ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 9th August 2018, 06:44 PM   #121
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 58,724
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
well, as they say, lets work the problem!

Lets think of all the ways that someone can have two "fathers," I can think of three right off the bat!
In today's modern society, yeah. But in the ancient Jewish law, do you really think the idea of divorce and re-marriage would have been socially acceptible? Isn't there a law about what happens when a husband dies (sin of Onan)? Let's "work the problem" about all these ways that someone can have two "fathers", and see whether they are actually feasible in that society at that time.

And also, this is the male lineage of Jesus we're talking about! Surely there's a motivation there to actually be accurate, especially in a holy book inspired by God.

Quote:
And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was said by some to be the son of Heli, Which was the son of Matthat, probably, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which might have been the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph, Which was the son of Mattathias or maybe Hiram, which was the son of Amos but some say the son of Levi, which might have been the son of Naum...
__________________
Wake up, you cardboard.
- Pixie of Key
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th August 2018, 06:50 PM   #122
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,864
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
In today's modern society, yeah. But in the ancient Jewish law, do you really think the idea of divorce and re-marriage would have been socially acceptible? Isn't there a law about what happens when a husband dies (sin of Onan)? Let's "work the problem" about all these ways that someone can have two "fathers", and see whether they are actually feasible in that society at that time.

And also, this is the male lineage of Jesus we're talking about! Surely there's a motivation there to actually be accurate, especially in a holy book inspired by God.
Yeah, lets work the problem, shall we?

I did not mention divorce at all.... hmmmm....

And y'all just claimed that it was the "male lineage"? where y'all getting that from?

Guessing the same place y'all got divorce from?

protip: I ain't a fundamentalist, and atheist biblical fundamental interpretation is about as exciting to me as splitter fundamental interpretation, you dig?
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th August 2018, 07:21 PM   #123
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 58,724
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
I did not mention divorce at all.... hmmmm....
Very well. What were the three ways that you mentioned? Let's examine those.

Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
And y'all just claimed that it was the "male lineage"? where y'all getting that from?
The Bible. I'm getting it from the Bible.

Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
protip: I ain't a fundamentalist, and atheist biblical fundamental interpretation is about as exciting to me as splitter fundamental interpretation, you dig?
I'm interested in your interpretation.
__________________
Wake up, you cardboard.
- Pixie of Key
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th August 2018, 07:39 PM   #124
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,864
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Very well. What were the three ways that you mentioned? Let's examine those.

The Bible. I'm getting it from the Bible.

I'm interested in your interpretation.
Cools, we got past the whole made up divorce thing.

The Bible. Do me a super solid and give me a, you know, quote? I don’t remember seeing that.

And let’s recall that our correspondents are trying to convince... well... folks like the big dog that there are contradictions, something that has singularly failed to happen, praise be to Christ
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.

Last edited by The Big Dog; 9th August 2018 at 07:49 PM.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th August 2018, 07:55 PM   #125
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 58,724
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Cools, we got past the whole made up divorce thing.
Again, what are the three ways that you could immediately think of for a man to have two fathers?

Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
The Bible. Do me a super solid and give me a, you know, quote? I don’t remember seeing that.
Quote:
David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias; And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa; And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias; And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias; And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias; And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon: And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel; And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor; And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud; And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob; And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. Matthew 1:6-16

And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli, Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph, Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge, Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda, Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri, Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er, Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim, Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David. Luke 3:23-31
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
And let’s recall that our correspondents are trying to convince... well... folks like the big dog that there are contradictions, something that has singularly failed to happen.
Yep, so long as you keep obfuscating, refusing to answer questions, and deflecting, you will be able to continue to claim that.
__________________
Wake up, you cardboard.
- Pixie of Key
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th August 2018, 08:43 PM   #126
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,864
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Again, what are the three ways that you could immediately think of for a man to have two fathers


Yep, so long as you keep obfuscating, refusing to answer questions, and deflecting, you will be able to continue to claim that.
Looks at so many words.

Gonna guess that you quoted all those words in lieu of proving your claim....

Looks at words...

Ugh, so many words....

Nope, does not support your claim about “male lineage.”

Cool. Chuckled about the false claim about obfuscating refusing blah blah blah.

ETA: oh golly, missed the part where you mentioned the three ways, etc etc, I gave five (5) in post 120, don’t worry about it
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.

Last edited by The Big Dog; 9th August 2018 at 08:49 PM.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th August 2018, 08:59 PM   #127
Cheetah
Graduate Poster
 
Cheetah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,020
TBD, are you saying there are no contradictions in the bible?


