Absurdities of so called science

[dad]

'What? You actually took those stories as historical fact, and not as interpretive myths? You didn't get that those stories were written by the people the educate and edift themselves?'



'WHAT? You think dying for something makes it true, even though millions of martrys have died for so-called "false" religions throughout history?

'What kind of lunatics did I leave in charge?'



'The Temple is the center of Jewish worship -- any foreign occupying who wants to hit the Jews where it hurts is going to go after it. Since the Jews were starting up with the Romans, "prophecizing" the destruction of the temple was a sure bet. Worshippers who were paying attention would've seen that.

'Really, dad, I never bothered to tell the Jews much of anything concering origins, so they took a mix of Sumerian, Babylonian, and Egyptian stories and re-wrote them into "The Garden of Eden."

'Since the important thing was that they gave Me the credit, I didn't see it as all that important to correct them on the details.'



Did He promise stuff, dad, or was that you?



Actually, we've learned quite a bit about the pile of fables in the Bible -- If I thought you were willing/able to handle it, I'd discuss these with you.

The sacking of Jerusalem and destruction of the temple was to happen, at the appearance of the Messiah as well, so many centuries, and decades, precisely from a certain edict. Go figure. Maybe He knew some snibblers would be around, and need some pre emptive muffling. Imagine that. The more one learns of bible prophesy, the more one realizes that time had to be traversed, because there are things that can be explained no other way. Attempts at minimizing it merely speak to the shallowness and lack of even basic understanding of scriptures to the one mouthing the mischievous madness.

 

[dad]

No, you said that Noah was real, but that we are not all related through him.

Do try to follow your own blather.

Why fib? The relationships of man to man are from the birth canal. Not the pond. You can't lay that bumrap on me.

 

[dad]

So, now you're calling God a liar because He's right and you're wrong. Fundie Pride increases exponentially.

Focus, man, I am calling the liar not God. Not the God a liar.

Figures you wouldn't get it -- anything a Fundie encounters that doesn't glorifythemselves rarely gets through.

And not imagining ourselves less than a worm's equal is glorification in the debased ignorance based evo eye. So??

And if God is not a liar as you claim, but trying to set you straight on everything you've got wrong -- are you humble enough to consider that perhaps you don't know the mind of God?

I do not know the mind of a liar god, of course, I know only how to lift my boot to his rear. It is not humility we need with an impostor, but greater power, and rest assured we can have that in spades.

You and you alone are calling God a liar -- don't drag anyone else into your own damnation for challenging Him.

God cannot lie, that is anything but calling Him a liar, try to keep up.

 

[dad]

Actually...
1 Kings 22:23: "Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in
the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil concerning
thee."

God will send strong delusion to those that already rejected Him, but NOT to His Own! So, whether He sends Satan to test Job, or some imp to lead some false God rejecting prophet to get it all messed up, what He is dealing with is sinful men. In dealing with His Own, His nature is clear, and unchangeable. It is impossible for Him to lie. In allowing a spirit to deceive already God rejecting man, His purposes are to have the truth prevail. NOT IN the already darkened mind of the rejector, but in the eyes of others, that hear, and see, and need the truth of the matter. "That is, suffered the lying spirit to suggest a lie to them, and sent them strong delusions to believe that lie, whose minds were disposed at any rate to flatter Ahab, to whom they told it; which was the way designed to bring him to the ruin appointed for him:" http://www.studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=1ki&chapter=22&verse=23

 

[Nathan Poe]

The sacking of Jerusalem and destruction of the temple was to happen, at the appearance of the Messiah as well, so many centuries, and decades, precisely from a certain edict. Go figure.

The temple was sacked a few times in Jewish history -- the most notable time was by the Romans -- before the Gospels were written.

Why wouldn't they associate that coincidence with the man some of them believed to be the Messiah?

Maybe He knew some snibblers would be around, and need some pre emptive muffling.

So stop snibbling already and learn some actual history.

Imagine that. The more one learns of bible prophesy, the more one realizes that time had to be traversed, because there are things that can be explained no other way.

No other way but your magical "maybe" thinking? Try reason instead, dad.

Attempts at minimizing it merely speak to the shallowness and lack of even basic understanding of scriptures to the one mouthing the mischievous madness.

And yet, you'll continue to mouth it until the cows come home -- on God's flying sapphire throne, most likely.

