how being biased works.
> 
> Sure there cons, there are cons here. That doesn’t make them correct.
> 
> I’m sure you’ve eaten in a restaurant with negative reviews and found those to not be the sane experience you found? Most times they just didn’t get their way.


In my mind a God or Gods are above and beyond any human or any human actions or above comparisons to humans by being Gods.
To compare Gods to humans is an insult to the God(s).
In my opinion a book or writings of any sort should not contain a single error, con, contradiction, falsehood, or anything unverifiable. 
When I am told what a God can do I find that claim does not add up to any supposed Holy Book I've even remotely researched and definitely not the Holy Book I was raised on.
Is it beyond a God's capability to write it's own book? I say No
Is it beyond a God's capability to make that book flawless? I say No
Is it beyond a  God's capability to make it universally understandable to all? I say No
Is it beyond a God's capability to make the book so true that not a single point of contention could even be fathomed? I say No
I have not seen anything God like about the Bible or any other holy books or writings. 
I do see man's involvement and that is a deal breaker for me no matter what excuse I am given as to why a God isn't God-Like.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> In my mind a God or Gods are above and beyond any human or any human actions or above comparisons to humans by being Gods.
> To compare Gods to humans is an insult to the God(s).
> In my opinion a book or writings of any sort should not contain a single error, con, contradiction, falsehood, or anything unverifiable.
> When I am told what a God can do I find that claim does not add up to any supposed Holy Book I've even remotely researched and definitely not the Holy Book I was raised on.
> ...


Man’s involvement doesn’t mean anything. With a spiritual understanding of it there’s no flaws. You’re not going to get that without God. The Bible wasn’t written for the non believers other than “what shall we do”.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Man’s involvement doesn’t mean anything. With a spiritual understanding of it there’s no flaws. You’re not going to get that without God. The Bible wasn’t written for the non believers other than “what shall we do”.


I disagree. Man's involvement doesn't mean anything when you have to overlook it. Otherwise Man's involvement is all we have. Spiritual in this case means to take it beyond what your senses are telling you and saying it is ok because God makes it all better.
I do understand your methods and ways to get you where you are. I was similar at one time. I just got to a point where I couldn't supress the things bugged me any longer.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

bullethead said:


> I disagree. Man's involvement doesn't mean anything when you have to overlook it. Otherwise Man's involvement is all we have. Spiritual in this case means to take it beyond what your senses are telling you and saying it is ok because God makes it all better.
> I do understand your methods and ways to get you where you are. I was similar at one time. I just got to a point where I couldn't supress the things bugged me any longer.


I can respect that.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Biased is where we all land. I can research outside of the Bible for Genesis 10 and find just as many pros as I can cons. No different than two scientists.
> 
> At the end of day I gotta go with what is evident to me.



Hey, if many languages exist...then* in the next sentence *only one language exists...with no explanation, and this doesn't sound like a plot device shoehorned into the story just so that a few sentences later God can "confound their language" and send the people back to speaking many languages - and this makes sense to you - that is your opinion and you are entitled to it. 

Personally, I'll believe the old fashioned and time proven explanation that languages naturally & gradually change over time, since there is a mountain of proof to validate the claim.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Actually I’ve changed a little over the years based on new learning. I don’t expect and no one should expect you or any other non believer to take my out alone. This is something you gotta find for yourself. It’s only a revelation that God can give you. We’re just saying don’t be sold against because one day you just might get it.



Yes there is that chance, but statistically the older you get the less likely you are to "come to Jesus" for lack of a better term.

That said, I don't have the stats on the reverse taking place (I will research it) but there a lot of people who become atheists after many years of being a devoted Christian to the point of being certified/ordained members of the clergy with years of intense Bible study under their belt. 

In other words an unbiased interest and curiosity in science, or a serious introspection of their own morals and deep questions about "why they believe" has made a lot of lifelong Christians open their eyes and jump ship, landing in the sea of reality. 
Come on in, the waters fine!


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 9, 2022)

"With a spiritual understanding of it there’s no flaws. You’re not going to get that without God." - spot lite

To be honest, this is troublesome to me. 
Deliberately _not _seeing "the flaws" that others _do_ see (and can _prove_ that they see) is self-delusion/self-deception. Granted I'm not blaming God, I'm blaming t_he belief _in God for_ requiring_ delusion to sustain your belief. IMHO any belief that disavows or suppresses proven, tangible, credible knowledge will end being counter-productive in the long run both for the individual and, to a point at least, society in general.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> "With a spiritual understanding of it there’s no flaws. You’re not going to get that without God." - spot lite
> 
> To be honest, this is troublesome to me.
> Deliberately _not _seeing "the flaws" that others _do_ see (and can _prove_ that they see) is self-delusion/self-deception. Granted I'm not blaming God, I'm blaming t_he belief _in God for_ requiring_ delusion to sustain your belief. IMHO any belief that disavows or suppresses proven, tangible, credible knowledge will end being counter-productive in the long run both for the individual and, to a point at least, society in general.


Changed my reply. “K”


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Changed my reply. “K”



 "K"? What does K mean?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> "K"? What does K mean?


It’s short  hand for ok lol. My wife hates it.

Mostly means I recognize my limitations and chose to feed rabbits, chickens, hogs and play in the creek with my grand boys.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> It’s short  hand for ok lol. My wife hates it.
> 
> Mostly means I recognize my limitations and chose to feed rabbits, chickens, hogs and play in the creek with my grand boys.



Great you like to do these things (I enjoy my grandkids too) but I'm not seeing what it has to do with recognizing your limitations.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Great you like to do these things (I enjoy my grandkids too) but I'm not seeing what it has to do with recognizing your limitations.


My apologetic skills aren’t that great to begin with and I eventually realize when I’m running out of smoke and I ain’t got no more logs to throw on. So I just have to shoot the bull going forward lol


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 9, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> My apologetic skills aren’t that great to begin with and I eventually realize when I’m running out of smoke and I ain’t got no more logs to throw on. So I just have to shoot the bull going forward lol



Oh I see. Your apologetic skills need no apology!  Aren't we all just wanna-be philosophers here anyway?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 9, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Oh I see. Your apologetic skills need no apology!  Aren't we all just wanna-be philosophers here anyway?


Yup lol ?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 12, 2022)

Okay I came across this story today. Those of you with more Bible experience might be familiar with it, but it's "new to me" unless I heard it before but forgot it.

Bottom line: if you put discolored tree branches near the watering holes of livestock, they will give birth to discolored babies!  I thought I had a pretty good grip on the science of genetics, but I was way, way off! 

The takeaway: this would be a great Myth Busters segment! 
If this is how the Bible ended up being written _with_ "divine inspiration & guidance"
I can't_ imagine _what it would be like if written by bronze age average humans _without_ divine inspiration! But don't just take my word for it, let's go to the source itself:

*Genesis 30:30-43*

*English Standard Version*

30 For you had little before I came, and it has increased abundantly, and the Lord has blessed you wherever I turned. But now when shall I provide for my own household also?” 31 He said, “What shall I give you?” Jacob said, “You shall not give me anything. If you will do this for me, I will again pasture your flock and keep it: 32 let me pass through all your flock today, removing from it every speckled and spotted sheep and every black lamb, and the spotted and speckled among the goats, and they shall be my wages. 33 So my honesty will answer for me later, when you come to look into my wages with you. Every one that is not speckled and spotted among the goats and black among the lambs, if found with me, shall be counted stolen.” 34 Laban said, “Good! Let it be as you have said.” 35 But that day Laban removed the male goats that were striped and spotted, and all the female goats that were speckled and spotted, every one that had white on it, and every lamb that was black, and put them in the charge of his sons. 36 And he set a distance of three days' journey between himself and Jacob, and Jacob pastured the rest of Laban's flock.
*37 Then Jacob took fresh sticks of poplar and almond and plane trees, and peeled white streaks in them, exposing the white of the sticks. 38 He set the sticks that he had peeled in front of the flocks in the troughs, that is, the watering places, where the flocks came to drink. And since they bred when they came to drink, 39 the flocks bred in front of the sticks and so the flocks brought forth striped, speckled, and spotted. 40 And Jacob separated the lambs and set the faces of the flocks toward the striped and all the black in the flock of Laban. He put his own droves apart and did not put them with Laban's flock. 41 Whenever the stronger of the flock were breeding, Jacob would lay the sticks in the troughs before the eyes of the flock, that they might breed among the sticks, 42 but for the feebler of the flock he would not lay them there. So the feebler would be Laban's, and the stronger Jacob's. 43 Thus the man increased greatly and had large flocks, female servants and male servants, and camels and donkeys.*

**


----------



## bullethead (Jun 12, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Okay I came across this story today. Those of you with more Bible experience might be familiar with it, but it's "new to me" unless I heard it before but forgot it.
> 
> Bottom line: if you put discolored tree branches near the watering holes of livestock, they will give birth to discolored babies!  I thought I had a pretty good grip on the science of genetics, but I was way, way off!
> 
> ...


I remember back in late 70s as a child watching Doug Henning take a black horse and a white horse and POOF they became a Zebra.
Fantastic to "witness" but about as equally real as what you posted.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 12, 2022)

bullethead said:


> I remember back in late 70s as a child watching Doug Henning take a black horse and a white horse and POOF they became a Zebra.
> Fantastic to "witness" but about as equally real as what you posted.



Okay smarty pants - have you even tried the discolored branches experiment to see if it works?   Granted, building a watering trough and buying some sheep might get costly (trees are all over Georgia so that part is easy) but you could scale it down.
You could use hamsters and paint pop-sickle sticks. Hamsters breed pretty fast so the turnaround time on the results of the experiment would be short. It's a good idea for a fifth grader's science class project IMHO.

Side note: I'm thinking this story would shift from "literal" to "metaphor" pretty fast in the minds of most believers. Option B would be which version of the Hebrew alphabet was used to spell the words "speckled" "peeled" and "breed" because it's all about context.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 12, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Okay smarty pants - have you even tried the discolored branches experiment to see if it works?   Granted, building a watering trough and buying some sheep might get costly (trees are all over Georgia so that part is easy) but you could scale it down.
> You could use hamsters and paint pop-sickle sticks. Hamsters breed pretty fast so the turnaround time on the results of the experiment would be short. It's a good idea for a fifth grader's science class project IMHO.
> 
> Side note: I'm thinking this story would shift from "literal" to "metaphor" pretty fast in the minds of most believers. Option B would be which version of the Hebrew alphabet was used to spell the words "speckled" "peeled" and "breed" because it's all about context.


It definitely works.
I have seen discolored branches in creeks and ponds and have caught discolored fish.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 12, 2022)

bullethead said:


> It definitely works.
> I have seen discolored branches in creeks and ponds and have caught discolored fish.



YES! Now it's all making sense. 
This explains the shadow bass! Smart money says there are discolored branches all up & down the shorelines where they live.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 12, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Okay I came across this story today. Those of you with more Bible experience might be familiar with it, but it's "new to me" unless I heard it before but forgot it.
> 
> Bottom line: if you put discolored tree branches near the watering holes of livestock, they will give birth to discolored babies!  I thought I had a pretty good grip on the science of genetics, but I was way, way off!
> 
> ...



Huh.... About time for a new sig line.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 12, 2022)

ambush80 said:


> Huh.... About time for a new sig line.



A new sig line? I don't follow you.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 12, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> A new sig line? I don't follow you.



The signature line on my profile.  You made me think of changing it, but I still really, really like the one I have.

Right down there

    l
    l
    l
    l
    v


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 12, 2022)

ambush80 said:


> The signature line on my profile.  You made me think of changing it, but I still really, really like the one I have.
> 
> Right down there
> 
> ...



oh, I thought you were talking about my sig line, which I don't even have. Cool, I'll look up that verse then!


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 12, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> oh, I thought you were talking about my sig line, which I don't even have. Cool, I'll look up that verse then!



   Ezekial 23:20-21 is definitely not family friendly!


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 14, 2022)

PARTING THE RED SEA!  Looked cool in the movie. However.....yeah, you know I'm going to throw in a "however". Or as the TV detective Columbo would say "just one more thing....."

During the fifth plague upon Pharaoh & Egypt, all the Egyptian (not Hebrew) livestock
*TO INCLUDE HORSES* was killed. With me so far? But then when God was allowing the Hebrews to cross the miraculously parted Red Sea, God takes out 600 Egyptian chariots/riders (drowning them) by releasing the water that he held back for the Hebrews to make their escape.

EXCUSE ME?  God just killed all the Egyptian horses which are USED TO PULL EGYPTIAN CHARIOTS! So, were the Egyptian charioteers pulling their buddies in the chariots like a rickshaw? 
With no horses how can they pull their chariots?  Was Egyptian soldiers pulling each other in chariots in the special "director's cut" of The Ten Commandments?


*Exodus 9*

*English Standard Version*



*The Fifth Plague: Egyptian Livestock Die*
9 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Go in to Pharaoh and say to him, ‘Thus says the Lord, the God of the Hebrews, “Let my people go, that they may serve me. 2 For if you refuse to let them go and still hold them, 3 behold, the hand of the Lord will fall with a very severe plague upon your livestock that are in the field,* the horses,* the donkeys, the camels, the herds, and the flocks. 4 But the Lord will make a distinction between the livestock of Israel and the livestock of Egypt, so that nothing of all that belongs to the people of Israel shall die.”’” 5 And the Lord set a time, saying, “Tomorrow the Lord will do this thing in the land.” 6 And the next day the Lord did this thing. All the livestock of the Egyptians died, but not one of the livestock of the people of Israel died. 7 And Pharaoh sent, and behold, not one of the livestock of Israel was dead. But the heart of Pharaoh was hardened, and he did not let the people go.