Do you not know of any contradictions?
__________________
"... when you dig my grave, could you make it shallow so that I can feel the rain" - DMB
Cheetah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th August 2018, 09:21 PM   #128
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,864
Originally Posted by Cheetah View Post
TBD, are you saying there are no contradictions in the bible?


Do you not know of any contradictions?
I hear tell of them, have not seen any, certainly not that amount to a hill of beans. Of course, as pointed out previously, I ain’t a fundamentalist, like most antitheists.

Look forward to discussing what ever people want to bring up, tho.
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th August 2018, 10:24 PM   #129
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 58,724
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Looks at so many words.

Gonna guess that you quoted all those words in lieu of proving your claim....

Looks at words...

Ugh, so many words....
Those words are directly copied from the King James Bible. I guess this is the first time you're reading them.

Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Nope, does not support your claim about “male lineage.”
Then what do you think these Biblical passages are demonstrating? It sure looks like a male lineage to me. Two different ones tracing a male lineage between Jesus and David. This was important because Jesus couldn't fulfiil the prophecy of the Messiah unless he was a descendent of David (eg. Zechariah 12:10).

Can you please explain what these two passages are, if not male lineages?

Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
ETA: oh golly, missed the part where you mentioned the three ways, etc etc, I gave five (5) in post 120, don’t worry about it
Okay, my apologies, I had missed that. Let's see...

Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Sure. There are biological fathers, adoptive fathers, stepfathers, fathers in law, and Levitical fathers under Jewish law.
Okay, I have questions.

1. Was adoption a usual practice amongst the Hebrews at the time to the extent that an adopted father was equivalent to a biological father in both a legal and a religious sense?

2. Was divorce and re-marriage also a usual practice at the time? Or was it as Luke 16:18 suggests, adultery?

3. Is a man considered to be a direct descendant of the father-in-law?

4. I cannot find a definition of the term "Levitical father". Can you point me towards an accurate and appropriate definition?

Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
I think based on the language that one was his biological father and one was his father in law!
From the language? The language of Matthew says "Jacob begat Joseph". Do you have some alternative definition of the word "begat" that the rest of us don't know about? The language of Luke says "Joseph, which was the son of Heli". Are sons-in-law routinely referred to as "sons" in genealogies where you're from? Remember, we're not only talking about a legal document but a religious one, describing the Messiah's descent from David.

Furthermore, the genealogy in Matthew contains 27 generations from David to Jesus. The genealogy in Luke contains 42. By a generous interpretation of one generation being twenty years, this means that Matthew has 540 years separating David and Jesus, while Luke has 840. That's three hundred years of difference between what you suggest is the father-in-law and the father. Can you explain that one away? Please try to do so as condescendingly as possible.
__________________
Wake up, you cardboard.
- Pixie of Key

Last edited by arthwollipot; 9th August 2018 at 11:19 PM.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th August 2018, 11:15 PM   #130
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 58,724
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
I hear tell of them, have not seen any, certainly not that amount to a hill of beans. Of course, as pointed out previously, I ain’t a fundamentalist, like most antitheists.

Look forward to discussing what ever people want to bring up, tho.
The Skeptics Annotated Bible contains a list of 531 contradictions taken from the King James Bible, almost all of which are, in my opinion, trivial or spurious. But there are a few good ones. How many women came to Jesus' tomb, and at what time of day? Whom did they meet when they arrived there? Was the tomb closed or already open when they arrived? Different gospel accounts provide widely different answers.

All this is minor though, compared to the genealogy problem, particularly the discrepancy of years between the two. That, in my opinion, just cannot be reconciled or handwaved away.
__________________
Wake up, you cardboard.
- Pixie of Key
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th August 2018, 11:27 PM   #131
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,163
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
well, as they say, lets work the problem!

Lets think of all the ways that someone can have two "fathers," I can think of three right off the bat!
Try to focus a little, please. Don't scatter. The contradiction has nothing to do with what matters to establish the Davidic lineage of Jesus whether Mary or Joseph, but with the fact that two different biological fathers of Joseph are quoted, Jacob and Heli. And two different lines to Jesus from David had been established. This is biiogically and genealogically impossible.

Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Sure. There are biological fathers, adoptive fathers, stepfathers, fathers in law, and Levitical fathers under Jewish law.
Yes, you can invent what you want. But genealogically one single father is relevant. And in Jesus' genealogy there are two. They are two different genealogies.

