Total Posts:165|Showing Posts:61-90|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Does the bible make sense?

MadCornishBiker
Posts: 25,917
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2017 8:39:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/28/2017 1:47:36 AM, Composer wrote:
Gen. 3: 2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, "You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.""

Where does Story book God(s) say " you must not touch it? ".

:)

Depends on your translation, obviously.
It impossible to make a horse drink which is not thirsty, or eat if it is not hungry.

Likewise it is impossible to teach a person who does not wish to learn. Matthew 13:15.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 25,917
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2017 8:43:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/28/2017 1:24:48 PM, Face-of-the-deep wrote:
The knowledge of good and evil was put in the tree. God warns Adam not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil because it would end his innocence. He would become like God knowing good and evil. That is exactly what happened.

Genesis 3: 22 And the Lord God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."

When you quote the Bible you need to quote what it says.-->"Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"<--It really is futile when not being able to read. (lest) means unless. The Bible says:"Unless he reach out his hand...".

You need to understand what it is using the words to mean because there are many differences between translations but only one meaning to each passage.

Yes Adam and Even knew Good and Evil, but what does that actually mean.

History makes it obvious they did not learn the difference between good and evil, merely the effects of good and evil.

Mankind still doesn't really know, because they all have their own ideas of what is good and what is evil, even within the same cultures.

Like I said, what the words were used to mean is more important than the words themselves.
It impossible to make a horse drink which is not thirsty, or eat if it is not hungry.

Likewise it is impossible to teach a person who does not wish to learn. Matthew 13:15.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 25,917
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2017 8:50:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/28/2017 1:32:24 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/27/2017 9:24:29 PM, 12_13 wrote:
At 3/26/2017 4:12:50 PM, Harikrish wrote:
God did not live in the Garden with Adm nod Eve. He gave them instructions and left.
But he did put the knowledge of good and evil into a tree.

Genesis 2:16-17, "And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.""

No wonder if you are lost when you add so much own meanings to Bible scriptures.

That was straight from the Bible. God warns Adam not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

That scripture doesn"t say the knowledge was put into that tree. By eating the fruit, they could get the knowledge, because then they see what it means to be without God.

The knowledge of good and evil was put in the tree. God warns Adam not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil because it would end his innocence. He would become like God knowing good and evil. That is exactly what happened.

Genesis 3: 22 And the Lord God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." 23 So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. 24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side[e] of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.

If you knew your scriptures you would know eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil was how tge became like Gid knowing good and evil.

Genesis 3:

The Fall
3 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, "You must not eat from any tree in the garden"?"

2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, "You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.""

4 "You will not certainly die," the serpent said to the woman. 5 "For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

And what they did was acquire the knowledge of good and evil. The bible is full of attempts by God to teach man the difference between good and evil. He even sent prophets and his own son Jesus to teach man what was good and what was evil. But Adam and Eve having been punished by God for acquiring the knowledge of good and evil created a genetic revulsion and avoidance for such knowledge. Any wonder why the Jews resisted the prophets and Jesus because they saw this as another trap to force them to learn what was good and evil only to be punished again like Adam and Eve.

Bible says the reason why Jesus came was this:

"The Spirit of the Lord is on me, Because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim release to the captives, Recovering of sight to the blind, To deliver those who are crushed, And to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord."
Luke 4:18-19

But we know that was not what the people were threatening Jesus with stoning for. Jesus was also making blasphemous claims.

John 10:33 "We are not stoning you for any good work," they replied, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."

Except that if you had the slightest knowledge of scripture you would know that Jesus never claimed to be God, that was simply another Pharisaic lie, which you are incapable of recognising for what it is.

That claim of the Pharisees was no more true than the claim that Jesus taught subversion.

I rather believe what the Bible tells than you.

The bible has failed scientific scrutiny. Archeological discoveries demolishes the Bible proving the characters in the bible were fictional character. There was no Exodus. The kingdom of David and Solomon was just some tiny little cow town. Even Jesus was a deluded Jewish rabbi who was crucified by the Romans.

No, the Bible has not failed scientific scrutiny, that is another lie that many have fallen for.

In fact in the few areas that the Bible touches on science they agree 100%, apart from the obvious mistranslation of Genesis 1:14, which states an impossibility since the sun moon and stars were only created once, in verse 1.

The only thing that happened at the stage verse 14 describes,the only thing that was possible, was that they became visible from the earth's surface.


And you believe that because you say so and everything you say must be true because you says so?
Most biblical scholars agree what over time has proven to be sound exegesis and hermeneutics. I am just presenting what biblical scholars agree are contradictions that are resolved by other fields like archeology and historical context.
It impossible to make a horse drink which is not thirsty, or eat if it is not hungry.

Likewise it is impossible to teach a person who does not wish to learn. Matthew 13:15.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 25,917
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2017 8:52:26 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/27/2017 12:45:06 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/27/2017 12:36:01 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 3/27/2017 2:09:14 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/26/2017 10:46:02 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 3/26/2017 9:28:57 PM, Skeptical1 wrote:
Does the bible make sense?

Is the Pope Jewish?

I don't know. I know an atheist who tells me he is Jewish and I'm like, how is that even possible(?) He's looking at me like it's a stupid question and I'm pretty much thinking the same because how can you be Jewish and an atheist unless he married and atheist maybe. There might be some wiggle room there if God starts asking about it.

You should be surprised there aren't most Jews turning atheist after 1500 years of persecution and expulsion. If God picked a people that wouldn't quit on him he picked right when he picked the Jews. Too bad you are a holocaust denier.

Unfortunately he picked on the wrong people since they deserted him and his true worship centuries ago. That is why he let Israel disappear from the face of the earth centuries before Christ was born, and the current "Israel" is a fake.

The Jews have always proven to be as "stiff-necked" as the nation which spawned then, Israel. They refuse to accept their error, and refuse to accept the fulfilment of prophecies contained in their own word.

basically, as they have since Israel rejected their God from being king over them in the days of the prophet Samuel, continued to say to God "our way or no way". They even forced the Romans to put his only begotten son to death in his human form by blackmailing Pilate, threatening to cause him trouble with his masters in Rome, who were somewhat dubious about him anyway.