*Exodus 14*

*English Standard Version*



*Crossing the Red Sea*
14 Then the Lord said to Moses, 2 “Tell the people of Israel to turn back and encamp in front of Pi-hahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, in front of Baal-zephon; you shall encamp facing it, by the sea. 3 For Pharaoh will say of the people of Israel, ‘They are wandering in the land; the wilderness has shut them in.’ 4 And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and he will pursue them, and I will get glory over Pharaoh and all his host, and the Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord.” And they did so.
5 When the king of Egypt was told that the people had fled, the mind of Pharaoh and his servants was changed toward the people, and they said, “What is this we have done, that we have let Israel go from serving us?” 6 So he made ready his chariot and took his army with him, 7 and took six hundred chosen chariots and all the other chariots of Egypt with officers over all of them. 8 And the Lord hardened the heart of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and he pursued the people of Israel while the people of Israel were going out defiantly. 9* The Egyptians pursued them, all* *Pharaoh's horses and chariots and his horsemen* and his army, and overtook them encamped at the sea, by Pi-hahiroth, in front of Baal-zephon.

Any thoughts?


----------



## Madman (Jun 14, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> PARTING THE RED SEA!  Looked cool in the movie. However.....yeah, you know I'm going to throw in a "however". Or as the TV detective Columbo would say "just one more thing....."
> 
> During the fifth plague upon Pharaoh & Egypt, all the Egyptian (not Hebrew) livestock
> *TO INCLUDE HORSES* was killed. With me so far? But then when God was allowing the Hebrews to cross the miraculously parted Red Sea, God takes out 600 Egyptian chariots/riders (drowning them) by releasing the water that he held back for the Hebrews to make their escape.
> ...



Could Exodus 9:18-21 help?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 14, 2022)

Madman said:


> Could Exodus 9:18-21 help?


So the Pharoah's army listened to God and put thousands of horses inside so that they can use those horses to try to kill that same God's people later in the week?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 14, 2022)

Madman said:


> Could Exodus 9:18-21 help?



Not at all!   The fifth plague killed the Egyptian horses/livestock. Then I guess God literally "beats a dead horse" because the seventh plague AKA the hail plague, kills the Egyptian horses/livestock yet again. 
So now there is_ not even a chance _that there's an Egyptian horse left to pull an Egyptian chariot to pursue the fleeing Hebrews. 

To be fair, the Bible never actually states that the Egyptian army _didn't _use themselves - rather than horses - to pull chariots like they are rickshaws!


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 14, 2022)

bullethead said:


> So the Pharoah's army listened to God and put thousands of horses inside so that they can use those horses to try to kill that same God's people later in the week?



Pharoah listened to God by putting his already dead (from the fifth plague) horses inside so they wouldn't be killed by the hail. 

Or maybe all of the Pharoah's army were secretly "believers" and their horses survived both the fifth and the seventh plagues. I'm sure that wouldn't raise a red flag of suspicion for the Pharoah when it was "go time" to pursue the Hebrews!


----------



## Madman (Jun 14, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Not at all!   The fifth plague killed the Egyptian horses/livestock. Then I guess God literally "beats a dead horse" because the seventh plague AKA the hail plague, kills the Egyptian horses/livestock yet again.
> So now there is_ not even a chance _that there's an Egyptian horse left to pull an Egyptian chariot to pursue the fleeing Hebrews.
> 
> To be fair, the Bible never actually states that the Egyptian army _didn't _use themselves - rather than horses - to pull chariots like they are rickshaws!


Does it say they didn’t use Hebrew horses?  Or perhaps 9:3 applies.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 14, 2022)

Madman said:


> Does it say they didn’t use Hebrew horses?  Or perhaps 9:3 applies.


Big difference in War Horses vs field horses.
Crazy how slaves are allowed to keep get away vehicles.


----------



## Madman (Jun 14, 2022)

bullethead said:


> So the Pharoah's army listened to God and put thousands of horses inside so that they can use those horses to try to kill that same God's people later in the week?


Perhaps some of the servants believed.


----------



## Madman (Jun 14, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Big difference in War Horses vs field horses.
> Crazy how slaves are allowed to keep get away vehicles.


War horses are not allowed “in the field”.  
difficult to get exercise in a stall.


----------



## Madman (Jun 14, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Crazy how slaves are allowed to keep get away vehicles.


?????


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 14, 2022)

Madman said:


> Perhaps some of the servants believed.



I would imagine some servants believed, but why would those same servants take their (or the Pharoah's) horses and join the Pharoah's army just to fight The Hebrews -  which are actually on their side, being fellow believers?


----------



## Madman (Jun 14, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> I would imagine some servants believed, but why would those same servants take their (or the Pharoah's) horses and join the Pharoah's army just to fight The Hebrews -  which are actually on their side, being fellow believers?


People do strange things to survive, just look around today.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 14, 2022)

Madman said:


> Does it say they didn’t use Hebrew horses?  Or perhaps 9:3 applies.



True! But as bullet head said, field horses & war (chariot pulling) horses are trained for different purposes. I would think - though I'm not an experienced horseman - that a work horse hooked up to chariot would freak out when the stuff started hitting the fan in combat!  Granted given time to train horses for a new purpose I'm sure they would work out, but they don't have that much time according to the story. 

Maybe the Pharoah could import & train horses from other countries, which is even less plausible.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 14, 2022)

Madman said:


> War horses are not allowed “in the field”.
> difficult to get exercise in a stall.


I am talking about your suggestion that the Egyptians used the Hebrew horses to persue the Hebrews.
War Horses are trained to pull chariots and engage in war maneuvers. Horses that are not trained for such exercises don't do well in such exercises.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 14, 2022)

Madman said:


> ?????


Why would slaves have thousands of horses?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 14, 2022)

Madman said:


> People do strange things to survive, just look around today.



You have a point, but I think that the story would have mentioned such secret believer deception at some point. Then again, the Bible has a habit of repeating trivial things over & over, but glossing over or ignoring points essential to a story.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 14, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Why would slaves have thousands of horses?



True, slaves might care for - and work with - the Pharoah's horses, but they certainly wouldn't own their own.


----------



## Madman (Jun 14, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> True! But as bullet head said, field horses & war (chariot pulling) horses are trained for different purposes. I would think - though I'm not an experienced horseman - that a work horse hooked up to chariot would freak out when the stuff started hitting the fan in combat!  Granted given time to train horses for a new purpose I'm sure they would work out, but they don't have that much time according to the story.
> 
> Maybe the Pharoah could import & train horses from other countries, which is even less plausible.



I don’t recall a time given in the story.  How long does it say?


----------



## Madman (Jun 14, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> You have a point, but I think that the story would have mentioned such secret believer deception at some point. Then again, the Bible has a habit of repeating trivial things over & over, but glossing over or ignoring points essential to a story.


Really?  Give me some examples of this habit.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 15, 2022)

Madman said:


> Really?  Give me some examples of this habit.



It will take a while! I wasn't writing everything down as I watched the person on you tube reading & commenting on Genesis. So I will have to review them again, but it's almost like the Bible writers were getting paid by the word or something.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 15, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> True, slaves might care for - and work with - the Pharoah's horses, but they certainly wouldn't own their own.


Hard to imagine that someone held in captivity who are in negotiations with their captors to be released would put the pursuit vehicles in their own garages and gas them up with premium...especially if a Devine force is involved on their side. 
If they in fact did shelter their captors horses it is odd that an all knowing being wouldn't have known the horses would be used to pursue "his" people.....unless such a being gets a kick out of crushing men and horses with water. Someone seems to have a drowning fetish.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 15, 2022)

Okay Mad Man here is just one example of the Bible (or at least the author of this particular part of the Bible) taking way too long to put out a small bit of information because they are pretty much repeating the same thing two or three times.
It's not like different characters are recounting their own experiences and they differ, which is understandable of course.


*Genesis 23*

*English Standard Version*



*Sarah's Death and Burial*
23 Sarah lived 127 years; these were the years of the life of Sarah. 2 And Sarah died at Kiriath-arba (that is, Hebron) in the land of Canaan, and Abraham went in to mourn for Sarah and to weep for her. 3 And Abraham rose up from before his dead and said to the Hittites,[a] 4 “I am a sojourner and foreigner among you; give me property among you for a burying place, that I may bury my dead out of my sight.” 5 The Hittites answered Abraham, 6 “Hear us, my lord; you are a prince of God[b] among us. Bury your dead in the choicest of our tombs. None of us will withhold from you his tomb to hinder you from burying your dead.” 7 Abraham rose and bowed to the Hittites, the people of the land. 8 And he said to them, “If you are willing that I should bury my dead out of my sight, hear me and entreat for me Ephron the son of Zohar, 9 that he may give me the cave of Machpelah, which he owns; it is at the end of his field. For the full price let him give it to me in your presence as property for a burying place.”
10 Now Ephron was sitting among the Hittites, and Ephron the Hittite answered Abraham in the hearing of the Hittites, of all who went in at the gate of his city, 11 “No, my lord, hear me: I give you the field, and I give you the cave that is in it. In the sight of the sons of my people I give it to you. Bury your dead.” 12 Then Abraham bowed down before the people of the land. 13 And he said to Ephron in the hearing of the people of the land, “But if you will, hear me: I give the price of the field. Accept it from me, that I may bury my dead there.” 14 Ephron answered Abraham, 15 “My lord, listen to me: a piece of land worth four hundred shekels[c] of silver, what is that between you and me? Bury your dead.” 16 Abraham listened to Ephron, and Abraham weighed out for Ephron the silver that he had named in the hearing of the Hittites, four hundred shekels of silver, according to the weights current among the merchants.
17 So the field of Ephron in Machpelah, which was to the east of Mamre, the field with the cave that was in it and all the trees that were in the field, throughout its whole area, was made over 18 to Abraham as a possession in the presence of the Hittites, before all who went in at the gate of his city. 19 After this, Abraham buried Sarah his wife in the cave of the field of Machpelah east of Mamre (that is, Hebron) in the land of Canaan. 20 The field and the cave that is in it were made over to Abraham as property for a burying place by the Hittites.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 15, 2022)

Madman said:


> I don’t recall a time given in the story.  How long does it say?



The whole shebang from the last plague to crossing the Red Sea would have played out quickly. Other than a short detour (no pun intended) to explain the significance of the Passover tradition and the unleavened bread tradition and whatnot * the story moves along at a fast pace. The Egyptian people were fed up with getting hammered by the plaques. Here is a Bible quote below. So while the Bible doesn't say, there is no reason to assume that the pace of the story would have slowed down enough for Egypt replace all the horses killed by two plaques, the livestock plaque and the hail plague.
Side note God doesn't play on a hailstorm smiting! During the battle when God made the sun stand still in the sky he also sent a super deadly hailstorm.

*The Exodus*
The Egyptians were urgent with the people to send them out of the land in haste. For they said, “We shall all be dead.”

* to be fair, the Bible had to explain these important Jewish traditions somewhere, so doing it while the events were playing out was a logical place as any

I ALMOST FORGOT! Exodus chapter 13 starts out with instructions for HUMAN SACRIFICE! 

However, a few sentences later they switch back to only animal sacrifice, with the human sacrifice being only symbolic, with an animal being the "stunt double" AKA "redeeming" for the humans. That was a close one!

*Consecration of the Firstborn*
Exodus 13:2  The Lord said to Moses, 2 “Consecrate to me all the firstborn. Whatever is the first to open the womb among the people of Israel,* both of man and of beast, is mine.”  *

*Exodus 13:13  Every firstborn of a donkey you shall redeem with a lamb, or if you will not redeem it you shall break its neck. Every firstborn of man among your sons you shall redeem. *


----------



## Madman (Jun 15, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Hard to imagine that someone held in captivity who are in negotiations with their captors to be released would put the pursuit vehicles in their own garages and gas them up with premium...especially if a Devine force is involved on their side.
> If they in fact did shelter their captors horses it is odd that an all knowing being wouldn't have known the horses would be used to pursue "his" people.....unless such a being gets a kick out of crushing men and horses with water. Someone seems to have a drowning fetish.



Pretty sure the Pharaoh had his own stables and his own fuel for the horses, but then again neither of us know do we?  We either trust the authors and the translators or we don't, it is that simple.

There are dictatorships today that demand allegiance or death, pretty sure the Pharaoh was the same.


----------



## Madman (Jun 15, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Okay Mad Man here is just one example of the Bible (or at least the author of this particular part of the Bible) taking way too long to put out a small bit of information because they are pretty much repeating the same thing two or three times.
> It's not like different characters are recounting their own experiences and they differ, which is understandable of course.
> 
> 
> ...


You might want to spend some time studying ancient eastern writing styles.


----------



## Madman (Jun 15, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> So while the Bible doesn't say, there is no reason to assume that the pace of the story would have slowed down enough for Egypt replace all the horses killed by two plaques, the livestock plaque and the hail plague..



There is no reason to assume otherwise.



oldfella1962 said:


> *The Exodus*
> I ALMOST FORGOT! Exodus chapter 13 starts out with instructions for HUMAN SACRIFICE!



Consecration does not equate to sacrifice.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 15, 2022)

Madman said:


> Pretty sure the Pharaoh had his own stables and his own fuel for the horses, but then again neither of us know do we?  We either trust the authors and the translators or we don't, it is that simple.
> 
> There are dictatorships today that demand allegiance or death, pretty sure the Pharaoh was the same.



Then I don't trust the authors/translators/editors to be consistent, accurate or coherent. As for the Pharoah having his own horses I'm sure that he did, before all the Egyptian horses were KILLED in two almost back-to-back plagues (of Biblical proportions). The Bible says all the Egyptian livestock were killed.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 15, 2022)

Madman said:


> Pretty sure the Pharaoh had his own stables and his own fuel for the horses, but then again neither of us know do we?  We either trust the authors and the translators or we don't, it is that simple.
> 
> There are dictatorships today that demand allegiance or death, pretty sure the Pharaoh was the same.


In Exodus 9:6 it says all of the Egyptian livestock were killed. No mention of a saving shelter.
Then in 20 it is saying about the servants sheltering livestock in their houses.

