Adoni-Bezek's thumbs and big toes cut off
Judges 1:6 Adoni-Bezek fled, but they chased him and caught him, and cut off his thumbs and big toes.
PERSONAL COMMENTARY
A bit violent don't you think?
".. daily I take thy word and I apply it literally." - from CRAZY by Ayiesha Woods
Categories
- Killings (56)
- Judgment (46)
- God Kills (38)
- God's Laws (25)
- Huh? (21)
- Violence (20)
- Women (19)
- New Testament (16)
- Genocide (12)
- Confusing (11)
- Youth (9)
- Family (8)
- Jesus (7)
- Stonings (7)
- Discrimination (6)
- God and evil (6)
- Slavery (4)
- General (3)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2007
(149)
-
▼
April
(20)
- God kills and makes alive
- Solomon has his brother murdered
- Why couldn't God combat iron chariots?
- Adoni-Bezek's thumbs and big toes cut off
- 10,000 killed
- Is God good and holy or jealous, unforgiving, and ...
- Kill the prophet whose proclamation does not come ...
- Kill the man who shows contempt for a priest
- Genocide at Jericho (well almost)
- God is a consuming fire. He will destroy and help...
- Strange Rituals
- God sends venomous snakes to bite and kill his peo...
- Killed for bringing a bad report
- Get married, bear children, and keep house!
- Eating Flesh and Drinking Blood
- Stoned to death for cursing during a fight
- An eye for eye, tooth for tooth
- God's view of slavery
- Kill those who work on the Sabbath
- God kills all the firstborn sons of the Egyptians
-
▼
April
(20)
36 comments:
The whole story might help:
Judges 1:7 "And Adonibezek said, Threescore and ten kings, having their thumbs and their great toes cut off, gathered their meat under my table: as I have done, so God hath requited me. And they brought him to Jerusalem, and there he died."
The account in verse 6 isn't a case of random, needless violence. It's retribution.
God absolutely does condone violence in the OT and for a good reason: Deu 7:1 "When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou; And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them: Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods:
Rom 9:17 "...Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth."
God has His reasons and they're not ours to judge.
Eternal suffering and torture? I assume you're talking about hell? The Bible doesn't teach of such a place. There will be ONE judgment and one judgment only and it'll occur when Christ returns. Until then, people die, good and evil alike, and they all end up in the same place: the grave.
Job 3:13-19 "For now should I have lain still and been quiet, I should have slept: then had I been at rest, With kings and counsellors of the earth, which built desolate places for themselves; Or with princes that had gold, who filled their houses with silver: Or as an hidden untimely birth I had not been; as infants which never saw light. There the wicked cease from troubling; and there the weary be at rest. There the prisoners rest together; they hear not the voice of the oppressor. The small and great are there; and the servant is free from his master."
"God has His reasons and they're not ours to judge."
What a lame and pathetic excuse for explaining away such crap thinking and horrible violence.
Your god did not have his lofty mysterious reasons...
Anymore than Allah has his reasons for why the WTC is no longer standing.
AND it is for me to JUDGE because the bible is just a piece of literature and lemmings like you take it as the infallible, authoritative, perfect word of a being that probably doesn't exist.
The good reason you spoke of is to steal another people's land and make it their own in the name of their god. Kind of like what we did to the Native Americans.
Mere men committed genocide and stole lands and cities and personal belongings and quieted their collective conscience by claiming it was the will or direction of a god.
You must be one of the "sects" of the christian cult that thinks hell is a permanent second death and your soul no longer exists.
EVEN though there are many many scriptures that point to a place of suffering originally made for the devil and his angels, but is now available to human souls that reject christ.
Even Jesus called hell a place of suffering and torment and of weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Are you saying Jesus was just kidding or lying?
If you are weeping and gnashing your teeth than you exist in some form. Duh!
Read your f--king bible and get an opinion of your own, not some apologetics moron or the theory of your pastor.
You reject both the Bible and God but make claims that defend its so-called teachings. Why?