 

[AV1611VET]

The temple was sacked a few times in Jewish history -- the most notable time was by the Romans -- before the Gospels were written.

Why wouldn't they associate that coincidence with the man some of them believed to be the Messiah?

This wouldn't just turn out to be another "routine sacking". There was something supernatural about this one.

For one, the veil was rent from top to bottom when Jesus died on the cross.

It would have taken six oxen to do that.

As the time drew near for the Temple to be destroyed, God made one last attempt to persuade the priests to abandon their vocation. He had Paul anonymously write the book of Hebrews, which clearly shows Jesus' mastery over sacerdotalism and the Temple; whose veil they would have had to replace.

They had plenty of time to sell what was in there and retire comfortably, but most of them refused to believe, and they paid the price for it.

 

[BananaSlug]

God will send strong delusion to those that already rejected Him, but NOT to His Own!

That is still lying/deceiving regardless.

So, whether He sends Satan to test Job, or some imp to lead some false God rejecting prophet to get it all messed up, what He is dealing with is sinful men.

Job was a Godly man! He did nothing to deserve such despicable acts. God was merely showing off to show that Job would still praise him despite such horrible events! The prophets in 1 Kings 22 were men that God sent a lying spirit to to lead King Ahab into a deadly engagement.

In dealing with His Own, His nature is clear, and unchangeable. It is impossible for Him to lie. In allowing a spirit to deceive already God rejecting man, His purposes are to have the truth prevail. NOT IN the already darkened mind of the rejector, but in the eyes of others, that hear, and see, and need the truth of the matter.

So God does not change?
Exodus 20:5
5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,

Ezekiel 18:20
The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him.​

There are many other verses that show where God lied/deceived.​

2 Chronicles 18:22Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets.Jeremiah 20:7 O Lord, thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived.
Ezekiel 14:9
And if a prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet.
2 Thessalonians 2:11
For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.

"That is, suffered the lying spirit to suggest a lie to them, and sent them strong delusions to believe that lie, whose minds were disposed at any rate to flatter Ahab, to whom they told it; which was the way designed to bring him to the ruin appointed for him:"

 

[Hespera]

That is still lying/deceiving regardless.



Job was a Godly man! He did nothing to deserve such despicable acts. God was merely showing off to show that Job would still praise him despite such horrible events! The prophets in 1 Kings 22 were men that God sent a lying spirit to to lead King Ahab into a deadly engagement.



So God does not change?
Exodus 20:5
5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,

Ezekiel 18:20
The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him.​

There are many other verses that show where God lied/deceived.​

2 Chronicles 18:22Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets.Jeremiah 20:7 O Lord, thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived.
Ezekiel 14:9
And if a prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet.
2 Thessalonians 2:11
For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.

I really have a hard time understanding how I am to take any of this seriously. I know, faith. But I dont know what that is either. Have I been sent a delusion? By whom and which is the delusion?

 

[BananaSlug]

Christians confronted by such verses will either run and hide, divert the attention away from such verses, or try to explain how the verses don't really contradict anything.

 

[dad]

The temple was sacked a few times in Jewish history -- the most notable time was by the Romans -- before the Gospels were written.

Name even 2 times, say, that not one stone was found upon another!!! Not sacked, but dismembered, mutilated, folded, and scraped!! Should be enough there to clue in to. All that, as well as right on cue, so many years from when Daniel the prophet spoke about when Messiah would be cut off for others!!! And, as Avi pointed out, we have the hand of heaven ripping the veil as icing here. One total destruction after the prophesy (the previous temple destroyed was part of another astounding prophesy of captivity for 70 years, and etc!!) and one after the Messiah was killed for man right on cue! Be amazed, be very very amazed.

Why wouldn't they associate that coincidence with the man some of them believed to be the Messiah?

Would that be after he healed tens of thousands from lameness, blindness, deafness, and raised some from death, walked on water, fed thousands and thousands from a few bits of food, etc? The man that just happened along the right year that Daniel predicted!? That raised from the dead and had witnesses? That went on to impact the rest of history in a major way? Calling a series of miraculous events associated with Him coincidence is beyond the pale of reason.

And yet, you'll continue to mouth it until the cows come home -- on God's flying sapphire throne, most likely.

No, advancing the stunningly clear and accurate plan of the Almighty, laid out in the scriptures, is anything but that. And God's wheels are bible 101,



Eze 1:26 And above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it. 27 And I saw as the colour of amber, as the appearance of fire round about within it, from the appearance of his loins even upward, and from the appearance of his loins even downward, I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and it had brightness round about. 28 As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. And when I saw it, I fell upon my face, and I heard a voice of one that spake.