*All the livestock died:*  Exodus 9:1-7, “Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘Go to Pharaoh and speak to him, “Thus says the Lord, the God of the Hebrews, ‘Let My people go, that they may serve Me.’ 2 For if you refuse to let them go, and continue to hold them, 3 behold, the hand of the Lord will come with a very severe pestilence on your livestock which are in the field, on the horses, on the donkeys, on the camels, on the herds, and on the flocks. 4 But the Lord will make a distinction between the livestock of Israel and the livestock of Egypt, so that nothing will die of all that belongs to the sons of Israel.”‘ 5 And the Lord set a definite time, saying, ‘Tomorrow the Lord will do this thing in the land.’ 6 So the Lord did this thing on the morrow, and all the livestock of Egypt died; but of the livestock of the sons of Israel, not one died. 7 And Pharaoh sent, and behold, there was not even one of the livestock of Israel dead. But the heart of Pharaoh was hardened, and he did not let the people go.”
*All the livestock did not die:*  Exodus 9:18-21, “Behold, about this time tomorrow, I will send a very heavy hail, such as has not been seen in Egypt from the day it was founded until now. 19 “Now therefore send, bring your livestock and whatever you have in the field to safety. Every man and beast that is found in the field and is not brought home, when the hail comes down on them, will die.”’” 20 The one among the servants of Pharaoh who feared the word of the Lord made his servants and his livestock flee into the houses; 21 but he who paid no regard to the word of the Lord left his servants and his livestock in the field.”


----------



## Madman (Jun 15, 2022)

bullethead said:


> In Exodus 9:6 it says all of the Egyptian livestock were killed. No mention of a saving shelter.
> Then in 20 it is saying about the servants sheltering livestock in their houses.
> 
> *All the livestock died:*  Exodus 9:1-7, “Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘Go to Pharaoh and speak to him, “Thus says the Lord, the God of the Hebrews, ‘Let My people go, that they may serve Me.’ 2 For if you refuse to let them go, and continue to hold them, 3 behold, the hand of the Lord will come with a very severe pestilence on your livestock which are in the field, on the horses, on the donkeys, on the camels, on the herds, and on the flocks. 4 But the Lord will make a distinction between the livestock of Israel and the livestock of Egypt, so that nothing will die of all that belongs to the sons of Israel.”‘ 5 And the Lord set a definite time, saying, ‘Tomorrow the Lord will do this thing in the land.’ 6 So the Lord did this thing on the morrow, and all the livestock of Egypt died; but of the livestock of the sons of Israel, not one died. 7 And Pharaoh sent, and behold, there was not even one of the livestock of Israel dead. But the heart of Pharaoh was hardened, and he did not let the people go.”
> *All the livestock did not die:*  Exodus 9:18-21, “Behold, about this time tomorrow, I will send a very heavy hail, such as has not been seen in Egypt from the day it was founded until now. 19 “Now therefore send, bring your livestock and whatever you have in the field to safety. Every man and beast that is found in the field and is not brought home, when the hail comes down on them, will die.”’” 20 The one among the servants of Pharaoh who feared the word of the Lord made his servants and his livestock flee into the houses; 21 but he who paid no regard to the word of the Lord left his servants and his livestock in the field.”


Arguing from silence is a poor debate.

But y’all read it on the inter web so it must be true.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 15, 2022)

"Consecration does not equate to sacrifice." - mad man

Thanks for clearing that up! I read "first to open the womb" and that's what threw me. Open the womb means to give birth. I thought it meant to open the womb in a crude c-section kind of way and remove the contents. So they mean firstborn, got it. Maybe I don't like this author's word choices so well.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 15, 2022)

Madman said:


> You might want to spend some time studying ancient eastern writing styles.



Hard pass on that!   I did two tours of Korea, and trying to get straight, accurate answers out of those people was like pulling teeth. It's like a completely different mindset & world view. I can't imagine adding fuel to the fire by going back in time too!


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 15, 2022)

bullethead said:


> In Exodus 9:6 it says all of the Egyptian livestock were killed. No mention of a saving shelter.
> Then in 20 it is saying about the servants sheltering livestock in their houses.
> 
> *All the livestock died:*  Exodus 9:1-7, “Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘Go to Pharaoh and speak to him, “Thus says the Lord, the God of the Hebrews, ‘Let My people go, that they may serve Me.’ 2 For if you refuse to let them go, and continue to hold them, 3 behold, the hand of the Lord will come with a very severe pestilence on your livestock which are in the field, on the horses, on the donkeys, on the camels, on the herds, and on the flocks. 4 But the Lord will make a distinction between the livestock of Israel and the livestock of Egypt, so that nothing will die of all that belongs to the sons of Israel.”‘ 5 And the Lord set a definite time, saying, ‘Tomorrow the Lord will do this thing in the land.’ 6 So the Lord did this thing on the morrow, and all the livestock of Egypt died; but of the livestock of the sons of Israel, not one died. 7 And Pharaoh sent, and behold, there was not even one of the livestock of Israel dead. But the heart of Pharaoh was hardened, and he did not let the people go.”
> *All the livestock did not die:*  Exodus 9:18-21, “Behold, about this time tomorrow, I will send a very heavy hail, such as has not been seen in Egypt from the day it was founded until now. 19 “Now therefore send, bring your livestock and whatever you have in the field to safety. Every man and beast that is found in the field and is not brought home, when the hail comes down on them, will die.”’” 20 The one among the servants of Pharaoh who feared the word of the Lord made his servants and his livestock flee into the houses; 21 but he who paid no regard to the word of the Lord left his servants and his livestock in the field.”



AHA! So in the hail plague the believer servants brought their horses in and saved them. Living horses that could pull Pharoah's army chariots. I'm tracking so far.
*HOWEVER!   *Were the believer servants who heeded God's words ACTUAL HEBREWS?  This is important because: in the livestock plague all Egyptian livestock died, but all Hebrew livestock lived. So when the hail plaque hit if you were "a servant of the Pharoah" who feared God and heeded his words but were not a card-carrying Hebrew, it would be too late to save your horse because it would have been killed already in the livestock plague. 

This is interesting & educational!  I've never been a fan of reading fiction. 
But the Bible has a good mix of fantastical/ridiculous stories, soap-opera incestual drama, and "so bad it's good" writing & plotlines that keep you entertained! 
And because it's "all over the map" it can be cherry-picked to prove - or disprove - anything you want it to! It can be interpreted six ways from Sunday from multiple levels.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 15, 2022)

Madman said:


> Arguing from silence is a poor debate.
> 
> But y’all read it on the inter web so it must be true.



Again I'm "lost in the sauce".  What does "arguing from silence" mean?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 15, 2022)

Madman said:


> Arguing from silence is a poor debate.
> 
> But y’all read it on the inter web so it must be true.


Are those passages not what I also read in the Bible?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 15, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> AHA! So in the hail plague the believer servants brought their horses in and saved them. Living horses that could pull Pharoah's army chariots. I'm tracking so far.
> *HOWEVER!   *Were the believer servants who heeded God's words ACTUAL HEBREWS?  This is important because: in the livestock plague all Egyptian livestock died, but all Hebrew livestock lived. So when the hail plaque hit if you were "a servant of the Pharoah" who feared God and heeded his words but were not a card-carrying Hebrew, it would be too late to save your horse because it would have been killed already in the livestock plague.
> 
> This is interesting & educational!  I've never been a fan of reading fiction.
> ...


The words in the Bible are 100% as written as long as you do not question them in any way. If you use those words as written as evidence against themselves then those words magically become property of the internet and are held in disregard. Believers get to choose whuts whut depending upon how the conversation is going for them.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 15, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> AHA! So in the hail plague the believer servants brought their horses in and saved them. Living horses that could pull Pharoah's army chariots. I'm tracking so far.
> *HOWEVER!   *Were the believer servants who heeded God's words ACTUAL HEBREWS?  This is important because: in the livestock plague all Egyptian livestock died, but all Hebrew livestock lived. So when the hail plaque hit if you were "a servant of the Pharoah" who feared God and heeded his words but were not a card-carrying Hebrew, it would be too late to save your horse because it would have been killed already in the livestock plague.
> 
> This is interesting & educational!  I've never been a fan of reading fiction.
> ...


Until you get to verses 20 and 21 and your fabricated confusion is cleared up. At least it should be.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 15, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Until you get to verses 20 and 21 and your fabricated confusion is cleared up. At least it should be.



There is no "fabricated confusion". I can't figure out how if all the "livestock of Egypt" was killed in THE LIVESTOCK PLAGUE (not the hail plague) and only the "livestock of the Sons Of Israel" was spared, did this mean that Egyptians sympathetic to - and now possibly believing in - the God of the Hebrews (though they were not actual "sons of Israel") would their livestock be spared? 

Because *the criteria CHANGES *for the HAIL PLAGUE! For the hail plague God says anyone who served Pharoah _but_ is now heeding the word of God (learned their lesson? Wised up to God's power?) will have their livestock spared. It doesn't mention that they have to be "sons of Israel" at all. A petty point? Not really, because this affects whether there would even be any Egyptian horses_ alive_ after the livestock plague. 

Did the Egyptian army steal the living horses from any Hebrews still hanging around waiting to be killed because they believe in God and are thus not loyal to the Pharoah?

That would be something worthwhile to add to the story to alleviate any possible questions about plot holes. It's not crystal clear to me is all I'm saying.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 15, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Until you get to verses 20 and 21 and your fabricated confusion is cleared up. At least it should be.


If the livestock of the non Hebrews was killed off earlier by the Lord in Ex 9:6 because there was no stipulation on how to save them then, where and when did they replenish their numbers 14 verses later?


----------



## Madman (Jun 15, 2022)

bullethead said:


> If the livestock of the non Hebrews was killed off earlier by the Lord in Ex 9:6 because there was no stipulation on how to save them then, where and when did they replenish their numbers 14 verses later?



They replenished before 14 verses later, it has been admitted that there is no time frame given.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 15, 2022)

Madman said:


> They replenished before 14 verses later, it has been admitted that there is no time frame given.


Cecil B Demill seemed to think the timeline was pretty quick.


----------



## Madman (Jun 15, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Cecil B Demill seemed to think the timeline was pretty quick.


LOL Ok.  Your right. Who could argue with old Cecil.

But you will have to ask him where Pharaoh got the horses to pursue Moses.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 15, 2022)

Madman said:


> They replenished before 14 verses later, it has been admitted that there is no time frame given.


So was God's punishment really even a punishment if they could just go get more and carry on as if nothing happened? Maybe a little hardening of the hearts of the traders should have been in order to not sell.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 15, 2022)

Madman said:


> LOL Ok.  Your right. Who could argue with old Cecil.
> 
> But you will have to ask him where Pharaoh got the horses to pursue Moses.


Oy vey, foist dey didnt have horses, then dey did have horses a few lines latah...vat do I know about contradictory writing anyvay?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 15, 2022)

Madman said:


> LOL Ok.  Your right. Who could argue with old Cecil.
> 
> But you will have to ask him where Pharaoh got the horses to pursue Moses.


Cecil said Prop Department


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 15, 2022)

Madman said:


> LOL Ok.  Your right. Who could argue with old Cecil.
> 
> But you will have to ask him where Pharaoh got the horses to pursue Moses.



Good point! Since all the horses were killed, I think it would be *awesome*
to see Pharoah riding a huge *Galapagos Tortoise!*
No, wait....make it really epic with Pharoah riding on TWO tortoises, like Jesus when he rode not one but *TWO donkeys* (depending on which part of the four gospels you are reading).

The gospel of Mathew has Jesus riding two donkeys at the same time! 
Why you ask? Most Bible scholars thinks it's to fulfill a prophesy in Zechariah 9:9. Think I'm kidding? Google it!


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 15, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> There is no "fabricated confusion". I can't figure out how if all the "livestock of Egypt" was killed in THE LIVESTOCK PLAGUE (not the hail plague) and only the "livestock of the Sons Of Israel" was spared, did this mean that Egyptians sympathetic to - and now possibly believing in - the God of the Hebrews (though they were not actual "sons of Israel") would their livestock be spared?
> 
> Because *the criteria CHANGES *for the HAIL PLAGUE! For the hail plague God says anyone who served Pharoah _but_ is now heeding the word of God (learned their lesson? Wised up to God's power?) will have their livestock spared. It doesn't mention that they have to be "sons of Israel" at all. A petty point? Not really, because this affects whether there would even be any Egyptian horses_ alive_ after the livestock plague.
> 
> ...





bullethead said:


> If the livestock of the non Hebrews was killed off earlier by the Lord in Ex 9:6 because there was no stipulation on how to save them then, where and when did they replenish their numbers 14 verses later?


That is why I said it should not be confusing when you get to verses 20 & 21. Carefully read what the scriptures are saying.

Exodus 9:

3 - Behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thy cattle *which is in the field............*

20 -He that feared the word of the Lord among the servants of Pharaoh made his servants and his *cattle flee into the houses *

21 - And he that regarded not the word of the Lord left his servants and his cattle *in the field.*

After reading the entire Chapter any unbiased Reader would conclude that if cattle can be left in the field or moved into "houses" (and that is not your living room) - then some cattle would have survived through this plague / hail storm / etc., by not being in the field.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 15, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Again I'm "lost in the sauce".  What does "arguing from silence" mean?


A bunch of stuff but in short - logical fallacy. 

An attempt to demonstrate something as true in the absence of evidence.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 15, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> That is why I said it should not be confusing when you get to verses 20 & 21. Carefully read what the scriptures are saying.
> 
> Exodus 9:
> 
> ...



still not getting it. Not a big deal. Bottom line, obviously horses survived if the Egyptian army used chariots, so I won't get too wrapped around the axle over it. 
HA! Comedy gold right there - you're welcome!


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 16, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> still not getting it. Not a big deal. Bottom line, obviously horses survived if the Egyptian army used chariots, so I won't get too wrapped around the axle over it.
> HA! Comedy gold right there - you're welcome!



Per scripture that you say is contradictory - in verse 3, the warning was that the hand of the Lord was on the cattle in the field. Obviously some cattle were not in the field if you’re told in verse 20 and 21 that those that feared the Lord put their cattle in their houses, and those that didn’t left them in the field. And again in verse 25 - all that was in the field. 


Before someone goes there (see I’m familiar with “research” ? (the online links) “but it says all”…….yes it does, but it mentions “all that’s in the field” in multiple places. Plus consider how “all” is used. In Exodus 7 all dug for water. If it actually means all that would mean that infants dug for water, too. 

