Signs of the End Times - Part Two
Quote:
I suggest Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew to learn a bit about the history of the text Christians deem holy. Luke was most likely written a generation or two after the time of Christ. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Is there a resource you can recommend as an alternative to Strong's? |
Quote:
You see, Abraham sent Hagar away—he divorced her, it was a violent act. Abraham sent a mother and her child into the desert to die. Deu 24:1 If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, So as Abraham he SENDS her from his house—so the English uses the word divorce. Children suffer immensely—it is violence. So it is like Amnon—love turns to hatred---- 2Sa_13:1 In the course of time, Amnon son of David fell in love with Tamar, the beautiful sister of Absalom son of David. After the sex act--2Sa_13:15 Then Amnon hated her with intense hatred. In fact, he hated her more than he had loved her. Amnon said to her, "Get up and get out!" So Amnon married his half-sister then divorced her---"Get up and get out!" In actual fact this was rape---violence---this was the sort of violence in the days of Noah. |
Quote:
I do not think Paul even knows the word he was going for was עֶרְוָה, that would mean he has the ability to actually 'know' anything, which he clearly does not...........:rolleyes: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
We can see how he approaches the issue in post 3810. Notice how he takes his conclusion and interpretation and works backwards from there. He's not reading what the Bible says and building his interpretation upon that, but backtracking from the conclusion he wants to reach. The underlying Hebrew is not a source of revelation for him, but a tool to use sparingly when it can support his extant beliefs. He doesn't really care what the Bible says about divorce, only how he can use its words to support what he wants to believe. If he is divorced, as I suspect, he may be trying to find a way to turn his failure to move on to a new relationship into a virtue, much like the "Men Going Their Own Way" movement. One interesting part about his post is that he's so blatant about backtracking. I've heard plenty of sermons over the years and most backtrackers at least have the competence to structure their statements so it looks like their preconceived conclusion was derived from scripture, instead of the other way around. Paul however lacks the subtlety and communication skill to realize this is even advisable, let alone do it. I think it's one of the reasons he has no followers. |
Quote:
Taking the life of Adam and Eve as an absolute rule about what is and is not permissible would ban eyeglasses, IVF, crop rotation and anything else not explicitly permitted in later laws. If you're going to sincerely use Adam and Eve as proof that polygamy, polyandry and polyamory are all verboten by God, then log off your computer as Adam and Eve didn't have one of those either. Besides, the two creation accounts differ on when God created a spouse for Adam. Did you ever hear of Lilith? |
Quote:
These immortals sure do have some odd sexual hang-ups. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Or is it supernaturally? Hard to tell what is being claimed. Oops. Anything being hard is not allowed. No need to lock up your |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
After all, it would not be much fun to be an immortal person unless such a person could have some fun once in a while. ;) |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Just testing to see if I can post.
Why is my name faded? What does that mean? |
Quote:
|
Part 2: This time even more vague and vacuous
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Heck, being properly immortal would open up whole new realms of possibility. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Signs of the End Times - Part Two
Quote:
I'm also thinking of the tomb colonies in the game "Fallen London." |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...8#post11564708
My point here is that your god is the inferior to Smith. Smith, for all his faults (and there were many) is not AS despicable as your god because Smith didn't murder children. So, if you're going to follow a delusion, it would be better to follow Smith than your god who murdered pretty much everyone. |
Paul now that we are in a new thread I have my two standard and as yet unanswered questions for you:
1. Why should I accept the existence of your deity to the exclusion of all others? Please provide your evidence; and 2. If Yahweh is against multiple marriage and sex outside of what we consider normal marriage (ie sex with slaves), why are several biblical characters who did just that considered to be righteous? (Ex. Abraham and Jacob) |
Quote:
Genesis 38:13 It was told to Tamar, “Behold, your father-in-law is going up to Timnah to shear his sheep.” 14 So she removed her widow’s garments and covered herself with a veil, and wrapped herself, and sat in the gateway of Enaim, which is on the road to Timnah; for she saw that Shelah had grown up, and she had not been given to him as a wife. 15 When Judah saw her, he thought she was a harlot, for she had covered her face. 16 So he turned aside to her by the road, and said, “Here now, let me come in to you”; for he did not know that she was his daughter-in-law. And she said, “What will you give me, that you may come in to me?” 17 He said, therefore, “I will send you a young goat from the flock.” She said, moreover, “Will you give a pledge until you send it?” 18 He said, “What pledge shall I give you?” And she said, “Your seal and your cord, and your staff that is in your hand.” So he gave them to her and went in to her, and she conceived by him. 19 Then she arose and departed, and removed her veil and put on her widow’s garments ... |