Speaking of getting your own opinion, where exactly does Scripture say hell was originally made for the devil and his angels? I'd also like to know where the idea of two judgments are taught in Scripture.
Job 3:13-19 "For now should I have lain still and been quiet, I should have slept: then had I been at rest, With kings and counsellors of the earth, which built desolate places for themselves; Or with princes that had gold, who filled their houses with silver: Or as an hidden untimely birth I had not been; as infants which never saw light. There the wicked cease from troubling; and there the weary be at rest. There the prisoners rest together; they hear not the voice of the oppressor. The small and great are there; and the servant is free from his master." Doesn't seem like hell to me. Doesn't seem like heaven either. What's Job talking about?
You obviously know your Bible so I patiently await your response.
I am not defending it's teachings. But looking at it literally (i.e. the way it is actually written) something which christians claim to do, but fail becuase they read the damn book for themselves.
They live their lives based on "sound bites" and "cliff notes" versions of a piece of literature so riddled with contradiction and idiocy.
The bible is a poorly written story book and filled with poorly flushed out teachings on "morality" that were acceptable to the primitive cultures that embraced it and spread it around the planet.
It's tired and busted and those who try to re-invent it or make it more relevant with clever pop-philosophy or watered down dogma to make it seem less barbaric and ridiculous.
You are obviously one of many who claim to possess "bible knowledge" and yet are ignorant of a great many "truths" that are in bible.
(I use the word truths very sarcastically here)
On Job's Limbo-World...
Your quote from Job is probably a reference to a Jewish mythical place called Abraham's Bosom.
Jesus referenced it in Luke 16:22
"The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried."
It is where the Roman's got the concept of Purgatory. It is nothing new to religion, and traces of a "limbo" like place are found in most ancient polytheistic and monotheistic faiths dated back thousands of years.
On HELL as a place of
conscious torment...
JESUS EXACT words below.
Matthew 5:22b
"But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell."
FYI: Hell is a place where fire can exist, thus it is not a place of non-existence.
Matthew 5:30
"And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell."
FYI: Hell is a physical as well as spiritual place or your body would not be able to exist there.
Mark 9:43
"If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out."
FYI: In Hell the fire NEVER goes out. That would be defined as eternal wouldn't it?
Hmmm... See a pattern with the main man Jesus's take on hell, yet?
Luke 16:23
"In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side."
Rich, selfish bastard in hell being tormented. Sounds like eternal concious, suffering to me.
Matthew 13:41-42
"The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
again..
Matthew 136:49-50
"This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous and throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth"
Luke 13:28-29
"There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out. 29People will come from east and west and north and south, and will take their places at the feast in the kingdom of God."
On hell as a place
for fallen angels...
Matthew 25:41 - JESUS EXACT WORDS
"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."
Confirm by the rock of the church.
2 Peter 2:4
"For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment"
And of course, the ned of fairy tale...
Revelation 20:10
"And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever."
The beast(anti-christ) and the false prophet are humans, right? Anyone who follows them suffers their fate, right?
Careful Jason... the more you debate with me, the more faith you might lose as I point out the obvious.
You're making this too easy, Martin :) I can show you what the Bible says about the death state, where it says it and how it fits into the overall message. Can you do the same for the existence of hell as a place of punishment in both the OT and NT?
God condemned the Children of Israel for their dreadful crime of burning their children in the fire; which, said God, "I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind." (Jer. 7:31) How then can anyone accuse God of a worse crime: burning people for eternity in an imaginary place of torment?
Abraham's Bosom
The quote from Job is "probably" referring to a mythical place called Abraham’s Bosom? Continue your defense of Christian beliefs; Where's your proof this is a reference to Abraham's Bosom?
Hell - Conscious Torment
You say hell is a place of conscious torment. "Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man….his breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth, in THAT VERY DAY HIS THOUGHTS PERISH." (Ps.146:3-4). If thoughts perish when someone dies, how can hell torment be conscious?
"For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not anything, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten" (Ecc. 9:5). Nothing could be more final and comprehensive: the dead KNOW NOTHING. How can they be tormented if they know nothing? Is "knowing nothing" conscious torment?