Based on how you’re reading this story;
If you’ve got 10 dogs; 7 run lose, 3 are “housed” and I tell you I’m killing all your dogs found “in my field” (that’s exactly what verse 3 warns about) where my livestock is and the next day I call you and tell you I killed them all……..your first instinct would be that I killed all 10.

It’s ok not to believe the Exodus story but you can’t make your case that it’s contradictory as your reasoning for not believing it.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> That is why I said it should not be confusing when you get to verses 20 & 21. Carefully read what the scriptures are saying.
> 
> Exodus 9:
> 
> ...


So in 9:3 all the livestock, cattle horses, donkeys, lambs, sheep etc in the field were killed but no specifics as to how.
Then whatever was left in the field again in 9:22 were killed by hail (numbers really had to be down at that point after the 1st kill off) except for those Egyptians that took heed and put their animals inside.
Then as you say later in the whole story some of the grain was killed by the hail and some survived but yet again even later the Locusts ate all the remaining crops and grain. All = Everything
So we have a naion of Boil laced Egyptians that had a majority of their livestock killed the 1st time, another round of livestock deaths the 2nd time, whatever livestock was saved had nothing to eat later due to no grain. The Egyptians had no meat unless they were eating the war horses who were inside and the Egyptians had no grain to eat as whatever wasn't destroyed by the hail was eaten by the locusts.
Now, in slavetown the Hebrews were living large as their livestock were not touched. If the Egyptians were starving and they took the Hebrews livestock and grains they certainly were not sharing them out of kind gestures so one side or the other had to be on the verge of starvation.
But wait, there is more. The Holy Ghost creeps through and kills all the first born of anyone who didn't sacrifice a lamb and cook it over a fire cooking all parts and eat it while their cloaks were tucked in while holding a staff in one hand.(thems the biblical instructions) Any uneaten parts had to be burned in the fire PLUS the lambs blood had to be smeared above the door and on the sides of the door. Not to be merciful on the livestock the Holy Ghost kills the first born of all the animals too further decimating already decimated numbers of livestock.
And even when Pharaoh gave in to Moses's demands the Lord purposely stepped in and hardened his heart to change his mind only so the Lord can smack him with another round of suffering and death to him and his people including his starving boil infested army who are down on horses which have no grain to eat either.
But sound the trumpets, gather the starving men have them hitch up the rickity starving half dozen horses that are left to heavy chariots and lets chase the Hebes full tilt across the desert only so we can lose another 90% of men and horses when the Sea smashes us to bits.
Remember there was supposed to be 400,000 Hebrews. If even 1/3 were fighting aged boys and men the Egyptians would have needed a sizeable healty force of men and horses to slay 400,000 and 100,000 of those being capable fighters.
It would seem more of a miracle that Pharoah was able to fend off a God's wraths and keep his animal, grain and people numbers so high that he could continue on, then lose the majority to the sea, regroup in no time and continue on back home flourishing as an economical and industrial powerhouse as if it all didn't happen.

Oh yea, and now even most Jewish scholars admit that none of it happened literally.
The Jews were not slaves to the Egyptians and there is no evidence that 400,000 thousand of them wandered the desert for 40 years.
Turns out that the Egyptians paid people of all nations to work and treated them extremely well.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 16, 2022)

bullethead said:


> So in 9:3 all the livestock, cattle horses, donkeys, lambs, sheep etc in the field were killed but no specifics as to how.
> Then whatever was left in the field again in 9:22 were killed by hail (numbers really had to be down at that point after the 1st kill off) except for those Egyptians that took heed and put their animals inside.
> Then as you say later in the whole story some of the grain was killed by the hail and some survived but yet again even later the Locusts ate all the remaining crops and grain. All = Everything
> So we have a naion of Boil laced Egyptians that had a majority of their livestock killed the 1st time, another round of livestock deaths the 2nd time, whatever livestock was saved had nothing to eat later due to no grain. The Egyptians had no meat unless they were eating the war horses who were inside and the Egyptians had no grain to eat as whatever wasn't destroyed by the hail was eaten by the locusts.
> ...





bullethead said:


> So in 9:3 all the livestock, cattle horses, donkeys, lambs, sheep etc in the field were killed but no specifics as to how.
> Then whatever was left in the field again in 9:22. All = Everything
> 
> 
> ...


Actually in verse 3 right from the start it says all that’s in the field.

You’d think I killed all your dogs, too? Even those housed?

Jewish scholars. Nothing against either one but that’s like saying the Jehovas Witness tells the Catholic Church - you’re wrong.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Actually in verse 3 right from the start it says all that’s in the field.


Correct. I am not disputing "all that is in the field"
What is a fair number of animals that would be expected to be out in "the field" in Egypt's climate? Lets also remember that no specific way of death was given like hail later on in round 2 of death.




Spotlite said:


> You’d think I killed all your dogs, too? Even those housed?


No, I'd think that using Livestock, not dogs,who spend the majority of time in the field would be out in the field. More out in the field than were not in the field at any given time.
So instead of 3 out of 10 dogs being killed, a more likely scenario would be 7 out of every 10 Livestock is killed initially.  That includes horses, cattle, sheep etc.
Then in a 2nd wave of Hail death even more livestock are killed out in the field. Lets be generous and say out of the remaining 30% left from initial mass casualty in 9:3 the Egyptian are more wise and they only lose 1/3.
That leaves us with 20% of all livestock that we started with.
2 out of 10. 20 out of 100. 200 out of a thousand. Etc.
Then all the food for the livestock is either half destroyed by hail or fully eaten by locusts. There is no stipulation for inside grain.  The locusts ate it All.
What are the depleted numbers of inside surviving livestock eating if all the grain is gone? Lets also remember that an argument that you and madman are making is that there is no specific time table. Ok. So can the starving livestock wait a year for new crops? Will they have offspring when in starvation?
Then, the Holy Ghost kills off all the first born of the remaining depleted and starving livestock.
Spotlite, that is a LOT of dead livestock. All types of livestock.
Not only do the dwindling numbers numbers of livestock starving but so are the Millions of people who now have 90% of their meat supply dead but also have no grain to eat either.
The remaining livestock are now the only food souce left.



Spotlite said:


> Jewish scholars. Nothing against either one but that’s like saying the Jehovas Witness tells the Catholic Church - you’re wrong.


It would be exactly the Opposite of that analogy.  It would be the Catholic Church telling the JWs they are wrong and that particular analogy only works where Christianity is involved.

The Jews wrote the OT stories. The Jews use those OT stories. They believed they lived those stories. And now after being educated through historical and scientific research admit that the stories are just that.
You are , as a Christian, are trying to tell the Jews(and other biblical scholars, historians, scientists,  The Egyptians) that they are wrong in admitting that the Exodus didnt happen.
You are the Jehovas Witnesses in your own analogy,skipping the Catholic Church, and trying to tell the Jews how it is.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 16, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Correct. I am not disputing "all that is in the field"
> What is a fair number of animals that would be expected to be out in "the field" in Egypt's climate? Lets also remember that no specific way of death was given like hail later on in round 2 of death.
> 
> 
> ...


I’m not sure about a fair number. The hang up contradiction was “all” were killed so where did the new ones come from 14 verses later. If there was at least one male and one female left there was enough to reproduce. Not knowing how many were killed, how many were not killed and not knowing the time span between verses 3 and 20 it’s far reach to say it’s contradictory. I do know several dairy farms that can house 100’s of cows for milking. I can shelter 60 with no problem in my barn. I’ve done it in a bad lighting storm before - had one get hit by lightning. Back then fences were not as sophisticated as they are now. Many stalled their livestock at night for protection against predators. Yea wouldn’t think there were very many 100 plus cow farms back then. And sheep / goats have to have shelter from weather to survive. I used to run goats - my goat barn could house 100.

Todays Jews aren’t living, aren’t holding traditions, and aren’t performing certain ceremonies the way the original Jews did. They can only read what’s written just like you and I can. So to say a Jewish scholar says……to me is the same as saying the Jehovas Witness said…..

Both attended a program to earn their scholars based on their beliefs. I doubt either changed their belief about God.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I’m not sure about a fair number. The hang up contradiction was “all” were killed so where did the new ones come from 14 verses later. If there was at least one male and one female left there was enough to reproduce. Not knowing how many were killed, how many were not killed and not knowing the time span between verses 3 and 20 it’s far reach to say it’s contradictory.


You are trying to use what is not said between verse 3 and 25 against what is said. If the writer wanted to convey that a month, a year, 10 years passed in between he would have. These people didn't age greatly. Pharoah's son was young and was still young when the HG killed him. 

"ALL" is a sticking point here. We understand that "all" is referring to the amount of livestock that were out in the field not one time but twice. Meaning that whatever the number was the first time, even more died the next time.
Saying that we don't know how much time passed in between is an excuse not a fact based solution. The story line seems to flow quickly.



Spotlite said:


> I do know several dairy farms that can house 100’s of cows for milking. I can shelter 60 with no problem in my barn. I’ve done it in a bad lighting storm before - had one get hit by lightning. Back then fences were nit as sophisticated as they are now. Many stalled their livestock at night for protection against predators. Yea wouldn’t think there were very many 100 plus cow farms back then. Abs sheep / goats have to have shelter from weather to survive.


Fences were most likely scarce back then as were shelters. Thats why they had people to tend to the flocks/herd.
In the first mass death of animals who were in the field it does not specify how the animals were killed. It seems as if God suddenly turned off the Life Switch and anything out in the field died. No warning, No 6th sense that had the animals head for shelter. Being God, I would think he'd do it  at the perfect time of the day when the maximum amount of enemy animals were outside in order to have the most effect. Does that seem reasonable? 

Unless we get into the Ancient Egyptian practices of raising livestock amd compare them to today's modern techniques and housing I would gess that Pharoah had the means and space to house many animals if and when necessary. But like most farms those animals were out and about in greater numbers and more often than locked up. With no warning from Gods first strike God would have gotten a good majority the first time and flattened a pile more with hail later....being God and all.
Then factor in the destruction of all grain by hail and locusts, starving animals, starving people and the first born of each all dying at the same time and any excuses as to why an enemy of your God could survive is not flattering to your God at all.



Spotlite said:


> Todays Jews aren’t living, aren’t holding traditions, and aren’t performing certain ceremonies the way the original Jews did. They can only read what’s written just you and I can. So to say a Jewish scholar says……to me is the same as saying the Jehovas Witness said…..
> 
> Both attended a program to earn their scholarships based on their beliefs. I doubt either changed their belief about God.


It's the Archeologists,  Historians, and researchers who check the sites, archives and histories of these cultures that affirm or deny is what counts.
It is telling when a culture admits that things are not as once as believed.  Evidence and lack there of does that.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 16, 2022)

bullethead said:


> You are trying to use what is not said between verse 3 and 25 against what is said. If the writer wanted to convey that a month, a year, 10 years passed in between he would have. These people didn't age greatly. Pharoah's son was young and was still young when the HG killed him.
> 
> "ALL" is a sticking point here. We understand that "all" is referring to the amount of livestock that were out in the field not one time but twice. Meaning that whatever the number was the first time, even more died the next time.
> Saying that we don't know how much time passed in between is an excuse not a fact based solution. The story line seems to flow quickly.
> ...


I think we’re both using what is not said.

Evidence - where does it say every single cow the Egyptians had were killed? All only represents all that were in the field. If it were all cattle there’d be no need for the Writer to mention in the field nor in the houses. Be it fiction or non fiction I don’t think the Writer of any story is that conflicting in 14 paragraphs - especially fiction.

I could guess at storage space back then for livestock, but based on old stall barns that’s becoming less common in todays world - I have to believe they had enough room to shelter their best animals. I’m sure they didn’t shelter all.

I get historian’s, researchers, etc., but they’re no different than denominations - all historians don’t agree.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 16, 2022)

bullethead said:


> You are trying to use what is not said between verse 3 and 25 against what is said. If the writer wanted to convey that a month, a year, 10 years passed in between he would have. These people didn't age greatly. Pharoah's son was young and was still young when the HG killed him.
> 
> "ALL" is a sticking point here. We understand that "all" is referring to the amount of livestock that were out in the field not one time but twice. Meaning that whatever the number was the first time, even more died the next time.
> Saying that we don't know how much time passed in between is an excuse not a fact based solution. The story line seems to flow quickly.
> ...


To be fair - All.

When you see a news heading that says Democrats / Republicans support……

Do you think that means all?

Even if it says all Democrats / Republicans support……

You already know that it does not mean every single one.

The sane Writer write chapter 7. All dug for water. You’re saying that includes infants, disabled, etc.

Whatever all might mean to others, at least for this Writer it’s obvious that All doesn’t mean every single one. If so, that means infants dug for water, too. We both know that’s not the intent of that chapter be it fiction or non fiction.

In the case of chapter 9 verse 3 it specifically says “in the field”. That eliminates the sheltered all the way through verse 25.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> To be fair - All.
> 
> When you see a news heading that says Democrats / Republicans support……
> 
> ...


All in the case of the livestock pertaining to the accounts in Exodus means:
Every single animal that is considered livestock that was out in a field at the time the mass killing event happened.
God killed every animal that was in a field that didnt belong to a Hebrew.
Is that a fair assessment of "All" for this conversation? Political polls and digging wells are not the same context.

How many total of every livestock animal that existed in that area is vague nonsense that the Bible does not include.
Was it 1% or 99% none of us know.
But since the God we are talking about us supposed to be All Knowing it would make sense to kill as many as possible correct? Why he is unable or unwilling to kill sheltered ones also is beyond me. Anyway God is unsatisfied with his first wipeout so he tries a 2nd time with hail. He catches the buggers out in the fields again, and again you'd think being God he'd get maximum results for his efforts and the #s would be favorable to him. I would hope that a God would know how many livestock to kill in order to cripple an enemy. But, if you want to claim the Egyptians outsmarted your God by all means continue. 
Then God also wipes out the grain with 2 different events. What are the "All" of the surviving livestock eating if the grain is gone?
What are the people eating?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 16, 2022)

bullethead said:


> All in the case of the livestock pertaining to the accounts in Exodus means:
> Every single animal that is considered livestock that was out in a field at the time the mass killing event happened.
> God killed every animal that was in a field that didnt belong to a Hebrew.
> Is that a fair assessment of "All" for this conversation? Political polls and digging wells are not the same context.
> ...