It's all there in their own scrolls, and yet they treat them as meaningless. How can they possibly believe that God could smile on them?

Despite Satan's attempts to pervert it, there is a truly modern day Israel on this earth, but it is not the one people thin of as a nation, it is now known as Jehovah's Witnesses.

The only thing the Jews have not quit on is trying to tell God what to do instead of doing what he wants them to.

Look what you did with their religion. You used it to justify your 4 divorces,you used it to justify abandoning your 3 children, you got disfellowshipped and shunned when Jehovah's earthly organization found out how depraved you were. You used their religion to attract sexually immoral Filipino women. How much lower can you get?

I have not used scripture or the faith of the JWs to justify any such thing, however I have pointed out that I was divorced for adultery and that is the only grounds scripture allows divorce on.

As always you twist everything to your own warped ideas.
It impossible to make a horse drink which is not thirsty, or eat if it is not hungry.

Likewise it is impossible to teach a person who does not wish to learn. Matthew 13:15.
Face-of-the-deep
Posts: 80
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2017 11:13:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/28/2017 1:38:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/28/2017 1:24:48 PM, Face-of-the-deep wrote:
The knowledge of good and evil was put in the tree. God warns Adam not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil because it would end his innocence. He would become like God knowing good and evil. That is exactly what happened.

Genesis 3: 22 And the Lord God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."

When you quote the Bible you need to quote what it says.-->"Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"<--It really is futile when not being able to read. (lest) means unless. The Bible says:"Unless he reach out his hand...".

The futility is in your attempt to reach beyond your grasp. You try to act scholarly lest your advanced senility will betray you.

Definition of lest
for fear that "often used after an expression denoting fear or apprehension worried lest she should be late hesitant to speak out lest he be fired.

Get an education you old fart before you try to correct biblical scholars like Harikrish.

Thanks for helping prove my point. We can substitute unless in place of lest. It's a good thing I paid attention in English class. " for fear that (unless) she should be late hesitant to speak out (unless) he be fired.
Composer
Posts: 6,182
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 2:41:07 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/29/2017 8:39:08 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 3/28/2017 1:47:36 AM, Composer wrote:
Gen. 3: 2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, "You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.""

Where does Story book God(s) say " you must not touch it? ".

:)

Depends on your translation, obviously.
Then show such a translation!
Composer
Posts: 6,182
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 3:04:37 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/29/2017 8:50:02 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
No, the Bible has not failed scientific scrutiny, that is another lie that many have fallen for.
Apart from e.g. Prov. 30:25 & 30!
bulproof
Posts: 36,669
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 3:12:00 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/29/2017 8:50:02 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
No, the Bible has not failed scientific scrutiny, that is another lie that many have fallen for.
The bible is categorically refuted by science.
Composer
Posts: 6,182
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 3:21:10 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/16/2017 9:02:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
After creating Adam and Eve. God tells them they can eat from any tree in the garden except one.
Show us where Story book God told this to Eve?
Harikrish
Posts: 29,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 12:24:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/29/2017 8:33:26 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:27:27 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 5:02:04 PM, Perussi wrote:
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

He didn't have what he wanted, he had two humans who had sinned.

It is only a sin if the two knew what they were doing was wrong. They had no concept of good and evil before they ate the fruit.

God said in short "hey, see this? do not eat it". They understood language and were commandable, god even said to name the animals. They weren't idiots. They could understand the concept of good and bad.

How many animal nanes are found in Bible named by Adam? Adam couldn't even follow a simple order like don't eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

The bible isn't going to say what he named them, just that he did. He didn't follow it because he failed to not sin. He just failed. I can create complex formulas and i can still sin.

That is why the Bible doesn't make sense. It does even meet the educational standards of a grade four level. After studying the bible you still cannot name the animals or prove trees possess the knowledge of good and evil or even the ability to offer immortality.
Yet God punished Adam and Eve because he believed in the nonsense he created.

Note God said if they ate the fruit they would die. But they didn't have the concept of death either because they were the first human creation.

God wouldn't say if you eat this you will die if they didn't understand "die".

They were living in the Garden of Eden where no death was possible or had ever occurred. It even had the tree of life to grant immorality. Remember they were the first humans created.

Stop repeating that, that argument has fallen.
Do you deny Adam and Ever were the first humans created? They did it see death for another 900 years after they ate the fruit.
Harikrish
Posts: 29,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 12:47:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/29/2017 8:35:22 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:31:19 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 7:08:28 PM, Perussi wrote:
God either taught them to speak or created them knowing how to speak. Either way they knew what it meant. You don't have to experience or view death to be explained to what it is.

Most people don't know what death is even today. Is it the final resting place? Is death the beginning of the after life? What about the cycle of rebirths? What about entering Paradise upon death? Death is very abstract.

Death is when something dies. What you carry it to is afterlife skepticalness.

But Jesus proved death is not final. Reincarnation proves death is not final. Death is a gateway to the spiritual realm. But Adam and Eve were the first humans created. These concepts were not introduced to them. That is why they understood not what death was. Many don't see death as a punishment and even look forward to it. Adam and Eve did not see death as a punishment because they were filled with curiosity being the first humans.

So when God said they would die if they ate the fruit, they did not believe death was bad or a punishment not understanding what death was.
Harikrish
Posts: 29,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 1:16:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/29/2017 8:50:02 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 3/28/2017 1:32:24 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/27/2017 9:24:29 PM, 12_13 wrote:
At 3/26/2017 4:12:50 PM, Harikrish wrote:
God did not live in the Garden with Adm nod Eve. He gave them instructions and left.
But he did put the knowledge of good and evil into a tree.

Genesis 2:16-17, "And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.""

No wonder if you are lost when you add so much own meanings to Bible scriptures.

That was straight from the Bible. God warns Adam not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

That scripture doesn"t say the knowledge was put into that tree. By eating the fruit, they could get the knowledge, because then they see what it means to be without God.

The knowledge of good and evil was put in the tree. God warns Adam not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil because it would end his innocence. He would become like God knowing good and evil. That is exactly what happened.