Hell is just the grave, friend. It’s not as Hollywood as one would like but it is what it is. Not even Jesus’ body, which is said to have gone down to hell, suffered any lasting effects of the horrible fires of hell. Maybe it’s magical, non-burning fire…?
Hell
Matthew 5:22 – Where in this verse does Jesus teach that wicked people will be condemned to eternal hell torment?
Matthew 5:30 – What are those strange immortal worms that seem to have a remarkable resistance to hell-fire mentioned in Mark 9:42 (the parallel passage)? Because if you're going to take take the cutting off of a limb to be literal, surely those crazy worms must be literal as well. I’m also struggling with how cutting off one’s limb can improve one’s chances of salvation…?
Luke 16:23 – Well, let’s just see what happens now that you’ve taken this as a literal description of actual events (and not as a parable):
1. The passage speaks about bodies not souls.
2. The passage states that there was a great gulf fixed between Abraham and the rich man, yet they could both see and converse with each other. Is the great gulf to be taken literally?
3. Is heaven literally a place where conversations can be carried on between those enjoying bliss and those agonizing in hell?
4. How could Lazarus go literally to Abraham's bosom? Abraham (as now) was unquestionably dead and without his reward. (Heb. 11:8, 13, 39, 40).
Wait, there’s more:
Do those who believe in Abraham's bosom really believe that this is a place where the righteous deserve to be? Remember that both Abraham and Lazarus could see and hear the sorrowful pleadings of the rich man from across the "great chasm". Can you imagine "rewarding" the righteous by confining them to a place where for centuries they would have to see the agony, smell the smoke, and listen to the shrieks of the damned as they are screaming for relief while being tortured on the other side of the "great chasm"? Would you consider having to witness such a sight for eternity a "reward"?
Some additional absurdities to consider:
1. If you were being tormented in flames of fire, as the rich man was, would you request only a "drop of water" to quench your agony? Would not a jug or jar, or even a handful of water be more logical?
2. Do you believe that the rich man was so stupid as to expect righteous Lazarus to leave the comfort of "Abraham's bosom" and spend time visiting the rich man in flames of fire?
Hmmm…I do see a pattern here: Hell is absurd.
The questions continue.
Matthew 13:41-42 Do you think tares are also condemned to eternal punishment in hell? I ask because the wicked are symbolized by the tares in verse 30. If tares aren’t punished for eternity, why would you assume the wicked are?
(BTW, the weeping and gnashing of teeth will be the reaction of all those people who realize they weren’t granted admittance into the kingdom because of their false beliefs - see Luke 13:28)
Fallen Angels
What a bizarre concept. Fallen angels. What will they think of next...
Matthew 25:41 - Hell is a place for fallen angels as well? Well that’s interesting because Hebrews 1:14 says angels are “…ALL ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation…”. How do fallen angels in hell minister to the heirs of salvation?
Maybe the confusion is with the words “eternal fire”…? Fire is used in Scripture for utter destruction, not for preservation in torment. Consider that Sodom and Gomorrha were destroyed by fire and brimstone and are now set forth as "an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." (Jude 7, Gen. 19:24). Are these cities still burning?
2 Peter 2:4 – So fallen angels are in hell, in dungeons, awaiting judgment. Right. Well here’s the fundamental problem with angels being tormented in hell:
1) The wages of sin is death. (Romans 6:23)
2) If divine angels were sinners, then they would die.
3) But Jesus said angels do not die. (Luke 20:36)
4) Therefore, the angels which sinned were human, not divine angels.
I personally like to include verse 5 in the mix when quoting from this section. Reading the entire context does magical things! There's an interesting and clearly deliberate contrast here. God spared not those which sinned, and spared not the old world, but saved Noah from the flood. Clearly one and the same incident is referred to here - the flood. Those that sinned were killed in the flood, but Noah was saved.
