Plot holes in the bible and what the motivation for it would be

a reply to: ReyaPhemhurth

I hope that made you feel better.

And yes, you triggered me to feel more grateful for what I have, thank you.

And the way I use the word disdain - it means (to me) I would rather not notice them. They're beneath my notice. Not because I'm higher - no not at all. But because I just don't even want to think about them and what they're doing. Not a try at superiority.

But, if my choice of words makes you think I feel 'above' them, I apologize and hopefully you can forgive me. I have to remember words in English are not used the same as in the language I've spoken for the last 20 years.

Peace

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: Raggedyman

A question was asked An answer offered If you dont like it, oops

What question was asked?

No one asked you anything.

A person had a different interpretation of whats in the Bible.

This is what i was pointing out, you have always argued or at least it reads as though you think your interpretation is correct, hence why I said I see this in every thread you participate in.

If someone chooses to remain ignorant, thats fine.

is it?

Why the change of heart all of a sudden?

its not ok to remain ignorant when shown the truth

Question

originally posted by: DiaJax
if you want to tell me I'm wrong (please be constructive) I would also love to hear that.

Now if you want to remain wrong, thats not ok, its is however a choice to do so, so I can say, "If someone chooses to remain ignorant, thats fine."

So a person can choose to be wrong
If we throw in the fact a person chooses not to believe something when the opposite is proven true, they just wont believe or accept that truth, thats fine

Take the Japanese soldier who was told that Japan had surrendered and fought till 1974
edition.cnn.com...

People are people.

originally posted by: Disturbinatti
a reply to: silo13


So am I assuming by thinking you refuse to admit you were wrong but your silence is (obviously) proof that you are aware I have proven you wrong in addition to catching you make a third false claim, ''Chapter and verse" is how you say you refuted me, right before I honestly did that to you?


I would imagine that a decent Christian would not have trouble with this, it's not like it's debatable. I can quote the comment where I quote the Bible and cite the chapter that has Isaac's ordeal and doesn't even mention his age you said you proved it was 30 though.

The other is not debatable as it says Abraham was prevented from killing Isaac and informed by an angel THAT MOMENT that it was a test.

But I am not at all shocked as I don't recall the last time admitting they were wrong (a Christian) didn't have ulterior motive or actually happened period.

Usually if you defeat them in debate the go mute online.

If in person they invoke the devil at you. 'Satan is in you!"

Sorry it's just... I am waiting for you to answer and it has been about 2 days.

I didn't want to assume you are acknowledging you were wrong on both counts and about having proven it being false goes with that as 'error' too.

If you don't respond and admit it I will assume that you are admitting:

1. You were incorrect to say Abraham pbuh knew what he obviously didn't WHILE claiming to have studied the Bible "IN DEPTH" recommending that another also do so.

Which is not exactly honest as had you even read it 1 time you should know that Abraham pbuh was BEING TESTED, that knowing it would void it's being a test is obvious and to think/say/believe ''in depth study" is responsible for this misrepresentation of scripture is laughable.

2. You were wrong about knowing what the Bible doesn't say, that Isaac was 30 years old is NOT sais ONE TIME throughout the story or later in scripture and it's traditionally held that he was a youth of 12.

Which had you known you could have also connected with Jesus pbuh, the 12 tribes, 12 Apostles (which Paul is not one of or one period, at least of Christ).

And the age he came home from Egypt which would have at least been true even if not a prophecy regarding the Messiah in the first place.

Which is the only reason anyone would say that at 30 y.o. Isaac was going to be sacrificed, to say it is a type of the "Ministry of Christ's own beginning which also was at 30" which suggests the use of typology by the author and doesn't ever prove anything, just makes it familiar. Possibly dishonest.

In fact you probably heard this, this 12 y.o. Isaac tradition and mistook it as 30 because the ministry of Jesus pbuh began at age 30 and the reason comparison is done is to eisegetically "prove" the prediction of the not-prophecied-attributes of the Messiah ... attributed to Jesus pbuh posthumously like the "suffering servant" of Isaiah, Israel the nation actually, is eisegetically applied to Jesus pbuh to support what never happened. His defeat and murder, suffering, which wasn't Messianic and is partially why he was not accepted by later Jews in the first centuries AD.

The Messiah was supposed to be a Davidian type of warrior King and hero that unites Israel and ACTUALLY returns all 12 tribes TO Israel and these are the lost sheep who are today probably either Muslims or Christians and not ever going back as it was forever ago then and is obviously more so now, I realize this is unrealistic but still is believed by Jewish extremists and Christian extremist alike who both have different reasons for wanting to rebuild Herods Temple and will double cross each other in the end as true enemies do.