Quote:
So presently he is displayed as just another god. But because I have the evidence of his sovereignty, I proclaim his word in expectation of his revelation which I get from the Scriptures. The righteousness of Abraham, was displayed in his readiness to offer Isaac up as a sacrifice with regards to the command of God. His taking of Hagar as a wife was a mistake, having listened to his wife. The traditions of that time were not in line with what God revealed through the laws that God gave to Moses—even in those laws Moses retained some of the traditions. So what is understood, where there is no law, there is no sin—it was the laws that were given by God that determined the behaviour of Israel. So Jacob was deceived, and what transpired was a marriage to another sister as well as the sisters’ slaves. The tradition was that a slave belonged to a person, so the children of the slave became the property of the owner. But with Abraham, a subsequent law was introduced to curtail this practice—( Lev 18:9 "'Do not have sexual relations with your sister, either your father's daughter or your mother's daughter, whether she was born in the same home or elsewhere. ) As with Jacob, this law was subsequently promulgated—( Lev 18:18 "'Do not take your wife's sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living. ) So the laws exposed what the patriarchs did, did not entirely match up to what God intended, so God had to give laws to direct the behaviour of man. So now Jesus comes and declares the perfect plan for marriage---but the Churches reject that decree and perpetuate the sin of adultery. Many of the people that I confront on this issue of divorce are not aware of this decree, so the Churches have failed to carry out the mandate of Jesus. Yet it is so clearly stated. So when the time comes for this practice to be ended, it will bring about a great degree of sorrow—but it is essential in order to curtail future adultery. So the END times--will be the END of sin |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Genesis 4:13 And Cain said unto the Lord, My punishment is greater than I can bear. 14 Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me. 15 And the Lord said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the Lord set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.Who were these people who might find and kill Cain after he murdered his brother Abel? God said, evidently, if anyone kills Cain, I will take seven lives in return, to avenge him. So who were all these people? ETA Moreover, a person who is a vagabond is not about to remain in one place long enough to marry his sister and have enough people as offspring to populate a city which he built himself. These are not the actions of a "vagabond". The solution to the conundrums of Cain is evidently that the ancient sources contain two different versions of the Cain saga. In one he is a criminal vagabond. In the other he is a founder-patriarch. A hint, to illustrate this. Compare the names of the descendants of Cain, and those of Seth. The list of names is more or less the same. The lists are duplicates: two versions of the same myth. There's lots of that sort of thing in the Bible, as in other myth cycles. It's not a literally true story, Paul. Far from it. |
Quote:
Sent from my SM-A300FU using Tapatalk |
Quote:
Quote:
If not, you have no more authority to do anything or influence anyone than any other fanboy, or book reviewer. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
It is more likely that the so-called laws of Moses are a far later creation of a society, and given the authority of a legendary creator without regard to earlier myths and legends. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
So is the decree for what to do with a false prophet. Quote:
And you are looking forward to all those sinners being punished, aren't you? |
Signs of the End Times - Part Two
Quote:
Creationists have tackled this problem. The general consensus appears to be that the incest prohibition didn't come about until fallen man had drifted far enough from the genetic perfection of Adam and Eve for incest to produce offspring with genetic disorders. Debate rages on if this was the result of random mutation accumulation over time or God explicitly cursing fallen man for the sin of Eve. Both sides make compelling arguments, for creationists. Some of the discussions I've heard but rarely seen in print got into some weird territory with speculation about if the incest prohibition would be lifted if genetic perfection could be restored. Creationists can get REALLY creepy and some seem to have a "thing" for thinking about ways they could bone their close relatives. |
Quote:
You should know what is done with false prophets those who blaspheme. I am looking forward to sinners coming to repentance. Jesus came to set straight that which the previous generation got wrong! |
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:48 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-24, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.