I agree with your assessment - “God killed every animal that was in a field that didnt belong to a Hebrew.”

I agree that none of us know how many survived nor how many were killed. To punish I’d say the majority were killed. You don’t have to kill a farmers 200 head heard to wipe him out - 150 is basically a total loss.

I don’t think He’s unable or unwilling, Verse 20 says those that feared Him would shelter. Why kill their animals if they feared Him?

I don’t think the Egyptians outsmarted God - those that feared Him took shelter.

To remain in context with the story - if God fed the Israelites manna why would He withhold it from those that feared Him?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 16, 2022)

"Jewish scholars. Nothing against either one but that’s like saying the Jehovas Witness tells the Catholic Church - you’re wrong." - spot lite

 But it's_ their _book! Didn't Jews (or those Hebrews who would become Jews) write the Old Testament? It's pretty much their "origin story" that explains how they got started as a people. Jesus himself was a Jew. I would think that Jewish scholars have as much skin in the game as Christian Bible scholars concerning the Old Testament. 
Regardless IMHO both types of scholars are experts in their field, which is deep examination of works of fiction. 

But I do agree with you that a Jehovas Witness telling a Catholic that they are doing it wrong is pointless & ridiculous. 

Side note Jewish scholars (like Bible Scholars) definitely earn their money explaining away all the ever increasingly accurate findings by modern archeology! 

Bullet head pointed out that the "Exodus" was nowhere close to the huge event that the Bible describes. There are many thousands of Egyptian relics & carvings and whatnot all over the areas their empire controlled, and the Egyptians were all about keeping detailed records of everything. Nothing indicates a very large concentration 
of what we would call Hebrews living in or suddenly leaving Egypt. I hardly think they would deliberately just not mention them out of spite. 

The Exodus is just one example of Jews having to come to grips with their origin story being very embellished fiction. Current thinking is Moses didn't exist! "Moses" was probably a composite character based on the exploits & achievements of several early Hebrew leaders & organizers.  

Now here's a real shock to some people: when the Bible talks about the_ very_ early Old Testament/Torah characters like Abraham for example - I mean the oldest beginnings of Judaism/Christianity and *camels* are mentioned - we have a problem.

It turns out domesticated camels were not introduced into the Levant (the region including Israel and adjacent areas) until centuries after the time of Abraham. 

Now by the time the Old Testament was actually written they did have camels, so any camel talk taking place many generations after Abraham adds up. 
Is this nit-picky even for what I consider fiction? Not at all! If somebody wrote some historical fiction taking place in Georgia in 1877 and talked about Kudzu, it could ruin the fictional story since Kudzu wasn't introduced into the United States until the early part of the 20th century. Something like this would make you think that the author doesn't know what they are talking about.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I agree with your assessment - “God killed every animal that was in a field that didnt belong to a Hebrew.”
> 
> I agree that none of us know how many survived nor how many were killed. To punish I’d say the majority were killed. You don’t have to kill a farmers 200 head heard to wipe him out - 150 is basically a total loss.
> 
> ...


Keeping in context with the story.
What did any surviving livestock animal eat when all the crops and grain were either destroyed by Hail or eaten by Locusts?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> "Jewish scholars. Nothing against either one but that’s like saying the Jehovas Witness tells the Catholic Church - you’re wrong." - spot lite
> 
> But it's_ their _book! Didn't Jews (or those Hebrews who would become Jews) write the Old Testament? It's pretty much their "origin story" that explains how they got started as a people. Jesus himself was a Jew. I would think that Jewish scholars have as much skin in the game as Christian Bible scholars concerning the Old Testament.
> Regardless IMHO both types of scholars are experts in their field, which is deep examination of works of fiction.
> ...


At that time period the Hebrews would have wandered the desert in Egyptian territory the whole time anyway had there been an actual Exodus.
The authors really didn't have all the facts when writing. They used their best guesses at the time and that is alright for works of men and it shows it.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 16, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Keeping in context with the story.
> What did any surviving livestock animal eat when all the crops and grain were either destroyed by Hail or eaten by Locusts?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 16, 2022)

bullethead said:


> At that time period the Hebrews would have wandered the desert in Egyptian territory the whole time anyway had there been an actual Exodus.
> The authors really didn't have all the facts when writing. They used their best guesses at the time and that is alright for works of men and it shows it.



Yes, a small group of Hebrews wandering around but no significant population that would affect the Pharoah or Egyptian life in general.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Yes, a small group of Hebrews wandering around but no significant population that would affect the Pharoah or Egyptian life in general.


The same nomadic groups that were always wandering around those parts. Certainly no where near 400,000 for 40 years unless sand is edible.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 16, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Keeping in context with the story.
> What did any surviving livestock animal eat when all the crops and grain were either destroyed by Hail or eaten by Locusts?


This would be where I’d hang my hat - “if God fed the Israelites manna why would He withhold it from those that feared Him?”


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> This would be where I’d hang my hat - “if God fed the Israelites manna why would He withhold it from those that feared Him?”


So the animals also ate the miracle bread from heaven? Especially Pharoah's horses? Okaaay


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 16, 2022)

bullethead said:


> So the animals also ate the miracle bread from heaven? Especially Pharoah's horses? Okaaay


The question was concerning surviving livestock??? That tells me that we’re taking about those not killed in the hail storm. In context with the story - those that feared God took shelter. So…………“if God fed the Israelites manna why would He withhold it from those that feared Him?”


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> The question was concerning surviving horses??? That tells me that we’re taking about those not killed in the hail storm. In context with the story - those that feared God took shelter. So…………“if God fed the Israelites manna why would He withhold it from those that feared Him?”


Think outside the box.
Pharaoh would be the one person to have stables for his army's horses. A god fearing servant wouldn't have had to put them inside as the horses, some, few or many may have already been inside or inadvertently placed inside by god hating servants. What is the excuse that those horses got fed then since they didn't meet the stipulations?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> The question was concerning surviving livestock??? That tells me that we’re taking about those not killed in the hail storm. In context with the story - those that feared God took shelter. So…………“if God fed the Israelites manna why would He withhold it from those that feared Him?”


Didn't God give the Hebrews manna AFTER they left and were complaining that they couldn't find food in the desert?

What did the animals of the god fearing Egyptians eat (since there is no timeline)  for months when all the grain was gone and the Hebrews had not started their journey yet?
Egyptians worshipped cattle so they didnt eat what little of their own cattle was left. They people, god fearing or not had no grain to make bread.
I am just not seeing a valid even weak excuse?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 16, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Think outside the box.
> Pharaoh would be the one person to have stables for his army's horses. A god fearing servant wouldn't have had to put them inside as the horses, some, few or many may have already been inside or inadvertently placed inside by god hating servants. What is the excuse that those horses got fed then since they didn't meet the stipulations?



Good point. The Bible is silent on this so I can only speculate. 

I imagine Pharaoh had the means to feed his animals, the Israelites held in captivity didn’t. 

As a servant of Pharaoh knowing the stipulation of a God fearing man will house his livestock……I don’t believe that Pharaoh would have been to giddy about letting his servants put their livestock in his stables because Pharaoh’s intentions were not to comply with God. I’m sure there was room for Pharaoh's livestock but his servants personal livestock - no deal. 

The servants would not have taken a chance to give Pharaoh a clue that they feared God.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 16, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Didn't God give the Hebrews manna AFTER they left and were complaining that they couldn't find food in the desert?
> 
> What did the animals of the god fearing Egyptians eat (since there is no timeline)  for months when all the grain was gone and the Hebrews had not started their journey yet?
> Egyptians worshipped cattle so they didnt eat what little of their own cattle was left. They people, god fearing or not had no grain to make bread.
> I am just not seeing a valid even weak excuse?


They had other livestock. Lambs, goats, etc. 

John ate locust. I’m sure something was there. 

But this is coming right back to where I said to start with - the story isn’t contradictory. Can it be unbelievable? Sure.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Good point. The Bible is silent on this so I can only speculate.
> 
> I imagine Pharaoh had the means to feed his animals, the Israelites held in captivity didn’t.
> 
> ...


What would Pharaoh feed his animals since the hail ruined some of the crops and grain and the locusts ate the rest?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> They had other livestock. Lambs, goats, etc.
> 
> John ate locust. I’m sure something was there.
> 
> But this is coming right back to where I said to start with - the story isn’t contradictory. Can it be unbelievable? Sure.


Again, livestock is livestock.  Any that were in the fields were dead. Losing half or more would be devastating to the human population that has to feed on the remaining livestock. 
And again with the crops gone...how can animals eat and reproduce?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2022)

1. The river Nile turned the color of blood, the water stank and the fish died. Fish were off the menu
2. Hordes of frogs left the river, then they died and their bodies stank. Can't eat the frogs.
3. Swarms of gnats attacked the people and their animals. Wasn't safe to work the fields or be outside.
4. Swarms of flies then did the same. Again, unsafe to be outside.
5. An epidemic disease a d Hail storm killed many farm animals. 
6. Boils and skin sores broke out on the people and their animals. 
7. A violent hail storm ruined the crops. It would take a year to grow new crops.
8. A swarm of locusts ate what was left of the crops. How do humans and animals go months without grain and crops?
9. Darkness blanketed the country for three days. 
10. The eldest child in each family died suddenly, and so did the first born animals.

Who would be in shape, man or beast, enough to chase the Hebrews?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 16, 2022)

bullethead said:


> What would Pharaoh feed his animals since the hail ruined some of the crops and grain and the locusts ate the rest?


Again - time frame is unknown. I don’t call myself a farmer but the feed / hay / etc., I store up now is for next year.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 16, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Again, livestock is livestock.  Any that were in the fields were dead. Losing half or more would be devastating to the human population that has to feed on the remaining livestock.
> And again with the crops gone...how can animals eat and reproduce?


That area was not the only place to have livestock. It’s unknown how much livestock the Israelites owned. If God took care of them, He mud have also taken care of the Pharaoh servants that feared Him.

There’s no real answer described. Either side could run with possibilities. I don’t think knowing how those animals were fed is going to convince anyone that story is true - everything that’s saying contradiction falls on the word “All” and 14 verses later they’re back.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Again - time frame is unknown. I don’t call myself a farmer but the feed / hay / etc., I store up now is for next year.


A longer timeframe makes things worse for feeding animals and people long term.
Some verses mention the locusts eating the crops and grain. That could easily include stored food as those locusts eat everything. Locusts are used many times in the Bible and it means total destruction.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> That area was not the only place to have livestock. It’s unknown how much livestock the Israelites owned. If God took care of them, He mud have also taken care of the Pharaoh servants that feared Him.
> 
> There’s no real answer described. Either side could run with possibilities. I don’t think knowing how those animals were fed is going to convince anyone that story is true - everything that’s saying contradiction falls on the word “All” and 14 verses later they’re back.


It's unknown how many of Pharoah's servants feared God also.

People who have their own crops, livestock, supplies etc etc etc sound more like employees rather than oppressed slaves.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 16, 2022)

bullethead said:


> It's unknown how many of Pharoah's servants feared God also.
> 
> People who have their own crops, livestock, supplies etc etc etc sound more like employees rather than oppressed slaves.


But if they feared God it doesn’t matter what their social status was. 

For the story the rich man is poor as Job’s turkey without God.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 16, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> But if they feared God it doesn’t matter what their social status was.
> 
> For the story the rich man is poor as Job’s turkey without God.


Sorry for the confusion. 
The top answer was meant for Pharoah's servants.

The bottom one was meant for the Hebrew slaves not living like slaves.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 16, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Sorry for the confusion.
> The top answer was meant for Pharoah's servants.
> 
> The bottom one was meant for the Hebrew slaves not living like slaves.


Gotcha. I can agree.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 16, 2022)

bullethead said:


> 1. The river Nile turned the color of blood, the water stank and the fish died. Fish were off the menu
> 2. Hordes of frogs left the river, then they died and their bodies stank. Can't eat the frogs.
> 3. Swarms of gnats attacked the people and their animals. Wasn't safe to work the fields or be outside.
> 4. Swarms of flies then did the same. Again, unsafe to be outside.
> ...



Your argument is not unlike another common argument: when the Flood waters finally receded what did Noah & family & all the animals eat?  It would take a long time to grow any crop that they planted. Noah couldn't revert to being a hunter/gatherer since all life was just extinguished. Also until a brand new ecosystem(s) filled with a variety of critters got established, how would the predators survive?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 16, 2022)

COVER YOUR POO! GOD DOESN'T WANT TO SEE THAT NASTY STUFF! 
So why do I like this Bible segment? It reminds me of a Company Commander I had in Germany. She would sometimes take her dog to the field during training exercises and of course it wouldn't just stay in her tent with her. It would act up and poop everywhere and go into other soldiers' tents. 

Anyway, apparently sometimes God would actually come down to see how things were going with the war effort (leading from the front, boots on the ground leadership!) 
But hey, it's holy ground so have some RESPECT, newbies! Did you just get out of basic training?  Drop and give me twenty!


*Deuteronomy 23:12-14*

*English Standard Version*

12 “You shall have a place outside the camp, and you shall go out to it. 13 And you shall have a trowel with your tools, and when you sit down outside, you shall dig a hole with it and turn back and cover up your excrement. 14 Because the Lord your God walks in the midst of your camp, to deliver you and to give up your enemies before you, therefore your camp must be holy, so that he may not see anything indecent among you and turn away from you.