Since the Bible is inspired by God, one must think that God was on vacation that day.

So he also did the day of Jesus' birth. According to some parts of the gospels at the time of Herod and according to others during a census that never existed at the time of Herod --really never. This impliy that Jesus was born in a lapsus of some years (10). Poor Mary! What a long labour!

Neither do the evangelists agree on who saw the empty tomb first, who judged Jesus and other "unimportant" details that clearly reveal that God took many vacations and that, in God's absences, evangelists made up anything that came to mind without thinking about what someone had written before.

Last edited by David Mo; 10th August 2018 at 12:04 AM.
David Mo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th August 2018, 11:39 PM   #132
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,163
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
The Skeptics Annotated Bible contains a list of 531 contradictions taken from the King James Bible, almost all of which are, in my opinion, trivial or spurious. But there are a few good ones. How many women came to Jesus' tomb, and at what time of day? Whom did they meet when they arrived there? Was the tomb closed or already open when they arrived? Different gospel accounts provide widely different answers.

All this is minor though, compared to the genealogy problem, particularly the discrepancy of years between the two. That, in my opinion, just cannot be reconciled or handwaved away.
Thank you for the link. It is useful. I am sure the Big Dog is searching for 531 ways to explain what cannot be explained. His spiritual Director --is that what you say in English? -- must be terrified.
David Mo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 05:27 AM   #133
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 12,068
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
I hear tell of them, have not seen any, certainly not that amount to a hill of beans. Of course, as pointed out previously, I ain’t a fundamentalist, like most antitheists.

Look forward to discussing what ever people want to bring up, tho.
Since you constantly change your religious beliefs to suit whatever you want them to be, therefore you are quite unable to observe the numerous biblical contradictions.
__________________
On 28 JUN 2018 'yuno44907' said: "I am god and you have to help me."
On 03 JUL 2018 'yuno44907' got banned from the Forum.

A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 06:07 AM   #134
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,864
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
Try to focus a little, please. Don't scatter. The contradiction has nothing to do with what matters to establish the Davidic lineage of Jesus whether Mary or Joseph, but with the fact that two different biological fathers of Joseph are quoted, Jacob and Heli. And two different lines to Jesus from David had been established. This is biiogically and genealogically impossible.
Biological? One of our good friends in this very thread quoted the relevant sections of the Holy Scripture, and I don't see that word. Did we miss it, or is that a useful invention?

Fellas, it ain't like y'all are the first to notice that the two genealogies are not the same. This issue has been discussed and harmonized for at least 1800 years!
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 06:11 AM   #135
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 18,092
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Biological? One of our good friends in this very thread quoted the relevant sections of the Holy Scripture, and I don't see that word. Did we miss it, or is that a useful invention?

Fellas, it ain't like y'all are the first to notice that the two genealogies are not the same. This issue has been discussed and harmonized for at least 1800 years!
No. Christians simply came up with excuses, and the issue certainly has not been resolved for 1800 years.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 06:13 AM   #136
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,864
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post

1. Was adoption a usual practice amongst the Hebrews at the time to the extent that an adopted father was equivalent to a biological father in both a legal and a religious sense?

2. Was divorce and re-marriage also a usual practice at the time? Or was it as Luke 16:18 suggests, adultery?

3. Is a man considered to be a direct descendant of the father-in-law?

4. I cannot find a definition of the term "Levitical father". Can you point me towards an accurate and appropriate definition?
.
.

well, right off the bat you are missing the point: Divorce common? You know what was common? Death.

Get started here, dig in, and show me that they are contradictions

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yibbum
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.

Last edited by The Big Dog; 10th August 2018 at 07:21 AM.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 07:43 AM   #137
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,864
To humor myself, I took a gander at The "Skeptics" Annotated Bible and semi randomly looked at a claim, this one:

Was Jesus born in a house or a manger?

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/manger.html

One story tells the story of Jesus's birth, the other tells the story of the three wise men who visited Jesus after he was born. One would think that would immediately set off alarm bells in a "skeptic," no? These are two different events taking place in two different times! Doesn't that piss you off about the "skeptics" Bible.

me: My buddy's kid was born in a cab on the side of the highway!
"skeptic": Oh really.
me: yeah, I had to go to his house and bring their luggage to the hospital because they forgot it because they were in such a hurry.
"skeptic": why did you go to the hospital, you said she gave birth in a cab? Logic, therefore there is no God Child.
everyone else on earth:
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 07:48 AM   #138
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,163
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Biological? One of our good friends in this very thread quoted the relevant sections of the Holy Scripture, and I don't see that word. Did we miss it, or is that a useful invention?
For a Jew of that time it was not necessary to specify. Precision would arrive when filiation were not biological. Therefore, and as the only exception, it is specified that Jesus was the son of Joseph "as believed" (Luke 3:23) and that he was the (biological) son of Mary, not of Joseph (Matthew 1:16). Matthew mentions other women when there is some anomaly. Meanwhile, and in all other cases that can be contrasted with biblical lineages, "tou uiou" means "made by" and has a biological sense of lineage or blood.