Genesis 3: 22 And the Lord God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." 23 So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. 24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side[e] of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.

If you knew your scriptures you would know eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil was how tge became like Gid knowing good and evil.

Genesis 3:

The Fall
3 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, "You must not eat from any tree in the garden"?"

2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, "You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.""

4 "You will not certainly die," the serpent said to the woman. 5 "For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

And what they did was acquire the knowledge of good and evil. The bible is full of attempts by God to teach man the difference between good and evil. He even sent prophets and his own son Jesus to teach man what was good and what was evil. But Adam and Eve having been punished by God for acquiring the knowledge of good and evil created a genetic revulsion and avoidance for such knowledge. Any wonder why the Jews resisted the prophets and Jesus because they saw this as another trap to force them to learn what was good and evil only to be punished again like Adam and Eve.

Bible says the reason why Jesus came was this:

"The Spirit of the Lord is on me, Because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim release to the captives, Recovering of sight to the blind, To deliver those who are crushed, And to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord."
Luke 4:18-19

But we know that was not what the people were threatening Jesus with stoning for. Jesus was also making blasphemous claims.

John 10:33 "We are not stoning you for any good work," they replied, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."

Except that if you had the slightest knowledge of scripture you would know that Jesus never claimed to be God, that was simply another Pharisaic lie, which you are incapable of recognising for what it is.

Jesus never claimed to be an angel either. Yet you believe Jesus was the incarnate of angel Michael.

Jesus claimed to be the Son of God thereby claiming he was a God like his father. To placate them he said they are all Gods. Read your scriptures, you retard.

John 10:34 Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, "I have said you are "gods""[d]? 35 If he called them "gods," to whom the word of God came"and Scripture cannot be set aside" 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, "I am God"s Son"? 37 Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father. 38 But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father." 39 Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp.

That claim of the Pharisees was no more true than the claim that Jesus taught subversion.

The verse is clear Jesus by claiming his father was God made him the son of God and therefore a God like his father. Try to understand the relationship son and father both Gods, you retard.

I rather believe what the Bible tells than you.

That is why you are a failed husband, a failed father, a failed JW member and a failed Filipino lover. You failed in school, you failed in business, your physical, mental and financial health is failing. What you believe is what made you the lowest of the low.

The bible has failed scientific scrutiny. Archeological discoveries demolishes the Bible proving the characters in the bible were fictional character. There was no Exodus. The kingdom of David and Solomon was just some tiny little cow town. Even Jesus was a deluded Jewish rabbi who was crucified by the Romans.

No, the Bible has not failed scientific scrutiny, that is another lie that many have fallen for.

There isn't enough math or science in the Bible to meet the requirements of a fourth grader. That is why the bible is not taught in schools. It fails to meet the educational standards required. It cannot meet the educational standards because it has failed scientific scrutiny.

In fact in the few areas that the Bible touches on science they agree 100%, apart from the obvious mistranslation of Genesis 1:14, which states an impossibility since the sun moon and stars were only created once, in verse 1.

Those are big mistakes. The fact you could not finish school despite claiming you started reading the bible when you were 8 years old proves the bible had little academic value and could not be applied to an educational curriculum. The bible is worthless nonsense.

The only thing that happened at the stage verse 14 describes,the only thing that was possible, was that they became visible from the earth's surface.

Suffice to say after studying the bible for 60 years you ended your career as a window cleaner.

And you believe that because you say so and everything you say must be true because you says so?
Most biblical scholars agree what over time has proven to be sound exegesis and hermeneutics. I am just presenting what biblical scholars agree are contradictions that are resolved by other fields like archeology and historical context.
Perussi
Posts: 3,687
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 1:34:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2017 12:24:14 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:33:26 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:27:27 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 5:02:04 PM, Perussi wrote:
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

He didn't have what he wanted, he had two humans who had sinned.

It is only a sin if the two knew what they were doing was wrong. They had no concept of good and evil before they ate the fruit.

God said in short "hey, see this? do not eat it". They understood language and were commandable, god even said to name the animals. They weren't idiots. They could understand the concept of good and bad.

How many animal nanes are found in Bible named by Adam? Adam couldn't even follow a simple order like don't eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

The bible isn't going to say what he named them, just that he did. He didn't follow it because he failed to not sin. He just failed. I can create complex formulas and i can still sin.

That is why the Bible doesn't make sense. It does even meet the educational standards of a grade four level. After studying the bible you still cannot name the animals or prove trees possess the knowledge of good and evil or even the ability to offer immortality.

That isn't what the bible teaches, it has a purpose, not to educate modernly though, not sure where this came from.

Yet God punished Adam and Eve because he believed in the nonsense he created.

If we are assuming this happened then what makes anything nonsence?

Note God said if they ate the fruit they would die. But they didn't have the concept of death either because they were the first human creation.

God wouldn't say if you eat this you will die if they didn't understand "die".

They were living in the Garden of Eden where no death was possible or had ever occurred. It even had the tree of life to grant immorality. Remember they were the first humans created.

Stop repeating that, that argument has fallen.
Do you deny Adam and Ever were the first humans created? They did it see death for another 900 years after they ate the fruit.

God taught them to speak and just explained the concept of death, simple. It is the only reasonable way they could have been talking to each other and understood death. Again, god wouldn't say a word they wouldn't understand. For example, would you be talking to someone and throw a word in they don't know knowing they don't know it? No.
Harikrish
Posts: 29,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 1:46:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/29/2017 8:52:26 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 3/27/2017 12:45:06 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/27/2017 12:36:01 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 3/27/2017 2:09:14 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/26/2017 10:46:02 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 3/26/2017 9:28:57 PM, Skeptical1 wrote:
Does the bible make sense?

Is the Pope Jewish?

I don't know. I know an atheist who tells me he is Jewish and I'm like, how is that even possible(?) He's looking at me like it's a stupid question and I'm pretty much thinking the same because how can you be Jewish and an atheist unless he married and atheist maybe. There might be some wiggle room there if God starts asking about it.