The whole chapter for your reading pleasure:



*Deuteronomy 23*

*English Standard Version*



*Those Excluded from the Assembly*
23 “No one whose testicles are crushed or whose male organ is cut off shall enter the assembly of the Lord.
2 “No one born of a forbidden union may enter the assembly of the Lord. Even to the tenth generation, none of his descendants may enter the assembly of the Lord.
3 “No Ammonite or Moabite may enter the assembly of the Lord. Even to the tenth generation, none of them may enter the assembly of the Lord forever, 4 because they did not meet you with bread and with water on the way, when you came out of Egypt, and because they hired against you Balaam the son of Beor from Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse you. 5 But the Lord your God would not listen to Balaam; instead the Lord your God turned the curse into a blessing for you, because the Lord your God loved you. 6 You shall not seek their peace or their prosperity all your days forever.
7 “You shall not abhor an Edomite, for he is your brother. You shall not abhor an Egyptian, because you were a sojourner in his land. 8 Children born to them in the third generation may enter the assembly of the Lord.
*Uncleanness in the Camp*
9 “When you are encamped against your enemies, then you shall keep yourself from every evil thing.
10 “If any man among you becomes unclean because of a nocturnal emission, then he shall go outside the camp. He shall not come inside the camp, 11 but when evening comes, he shall bathe himself in water, and as the sun sets, he may come inside the camp.
12 “You shall have a place outside the camp, and you shall go out to it. 13 And you shall have a trowel with your tools, and when you sit down outside, you shall dig a hole with it and turn back and cover up your excrement. 14 Because the Lord your God walks in the midst of your camp, to deliver you and to give up your enemies before you, therefore your camp must be holy, so that he may not see anything indecent among you and turn away from you.
*Miscellaneous Laws*
15 “You shall not give up to his master a slave[a] who has escaped from his master to you. 16 He shall dwell with you, in your midst, in the place that he shall choose within one of your towns, wherever it suits him. You shall not wrong him.
17 “None of the daughters of Israel shall be a cult prostitute, and none of the sons of Israel shall be a cult prostitute. 18 You shall not bring the fee of a prostitute or the wages of a dog[b] into the house of the Lord your God in payment for any vow, for both of these are an abomination to the Lord your God.
19 “You shall not charge interest on loans to your brother, interest on money, interest on food, interest on anything that is lent for interest. 20 You may charge a foreigner interest, but you may not charge your brother interest, that the Lord your God may bless you in all that you undertake in the land that you are entering to take possession of it.
21 “If you make a vow to the Lord your God, you shall not delay fulfilling it, for the Lord your God will surely require it of you, and you will be guilty of sin. 22 But if you refrain from vowing, you will not be guilty of sin. 23 You shall be careful to do what has passed your lips, for you have voluntarily vowed to the Lord your God what you have promised with your mouth.
24 “If you go into your neighbor's vineyard, you may eat your fill of grapes, as many as you wish, but you shall not put any in your bag. 25 If you go into your neighbor's standing grain, you may pluck the ears with your hand, but you shall not put a sickle to your neighbor's standing grain.


----------



## RegularJoe (Jun 18, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> ... when the Flood waters finally receded what did Noah & family & all the animals eat?  ....


While the  Bible does not say (as I know you know : );
however, the Bible does tell us that
there were aquatic critters, &
that there were a number of species taken onto the Ark in more than quantities of just 1 male + 1 female.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 18, 2022)

RegularJoe said:


> While the  Bible does not say (as I know you know : );
> however, the Bible does tell us that
> there were aquatic critters, &
> that there were a number of species taken onto the Ark in more than quantities of just 1 male + 1 female.



Yes, I forgot about the extra critters on the Ark. There are many MILLIONS of different species of critters worldwide, so I'm sure there was plenty of room on the Ark for a few million to tide them over until Earth's ecosystems got established after starting over completely from scratch.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 18, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Yes, I forgot about the extra critters on the Ark. There are many MILLIONS of different species of critters worldwide, so I'm sure there was plenty of room on the Ark for a few million to tide them over until Earth's ecosystems got established after starting over completely from scratch.



Don’t forget the olive branch. Something was growing. I’m pretty sure fish didn’t drown in the flood.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 18, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Don’t forget the olive branch. Something was growing. I’m pretty sure fish didn’t drown in the flood.



yeah, somehow an olive tree survived underwater for a year, which is deemed impossible in the year 2022. I guess olive trees were tougher back then!


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 18, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Yes, I forgot about the extra critters on the Ark. There are many MILLIONS of different species of critters worldwide, so I'm sure there was plenty of room on the Ark for a few million to tide them over until Earth's ecosystems got established after starting over completely from scratch.



yep... lots of different species....

the Bible says Kinds....  

How many kinds of animals are there in the world?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 19, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> yeah, somehow an olive tree survived underwater for a year, which is deemed impossible in the year 2022. I guess olive trees were tougher back then!


Deemed impossible by who?

If you read the entire Bible story, it tells you exactly why you are where you are - doubt…….unbelief……blind (Bible doesn’t make sense)

You’re literally proving that the Bible is accurate in that area.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 19, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Deemed impossible by who?
> 
> If you read the entire Bible story, it tells you exactly why you are where you are - doubt…….unbelief……blind (Bible doesn’t make sense)
> 
> You’re literally proving that the Bible is accurate in that area.



Oh I have no doubt that the Bible is accurate there! You have to "suspend disbelief"
to read the Bible. You have to convince yourself that 2 + 3 = 6 even if you know that in the real world that isn't the case. I just can't delude myself like that. 

I've said it before, but there's "faith" then there's "super faith". The Bible says that faith is the belief in things unseen. But IMHO that's only half the equation. "Super faith" is _disbelieving _things that_ are seen.  _This is what is required to be a believing Christian in the year 2022 versus the year 522. Here is an example:

Jesus walking on water, or turning water into wine CANNOT be disproved to my own personal satisfaction. I wasn't there, but if these miracles occurred it would take some faith on my part to believe it, but these miracles in themselves wouldn't conflict too much with my understanding of how the world actually works. These two miracles _border_ on plausible to me.

Now belief in Noah's Ark would require "super faith" on my part because the story of the Ark is full of holes (pun intended) six ways from Sunday!   There are dozens of ways the story falls apart in 2022 in the areas of biology, geology, zoology, engineering physics, etc etc etc. Bottom line I would have to completely erase my memory with a 
Men in Black device of nearly every bit of known information of how the Earth functions based not just on science, but my own eyes and common sense.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 19, 2022)

NE GA Pappy said:


> yep... lots of different species....
> 
> the Bible says Kinds....
> 
> How many kinds of animals are there in the world?



Oh, this is going to be fun!     I'm not going to put words in your mouth or assume anything about you, but there are many Christians who have a theory about "kinds" of animals. That is the theory that the Ark could have a feasible number of "kinds" of species on the Ark, if there are too many individual species to fit (and be fed) on the Ark. So when the Ark landed and the waters receded, the kinds became the millions of individual species.

Think about the irony of this: these Christians won't believe that millions of species evolved over billions of years, but they will believe that millions of species came to be from changing (they can't say evolved) from the original "kinds" on the Ark in a_ few_ _thousand_ years! 

But the Ark is "low hanging fruit" as a miracle to debunk because the Bible gives so - much - detail that the story debunks itself at nearly every level. There are many scientific segments on the internet (or library or bookstores) that explain the nuts & bolts of why the Ark story should not be taken literally. Back when the Bible was written & finalized the claims couldn't be disproved because science was in it's infancy.


----------



## RegularJoe (Jun 19, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> ....these Christians won't believe that millions of species evolved over billions of years,...


The last mass extinction is reported to be 65 million years ago per
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-timeline-of-the-mass-extinction-events-on-earth.html
as well as
https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/mass-extinctions


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 19, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Oh I have no doubt that the Bible is accurate there! You have to "suspend disbelief"
> to read the Bible. You have to convince yourself that 2 + 3 = 6 even if you know that in the real world that isn't the case. I just can't delude myself like that.
> 
> I've said it before, but there's "faith" then there's "super faith". The Bible says that faith is the belief in things unseen. But IMHO that's only half the equation. "Super faith" is _disbelieving _things that_ are seen.  _This is what is required to be a believing Christian in the year 2022 versus the year 522. Here is an example:
> ...


No you don’t. Those hard to believe stories aren’t why I believe in God. I read them just like you do - I’m not suspending anything, I see no humanly way how they happened.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 19, 2022)

RegularJoe said:


> The last mass extinction is reported to be 65 million years ago per
> https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-timeline-of-the-mass-extinction-events-on-earth.html
> as well as
> https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/mass-extinctions



"mass extinction" doesn't mean EVERYTHING died, just 90 percent or so. 
But I concede your point! I stand corrected. I should have said millions of years, not billions. 65 million to be more realistic! So some Christians will not believe that the insane diversity of life on all seven continents evolved over 65 million years, but they believe that the insane diversity of life on all seven continents "came to be" over a few thousand years.   Or maybe some Christians actually believe that millions of species of birds & animals and the specialized foods they would need could fit on a wooden boat that wouldn't be seaworthy for 40 hours let alone 40 days. That's why IMHO Noah's Ark apologetics should just wave the white surrender flag and admit that they cannot and should not even _attempt _to square the story with any scientific reality.
Their best bet is to call it a miracle and pray for the ability to keep believing the story is true through miraculous means.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 19, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> No you don’t. Those hard to believe stories aren’t why I believe in God. I read them just like you do - I’m not suspending anything, I see no humanly way how they happened.



So, correct me if I'm wrong, but you believe that there is no limit to what God can do?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 19, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> So, correct me if I'm wrong, but you believe that there is no limit to what God can do?


I believe there is absolutely no limit. If He chose to fly a 200 passenger plane backwards on a 9 volt battery He can do it. 

Outside of God being the source of those impossible stories, I’m just like you. I can’t see it happening. 

As I said before those stories don’t awe me, I read them but they’re not why I believe in God.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 19, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I believe there is absolutely no limit. If He chose to fly a 200 passenger plane backwards on a 9 volt battery He can do it.
> 
> Outside of God being the source of those impossible stories, I’m just like you. I can’t see it happening.
> 
> As I said before those stories don’t awe me, I read them but they’re not why I believe in God.



Well I respect your opinion, even if I don't support it.


----------



## Dub (Jun 20, 2022)

*Stuff in the Bible you like*




*All of it.*


----------



## Mean Bone (Jun 26, 2022)

DOUG 281 said:


> BECAUSE IT IS THE ONLY TRUE BOOK THAT YOU WILL EVER READ.Pick one up and read it an study it try your best to live it. IF you don't have a KJV BIBLE sent me your mailing address i will send you one.



What if you don't speak English?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 26, 2022)

BECAUSE IT IS THE ONLY TRUE BOOK THAT YOU WILL EVER READ.Pick one up and read it an study it try your best to live it. IF you don't have a KJV BIBLE sent me your mailing address i will send you one. - Doug 281

Try to live it? I think if I found out that my newlywed bride wasn't a virgin on our wedding night, so I take her back to her father's house and stone her to death I might run afoul of the law.


----------



## 660griz (Jun 27, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I believe there is absolutely no limit. If He chose to fly a 200 passenger plane backwards on a 9 volt battery He can do it.


How about an indestructible audio/visual book in the language of choice? I mean, in a time where there was like, 12 people, that can read, God decides to put down the stuff to save you from hades on paperback? Then, he had to compete with all the other god's books. Then, there is the deep dark jungle folks. God couldn't drop a few audio/visual books down there? Maybe show up to tell them in person? Their souls didn't mean as much cause there wasn't that many? 
Oh, I know, let's send some white strangers with cooties down there to tell them all about God. That worked out well.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 27, 2022)

660griz said:


> How about an indestructible audio/visual book in the language of choice? I mean, in a time where there was like, 12 people, that can read, God decides to put down the stuff to save you from hades on paperback? Then, he had to compete with all the other god's books. Then, there is the deep dark jungle folks. God couldn't drop a few audio/visual books down there? Maybe show up to tell them in person? Their souls didn't mean as much cause there wasn't that many?
> Oh, I know, let's send some white strangers with cooties down there to tell them all about God. That worked out well.


Isn't it interesting how a Book like that was written on paper when only 12 people could read and with all of available education we have today there are those loster than a ball in high weeds at page 1? Pretty amazing well well well educated Writers back in the day, out of twelve that could read, I imagine only 4 could write.

I am not convinced that those souls will be lost (there is a scripture for that, go find it if you know the Bible) and maybe those white strangers were not even called to go to the dark jungles?  Who knows.

He is only "competing" to some.

You see how man`s way of thinking how God should do things turns out confusing for them? But I get some of your point, it`d been easier to make people believe.


----------



## 660griz (Jun 27, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Isn't it interesting how a Book like that was written on paper when only 12 people could read and with all of available education we have today there are those loster than a ball in high weeds at page 1? Pretty amazing well well well educated Writers back in the day, out of twelve that could read, I imagine only 4 could write.


 I will get a 6 year old to write you a story that will probably have you lost on page one too.

For salvation, it needs to be an 'owners manual' written to the lowest denominator not written like a Shakespearean play.

Like a book on safety. You know, important that folks grasp the concept. 



> I am not convinced that those souls will be lost (there is a scripture for that, go find it if you know the Bible) and maybe those white strangers were not even called to go to the dark jungles?  Who knows.


 They certainly thought they were called.



> You see how man`s way of thinking how God should do things turns out confusing for them? But I get some of your point, it`d been easier to make people believe.


 Like father, like son. Apple doesn't fall too far from the tree.
Aint my fault we were created in his image.
Well, you don't have to make em believe, just do actual God like stuff.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 27, 2022)

660griz said:


> I will get a 6 year old to write you a story that will probably have you lost on page one too.
> 
> For salvation, it needs to be an 'owners manual' written to the lowest denominator not written like a Shakespearean play.
> 
> ...


Could the 6 years old book impact world history and future? You have to admit, pretty impressive made up story when only 12 people could read at the time.

I don’t find anything confusing about the grasping the “important stuff”. That’s all derived from “I” don’t think you have to……idiots that have accidents with a safety book on important stuff didn’t think they had to take certain steps, either.

The rest….sure, the apple doesn’t fall from the tree. All apples don’t fall from the same tree, though,


----------



## bullethead (Jun 27, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> Could the 6 years old book impact world history and future? You have to admit, pretty impressive made up story when only 12 people could read at the time.
> 
> I don’t find anything confusing about the grasping the “important stuff”. That’s all derived from “I” don’t think you have to……idiots that have accidents with a safety book on important stuff didn’t think they had to take certain steps, either.
> 
> The rest….sure, the apple doesn’t fall from the tree. All apples don’t fall from the same tree, though,


Christianity was on it's way out until Constantine got involved. It was one of many small religions in that part of the world until Rome adopted it and made it official and against the law to follow something else. As Rome conquered so did their religion.  Jesus's "word" had a lot of help.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 27, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Christianity was on it's way out until Constantine got involved. It was one of many small religions in that part of the world until Rome adopted it and made it official and against the law to follow something else. As Rome conquered so did their religion.  Jesus's "word" had a lot of help.