But the problem still remains, because if we are talking about a genealogy, there is no point in specifying two lines. The genealogy of the King of France is the same, be it the matrilineal or patrilineal ties or the secondary route. The evangelists contradict each other and there is nothing more to say. "Having come of the seed of David according to flesh" (Rom 1,3)

Stop making twisted distinctions, please, they are pure Jesuitism of the worst tradition. As long as there is no reason to doubt, bread is called bread and wine, wine.

ADDED: And more funy: there is a difference of 14 names between the two lists. God didn't know how to count

Last edited by David Mo; 10th August 2018 at 08:00 AM.
David Mo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 08:00 AM   #139
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,864
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
For a Jew of that time it was not necessary to specify. Precision would arrive when filiation were not biological. Therefore, and as the only exception, it is specified that Jesus was the son of Joseph "as believed" (Luke 3:23) and that he was the (biological) son of Mary, not of Joseph (Matthew 1:16). Matthew mentions other women when there is some anomaly. Meanwhile, and in all other cases that can be contrasted with biblical lineages, "tou uiou" means "made by" and has a biological sense of lineage or blood.

But the problem still remains, because if we are talking about a genealogy, there is no point in specifying two lines. The genealogy of the King of France is the same, be it the matrilineal or patrilineal ties or the secondary route. The evangelists contradict each other and there is nothing more to say.

Stop making twisted distinctions, please, they are pure Jesuitism of the worst tradition. As long as there is no reason to doubt, bread is called bread and wine, wine.
To sum up, Biological does not appear. Thanks.

Next, "But the problem still remains, because if we are talking about a genealogy, there is no point in specifying two lines." Unless there is, as I have already pointed out, where one author is tracing one line to communicate to his Jewish audience, and another is tracing another line to communicate to his Gentile audience.

Example: On July 4, Charlie wants to show how American he is so he brags about how his ancestors came over on the Mayflower. A couple of months later after a couple of Mass, he brags how his ancestors were at the first Oktoberfest. A "skeptic" would accuse him of lying and declare there is no God beer.

A reasonable person would point out that those do not contradict at all, because one can have ancestors in both the US and in Munich.

It is called Logic.

Proust!
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.

Last edited by The Big Dog; 10th August 2018 at 08:03 AM. Reason: I know it is Prosit, but not changing it makes me laugh
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 08:03 AM   #140
sylvan8798
Master Poster
 
sylvan8798's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,800
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
1. Was adoption a usual practice amongst the Hebrews at the time to the extent that an adopted father was equivalent to a biological father in both a legal and a religious sense?

2. Was divorce and re-marriage also a usual practice at the time? Or was it as Luke 16:18 suggests, adultery?

3. Is a man considered to be a direct descendant of the father-in-law?
In Matthew, Jacob begat Joseph, meaning that Jacob was Joseph's biological father. In Luke, Joseph is described as "the son of Heli". Heli was Mary's father, but he had 2 daughters and no sons. Since he didn't have a son, Joseph was his "son" for inheritance/genealogical purposes. After that, the line described in Luke is Heli's.

Quote:

Furthermore, the genealogy in Matthew contains 27 generations from David to Jesus. The genealogy in Luke contains 42. By a generous interpretation of one generation being twenty years, this means that Matthew has 540 years separating David and Jesus, while Luke has 840. That's three hundred years of difference between what you suggest is the father-in-law and the father. Can you explain that one away? Please try to do so as condescendingly as possible.
Stretchy, but not impossible. Don't do the math that way.
__________________
DoYouEverWonder - Engineers and architects don't have to design steel buildings not to collapse from gravity. They already conquered gravity when they built it.