You should be surprised there aren't most Jews turning atheist after 1500 years of persecution and expulsion. If God picked a people that wouldn't quit on him he picked right when he picked the Jews. Too bad you are a holocaust denier.

Unfortunately he picked on the wrong people since they deserted him and his true worship centuries ago. That is why he let Israel disappear from the face of the earth centuries before Christ was born, and the current "Israel" is a fake.

The Jews have always proven to be as "stiff-necked" as the nation which spawned then, Israel. They refuse to accept their error, and refuse to accept the fulfilment of prophecies contained in their own word.

basically, as they have since Israel rejected their God from being king over them in the days of the prophet Samuel, continued to say to God "our way or no way". They even forced the Romans to put his only begotten son to death in his human form by blackmailing Pilate, threatening to cause him trouble with his masters in Rome, who were somewhat dubious about him anyway.

It's all there in their own scrolls, and yet they treat them as meaningless. How can they possibly believe that God could smile on them?

Despite Satan's attempts to pervert it, there is a truly modern day Israel on this earth, but it is not the one people thin of as a nation, it is now known as Jehovah's Witnesses.

The only thing the Jews have not quit on is trying to tell God what to do instead of doing what he wants them to.

Look what you did with their religion. You used it to justify your 4 divorces,you used it to justify abandoning your 3 children, you got disfellowshipped and shunned when Jehovah's earthly organization found out how depraved you were. You used their religion to attract sexually immoral Filipino women. How much lower can you get?

I have not used scripture or the faith of the JWs to justify any such thing, however I have pointed out that I was divorced for adultery and that is the only grounds scripture allows divorce on.

You admitted your wives were all innocent that you were the guilty party and the adulterer in all the marriages. Scriptures allow divorce on the grounds of adultery. Jehovah grants the innocent mate the right to decide whether to remain with the guilty partner or to seek a divorce. (Matthew 19:9). But whoever marries the adulterer which is you in this case is committing adultery. You already committed adultery with Imekda after you divorced from your last wife.

From the Jehovah site.

"What forms a Scriptural basis for divorce? Well, Jehovah hates adultery and sexual immorality. (Genesis 39:9; 2 Samuel 11:26, 27; Psalm 51:4) Indeed, he finds sexual immorality so despicable that he allows it as grounds for divorce. (For a discussion of what sexual immorality involves, refer to Chapter 9, paragraph 7, where sexual immorality is explained.) Jehovah grants the innocent mate the right to decide whether to remain with the guilty partner or to seek a divorce. (Matthew 19:9) Hence, if an innocent mate decides to seek a divorce, that one does not take a step that Jehovah hates. "

As always you twist everything to your own warped ideas.
You are the one with the twisted mind and twisted failures. Read your own confessions you pervert.

Proverbs 6:32 But a man who commits adultery has no sense; whoever does so destroys himself.
bulproof
Posts: 36,669
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 1:59:55 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2017 1:34:14 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/30/2017 12:24:14 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:33:26 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:27:27 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 5:02:04 PM, Perussi wrote:
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

He didn't have what he wanted, he had two humans who had sinned.

It is only a sin if the two knew what they were doing was wrong. They had no concept of good and evil before they ate the fruit.

God said in short "hey, see this? do not eat it". They understood language and were commandable, god even said to name the animals. They weren't idiots. They could understand the concept of good and bad.

How many animal nanes are found in Bible named by Adam? Adam couldn't even follow a simple order like don't eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

The bible isn't going to say what he named them, just that he did. He didn't follow it because he failed to not sin. He just failed. I can create complex formulas and i can still sin.

That is why the Bible doesn't make sense. It does even meet the educational standards of a grade four level. After studying the bible you still cannot name the animals or prove trees possess the knowledge of good and evil or even the ability to offer immortality.

That isn't what the bible teaches, it has a purpose, not to educate modernly though, not sure where this came from.

Yet God punished Adam and Eve because he believed in the nonsense he created.

If we are assuming this happened then what makes anything nonsence?

Note God said if they ate the fruit they would die. But they didn't have the concept of death either because they were the first human creation.

God wouldn't say if you eat this you will die if they didn't understand "die".

They were living in the Garden of Eden where no death was possible or had ever occurred. It even had the tree of life to grant immorality. Remember they were the first humans created.

Stop repeating that, that argument has fallen.
Do you deny Adam and Ever were the first humans created? They did it see death for another 900 years after they ate the fruit.

God taught them to speak and just explained the concept of death, simple. It is the only reasonable way they could have been talking to each other and understood death. Again, god wouldn't say a word they wouldn't understand. For example, would you be talking to someone and throw a word in they don't know knowing they don't know it? No.
Have you got the bible that you've written that adds all the bits you need added, like god told them about death even though he says that they brought death into the world?
Do you see that you are 152cm and that your claim to be 203cm is just your fantasy or do you believe it?
bulproof
Posts: 36,669
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 2:09:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2017 1:34:14 PM, Perussi wrote:
God taught them to speak and just explained the concept of death, simple.
And all you need do is supply the passage from your book supporting this claim. I'm waiting.
It is the only reasonable way they could have been talking to each other and understood death.
The only reasonable way the story could be told is if it was concocted as a folk tale to explain what an ignorant goatherd fabricated in his imagination.
Again, god wouldn't say a word they wouldn't understand.
Again provide bible passages that support your contention.
For example, would you be talking to someone and throw a word in they don't know knowing they don't know it? No.
Exactly! And that is the absolute proof that the story is a fiction, just as the shame of nudity is.
Harikrish
Posts: 29,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 2:11:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/29/2017 11:13:31 PM, Face-of-the-deep wrote:
At 3/28/2017 1:38:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/28/2017 1:24:48 PM, Face-of-the-deep wrote:
The knowledge of good and evil was put in the tree. God warns Adam not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil because it would end his innocence. He would become like God knowing good and evil. That is exactly what happened.

Genesis 3: 22 And the Lord God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."

When you quote the Bible you need to quote what it says.-->"Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"<--It really is futile when not being able to read. (lest) means unless. The Bible says:"Unless he reach out his hand...".

The futility is in your attempt to reach beyond your grasp. You try to act scholarly lest your advanced senility will betray you.