 I’ve often heard that, but Christianity is still with us.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 27, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I’ve often heard that, but Christianity is still with us.


Not sure you can credit the Bible itself for all that.
Alot of time, money, effort, conquering, indoctrinating, etc. went in to promoting the Bible/Christianity.
"Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature" is responsible for the bulk of its sucess.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 27, 2022)

WaltL1 said:


> Not sure you can credit the Bible itself for all that.
> Alot of time, money, effort, conquering, indoctrinating, etc. went in to promoting the Bible/Christianity.
> "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature" is responsible for the bulk of its sucess.


I’m just saying the references to Christianity was a dying thing hadn’t been proven to be facts. I’m ok with assuming.


----------



## 1gr8buildit (Jun 27, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Christianity was on it's way out until Constantine got involved. It was one of many small religions in that part of the world until Rome adopted it and made it official and against the law to follow something else. As Rome conquered so did their religion.  Jesus's "word" had a lot of help.


 I'm sure your aware of this viewpoint, but I will post it for scrutiny...
My understanding, whether founded on truth or not, who knows considering we are left to study what others wrote whom were likely biased.....Yet, much study has gone into this 'opinion",  is that Religion was prominent but strongly divided among 2 groups. Two versions of Christianity as sharply divided as the Republicans and Democrats of today. Constantine not particularly  interested in but one thing. Commerce through peace by executive demand. There were the Arians whom believed Jesus was a man, yet did not rule out him being God but pointed out verses like "the Father is greater than I".  And the crowd that thought Jesus was fully God. Their seemed to be no chance for a civil society, growing community and commerce in this enviroment. 
So, Constantine decreed a gathering of all the big name players to hash this out once in for all, apparently not biased, but willing to decree one side the winner and making the other side a capitol offense to possess any writings of the losing side. All of the losing side's  writings were burned in the street. "Orthodox" was decided for a time, until the Holy Spirit became a person, creating the tri app 80 years later.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 27, 2022)

1gr8buildit said:


> I'm sure your aware of this viewpoint, but I will post it for scrutiny...
> My understanding, whether founded on truth or not, who knows considering we are left to study what others wrote whom were likely biased.....Yet, much study has gone into this 'opinion",  is that Religion was prominent but strongly divided among 2 groups. Two versions of Christianity as sharply divided as the Republicans and Democrats of today. Constantine not particularly  interested in but one thing. Commerce through peace by executive demand. There were the Arians whom believed Jesus was a man, yet did not rule out him being God but pointed out verses like "the Father is greater than I".  And the crowd that thought Jesus was fully God. Their seemed to be no chance for a civil society, growing community and commerce in this enviroment.
> So, Constantine decreed a gathering of all the big name players to hash this out once in for all, apparently not biased, but willing to decree one side the winner and making the other side a capitol offense to possess any writings of the losing side. All of the losing side's  writings were burned in the street. "Orthodox" was decided for a time, until the Holy Spirit became a person, creating the tri app 80 years later.


Yes 1great I am familiar with the information.  The history of Christianity (at least to me) is more of interesting and fascinating than the stories within the Bible. There are so many chains in the events that took place over 300 years that literally took the religion from the brink of death to world domination. A few big breaks by secular powers turned it around.


----------



## 1gr8buildit (Jun 30, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Yes 1great I am familiar with the information.  The history of Christianity (at least to me) is more of interesting and fascinating than the stories within the Bible. There are so many chains in the events that took place over 300 years that literally took the religion from the brink of death to world domination. A few big breaks by secular powers turned it around.


Yes, I agree, the Christianity  history is extremely interesting. I see it from a different perspective than you. And it's all the more interesting.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jun 30, 2022)

"So, Constantine decreed a gathering of all the big name players to hash this out once in for all, apparently not biased, but willing to decree one side the winner and making the other side a capitol offense to possess any writings of the losing side.* All of the losing side's writings were burned in the street."* - 1gr8 buildit

  Well, that sure isn't a "red flag" of suspicion right there! Talk about "history is written by the winners" this takes it to a whole nuther level! We won't just not consider other viewpoints - we'll erase them completely. Now nobody can question our decisions. BTW early Islam did pretty much the same thing. Once they decided how it should be they destroyed all the original documents & writings that the Koran was based on.


----------



## 1gr8buildit (Jul 1, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> "So, Constantine decreed a gathering of all the big name players to hash this out once in for all, apparently not biased, but willing to decree one side the winner and making the other side a capitol offense to possess any writings of the losing side.* All of the losing side's writings were burned in the street."* - 1gr8 buildit
> 
> Well, that sure isn't a "red flag" of suspicion right there! Talk about "history is written by the winners" this takes it to a whole nuther level! We won't just not consider other viewpoints - we'll erase them completely. Now nobody can question our decisions. BTW early Islam did pretty much the same thing. Once they decided how it should be they destroyed all the original documents & writings that the Koran was based on.


Interestingly enough, Constantine just wanted to be a good leader. So he wanted peace that would promote commerce rather than one side not doing business with the other. He was not bias as to one side or the other. But he did decree one side as truth and went further, declaring the "canon" of scripture, having a "standard", a new bible sent out to all the churches. If I recall, it was around 50 that were ordered from the scribe. One per church. So, he eliminated the fight over which writings were inspired. It worked. Later they would prosper and Christianity was like being in the prestige country club. But.... Interesting.... Can't recall, Constantines girlfried or sister, I can't recall, swayed him to the old Arian view and he secretly became a believer later in life. Lots of details surrounding this that I can't recall.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 7, 2022)

*JUDGES 19  *To put this in perspective, it's *GENESIS 19 *but with a twist! 
Let's recap: Genesis 19 has Lot offering up his two virgin daughters to a mob of rapists, because he's not going to send his houseguests (angels most likely) outside to face a mob of rapists! This is the relevant part of the story to compare it to Judges 19.

In Judges 19 our hero offers up his virgin daughter and a _concubine_ to a mob of rapists, because he's not going to send his houseguest (not an angel) outside to face a mob of rapists! Long story short he only gives them his concubine, and after she's raped, he chops her up into twelve pieces, but for a totally legit reason of course.
It's a "feel good" story! The Hallmark Channel should turn it into a romantic comedy.

22 As they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, worthless fellows, surrounded the house, beating on the door. And they said to the old man, the master of the house, *“Bring out the man who came into your house, that we may know him.” 23 And the man, the master of the house, went out to them and said to them, “No, my brothers, do not act so wickedly; since this man has come into my house, do not do this vile thing. 24 Behold, here are my virgin daughter and his concubine. Let me bring them out now. Violate them and do with them what seems good to you, but against this man do not do this outrageous thing.*”* 25 But the men would not listen to him. So the man seized his concubine and made her go out to them. And they knew her and abused her all night until the morning. And as the dawn began to break, they let her go. 26 And as morning appeared, the woman came and fell down at the door of the man's house where her master was, until it was light.*

27 And her master rose up in the morning, and when he opened the doors of the house and went out to go on his way, behold, there was his concubine lying at the door of the house, with her hands on the threshold. 28 *He said to her, “Get up, let us be going.” But there was no answer. Then he put her on the donkey, and the man rose up and went away to his home. 29 And when he entered his house, he took a knife, and taking hold of his concubine he divided her, limb by limb, into twelve pieces, and sent her throughout all the territory of Israel.* 30 And all who saw it said, “Such a thing has never happened or been seen from the day that the people of Israel came up out of the land of Egypt until this day; consider it, take counsel, and speak.”

Quick question - how many stories of A MAN WILLING TO THROW HIS VIRGIN DAUGHTER TO A MOB OF RAPISTS does one book need? Two at least, it appears, but _who doesn't _love a good coward treating his daughter like trash story? 
Any thoughts? Only a great & loving god would divinely inspire humans to use such a timeless & relatable theme to get god's message across. 
Bronze age human males could have _never _concocted a story this beautiful. 
Any thoughts? Read all of Genesis 19 and Judges 19 and judge (see what I did there?) for yourself their merits. Share the stories with your kids or grandkids!


----------



## 1gr8buildit (Jul 7, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> *JUDGES 19 *To put this in perspective, it's *GENESIS 19 *but with a twist!
> Let's recap: Genesis 19 has Lot offering up his two virgin daughters to a mob of rapists, because he's not going to send his houseguests (angels most likely) outside to face a mob of rapists! This is the relevant part of the story to compare it to Judges 19.
> 
> In Judges 19 our hero offers up his virgin daughter and a _concubine_ to a mob of rapists, because he's not going to send his houseguest (not an angel) outside to face a mob of rapists! Long story short he only gives them his concubine, and after she's raped, he chops her up into twelve pieces, but for a totally legit reason of course.
> ...


There are many duplicate stories . There is a name for it, I can't recall. Dang I am getting rusty. Can't recall the name of a theory which I believe to be true. Overview is that the writing we have now is a paraphrase of previous stories. That's why we have these duplicates. And with that, I assume lots of embellishments. I will edit back in... maybe it's coming to me JEPD theory. LOL, I know my letters may be off.


----------



## 1gr8buildit (Jul 7, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> *JUDGES 19 *To put this in perspective, it's *GENESIS 19 *but with a twist!
> Let's recap: Genesis 19 has Lot offering up his two virgin daughters to a mob of rapists, because he's not going to send his houseguests (angels most likely) outside to face a mob of rapists! This is the relevant part of the story to compare it to Judges 19.
> 
> In Judges 19 our hero offers up his virgin daughter and a _concubine_ to a mob of rapists, because he's not going to send his houseguest (not an angel) outside to face a mob of rapists! Long story short he only gives them his concubine, and after she's raped, he chops her up into twelve pieces, but for a totally legit reason of course.
> ...


I don't like the story where the man made a vow to kill whomever walked out of his house upon returning, which was his daughter. And the story is played out as if nothing was wrong here. Yea, lots of stuff I don't like, coming from a believer


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 7, 2022)

1gr8buildit said:


> I don't like the story where the man made a vow to kill whomever walked out of his house upon returning, which was his daughter. And the story is played out as if nothing was wrong here. Yea, lots of stuff I don't like, coming from a believer



What I find very interesting is how the way the Taliban (not singling them out, just using an obvious example that everyone can relate to) treats their women is pretty much the same way the bronze age authors of the Bible treated their women! 
To be honest I used to be guilty of calling every tribal, backward society dumb savages and bloodthirsty and whatnot. But then I started digging into the Old Testament and YOWZA!  I can't even wrap my mind around the absolute brutality and misogyny of the Bronze/Iron age people, and what really, really, really grinds my gears is the God of the Bible condones & encourages this behavior!  Call me crazy, but you would think that God would be* the opposite *of the brutal savages, and teach the world how to behave, but God is just a Bronze age male ON STEROIDS quite a bit of the time!  God is bigger, badder, and smarter than all the other gods and humans, but morally he is just like them. At times he is worse! 

Okay, off my soapbox. Where is the story of the guy making a vow to kill whoever walks out of his house? It sounds like something that could happen in 2022!


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 7, 2022)

1gr8buildit said:


> I don't like the story where the man made a vow to kill whomever walked out of his house upon returning, which was his daughter. And the story is played out as if nothing was wrong here. Yea, lots of stuff I don't like, coming from a believer



The Old Testament characters * treat women like absolute garbage.  Their own DAUGHTERS are treated like garbage, considered less than animals. Unless a woman is essential to a story, or pumping out babies (only the birth of the male children really matter of course) they hardly exist.

* the New Testament characters are slightly better, and Jesus himself is for the most part a decent fellow. He does a complete 180 from his dad. This brings me to another point that I'm sure we've all heard before:

Jesus = God correct? Part of the Trinity, for those who believe that? People forget that 
Jesus is the son of the God of the Old Testament _and _the New Testament. It's the same God. But there is a HUGE character change between Old Testament God and New Testament God/Jesus. There is little consistency between the behavior (or maybe I'm just missing it) of the two Gods. It's like two completely different sets of producers/writers/directors & editors working on the same movie, with one set handling the first half, and the other set handling the second half. That's weird!


----------



## bullethead (Jul 7, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> The Old Testament characters * treat women like absolute garbage.  Their own DAUGHTERS are treated like garbage, considered less than animals. Unless a woman is essential to a story, or pumping out babies (only the birth of the male children really matter of course) they hardly exist.
> 
> * the New Testament characters are slightly better, and Jesus himself is for the most part a decent fellow. He does a complete 180 from his dad. This brings me to another point that I'm sure we've all heard before:
> 
> ...


It's almost as if someone wanted to improve on an existing religion.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 7, 2022)

bullethead said:


> It's almost as if someone wanted to improve on an existing religion.



Well I don't think anyone would disagree that there was room for improvement!


----------



## 1gr8buildit (Jul 7, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> What I find very interesting is how the way the Taliban (not singling them out, just using an obvious example that everyone can relate to) treats their women is pretty much the same way the bronze age authors of the Bible treated their women!
> To be honest I used to be guilty of calling every tribal, backward society dumb savages and bloodthirsty and whatnot. But then I started digging into the Old Testament and YOWZA!  I can't even wrap my mind around the absolute brutality and misogyny of the Bronze/Iron age people, and what really, really, really grinds my gears is the God of the Bible condones & encourages this behavior!  Call me crazy, but you would think that God would be* the opposite *of the brutal savages, and teach the world how to behave, but God is just a Bronze age male ON STEROIDS quite a bit of the time!  God is bigger, badder, and smarter than all the other gods and humans, but morally he is just like them. At times he is worse!
> 
> Okay, off my soapbox. Where is the story of the guy making a vow to kill whoever walks out of his house? It sounds like something that could happen in 2022!