- Professional Wastrel
sylvan8798 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 08:19 AM   #141
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,864
Originally Posted by sylvan8798 View Post
Stretchy, but not impossible. Don't do the math that way.
There is indeed no need to do the math at all, because Luke basically gives us the rough dates
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 08:20 AM   #142
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,163
Originally Posted by sylvan8798 View Post
In Matthew, Jacob begat Joseph, meaning that Jacob was Joseph's biological father. In Luke, Joseph is described as "the son of Heli". Heli was Mary's father, but he had 2 daughters and no sons. Since he didn't have a son, Joseph was his "son" for inheritance/genealogical purposes. After that, the line described in Luke is Heli's.
You have invented a story without any support. If you invent biographies you can made a ménage à trois. Uau!. I like this. More morbid. And the contradiction disappears also!

Let us be serious, please.
David Mo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 08:23 AM   #143
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,163
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
To sum up, Biological does not appear. Thanks.
There is no mention of Joseph being cross-eyed either.
Youre welcome.
David Mo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 08:28 AM   #144
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,864
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
There is no mention of Joseph being cross-eyed either.
Youre welcome.
Oh dear, is that another claim that you are making? Lets hope it does not prove to be false like your biological claim that took place not so long ago, hmmm?
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 08:28 AM   #145
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,163
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Next, "But the problem still remains, because if we are talking about a genealogy, there is no point in specifying two lines." Unless there is, as I have already pointed out, where one author is tracing one line to communicate to his Jewish audience, and another is tracing another line to communicate to his Gentile audience.

Example: On July 4, Charlie wants to show how American he is so he brags about how his ancestors came over on the Mayflower. A couple of months later after a couple of Mass, he brags how his ancestors were at the first Oktoberfest. A "skeptic" would accuse him of lying and declare there is no God beer.

A reasonable person would point out that those do not contradict at all, because one can have ancestors in both the US and in Munich.

It is called Logic.
Sorry, we are speaking of a Divine-Royal Genealogy dictated by God himself. The audience was the same: the believers in the Gospel of the Lord. Not much of a joke.

This time your jesuitism was really bad. You lose your faculties or your spiritual Director is tired of your games.
David Mo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 08:37 AM   #146
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,163
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Oh dear, is that another claim that you are making?
No. I am parodying your imaginative efforts to demand precisions that have nothing to do with the story we have in fron with the only goal to puff out clouds of smoke.

No dear. Both Matthew and LuKe are speaking of to have according to the flesh. Like Paul --you know, Paul of Tarsus. Now tell us about The Magic Mountain (fine novel), if you like. But the rest of us are talking about the Gospels. Come home, please.
David Mo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 08:39 AM   #147
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,864
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
Sorry, we are speaking of a Divine-Royal Genealogy dictated by God himself. The audience was the same: the believers in the Gospel of the Lord. Not much of a joke.

This time your jesuitism was really bad. You lose your faculties or your spiritual Director is tired of your games.
Ah, appeal to fundamentalism, of course.

And now we are being regaled by tales that the "The audience was the same: the believers in the Gospel of the Lord." Well, that is convenient, perhaps we should broaden that even farther, NO? The audince was the same: people! There, I am doing logic!

But if we actually focus, rather than setting up strawcastles like you have done, we notice something, something that may be important.

Hmmm, Matthew issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect while Luke was written in...

David, what language was Luke originally written in, and can you conceive of how that fact might be important to groups smaller than "the believers in the Gospel of the Lord" or "people"?
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.

Last edited by The Big Dog; 10th August 2018 at 08:48 AM.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 08:48 AM   #148
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,163
Let us make one thing clear: it is not the only time that each evangelist pulls out the story of Jesus in his own way, incurring contradictions with others. They don't even seem to really care. Each of them probably wrote for a limited core of Diaspora believers who received little news from the rest. And with some suspicion too.This allowed them to take advantage of local traditions and retouch things to his liking when necessary. Especially since there is often no a single editor for every gospel. But it is grotesque that in the second century a few narratives became canonical (counting on Revelation and the letters) that present many contradictions in terms of the narrative and ideological content. The conclusion is obvious: true believers give a damn about the rational coherence of what they believe. They believe because it is absurd and make their foolishness a claim. Warning! I don't say it myself. This is what Paul of Tarsus says, who is an unappealable saint.
David Mo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 08:59 AM   #149
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,163
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Ah, appeal to fundamentalism, of course.

And now we are being regaled by tales that the "The audience was the same: the believers in the Gospel of the Lord." Well, that is convenient, perhaps we should broaden that even farther, NO? The audince was the same: people! There, I am doing logic!

But if we actually focus, rather than setting up strawcastles like you have done, we notice something, something that may be important.

