It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Sun Matrix
Two questions. Who held these Ecclesiastic Councils that you are referring to.
Originally posted by Prot0n
Originally posted by Sun Matrix
Two questions. Who held these Ecclesiastic Councils that you are referring to.
You can learn abit about it here. www.livius.org...
Tell me Sun, which is the hebrew word for virgin and which word is used in the original hebrew version?
Aside from this, your take is based on your interpretation of the 120 year If interpretation is required then there needs to be some direction like a legend or key telling the reader which areas need to be interpreted and which do not. How is that the Bible passages you use as "proof" need no interpretation, yet this statement does? How does one decide? What makes your interpretation correct and mine incorrect? Do you catch my drift?
Fair enough, point taken. It's actually the first time I have heard anyone take this line, and I commend you for the originality shown. However, if you are saying that this was a one-off event that was to take place 120 years after Noah received the message to build the Ark, which I believe you are, why did it occur only 100 years later? From what I remember Noah only took 100 years to build the Ark and the flood lasted 40 days.
Genesis 5:32 And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD. 9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God. 10 And Noah begat three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
I am saying that the flood happened 120 years after God decided to destroy all mankind, and 100 years after Noah was told to build the Ark.
After he has said that he make's an observation for us. These giants were fornicating with ordinary people. In pagan religions the sons of (pick your diety) would fornicate and produce offspring with mortal humans that had superhuman power's or longer live's then normal mortals. When you remember this, the verse make's alot more sense along with God's decision to put a cap on our lifespan.
Originally posted by Sun Matrix
You just won't ever admit the truth, will you.
Originally posted by riley
Originally posted by Sun Matrix
You just won't ever admit the truth, will you.
Hmm. I'll admit it's the truth when you can prove Noah even existed, prove that everyone else on the planet died in a great flood [that means disproving the uniterupted existence of entire civilisations and cultures 5000 years ago] and prove there was a world wide flood.
You just won't ever admit the truth, will you. Everything I said was exactly in context. I just didn't jump to a conclusion that Noah was 500 old when chapter 6 started. I just read what it said.
I am saying that the flood happened 120 years after God decided to destroy all mankind, and 100 years after Noah was told to build the Ark.
I am saying that the flood happened 120 years after God decided to destroy all mankind
Now what seems to be the problem with the Isaiah 7 translation?
Originally posted by Sun Matrix
We can prove there was a flood by the sedimentary layers all over the earth. Go mountain climbing and hunt for sea shells. It happened.
All truth.
Here's the thing, you keeping saying the Bible is "factual truth". Now it may be the truth and it may not be the truth, it may contain some truths and it may contain non-truths at the same time.
FACT is the bible as we know it was a collection or "canon" of books that was officially put together in 300 AD by Constantine with the concil of Nicea. Now, there were also books not included in the bible by the concil and today we refer to them as the "Gnostic books". Alot of the Gnostic books have a "different" view of things. This was said to be "heresy" by the concil/Roman church.
Now, who is to say that these Gnostic books do not also contain "truth"?
Well, the Roman church said they did not contain truth, but am I or anyone really supposed to just take the Roman church's word as what should and should not be truth? The Roman church is FULL of controversy and murder, the inquistion, and the list goes on.
As if it were nothing more than an instruction manual.
Source
The name Israel (Champion of God, or Ruling with God), is a title which was specially bestowed by God Himself upon Jacob, the ancestor of the Israel people.
Jacob-Israel had twelve sons, of whom Judah was the fourth. It is obvious, therefore, that Judah was one of the children of Israel, and equally obvious that the other eleven sons could not possibly have been Judah.
Each of these twelve sons founded a tribe, with the exception of Joseph, who founded two tribes through his two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh. There were thus, strictly speaking, thirteen tribes; but, inasmuch as the tribe of Levi had no territorial status but was dispersed throughout the other twelve tribes for the performance of special duties, it became customary to speak of the whole nation as the twelve tribes of Israel.