Definition of lest
for fear that "often used after an expression denoting fear or apprehension worried lest she should be late hesitant to speak out lest he be fired.

Get an education you old fart before you try to correct biblical scholars like Harikrish.

Thanks for helping prove my point. We can substitute unless in place of lest. It's a good thing I paid attention in English class. " for fear that (unless) she should be late hesitant to speak out (unless) he be fired.

Your substitution isn't even grammatically correct. And if you are looking for a substitution for 'lest' it is not unless.

Try Synonyms
in case, just in case, for fear that, in order to avoid, to avoid the risk of

Get an education you old fart before you try to correct biblical scholars like Harikrish. You should have paid more attention to your senility instead of waiting for it to advance before attending English classes. Lol!!
Harikrish
Posts: 29,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 2:15:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2017 3:21:10 AM, Composer wrote:
At 3/16/2017 9:02:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
After creating Adam and Eve. God tells them they can eat from any tree in the garden except one.
Show us where Story book God told this to Eve?
Eve repeated what God said to her when the serpent questioned Eve.

Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, "You must not eat from any tree in the garden"?"

2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, "You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.""
Harikrish
Posts: 29,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 2:46:40 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2017 1:34:14 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/30/2017 12:24:14 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:33:26 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:27:27 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 5:02:04 PM, Perussi wrote:
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

He didn't have what he wanted, he had two humans who had sinned.

It is only a sin if the two knew what they were doing was wrong. They had no concept of good and evil before they ate the fruit.

God said in short "hey, see this? do not eat it". They understood language and were commandable, god even said to name the animals. They weren't idiots. They could understand the concept of good and bad.

How many animal nanes are found in Bible named by Adam? Adam couldn't even follow a simple order like don't eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

The bible isn't going to say what he named them, just that he did. He didn't follow it because he failed to not sin. He just failed. I can create complex formulas and i can still sin.

That is why the Bible doesn't make sense. It does even meet the educational standards of a grade four level. After studying the bible you still cannot name the animals or prove trees possess the knowledge of good and evil or even the ability to offer immortality.

That isn't what the bible teaches, it has a purpose, not to educate modernly though, not sure where this came from.

Did God expect man to remain in the stone or Bronze Age? That is why the bible is less relevant today.

Yet God punished Adam and Eve because he believed in the nonsense he created.

If we are assuming this happened then what makes anything nonsence?

That is the belief of 2 billion Christians who believe God believed the nonsense He created. But Adam, Eve and the talking serpent ignored God and lived to tell their story.

Note God said if they ate the fruit they would die. But they didn't have the concept of death either because they were the first human creation.

God wouldn't say if you eat this you will die if they didn't understand "die".

They were living in the Garden of Eden where no death was possible or had ever occurred. It even had the tree of life to grant immorality. Remember they were the first humans created.

Stop repeating that, that argument has fallen.
Do you deny Adam and Ever were the first humans created? They did it see death for another 900 years after they ate the fruit.

God taught them to speak and just explained the concept of death, simple. It is the only reasonable way they could have been talking to each other and understood death. Again, god wouldn't say a word they wouldn't understand. For example, would you be talking to someone and throw a word in they don't know knowing they don't know it? No.

God talked to Adam and Eve in the same language he used on the talking serpent. That was how confused God was, he could not tell the difference between a serpent and Humans. Why? Because creation was very new to Him too.
annanicole
Posts: 22,363
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 3:24:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/29/2017 8:52:26 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 3/27/2017 12:45:06 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/27/2017 12:36:01 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 3/27/2017 2:09:14 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/26/2017 10:46:02 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 3/26/2017 9:28:57 PM, Skeptical1 wrote:

Look what you did with their religion. You used it to justify your 4 divorces,you used it to justify abandoning your 3 children, you got disfellowshipped and shunned when Jehovah's earthly organization found out how depraved you were. You used their religion to attract sexually immoral Filipino women. How much lower can you get?

I have not used scripture or the faith of the JWs to justify any such thing, however I have pointed out that I was divorced for adultery ...

Yeah, your own adultery! You were on the receiving end of the divorce for adultery just as you'll be on the receiving end of the supposed horrors of this imaginary yet-future Armageddon.

By the way, does your latest little split up (with Imelda) count as another divorce? I guess since you claimed y'all were "married in God's eyes" that you two are now "divorced in God's eyes."
Perussi
Posts: 3,687
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 3:28:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2017 2:46:40 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/30/2017 1:34:14 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/30/2017 12:24:14 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:33:26 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:27:27 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 5:02:04 PM, Perussi wrote:
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

He didn't have what he wanted, he had two humans who had sinned.

It is only a sin if the two knew what they were doing was wrong. They had no concept of good and evil before they ate the fruit.

God said in short "hey, see this? do not eat it". They understood language and were commandable, god even said to name the animals. They weren't idiots. They could understand the concept of good and bad.

How many animal nanes are found in Bible named by Adam? Adam couldn't even follow a simple order like don't eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

The bible isn't going to say what he named them, just that he did. He didn't follow it because he failed to not sin. He just failed. I can create complex formulas and i can still sin.

That is why the Bible doesn't make sense. It does even meet the educational standards of a grade four level. After studying the bible you still cannot name the animals or prove trees possess the knowledge of good and evil or even the ability to offer immortality.

That isn't what the bible teaches, it has a purpose, not to educate modernly though, not sure where this came from.

Did God expect man to remain in the stone or Bronze Age? That is why the bible is less relevant today.

It isn't a fvuking textbook.

Yet God punished Adam and Eve because he believed in the nonsense he created.

If we are assuming this happened then what makes anything nonsence?

That is the belief of 2 billion Christians who believe God believed the nonsense He created. But Adam, Eve and the talking serpent ignored God and lived to tell their story.

No, why is it nonsence?

Note God said if they ate the fruit they would die. But they didn't have the concept of death either because they were the first human creation.

God wouldn't say if you eat this you will die if they didn't understand "die".

They were living in the Garden of Eden where no death was possible or had ever occurred. It even had the tree of life to grant immorality. Remember they were the first humans created.