Hmmm, Matthew issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect while Luke was written in...

David, what language was Luke originally written in, and can you conceive of how that fact might be important to groups smaller than "the believers in the Gospel of the Lord" or "people"?
Speculation again. The gospels were written in Greek in the context of the Diaspora on the basis of the Septuagint ( I am not sure of the name in English). They present important local variables, but also a common body. The evangelist is thinking of writing for the entire community of believers --it is not a text for pagans--and he intends to write the story of what happened in Palestine. It is not the genealogy of his town that he counts, but a fact that occurred in Palestine in a specific lineage that is the basis of his beliefs. If in doing so it adds local traditions (very possible) that does not make those traditions any less contrary to each other.

Of course fundamentalism. The only Christian who can be upset about contradictions is the one who thinks that there are no mistakes in the Bible. Apparently a guy named Big Dog is among them.

Last edited by David Mo; 10th August 2018 at 09:02 AM.
David Mo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 09:06 AM   #150
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,864
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
Speculation again. The gospels were written in Greek in the context of the Diaspora on the basis of the Septuaquinta ( I don't know the name in English). They present important local variables, but also a common body. The evangelist is thinking of writing for the entire community of believers --it is not a text for pagans--and he intends to write the story of what happened in Palestine. It is not the genealogy of his town that he counts, but a fact that occurred in Palestine in a specific lineage that is the basis of his beliefs. If in doing so it adds local traditions (very possible) that does not make those traditions any less contrary to each other.

Of course fundamentalism. The only Christian who can be upset about contradictions is the one who thinks that there are no mistakes in the Bible. Apparently a guy named Big Dog is among them.
I am amazed that everything in this post is wrong.

Matthew was originally written in the local vernacular to communicate to the Jewish people.
Luke was written in Greek to the Gentile audience, heck lots of them WERE pagans. yet we read "-it is not a text for pagans."

And so it goes folks....
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 09:17 AM   #151
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,163
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
I am amazed that everything in this post is wrong.

Matthew was originally written in the local vernacular to communicate to the Jewish people.
Luke was written in Greek to the Gentile audience, heck lots of them WERE pagans. yet we read "-it is not a text for pagans."

And so it goes folks....
I don't know your sources. Even in Wipedia the most common statement:

Quote:
The four canonical gospels, like the rest of the New Testament, were written in Greek,[7] Mark probably c. AD 66–70,[8] Matthew and Luke around AD 85–90,[9] and John AD 90–110.[10] Despite the traditional ascriptions, all four are anonymous, and none were written by eyewitnesses.[11]
Review your sources, please.
In any case, the language and the place they have written is secondary.

What is written is in contradiction with each other. Not only on this issue but on many others. Some of which have been cited. Whether it was for localism or for some other reason, the result is there. And it reached the absurd with the canonization of the Gospels and their attribution to a single infallible source.
And if you pretend that the Bible is infallible you are a fundamentalist. If you don't intend to, I don't know what you're doing here right now. Today's exegetes, including Catholics, know very well that there are errors and contradictions and seek to explain them as they can. They generally say they are interpolations, like the genealogies of Matthew and Luke.

Last edited by David Mo; 10th August 2018 at 09:24 AM.
David Mo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 09:31 AM   #152
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,864
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
I don't know your sources. Even in Wipedia the most common statement:

Review your sources, please.
Will do. My source is Saint Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, Father of the Church.

Quote:
Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him. Afterwards, John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon His breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia.

2. These have all declared to us that there is one God, Creator of heaven and earth, announced by the law and the prophets; and one Christ the Son of God. If any one do not agree to these truths, he despises the companions of the Lord; nay more, he despises Christ Himself the Lord; yea, he despises the Father also, and stands self-condemned, resisting and opposing his own salvation, as is the case with all heretics.
Sounds like someone ought to get busy fixing Wikipedia, no?
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 10:00 AM   #153
Hlafordlaes
Disorder of Kilopi
 
Hlafordlaes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: State of Flux
Posts: 8,721
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
That would appear to be your insistence, would it not, how when vexed you state a hypothetical (perhaps using the settings, moment and mood, to reflect your vexation) and then expect your opponent to stammer out some weak comment (in light of the settings, moment and mood) "to try to define what good evidence is (that is if they have any pulse) which you will use to vex "them in every court of opinion we face off in thenceforth."

When in reality any reasonable response would be to point out how utterly ludicrous your hypothetical is even in light of the settings, moment and mood.