For Christians it's the "Second coming" as with Muslims but for Jews they await two Messiah's, ben David and ben Joseph-Ephraim, one who will be killed by Armilus the son of the Adversary (Samael, Satan, Belial whatever you want to call the great fool) and another who will restore Israel as the World Ruler for eternity.

a reply to: Disturbinatti

It's been a close-run thing, but you may yet escape from this thread with your credibility intact -- unlike the unfortunate silo13.

Stick to religion and you should still make it out unscathed. But if you start parading your scientific and historical ignorance, you will undo all that you have so far accomplished.

Quit while you're ahead.

a reply to: Astyanax


I am not soliticing opinions and it was never close so why would I listen to someone who thinks it ever was?

I did what I do.

Let people say erroneous things knowing at anytime I decide I can easily prove them wrong and he knows this.

It's why he won't respond.

And if you even read my last comment at the end I said what I would assume in the event he refused to admit the truth.

Meaning I WAS done, I never quit but was finished with my destroying this person in debate.

Don't tell people what to do. You are not going to be listened to and didn't just now even make sense because clearly I WAS finished and you just need to put in your 1 cent.

You don't qualify for 2.

a reply to: Astyanax


In fact "quit while ahead" was something you should have done before proving inadvertently that you know as little as Silo13 by saying it was ever close when the 3 things he claimed were just lies you don't make yourself look great by not realizing it.

Which if you hadn't spoken I would not know, that you are not knowledgeable enough to know he never had a chance, if he is dependent upon the Bible, of proving his absurd claims about it.

Now I DO know you just needed to involve yourself to make it feel like you are a voice of reason and above having to debate facts. You just tell people what to say and how you think they did in their debate.

Ridiculous.

My advice:

Don't delude yourself into believing I want to know what you think. Seriously and not to be rude I literally have no reason to care about what you think about what I say, I said it and know more about what I do than you know about what I know.

And I definitely didn't ask for, need or take as complimentary, your 'advice.'

Not saying you can't say what you want just that you will waste time thinking I'm concerned about your thoughts on my words, more about saving you from having to go through this again as I debate issues and not how I did debating said issues.

a reply to: Astyanax



But Silo 13 at least next time he will think twice about asserting falsehoods as fact which were probably misunderstood hearsay taken wrong and repeated without verification ultimately only revealing that while not knowledgeable in details of a story so fundamental to 3 religions that all are not disputing the fact that God was testing the faith of Abraham pbuh, and he is not in sync with core theological concepts of Christianity in stating that foreknowledge was had by Abraham pbuh , thus rendering the to test void of any merit.

Making worse was the claim that the age of Isaac being 30 was a fact that some name dropped allegedly said, unfortunately for them/him the Bible doesn't say and that makes everything a guess, there is only tradition and it's that he was about 12.

And worse of all the allegation of having himself proven "chapter and verse" both of these terribly mistaken notions I can do nothing but ridicule because they are obviously wrong on one count and improbable but definitely not stated to be known on the other, and to say you can, have or will prove either is just something I don't let slide.

But as far as you are concerned about what point did I depart from religion that you would say I need to stick to it?

I am going to guess my statement of what each RELIGION expects at the End of Days as the only thing you could possibly misinterpet as not but obviously it is so I'm left baffled and unaware of anything else that could lead you to say such a thing.

Not confused, baffled.

Because I know you are not trying to claim Jesuits invention of the ridiculous Big Bang theory isn't related to religion, I would have to ridicule that notion if that's the case because 1. Jesuits are a religous Order of Catholicism and 2. Motivated only to further the Jesuit cause, which whatever is...is religous.

It was a diplomatic move that science and religous academics could both live with and no more, if accepted it could never be proven it wasn't God who caused it and really who or wgat else could?

Certainly not chance.

It's the filler of a scientific plot hole with a notion only explainable by an intelligent force, which is always interpreted to be God and if you say you believe in the Big Bang theory but not God...


You've got some 'splaining to do.

Cause and effect and all that.


Rather genius actually. Pacifies and inflates the ego of scientists and gives religous people an explanation that doesn't exclude God without giving the atheist people any explanation that is valid in any way but also impossible to disprove.

It's a hoodwink.

a reply to: Disturbinatti

Too late, I guess. And you were looking so good back there for a while. You began arguing from a position of authority, and I was cheering for you: some of the stars you see on your earlier posts are from me.

But then you went and spouted that twaddle about the Jesuits and the Big Bang. Proving that you have no idea how science, the Jesuit order and post-Enlightenment Western civilization really function. Bang went my image of you.