Stop repeating that, that argument has fallen.
Do you deny Adam and Ever were the first humans created? They did it see death for another 900 years after they ate the fruit.

God taught them to speak and just explained the concept of death, simple. It is the only reasonable way they could have been talking to each other and understood death. Again, god wouldn't say a word they wouldn't understand. For example, would you be talking to someone and throw a word in they don't know knowing they don't know it? No.

God talked to Adam and Eve in the same language he used on the talking serpent. That was how confused God was, he could not tell the difference between a serpent and Humans. Why? Because creation was very new to Him too.

I think god as defined in the bible would know a snake from a man. Maybe back then there was a universal language, the language of eden i think is mentioned a bit. And actually satan being a snake is possibly a metephor.
Harikrish
Posts: 29,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 6:02:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2017 3:28:18 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/30/2017 2:46:40 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/30/2017 1:34:14 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/30/2017 12:24:14 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:33:26 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:27:27 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 5:02:04 PM, Perussi wrote:
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

He didn't have what he wanted, he had two humans who had sinned.

It is only a sin if the two knew what they were doing was wrong. They had no concept of good and evil before they ate the fruit.

God said in short "hey, see this? do not eat it". They understood language and were commandable, god even said to name the animals. They weren't idiots. They could understand the concept of good and bad.

How many animal nanes are found in Bible named by Adam? Adam couldn't even follow a simple order like don't eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

The bible isn't going to say what he named them, just that he did. He didn't follow it because he failed to not sin. He just failed. I can create complex formulas and i can still sin.

That is why the Bible doesn't make sense. It does even meet the educational standards of a grade four level. After studying the bible you still cannot name the animals or prove trees possess the knowledge of good and evil or even the ability to offer immortality.

That isn't what the bible teaches, it has a purpose, not to educate modernly though, not sure where this came from.

Did God expect man to remain in the stone or Bronze Age? That is why the bible is less relevant today.

It isn't a fvuking textbook.

That is why the bible is less relevant today.

Yet God punished Adam and Eve because he believed in the nonsense he created.

If we are assuming this happened then what makes anything nonsence?

That is the belief of 2 billion Christians who believe God believed the nonsense He created. But Adam, Eve and the talking serpent ignored God and lived to tell their story.

No, why is it nonsence?

1. Talking serpents. Total nonsense.
2. Trees with knowledge of good and evil. Total nonsense.
3. Tree of life give immortality to those who eat of it. Total nonsense.

More to follow.

Note God said if they ate the fruit they would die. But they didn't have the concept of death either because they were the first human creation.

God wouldn't say if you eat this you will die if they didn't understand "die".

They were living in the Garden of Eden where no death was possible or had ever occurred. It even had the tree of life to grant immorality. Remember they were the first humans created.

Stop repeating that, that argument has fallen.
Do you deny Adam and Ever were the first humans created? They did it see death for another 900 years after they ate the fruit.

God taught them to speak and just explained the concept of death, simple. It is the only reasonable way they could have been talking to each other and understood death. Again, god wouldn't say a word they wouldn't understand. For example, would you be talking to someone and throw a word in they don't know knowing they don't know it? No.

God talked to Adam and Eve in the same language he used on the talking serpent. That was how confused God was, he could not tell the difference between a serpent and Humans. Why? Because creation was very new to Him too.

I think god as defined in the bible would know a snake from a man. Maybe back then there was a universal language, the language of eden i think is mentioned a bit. And actually satan being a snake is possibly a metephor.
So it is not clear what is literal or fabricated what is real or just metaphors in the bible. It is a collections of stories that need special interpretation to make sense.
Perussi
Posts: 3,687
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 6:50:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2017 6:02:33 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/30/2017 3:28:18 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/30/2017 2:46:40 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/30/2017 1:34:14 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/30/2017 12:24:14 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:33:26 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:27:27 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 5:02:04 PM, Perussi wrote:
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

He didn't have what he wanted, he had two humans who had sinned.

It is only a sin if the two knew what they were doing was wrong. They had no concept of good and evil before they ate the fruit.

God said in short "hey, see this? do not eat it". They understood language and were commandable, god even said to name the animals. They weren't idiots. They could understand the concept of good and bad.

How many animal nanes are found in Bible named by Adam? Adam couldn't even follow a simple order like don't eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

The bible isn't going to say what he named them, just that he did. He didn't follow it because he failed to not sin. He just failed. I can create complex formulas and i can still sin.

That is why the Bible doesn't make sense. It does even meet the educational standards of a grade four level. After studying the bible you still cannot name the animals or prove trees possess the knowledge of good and evil or even the ability to offer immortality.

That isn't what the bible teaches, it has a purpose, not to educate modernly though, not sure where this came from.

Did God expect man to remain in the stone or Bronze Age? That is why the bible is less relevant today.

It isn't a fvuking textbook.

That is why the bible is less relevant today.

It isn't less relavent at all, it is unlike any other material today.

Yet God punished Adam and Eve because he believed in the nonsense he created.

If we are assuming this happened then what makes anything nonsence?

That is the belief of 2 billion Christians who believe God believed the nonsense He created. But Adam, Eve and the talking serpent ignored God and lived to tell their story.

No, why is it nonsence?

1. Talking serpents. Total nonsense.

Either metaphor or supernatural being satan, don't forget the bible calls this serpent satan.

2. Trees with knowledge of good and evil. Total nonsense.

The tree is not sentient.

3. Tree of life give immortality to those who eat of it. Total nonsense.

The bible doesn't say this.

More to follow.

K, but if the christian god exists it could be litteral or not still. We don't know how eden or heaven holds. But god as defined in the bible could definately cheat nature.

Note God said if they ate the fruit they would die. But they didn't have the concept of death either because they were the first human creation.

God wouldn't say if you eat this you will die if they didn't understand "die".

They were living in the Garden of Eden where no death was possible or had ever occurred. It even had the tree of life to grant immorality. Remember they were the first humans created.

Stop repeating that, that argument has fallen.
Do you deny Adam and Ever were the first humans created? They did it see death for another 900 years after they ate the fruit.