Great thread, particularly in light of the the settings, moment and mood.
By your own criteria, you failed the first time you responded, contradicting the claim made above. Once again: declarative claims, historical or contemporary, bear no weight unless corroborated by evidence. Got any? Nope? In fact, you argue points relating to matters of faith, a special case of preferential reasoning that is purely declarative, thus the faith. What you do not have is any sort of observer-independent1 test for one iota of faith-based claims.

1 (Skip any Heisenberg nonsense.) This refers to observations that yield the same data regardless of observer. Example: Anyone picking up a stone and dropping it will see it fall. Fact of life for all beings, a universal law. In contrast, there is an historical claim in your faith regarding a certain stone with laws on it. Not only can it not be found -- to be expected for a single unique stone -- but there are no independent cases anywhere, ever of other stones with those laws that are not man-made. So, that stone was particular to a time and place in history, and we lack the physical evidence: a story to be taken on faith. Its laws have no universality, no underpinning, no foundation in any sense, making the beliefs themselves particular to a time and place. Not a universal truth, then. Oops. Sounds tribal and arbitrary... because it is.
__________________
Driftwood on an empty shore of the sea of meaninglessness. Irrelevant, weightless, inconsequential moment of existential hubris on the fast track to oblivion. Spends that time playing video games.
Summer Ongoing penance for overeating: His real name is Count Douchenozzle von Stenchfahrter und Lichtendicks. - shemp
Hlafordlaes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 10:28 AM   #154
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,864
Originally Posted by Hlafordlaes View Post
By your own criteria, you failed the first time you responded, contradicting the claim made above. Once again: declarative claims, historical or contemporary, bear no weight unless corroborated by evidence. Got any? Nope? In fact, you argue points relating to matters of faith, a special case of preferential reasoning that is purely declarative, thus the faith. What you do not have is any sort of observer-independent1 test for one iota of faith-based claims.

1 (Skip any Heisenberg nonsense.) This refers to observations that yield the same data regardless of observer. Example: Anyone picking up a stone and dropping it will see it fall. Fact of life for all beings, a universal law. In contrast, there is an historical claim in your faith regarding a certain stone with laws on it. Not only can it not be found -- to be expected for a single unique stone -- but there are no independent cases anywhere, ever of other stones with those laws that are not man-made. So, that stone was particular to a time and place in history, and we lack the physical evidence: a story to be taken on faith. Its laws have no universality, no underpinning, no foundation in any sense, making the beliefs themselves particular to a time and place. Not a universal truth, then. Oops. Sounds tribal and arbitrary... because it is.
Golly, so many wrong, fallacious and absolute assumptions in there. Lets break a few down, shall we? "Anyone picking up a stone and dropping it will see it fall. Fact of life for all beings, a universal law."

Universal law? How about if one is on the ISS, how about if one is blind, how about if the stone is pumice and i am standing underwater. Wrong.

Now something about a stone with those laws? Not even sure what you are talking about. A stone with laws written on it and you claim "but there are no independent cases anywhere, ever of other stones with those laws that are not man-made." There are lots of stones with laws written on them, heck to the Louvre and take a gander at some.

“Anu and Enlil ordained Hammurabi, a devout prince who fears the gods, to demonstrate justice within the land, to destroy evil and wickedness, to stop the mighty exploiting the weak, to rise like Shamash over the mass of humanity, illuminating the land …”
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 10:56 AM   #155
sylvan8798
Master Poster
 
sylvan8798's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,800
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
You have invented a story without any support. If you invent biographies you can made a ménage à trois. Uau!. I like this. More morbid. And the contradiction disappears also!

Let us be serious, please.
Correction: I did not invent it. I'm not all that knowledgeable on biblical matters. Someone else came up with this explanation.
__________________
DoYouEverWonder - Engineers and architects don't have to design steel buildings not to collapse from gravity. They already conquered gravity when they built it.

- Professional Wastrel
sylvan8798 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 11:32 AM   #156
sylvan8798
Master Poster
 
sylvan8798's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,800
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Now something about a stone with those laws? Not even sure what you are talking about.
Moses' tablet, I presume?
Quote:
A stone with laws written on it and you claim "but there are no independent cases anywhere, ever of other stones with those laws that are not man-made." There are lots of stones with laws written on them, heck to the Louvre and take a gander at some.
Wait, were those made by gods as well? Where is the evidence of that?
__________________
DoYouEverWonder - Engineers and architects don't have to design steel buildings not to collapse from gravity. They already conquered gravity when they built it.