God has technology as well. Makes the Jetsons look like the Flintstones.


For someone that has admitted, if I recall, at some time teaching children in a Catholic school, I think you should cut the clown act, and take these things a little more seriously.

If you really can't beliieve them, at least a respectful attitude and silent admission of ignorance and humilty would be in order.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Focus, man, I am calling the liar not God. Not the God a liar.

So not only are you calling Him a liar, you're saying He can't even be God because He dares disagree with you. Fundie Pride increases geometrically.

And not imagining ourselves less than a worm's equal is glorification in the debased ignorance based evo eye. So??

A worm's equal? Can you blather in English for a change? I'm sure you know what you're railing against -- all you seem to care about is how it doesn't glorify yourself.

I do not know the mind of a liar god, of course, I know only how to lift my boot to his rear.

You do that -- see how God reacts to those who elevate their own knowledge over His own. Fundie Pride at its finest.

It is not humility we need with an impostor, but greater power, and rest assured we can have that in spades. God cannot lie, that is anything but calling Him a liar, try to keep up.

Then stop calling Him a liar! Proving you wrong is hardly an indication of dishonesty.

 

[Nathan Poe]

This wouldn't just turn out to be another "routine sacking". There was something supernatural about this one.

"Routine sacking"? When having the center of worship for your entire faith is "routinely" sacked, you might want to consider that God has forsaken you.

Clearly, He doesn't care.

For one, the veil was rent from top to bottom when Jesus died on the cross.

It would have taken six oxen to do that.

Assuming it literally, and not figuratively, happened. It does make for a wonderful metaphor: The temple veil represented the separation of humans and God -- with Jesus' sacrifice on the cross, no such separation exists anymore.

The depiction of tearing the veil would clearly illustrate that to anyone familiar with Jewish culture -- alas, that rules you out.

As the time drew near for the Temple to be destroyed, God made one last attempt to persuade the priests to abandon their vocation. He had Paul anonymously write the book of Hebrews, which clearly shows Jesus' mastery over sacerdotalism and the Temple; whose veil they would have had to replace.

God didn't do a very good job keeping Paul anonymous if you know about it -- anywhere else He came up short?

They had plenty of time to sell what was in there and retire comfortably, but most of them refused to believe, and they paid the price for it.

Right, because God hates the Jewish Priests?

 

[AV1611VET]

"Routine sacking"? When having the center of worship for your entire faith is "routinely" sacked, you might want to consider that God has forsaken you.

The Temple is not the "center of worship for my entire faith" --- it was the center of worship for the Jews.

Clearly, He doesn't care.

Jesus clearly warned them ahead of time --- and even Titus' little William-T-Sherman romp over the Temple was prophesied ahead of time.

Therefore shall Zion for your sake be plowed as a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high places of the forest.

So it's hard to lay that charge at Jesus' feet --- (evidently unless you're an atheist, I suppose).

Assuming it literally, and not figuratively, happened. It does make for a wonderful metaphor: The temple veil represented the separation of humans and God -- with Jesus' sacrifice on the cross, no such separation exists anymore.

Let's put this into perspective ---

19 ¶ Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,
20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;
21 And having an high priest over the house of God;
22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.
23 Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering...

---

God didn't do a very good job keeping Paul anonymous if you know about it -- anywhere else He came up short?

I said he wrote it anonymously --- to this day his authorship is disputed --- I was just giving my personal opinion of who wrote it.

Whoever wrote it --- he (Paul?) wrote it anonymously.

Right, because God hates the Jewish Priests?

Like I said --- it's hard to lay that charge at God's feet, unless you're an atheist, I suppose.

You really need to understand Dispensation Theology, Nathan --- or I'm afraid you're going to go through life thinking God hates everyone, eh?

 

[Nathan Poe]

The Temple is not the "center of worship for my entire faith" --- it was the center of worship for the Jews.

And since your faith is pretty much lifted out of their scriptures, from the stories of One who supposedly fulfilled their prophecies, I thought you might feel a certain sense of kinship.

Otherwise, if the temple means nothing to you, neither should its sacking -- yet you brought it up as proof of... something.

Jesus clearly warned them ahead of time --- and even Titus' little William-T-Sherman romp over the Temple was prophesied ahead of time.