God taught them to speak and just explained the concept of death, simple. It is the only reasonable way they could have been talking to each other and understood death. Again, god wouldn't say a word they wouldn't understand. For example, would you be talking to someone and throw a word in they don't know knowing they don't know it? No.

God talked to Adam and Eve in the same language he used on the talking serpent. That was how confused God was, he could not tell the difference between a serpent and Humans. Why? Because creation was very new to Him too.

I think god as defined in the bible would know a snake from a man. Maybe back then there was a universal language, the language of eden i think is mentioned a bit. And actually satan being a snake is possibly a metephor.
So it is not clear what is literal or fabricated what is real or just metaphors in the bible. It is a collections of stories that need special interpretation to make sense.

Don't forget you are only focusing on where possible contradictions are. Most of it is not like this at all.
Harikrish
Posts: 29,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 8:52:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2017 6:50:35 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/30/2017 6:02:33 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/30/2017 3:28:18 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/30/2017 2:46:40 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/30/2017 1:34:14 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/30/2017 12:24:14 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:33:26 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:27:27 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 5:02:04 PM, Perussi wrote:
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

He didn't have what he wanted, he had two humans who had sinned.

It is only a sin if the two knew what they were doing was wrong. They had no concept of good and evil before they ate the fruit.

God said in short "hey, see this? do not eat it". They understood language and were commandable, god even said to name the animals. They weren't idiots. They could understand the concept of good and bad.

How many animal nanes are found in Bible named by Adam? Adam couldn't even follow a simple order like don't eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

The bible isn't going to say what he named them, just that he did. He didn't follow it because he failed to not sin. He just failed. I can create complex formulas and i can still sin.

That is why the Bible doesn't make sense. It does even meet the educational standards of a grade four level. After studying the bible you still cannot name the animals or prove trees possess the knowledge of good and evil or even the ability to offer immortality.

That isn't what the bible teaches, it has a purpose, not to educate modernly though, not sure where this came from.

Did God expect man to remain in the stone or Bronze Age? That is why the bible is less relevant today.

It isn't a fvuking textbook.

That is why the bible is less relevant today.

It isn't less relavent at all, it is unlike any other material today.

It is both irrelevant and unlike other trash.

Yet God punished Adam and Eve because he believed in the nonsense he created.

If we are assuming this happened then what makes anything nonsence?

That is the belief of 2 billion Christians who believe God believed the nonsense He created. But Adam, Eve and the talking serpent ignored God and lived to tell their story.

No, why is it nonsence?

1. Talking serpents. Total nonsense.

Either metaphor or supernatural being satan, don't forget the bible calls this serpent satan.

God even describes the talking serpent as a snake.

2. Trees with knowledge of good and evil. Total nonsense.

The tree is not sentient.

The fruits contained knowledge of good and evil. God put this knowledge of good and evil in a tree but not in humans. Absolute rubbish.
But plants are sentient.

https://www.psychologytoday.com...

3. Tree of life give immortality to those who eat of it. Total nonsense.

The bible doesn't say this.

Read your scriptures.
Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and live forever.
More to follow.

K, but if the christian god exists it could be litteral or not still. We don't know how eden or heaven holds. But god as defined in the bible could definately cheat nature.

Now God is a cheater too, great!!!

Note God said if they ate the fruit they would die. But they didn't have the concept of death either because they were the first human creation.

God wouldn't say if you eat this you will die if they didn't understand "die".

They were living in the Garden of Eden where no death was possible or had ever occurred. It even had the tree of life to grant immorality. Remember they were the first humans created.

Stop repeating that, that argument has fallen.
Do you deny Adam and Ever were the first humans created? They did it see death for another 900 years after they ate the fruit.

God taught them to speak and just explained the concept of death, simple. It is the only reasonable way they could have been talking to each other and understood death. Again, god wouldn't say a word they wouldn't understand. For example, would you be talking to someone and throw a word in they don't know knowing they don't know it? No.

God talked to Adam and Eve in the same language he used on the talking serpent. That was how confused God was, he could not tell the difference between a serpent and Humans. Why? Because creation was very new to Him too.

I think god as defined in the bible would know a snake from a man. Maybe back then there was a universal language, the language of eden i think is mentioned a bit. And actually satan being a snake is possibly a metephor.
So it is not clear what is literal or fabricated what is real or just metaphors in the bible. It is a collections of stories that need special interpretation to make sense.

Don't forget you are only focusing on where possible contradictions are. Most of it is not like this at all.
These are the obvious contradictions beginning with the first book of Genesis. It continues to get worse.
12_13
Posts: 2,575
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2017 10:04:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/29/2017 8:38:30 PM, Harikrish wrote:
And why do you think what a scholar applies in not reasoned or proven?.

I think so every time person doesn"t understand even words or sentences. Or when person doesn"t understand the difference between fact/evidence/proof and opinion or belief. Or when person is illogical.
Composer
Posts: 6,182
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2017 12:56:02 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2017 2:15:52 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/30/2017 3:21:10 AM, Composer wrote:
At 3/16/2017 9:02:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
After creating Adam and Eve. God tells them they can eat from any tree in the garden except one.
Show us where Story book God told this to Eve?
Eve repeated what God said to her when the serpent questioned Eve.
Story book God NEVER said that to Story book Eve!

It was said to Story book Adam alone -

Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "You may surely eat of every tree of the garden,
Gen 2:17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." (ESV Story book)

No mention of ' not touching! '.

Story book Eve didn't exist until later - Gen. 2:22, Story book
Perussi
Posts: 3,687
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2017 4:36:11 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2017 8:52:52 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/30/2017 6:50:35 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/30/2017 6:02:33 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/30/2017 3:28:18 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/30/2017 2:46:40 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/30/2017 1:34:14 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/30/2017 12:24:14 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:33:26 PM, Perussi wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:27:27 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/29/2017 5:02:04 PM, Perussi wrote:
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

He didn't have what he wanted, he had two humans who had sinned.

It is only a sin if the two knew what they were doing was wrong. They had no concept of good and evil before they ate the fruit.