- Professional Wastrel
sylvan8798 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 11:44 AM   #157
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,864
Originally Posted by sylvan8798 View Post
Moses' tablet, I presume?

Wait, were those made by gods as well? Where is the evidence of that?
Well, to be honest, I have no idea what we are talking about. Out of nowhere we are treated to... something.... about "there is an historical claim in your faith regarding a certain stone with laws on it."

I never mentioned it, and damned if i can tell what he is referring to (the stone? the laws? the writing on the stone?)

He couldn't be talking about the tablets that Moses brought down out of the Mountain because the Bible clearly says they were destroyed.
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 11:44 AM   #158
Hlafordlaes
Disorder of Kilopi
 
Hlafordlaes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: State of Flux
Posts: 8,721
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Golly, so many wrong, fallacious and absolute assumptions in there. Lets break a few down, shall we? "Anyone picking up a stone and dropping it will see it fall. Fact of life for all beings, a universal law."

Universal law? How about if one is on the ISS, how about if one is blind, how about if the stone is pumice and i am standing underwater. Wrong.
Gravity is part of the HS physics curriculum. The ISS is constantly falling past the curvature of the Earth, as one smart fellow once mused could be done with a cannon ball shot with enough power. Pumice is less dense than water, so your special example confirms gravity alone is what provides Aristotle's "Levity," which, like rising helium balloons in the air, is merely gravity sorting elements by atomic weight. Thanks for confirming the universal application of physical law, and note such laws do not require anyone to enforce them, unlike, ahem, those of certain limp-wristed deities named Yahweh.

Quote:
Now something about a stone with those laws? Not even sure what you are talking about. A stone with laws written on it and you claim "but there are no independent cases anywhere, ever of other stones with those laws that are not man-made." There are lots of stones with laws written on them, heck to the Louvre and take a gander at some.

“Anu and Enlil ordained Hammurabi, a devout prince who fears the gods, to demonstrate justice within the land, to destroy evil and wickedness, to stop the mighty exploiting the weak, to rise like Shamash over the mass of humanity, illuminating the land …”
Not the same laws. Particular to the circumstance, perfectly making my point about their arbitrary nature.

Done! You really can't answer the original question at all, after all, given what's been provided so far. Epic.
__________________
Driftwood on an empty shore of the sea of meaninglessness. Irrelevant, weightless, inconsequential moment of existential hubris on the fast track to oblivion. Spends that time playing video games.
Summer Ongoing penance for overeating: His real name is Count Douchenozzle von Stenchfahrter und Lichtendicks. - shemp
Hlafordlaes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 12:02 PM   #159
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,864
Originally Posted by Hlafordlaes View Post
Gravity is part of the HS physics curriculum.
Folks, look at those goalposts ZOOOOOOMMMMM!!!!!!!!

Original claim: "Anyone picking up a stone and dropping it will see it fall."

I gave three examples clearly falsifying this claim. So what happens? You change the claim, and now pretend that the claim was not "anyone... will see it fall." (Because not everyone can see, and not everything that is dropped falls). Instead it now includes "Aristotle's "Levity," which, like rising helium balloons in the air, is merely gravity sorting elements by atomic weight," which is a joke, right, because: hilarious.

Although, I do have to hand it to you, this:

"Done! You really can't answer the original question at all, after all, given what's been provided so far. Epic."

Was an "epic" declaration of "victory."

fantastic.

I mean "epic"!!
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.

Last edited by The Big Dog; 10th August 2018 at 12:06 PM.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2018, 12:41 PM   #160
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 12,068
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Well, to be honest, I have no idea what we are talking about. Out of nowhere we are treated to... something.... about "there is an historical claim in your faith regarding a certain stone with laws on it."

I never mentioned it, and damned if i can tell what he is referring to (the stone? the laws? the writing on the stone?)

He couldn't be talking about the tablets that Moses brought down out of the Mountain because the Bible clearly says they were destroyed.
You need to brush up on your mythology a bit!

The original ten commandments were not destroyed, but were rather broken to pieces when Moses saw his people worshiping a golden calf. Later the broken pieces, a bowl of manna, the staff of Aaron were placed in the Ark of Covenant for safe keeping. Until the ark was stolen by the Egyptian pharaoh Sishak some years later.
__________________
On 28 JUN 2018 'yuno44907' said: "I am god and you have to help me."
On 03 JUL 2018 'yuno44907' got banned from the Forum.

A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:57 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.