I’m sorry, but I am not going to read three long posts that appear to consist mainly of venting. For your information, Georges Lemaître was a highly accomplished and respected astronomer and physicist; that he happened also to be a priest of the Roman Catholic Church did nothing to diminish his reputation among fellow scientists. Instead of making metaphysical claims regarding the Big Bang, Lemaître actually influenced the pope, Pius XII, to walk back on some claims Pius had made earlier about how Lemaître’s ideas ‘proved’ the creation story in Genesis.

As for Lemaître’s two big ideas, the expanding universe and the Big Bang, both have been found by observation and experiment to be correct and consistent. You may choose to accept or reject these theories, but only one of those choices is well-informed and intelligent.

Ramadan Karim.

originally posted by: silo13
a reply to: ReyaPhemhurth

I hope that made you feel better.

And yes, you triggered me to feel more grateful for what I have, thank you.

And the way I use the word disdain - it means (to me) I would rather not notice them. They're beneath my notice. Not because I'm higher - no not at all. But because I just don't even want to think about them and what they're doing. Not a try at superiority.

But, if my choice of words makes you think I feel 'above' them, I apologize and hopefully you can forgive me. I have to remember words in English are not used the same as in the language I've spoken for the last 20 years.

Peace

It's not about what makes me feel better. By the sounds of your posts, it sounds like you're the one always needing reassurance by replying to posts and dissecting the posts word by word by asking questions on what each word means. And if you are unsure of what I mean and don't feel like going back to reread your own posts, I'd be glad to quote you to point it out. Let me know. And I'm certain that when you do get 'triggered', you also are needing reassurance from your god.

And as far as the word 'disdain' goes, it's always had that meaning. It has always had connotations pertaining to inferiority, unworthiness, etc. The 20 years you're talking about makes no difference. At this point, you're just using words incorrectly and when it's pointed out to you, you claim the meaning is different to you . So, yeah, you're just redefining words willy nilly however you feel fits your defense better.

I mean, it' s a free country, so I guess you're more than welcome to start saying the word 'disdain' means you 'don't want to see it'. But, just be warned that a good majority of people that actually do know what the word means, they're going to disagree without even having to look up it.

originally posted by: Disturbinatti

originally posted by: ReyaPhemhurth
Biggest plot twist:

In the OT it is spelled out that bestiality is wrong.

Exodus 22:19
"Anyone who has sexual relations with an animal must be put to death.

Leviticus 18:23
Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is a perversion.

But then, he made a new covenant for the NT.

And then suddenly he changes his mind on bestiality...

Ezekiel 23:20
There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.




Woooww. Mind-blowing! More plot twists than a Harlequin romance novel. My goodness.

P.S. If you could not sense the sarcasm, I feel sorry for you.

Are you pro-bestialty or what?

It's still illegal today so be careful, it is not just religous people who are grossed out by it.

If you're going to quote one of my posts and comment on them, you might want to actually read the post. In it's entirety. You know, that part of the post called the bottom where I point out the entire thing is SARCASM.

This is just another post of yours that makes you look foolish because you comment without really having a reason. Kind of like your silly, nonsensical comments about atheists working at jiffy lube. A lot of your posts that aren't long rants about your 'intelligent design blah blah god is eternal i have no evidence blah blah' it's just unnecessary, unfunny nonsense.

You're like the guy cracking jokes with toilet paper hanging out the back of his pants. You think we're all laughing at your jokes, but we're really laughing at you.

So, until you actually read and comprehend words and posts in their fullest content, I'd avoid making unnecessary posts, because each post makes you look more and more foolish. Those that lean towards the big bang or any scientific theory have 'splainin to do? I'd be willing to wager that people like you, who believe by silly faith alone and have NO scientific evidence to back them..I'd say you have some 'splainin to do'. So, go on, 'splain away.

P.S. Quoting religious text (especially the countless plot holes and twists, be it a serious 'pointing out' of it or a sardonic one) does not mean you support the bits you're quoting. I could quote one of the more violent parts of it, doesn't mean I condone violence. See. I explained why your post is nonsensical. I made it easy for you.

I await your long-winded, nonsensical 'eighteen-paragraphs-spanning-three-posts' post. I bet you'll find a way to come across as both frustrated and insulting while trying to spin it around by making it seem like I'm frustrated and insulted. I look forward to hearing from you, junior.

How's everyone today?

originally posted by: Disturbinatti


How's everyone today?

Not going to reply?

a reply to: ReyaPhemhurth

Ezekiel 23:20
There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

What? Are you like 12? All titilated and WOW over some sex talk?