Didn't we just cover this? The Temple was the center of the Jews' religion, culture, government, the whole shebang. A foreign army looking to hit the Jews where it hurts couldn't ask for a more obvious target.

"Prophecizing" its destruction is about as impressive as "prophecizing" the burning of Washington during the War of 1812 -- any competent strategist would've seen that coming.

So it's hard to lay that charge at Jesus' feet --- (evidently unless you're an atheist, I suppose).

What charge? Every observant Jew would know how vulnerable the Temple was to foreign attack -- including Jesus, who was, if nothing else, a very observant Jew.

Let's put this into perspective ---

I eagerly look forwrd to the day you set aside magical thinking for the sake of Fundie Pride and put something into perpective --

-- Clearly, today is not that day.

---I said he wrote it anonymously --- to this day his authorship is disputed --- I was just giving my personal opinion of who wrote it.

Ah, so you were attempting to pass off your personal opinion as fact, then?

Whoever wrote it --- he (Paul?) wrote it anonymously.

Which would seem to rule out Paul, who was not in the habit of writing anonymously. Besides, the author of Hebrews says:

How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;

Meaning that whoever he is, he got his instruction from one of the apostles.

But Paul himself says:

For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

And --

For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

Where he clearly says he received his instructions from Christ Himself via revelation.

Like I said --- it's hard to lay that charge at God's feet, unless you're an atheist, I suppose.

or unless I listen to your apologetics.

You really need to understand Dispensation Theology, Nathan --- or I'm afraid you're going to go through life thinking God hates everyone, eh?

Not everyone -- just the people He wants destroyed.

 

[AV1611VET]

Which would seem to rule out Paul, who was not in the habit of writing anonymously. Besides, the author of Hebrews says:


Originally Posted by Hebrews 2:3

How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;
​

Meaning that whoever he is, he got his instruction from one of the apostles.

But Paul himself says:


Originally Posted by Galatians 1:12

For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
​

And --


Originally Posted by 1 Corinthians 11:23

For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
​

Where he clearly says he received his instructions from Christ Himself via revelation.

Again, though, what you perceive as a contradiction, is merely a paradox.

You're forgetting that when Paul was saved, he "disappeared" for a thousand days; but when he shows up again on the scene, he keeps a very low profile until he is taken to Jerusalem and introduced to the Apostles, who, after questioning him, gives him the "right hand of fellowship."

Where he went, and Who he got his education from, is well-documented in Galatians 1.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Again, though, what you perceive as a contradiction, is merely a paradox.

"Paradox" being the current buzzword for "doing whatever is necessary to Scripture to avoid admitting a mistake"?

Fundie Pride does it again.

You're forgetting that when Paul was saved, he "disappeared" for a thousand days; but when he shows up again on the scene, he keeps a very low profile until he is taken to Jerusalem and introduced to the Apostles, who, after questioning him, gives him the "right hand of fellowship."

Where he went, and Who he got his education from, is well-documented in Galatians 1.

You're forgetting that I just said this -- "well-documented" in Galatians 1 that Paul claims he got his education from Christ himself -- why would he lie about this if he also worte Hebrews?

 

[AV1611VET]

You're forgetting that I just said this -- "well-documented" in Galatians 1 that Paul claims he got his education from Christ himself -- why would he lie about this if he also worte Hebrews?

Because I'm sure the priests hated him, and would not have read the Epistle if they knew Paul authored it.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Because I'm sure the priests hated him, and would not have read the Epistle if they knew Paul authored it.

So Paul was forced to lie in his epistle -- disguising his identity and misrepresenting his own past -- in order to get it taken seriously?

Makes you wonder how many other lies are in the "sacred" Scriptures to get them taken seriously, doesn't it?

 

[dad]

Again, though, what you perceive as a contradiction, is merely a paradox.

You're forgetting that when Paul was saved, he "disappeared" for a thousand days; but when he shows up again on the scene, he keeps a very low profile until he is taken to Jerusalem and introduced to the Apostles, who, after questioning him, gives him the "right hand of fellowship."

Where he went, and Who he got his education from, is well-documented in Galatians 1.

Quite interesting. I didn't know that.

 

[dad]

Because I'm sure the priests hated him, and would not have read the Epistle if they knew Paul authored it.

He also leaned at the feet ofr Gamaliel, if I recall? So apparently Good has helpers.