God said in short "hey, see this? do not eat it". They understood language and were commandable, god even said to name the animals. They weren't idiots. They could understand the concept of good and bad.

How many animal nanes are found in Bible named by Adam? Adam couldn't even follow a simple order like don't eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

The bible isn't going to say what he named them, just that he did. He didn't follow it because he failed to not sin. He just failed. I can create complex formulas and i can still sin.

That is why the Bible doesn't make sense. It does even meet the educational standards of a grade four level. After studying the bible you still cannot name the animals or prove trees possess the knowledge of good and evil or even the ability to offer immortality.

That isn't what the bible teaches, it has a purpose, not to educate modernly though, not sure where this came from.

Did God expect man to remain in the stone or Bronze Age? That is why the bible is less relevant today.

It isn't a fvuking textbook.

That is why the bible is less relevant today.

It isn't less relavent at all, it is unlike any other material today.

It is both irrelevant and unlike other trash.

It is very relavent, all of it, but not the parts you are mentioning.

Yet God punished Adam and Eve because he believed in the nonsense he created.

If we are assuming this happened then what makes anything nonsence?

That is the belief of 2 billion Christians who believe God believed the nonsense He created. But Adam, Eve and the talking serpent ignored God and lived to tell their story.

No, why is it nonsence?

1. Talking serpents. Total nonsense.

Either metaphor or supernatural being satan, don't forget the bible calls this serpent satan.

God even describes the talking serpent as a snake.

2. Trees with knowledge of good and evil. Total nonsense.

The tree is not sentient.

The fruits contained knowledge of good and evil. God put this knowledge of good and evil in a tree but not in humans. Absolute rubbish.
But plants are sentient.

https://www.psychologytoday.com...

3. Tree of life give immortality to those who eat of it. Total nonsense.

The bible doesn't say this.

Read your scriptures.
Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and live forever.
More to follow.

K, but if the christian god exists it could be litteral or not still. We don't know how eden or heaven holds. But god as defined in the bible could definately cheat nature.

Now God is a cheater too, great!!!

Note God said if they ate the fruit they would die. But they didn't have the concept of death either because they were the first human creation.

God wouldn't say if you eat this you will die if they didn't understand "die".

They were living in the Garden of Eden where no death was possible or had ever occurred. It even had the tree of life to grant immorality. Remember they were the first humans created.

Stop repeating that, that argument has fallen.
Do you deny Adam and Ever were the first humans created? They did it see death for another 900 years after they ate the fruit.

God taught them to speak and just explained the concept of death, simple. It is the only reasonable way they could have been talking to each other and understood death. Again, god wouldn't say a word they wouldn't understand. For example, would you be talking to someone and throw a word in they don't know knowing they don't know it? No.

God talked to Adam and Eve in the same language he used on the talking serpent. That was how confused God was, he could not tell the difference between a serpent and Humans. Why? Because creation was very new to Him too.

I think god as defined in the bible would know a snake from a man. Maybe back then there was a universal language, the language of eden i think is mentioned a bit. And actually satan being a snake is possibly a metephor.
So it is not clear what is literal or fabricated what is real or just metaphors in the bible. It is a collections of stories that need special interpretation to make sense.

Don't forget you are only focusing on where possible contradictions are. Most of it is not like this at all.
These are the obvious contradictions beginning with the first book of Genesis. It continues to get worse.

When all else fails...

It wasn't back then like it is today and god is god and could litterally do anything he felt like doing. And some of it may be metaphorical. Translations.... Metaphors... Who the heck knows? But i can believe either way. From a scientific perspective the bible makes no sence at all.
Keltron
Posts: 182
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2017 5:23:24 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/16/2017 9:02:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
After creating Adam and Eve. God tells them they can eat from any tree in the garden except one.

Genesis 2:17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die."

What happens when they disobey God and eat the forbidden fruit?

Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life firever.

They become like him and now he does not want them to live forever.

So what does God do? He punishes Adam and Eve for disobeying him.


Genesis 3: 14 So the Lord God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all livestock and all wild animals. You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.
15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring[a] and hers; he will crush[b] your head, and you will strike his heel."
16 To the woman he said, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."
17 To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, "You must not eat from it," "Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow you will eat your foo until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken for dust you are and to dust you will return."

The rest of the bible is about God sending prophets to teach the people what is good and evil and laws they should obey. Why?

Odd that God is asking them to learn the difference between good and evil when he punished Adam and Eve for eating the forbidden fruit because they were desirous of gaining wisdom of good and evil. God was against them learning then in the Garden. Now he sends prophets to teach them and wonders why they are reluctant to learn forgetting he punished them when they wanted to learn.

Genesis 3:6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

Because Adam and Eve gained the knowledge and became like Him, God did not want them to also live forever. So he banished them from the garden and had angels guard the tree of life.

So why did he send his only begotten son Jesus?


John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

But it was God who took away the tree of life so they would not live forever. Now he is offering Jesus to restore what he took away from them Ie the tree of life.

God suffers from circular reasoning/logic. The bible only makes sense if you suffer from the same condition.
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

In short, God is trying to restore his creation back to Paradise which he took away from Adam and Eve for disobeying him by desiring what he wanted them to learn anyways.

The Bible makes sense within its contemporary context. The first part of the OT is foundational mythology, the middle part, that is the stuff form the books of Chronicles and Kings is mostly history, but written with a Judaic bias (Judah versus Israel). The entire OT is compiled from the point of view of the Babylonian exile, which was a real, historical event. The Gospels present a mythological account of Jesus which is written around prophetic themes from the OT. The Pauline books present a fairly accurate account of Christianity's move toward metroplitinism. And Revelation is an apocalyptic criticism of the Roman empire.
Harikrish
Posts: 29,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2017 12:21:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2017 10:04:09 PM, 12_13 wrote:
At 3/29/2017 8:38:30 PM, Harikrish wrote:
And why do you think what a scholar applies in not reasoned or proven?.

I think so every time person doesn"t understand even words or sentences. Or when person doesn"t understand the difference between fact/evidence/proof and opinion or belief. Or when person is illogical.

Try to answer the question. No one asked you for your dumb opinions.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.