Sex runs all through the bible. Some of the greatest love letters ever writen.

As for the scripture you chose to pic and choose over? He's talking about prostitues and how they will be destroyed.

WOW animal genitals in bold.

LMBO

peace

a reply to: ReyaPhemhurth


I wasn't aware you said anything but there isn't anything to respond to in your message so this is my response.

Just an angry person ranting who doesn't know enough to be coherent, every message of yours is the same thing and you are a waste of time.

a reply to: ReyaPhemhurth

It's not about what makes me feel better. By the sounds of your posts, it sounds like you're the one always needing reassurance by replying to posts and dissecting the posts word by word by asking questions on what each word means.

Wow, so I reply and I’m wrong, I ask questions and I’m wrong. Woohoo. I’m on a winning streak here, lol. Love it!

And if you are unsure of what I mean and don't feel like going back to reread your own posts, I'd be glad to quote you to point it out. Let me know.

Thank you, I’ll keep that in mind.

And I'm certain that when you do get 'triggered', you also are needing reassurance from your god.

Nothing wrong with needing reassurance. I don't need it here on ATS but if and when I do need it? I’m blessed I can fall back on my (heavenly) Father for his love and reassurance. He never lets me down.

And as far as the word 'disdain' goes, it's always had that meaning. It has always had connotations pertaining to inferiority, unworthiness, etc. The 20 years you're talking about makes no difference.

Do you know a foreign language? If not? Sorry, but, it happens all the time. Even if you don’t know a foreign language, let’s see. There’s words like, faggot, loo, beastly, and on and on. You might use the word one way, others do not. Meanings change. For me, if i ‘disdain’ something - I just don’t want to be bothered by it.

And since we’re talking about the bible - or should be - instead of a barrage of continual personal attacks? Here’s one of my favorites.

Romans 8:38-39

For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,

Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

The only plot hole in that is so many people will never get it.

peace

Edit to Add:

And by the way - I could care less how you try to attack, your opiinion of me is none of my business and you're about as pesky as a flea. My point - It would be nice if you could stay on topic. I would hate to have your posts removed for not following T&C. That being said? Unless you do stay on topic? I will not answer you again. It's been fun and all but I don't want to continue down this road of throwing the topic over just to listen to your personal rants.

originally posted by: silo13
a reply to: ReyaPhemhurth

Ezekiel 23:20
There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

What? Are you like 12? All titilated and WOW over some sex talk?

Sex runs all through the bible. Some of the greatest love letters ever writen.

As for the scripture you chose to pic and choose over? He's talking about prostitues and how they will be destroyed.

WOW animal genitals in bold.

LMBO

peace

You definitely missed the point. The "Wow" in bold was a formatting issue with the scripting that would not undo itself when I tried to edit the post. That portion was not supposed to be in bold. Though, even if it is in bold, it still doesn't change the point. And the POINT was to show you anyone can misconstrue and misinterpret anything (be it in the bible or anywhere else) given the way it is quoted. THAT was the point. I didn't LITERALLY think there was bestiality in the bible. Again, pay attention how I said it was SARCASM. I'll say the same to you, read my ENTIRE post before commenting and replying. You look foolish, as you missed the entire point of it being sarcastic and illustrating the point that people can quote verse for verse for verse can can make it appear at it should be interpreted any number of ways. Meaning by focused omission and such.

So, good job, missing the point.

a reply to: Disturbinatti

Hahaha. See. I keep telling you, I'm perfectly chill. And my posts are definitely coherent. Your posts are all the same as well, a frustrated poster who keeps demanding others say he is right, followed by you claiming others are angry and incoherent, when in reality your posts sound triggered, frustrated and are a long garbled mess.

originally posted by: silo13
a reply to: ReyaPhemhurth

It's not about what makes me feel better. By the sounds of your posts, it sounds like you're the one always needing reassurance by replying to posts and dissecting the posts word by word by asking questions on what each word means.

Wow, so I reply and I’m wrong, I ask questions and I’m wrong. Woohoo. I’m on a winning streak here, lol. Love it!

And if you are unsure of what I mean and don't feel like going back to reread your own posts, I'd be glad to quote you to point it out. Let me know.

Thank you, I’ll keep that in mind.

And I'm certain that when you do get 'triggered', you also are needing reassurance from your god.

Nothing wrong with needing reassurance. I don't need it here on ATS but if and when I do need it? I’m blessed I can fall back on my (heavenly) Father for his love and reassurance. He never lets me down.

And as far as the word 'disdain' goes, it's always had that meaning. It has always had connotations pertaining to inferiority, unworthiness, etc. The 20 years you're talking about makes no difference.