I think this gives us indication as to whom wrote the bible. I find inspiration within but see the effects of man. Man treated women like savages back then, as we could predict, it was portrayed as though noting was wrong with that. If God had wrote it, then it would reflect moral standards. However, again, I find inspiration within. Slippery slope of picking and chosing, LOL.


----------



## 1gr8buildit (Jul 7, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> The Old Testament characters * treat women like absolute garbage.  Their own DAUGHTERS are treated like garbage, considered less than animals. Unless a woman is essential to a story, or pumping out babies (only the birth of the male children really matter of course) they hardly exist.
> 
> * the New Testament characters are slightly better, and Jesus himself is for the most part a decent fellow. He does a complete 180 from his dad. This brings me to another point that I'm sure we've all heard before:
> 
> ...


Moses did not get to go into the promise land. Prior to, he would say "stand still and see what God will do here today". But once, he said, "must I bring water from this rock." Sad. He was kept from the promise land because he did not acknowledge who's power this was from and used "I". Jesus always said, I can do nothing on my own. He would never claim to be God.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 7, 2022)

1gr8buildit said:


> I think this gives us indication as to whom wrote the bible. I find inspiration within but see the effects of man. Man treated women like savages back then, as we could predict, it was portrayed as though noting was wrong with that. If God had wrote it, then it would reflect moral standards. However, again, I find inspiration within. Slippery slope of picking and choosing, LOL.



But since God is giving divine inspiration and is ultimately responsible for the content of the finished product, wouldn't God have put out a strong message that behaving like a murderous, misogynistic, incestuous bully is wrong? Or maybe God thinks it's okay to be all these things (as long as you are obeying his will) and modern society is straying too far from God's chosen path for mankind? God did literally flood the entire world killing babies & children, thus making him the worst mass murderer in history, bar none.

But wait, there's more! How about God giving these instructions to Samuel (to relay to Saul) in 1 Samuel 15? It involves killing children & babies. Complete extermination, in other words. Hey, God is the expert, right? 

"And Samuel said to Saul, “The Lord sent me to anoint you king over his people Israel; now therefore listen to the words of the Lord. 2 Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came up out of Egypt. 3 Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction[a] all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’”

Long story short, a few verses later we get a cherry-on-the-top of the killing cake with this sudden hacking to death. Not as good as cutting up a raped concubine, but then again what is, am I right? 

"32 Then Samuel said, “Bring here to me Agag the king of the Amalekites.” And Agag came to him cheerfully.[d] Agag said, “Surely the bitterness of death is past.” 33 And Samuel said, “As your sword has made women childless, so shall your mother be childless among women.” And Samuel hacked Agag to pieces before the Lord in Gilgal."


----------



## 1gr8buildit (Jul 7, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> But since God is giving divine inspiration and is ultimately responsible for the content of the finished product, wouldn't God have put out a strong message that behaving like a murderous, misogynistic, incestuous bully is wrong? Or maybe God thinks it's okay to be all these things (as long as you are obeying his will) and modern society is straying too far from God's chosen path for mankind? God did literally flood the entire world killing babies & children, thus making him the worst mass murderer in history, bar none.
> 
> But wait, there's more! How about God giving these instructions to Samuel (to relay to Saul) in 1 Samuel 15? It involves killing children & babies. Complete extermination, in other words. Hey, God is the expert, right?
> 
> ...


I can't defend the bible here.You are correct that it is contradictory to what we assume should be in there.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 7, 2022)

1gr8buildit said:


> I can't defend the bible here.You are correct that it is contradictory to what we assume should be in there.



I appreciate your honesty! I was amazed - but not surprised - at the mental gymnastics of some apologetics concerning these verses.  "It's a matter of context"
"It wasn't violence, just God applying His fair judgement" "The Amalekites had been warned many times and given many chances, so they had it coming" etc.etc.


----------



## 1gr8buildit (Jul 7, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> I appreciate your honesty! I was amazed - but not surprised - at the mental gymnastics of some apologetics concerning these verses.  "It's a matter of context"
> "It wasn't violence, just God applying His fair judgement" "The Amalekites had been warned many times and given many chances, so they had it coming" etc.etc.


most of the defending crowd does not have a clue what's in there. Those that read the bible as a devotional never will.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 7, 2022)

1gr8buildit said:


> most of the defending crowd does not have a clue what's in there. Those that read the bible as a devotional never will.



It's the professional apologetics that can really pull out all the stops to rationalize anything in the Bible. I will give them credit for creativity that's for sure.


----------



## 1gr8buildit (Jul 8, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> It's the professional apologetics that can really pull out all the stops to rationalize anything in the Bible. I will give them credit for creativity that's for sure.


They depend on their audience not fully knowing the bible or what is in there. I refrain from pointing out things due to the concept of "not wanting to cause a babe to stumble". Yet,  I love to discuss those things because I find them extremely interesting.I will agree though that I have heard a few that had talent. But the talent consisted of talking circles like a political debate until the original topic is forgotten


----------



## RegularJoe (Jul 8, 2022)

Re.: Original Post .... "Stuff in The Bible You Like."

The Old Testament, for me, _also_, has many _not_ rationally comprehendable components.

The New Testament, for me, _is_ comprehenable based on three personal cornerstones:

_1._  My research (< not my intent to present or debate - this is purely informational for whoever cares to simply see this statement at face value) of the Christ's death and resurrection.

_2._  My slow, careful, objective reading of the New Testament over one year (e.g., per www.TheBible.bz  ) through which I could only conclude how adequately resonating the New Testament is to my heart (did _not_ say it was rational).

_3._  Based on and because of "1." and "2.," my experiences in the wake of simply giving Jesus' teachings a try 
( e.g., John 7:17 where in He is reported to have said "_Anyone who chooses to do the will of God will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own._" - niv).

New Testament observation / comment:  Jesus is _repeatedly_ reported as making validating references to Old Testament people and events.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 8, 2022)

1gr8buildit said:


> They depend on their audience not fully knowing the bible or what is in there. I refrain from pointing out things due to the concept of "not wanting to cause a babe to stumble". Yet,  I love to discuss those things because I find them extremely interesting.I will agree though that I have heard a few that had talent. But the talent consisted of talking circles like a political debate until the original topic is forgotten



I've seen some of them on the internet, and they come off like they are trying to pull a fast one on you.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 8, 2022)

RegularJoe said:


> Re.: Original Post .... "Stuff in The Bible You Like."
> 
> The Old Testament, for me, _also_, has many _not_ rationally comprehendable components.
> 
> ...



That's a logical way to approach studying any complicated subject IMHO. However human nature being what it is for everybody - believers in any religion or non-believers in any religion - if studying Jesus' teachings has a profound effect on you, and you study further _while expecting _to see his teachings having a positive effect in your life, anything positive in your life you will likely attribute to Jesus' teachings. This is just confirmation bias that cannot be eliminated, only managed. This applies to every human in every culture of course. 

As for Jesus referencing the Old Testament it makes sense that the writers of the NT
would include references to the OT since it lends credibility to the NT by having the subject of the new story, Jesus (versus just peripheral characters) reference the already established & accepted story. Also, you can't really mess up the accuracy of the reference because the writers are doing it in hindsight rather than prophesizing.

Bottom line if applying Jesus' teachings are working for you, that's great. If you are getting quantifiable & satisfactory results, then you applying his teachings should be continued. "If it works, don't fix it" is solid reasoning IMHO! I'm not denying the teachings don't exist, since the NT is an actual book that I can prove for myself exists. I value and try to follow Ben Franklin's advice (guy was a genius) but _I can almost guarantee_ he didn't say or do half the things attributed to him!


----------



## RegularJoe (Jul 8, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> That's a logical way to approach studying any complicated subject IMHO.
> However human nature being what it is for everybody - believers in any religion or non-believers in any religion -
> if studying Jesus' teachings has a profound effect on you, and you study further while
> _expecting to see his teachings having a positive effect in your life, _anything positive in your life you will likely attribute to Jesus' teachings.
> This is just confirmation bias that cannot be eliminated, only managed. This applies to every human in every culture of course....


Did I actually say that I was ..."_expecting to see his teachings having a positive effect in (my) your life" ?_
With all respect due .... I do not see where that was within that which I posited.
My apologies, if I am in error.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 9, 2022)

RegularJoe said:


> Did I actually say that I was ..."_expecting to see his teachings having a positive effect in (my) your life" ?_
> With all respect due .... I do not see where that was within that which I posited.
> My apologies, if I am in error.



by "your life" I meant anybody's life. In other words, if you expect that Jesus teachings will improve your life then that is what you will glean from studying his teachings/words.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Aug 26, 2022)

Samson killing 1,000 Philistines with the jawbone of a donkey! 
I like this because of the hilarious mental picture it paints. It's like a Bruce Lee movie where guys keep coming at Bruce and he kicks their behinds, but more guys just keep coming without changing their strategy. 

So imagine this - there's obviously a large military contingent surrounding Samson. So at what point do they say "hey! Look at everyone whacked & stacked from that guy swinging a donkey jawbone. There must be dozens...no wait *HUNDREDS *of our guys taken out! Do you think we should attack him with a variety of weapons with a longer range like spears, bows & arrows, or even just surround him & relentlessly pummel him with rocks until we overtake him? His range with that jawbone is very limited and there's only one of him!"   Any thoughts? 

JUDGES 15: 14-17 


When he came to Lehi, the Philistines came shouting to meet him. Then the Spirit of the LORD rushed upon him, and the ropes that were on his arms became as flax that has caught fire, and his bonds melted off his hands. *15*And he found a fresh jawbone of a donkey, and put out his hand and took it, and with it he struck 1,000 men. *16*And Samson said,


“With the jawbone of a donkey,
heaps upon heaps,
with the jawbone of a donkey
have I struck down a thousand men.”


----------



## 1gr8buildit (Aug 26, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Samson killing 1,000 Philistines with the jawbone of a donkey!
> I like this because of the hilarious mental picture it paints. It's like a Bruce Lee movie where guys keep coming at Bruce and he kicks their behinds, but more guys just keep coming without changing their strategy.
> 
> So imagine this - there's obviously a large military contingent surrounding Samson. So at what point do they say "hey! Look at everyone whacked & stacked from that guy swinging a donkey jawbone. There must be dozens...no wait *HUNDREDS *of our guys taken out! Do you think we should attack him with a variety of weapons with a longer range like spears, bows & arrows, or even just surround him & relentlessly pummel him with rocks until we overtake him? His range with that jawbone is very limited and there's only one of him!"   Any thoughts?
> ...


Embellishments for sure. And this coming from a believer in Jesus , just not all that is written. Hard sell that Sampson pushed over the pillars and killed more than the collapse of the trade center on 911


----------



## oldfella1962 (Aug 26, 2022)

1gr8buildit said:


> Embellishments for sure. And this coming from a believer in Jesus , just not all that is written. Hard sell that Sampson pushed over the pillars and killed more than the collapse of the trade center on 911



I'm aware of the pillars event, but I didn't know that many people died. I realize outrageous embellishments were necessary back in the day because your god has to be bigger & better than the other gods, but after a while it all seems like Paul Bunyan legends type of fiction, and it's hard to take any of it seriously. 

Bottom line if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is no matter who is telling the tale.


----------



## brutally honest (Aug 26, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Samson killing 1,000 Philistines with the jawbone of a donkey!
> I like this because of the hilarious mental picture it paints. It's like a Bruce Lee movie where guys keep coming at Bruce and he kicks their behinds, but more guys just keep coming without changing their strategy.




What if the jawbone was pure adamantium?  Did you consider that?

O ye of little faith!


----------



## oldfella1962 (Aug 26, 2022)

brutally honest said:


> What if the jawbone was pure adamantium?  Did you consider that?
> 
> O ye of little faith!



 I'm sure more than one Christian apologist has came up with a theory like that to explain the jawbone story.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Aug 26, 2022)

WaltL1 said:


> To me, I just dont see how being able to understand every twist and turn of a ~3400 year old group of writings assembled in a to a book proves "God" anyway.
> Every religion has their stories whether written down or in oral form and it all proves nada other than thats what they believe about their god.



This will not be a popular post. The churches that existed from Christ up through the 1600s were handing down the stories and church doctrine by word of mouth. Direct linage from the apostles onward through church leaders. Bibles were gatherings of the stories collected from scrolls and hand written. By mid 1600s church officials had gained much power and wealth through government. Instead of attempting to deal with the corruption they decided to turn religion on its head and change the fundamentals of the church, the reformation. The printing press came along about the same time. Hence the interpretations that provide the foundation of the protestant faiths are fairly new by historical reference and spread through the easily printed bibles. The old faiths of the original churches still practice this direct linage doctrine of the leaders being responsible for the doctrine.

I tell you this as I spent most of my life bouncing around looking for answers to some of your questions. I found comfort in religion with an ancient church.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Aug 26, 2022)

Ruger#3 said:


> This will not be a popular post. The churches that existed from Christ up through the 1600s were handing down the stories and church doctrine by word of mouth. Direct linage from the apostles onward through church leaders. Bibles were gatherings of the stories collected from scrolls and hand written. By mid 1600s church officials had gained much power and wealth through government. Instead of attempting to deal with the corruption they decided to turn religion on its head and change the fundamentals of the church, the reformation. The printing press came along about the same time. Hence the interpretations that provide the foundation of the protestant faiths are fairly new by historical reference and spread through the easily printed bibles. The old faiths of the original churches still practice this direct linage doctrine of the leaders being responsible for the doctrine.
> 
> I tell you this as I spent most of my life bouncing around looking for answers to some of your questions. I found comfort in religion with an ancient church.



Interesting! The 1600's? I figured the Bible canon was pretty much set-in-stone hundreds of years before then. If this is the case then modern Christianity is not that much older than Islam!


----------



## Ruger#3 (Aug 26, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Interesting! The 1600's? I figured the Bible canon was pretty much set-in-stone hundreds of years before then. If this is the case then modern Christianity is not that much older than Islam!



Christianity goes back to Christ, Protestantism started in the 1600s. Catholics, Orthodox and Anglicans go back to the disciples. The others started fairly recently as history goes. I think the church of Christ was first established in the mid 1800s.


----------