Do you know a foreign language? If not? Sorry, but, it happens all the time. Even if you don’t know a foreign language, let’s see. There’s words like, faggot, loo, beastly, and on and on. You might use the word one way, others do not. Meanings change. For me, if i ‘disdain’ something - I just don’t want to be bothered by it.

And since we’re talking about the bible - or should be - instead of a barrage of continual personal attacks? Here’s one of my favorites.

Romans 8:38-39

For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,

Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

The only plot hole in that is so many people will never get it.

peace

Edit to Add:

And by the way - I could care less how you try to attack, your opiinion of me is none of my business and you're about as pesky as a flea. My point - It would be nice if you could stay on topic. I would hate to have your posts removed for not following T&C. That being said? Unless you do stay on topic? I will not answer you again. It's been fun and all but I don't want to continue down this road of throwing the topic over just to listen to your personal rants.

Hahaha, my posts are not off topic. They were definitely on topic. Had I decided to start calling you names and start talking about something random like helicopters, then your point might not be so moot. And the thing you're talking about is called a homophone. It's a word that has multiple meanings. Faggot does have multiple meanings. You're right there. But disdain does not have a 'slight variance' in meaning. If you wanted to say you 'didn't want to bother' with something, you could have just said that outright or could have found a word that is less strong than 'disdain'. 'Disdain' never had a 'meh' meaning of 'not wanting to be bothered with it'. If I said I disdain vegetables, I'm willing to wage that most people would think I have strong, negative feelings about vegetables versus thinking that "I don't want to be bothered by them."

And as for me speaking a foreign language? That question seems a bit 'off topic'.

When it comes to providing extra information about the events of Genesis, Jubilees, called "Little Genesis" though actually longer than Genesis it covers a shorter amount of time, is excellent.

It was found with the DSS in fragments as was Enoch, both survived in the Ethiopian Church as Canonical and fill in many holes in the Bible.

Enoch clarifies that God destroyed the Nephilim and Rephaim in the Deluge because they had gotten so wicked they were going to destroy mankind for good.

It wasn't humans fault that giants with superior knowledge overran the earth and the flood wasn't because of man's sins but to specifically preserve the pure human line and destroy the hybrids.

Their souls are demons, who were giants that died in the flood.

Jubilees has Issac, Ishmael and Abraham pbut celebrate "The feast of first fruits at Beersheba, and "Abraham rejoiced because his 2 sons had come." The year of Abraham's death pbuh. 22:1-5

Has Abraham pbuh give gifts to the Ishmaelites and sons of Keturah before giving Isaac his inheritance pbut, and gives them a kind message before he departs on how they are to live, asks that God bless them if they worship Him (and despite what also Israel was guilty of, lapses into idolatry, they did and were blessed and still do worship God and are blessed, whoever is righteous, and are trusted even to bring non Semitic peoples to God and do in droves) and given from Paran to Babylon and obviously Arabia, as it calls them collectively Arabs and Ishmaelites, that they mingled.


It doesn't state the age of Isaac but says "And I and the LAD shall go..." to Sarah pbut immediately before the aborted sacrifice so he wasn't an adult, in the previous chapter he just finished weaning and the next, 19, is his wedding.


States that the six days of creation were 22 acts after beginning with Moses receiving the tables of the Law and God personally teaching it to him, revealing the future events of Israel's apostasy and the angel of the Shekhina/Presence (Enoch-Metatron) revealing the account of creation that matches the 22 letters of the AlephBet and later Sefer Yezira was attributed to Abraham pbuh and has a similar scenario.


It's devil is Belial or Mestema like in the DSS and the marriages of Cain and Seth are covered.


A Kainam is born of Arphaxad son of Shem finds the insrcribed teachings of the Watchers causing him to sin he marries Nimrod's daughter and in the THIRTY THIRD Jubilee the world is divided in 3, the sons of Noah and that is detailed in 8, 9. Evil spirits lead astray the sons of Noah in 10:1-2, Mastema given permission to retain 1/10 of his subjects.

It describes the Tower of Babel and names "Reu" as its chief builder, Evil, Nimrod usually.

Reu marries the daughter of "Ur", "Ora" her name.

Ur is "Son of Chesed" which oddly means Piety as in Hasidim, "Pious Ones." Builder of "Ara of the Chaldees." Terah is born here and marries Edna, mother of Abram pbut, who is the first to forsake the idol worship of Chaldea, destroys the idols of the house in fire.


Hebrew is first mentioned as a language taught by God to Abraham pbuh.