So why describe angels “chained in darkness”? Because chains or bonds are used as a symbol of death. Psalm 18:4-5 (NLT): "The ropes of death surrounded me; the floods of destruction swept over me. The grave wrapped its ropes around me; death itself stared me in the face." Note also "the floods of destruction". Great symbolic language describing the Flood...
No eternal damnation here. Just a simple, overwhelming death.
Revelation 20:10 – In verse 14, death and hell are also cast into the lake of fire. Since you're saying the lake of fire is hell, please explain this verse.
BTW, when did these angels fall and where is it recorded…?
I'd also like to know where the idea of two judgments are taught in Scripture.
Hey Martin, read Gen 3:19 "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."
The curse surprisingly doesn't include the possibility of writhing in agony for eternity. Man was TAKEN from the ground, man RETURNS to the ground. How much clearer could it be?
Hello people!
Are you arguing for or against the bible? It is hard to tell.
Is the bible meant to be taken literally, or is it all metaphor
or parable-like story telling?
If not literal, then who determines if a six day creation, talking snakes and donkeys, impossible plagues, god writing ten commandments on stone tablets, prophets that run faster than horses, god's son doing miracles that aren't as cool as Criss angel's show is all just fanciful storytelling or literally happened?
Jason you just pointed out more contradictions making it even less valid and my assumption is you are in defense of the book.
Your arguments are weak and filled with denial of the very words of christ mentioning hell as a place of torment.
Isn't christ the final authority if you are a christian?
The Hebrew take on Hell and the Christian take on Hell have always been dogmatically opposed.
Never said I oppose this thought.
Might be why the 3rd century Roman church slaughtered the Jews and burned down synagogues shortly after christianity was declared the official religion of the empire.
I am neither Jewish or Christian.
I am atheist.
How about classifying yourself, Jason, what denomination are you?
Or more accurately, if non-denom where do you attend?
Your beliefs are less than mainstream.
But, being raised christian, I do know the bible inside and out and it is funny that all of the "quotes" being given for hell as a non-existence are old testament.
The new testament Hell was more influenced by the Greek mythical place known as Hades.
As far as Abraham's Bosom, there is no scripture for it, but it was such a part of the culture and belief system that jesus felt the need to reference it in a teaching.
Are you ignorant about history, culture and archeology as most christian's are?
Jason, quoting vague scripture after scripture, especially from poetic books such as Psalms and Ecclesiastes which are considered worthless to most scholars proves nothing.
There is little or no archaeological proof that David ever existed or if he wrote the Psalms, he is likely to be a fabrication of the Jewish people who needed a hero for themselves and their children.
The author of Ecclesiastes is unknown, though some like to
assume it was Solomon because his legend is remembered with such fondness. There is no proof Solomon ever existed either, or at least not the way the bible mentions him.
There is no proof that his glorious temple ever existed and there are no records outside of Jewish myth that a king was ever so rich he put his silver outside the city, because there was so much gold inside.
As far as fallen angels go...
Are you serious?
You don't believe in demons,
yet you seem to be a christian?
What then did jesus cast out of people? What did he send into the pigs, a story which is to be taken literally, right? Why did he tell the disciples in the GREAT F--KING COMMISSION TO CAST OUT DEMONS?
Was he joking or lying or maybe the christian faith is absurd and it's time to put it out of the religion section at Borders on the shelf where it belongs with the rest of mythology and fiction form days of old.
Again, the fallen angels (demons) are referenced only a few times in the bible, yet a huge part of the religion, whether catholic or protestant.
Some say Isiah 14 is a reference to Lucifer becoming Satan. I think it is too vague and could be a political rant draped with spiritual metaphor as the Jews
were accustomed to doing.
Some say Revelation 12:4 is about the rebellion in heaven and Satan took a 1/3 of god's angels with him as 12:9 backs it up.
Rev 12:4
"His tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth."
Confirmed in black and white in...
Rev 12:9
"The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him."
Read Wikipedia for more...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallen_angel
Do you even know what it
is you believe?
I do.
I believe that Peter Jackson and George Lucas are better at creating spiritual stories and parables with clever metaphors than were the ignorant authors of the bible.
Martin, you said a lot without really saying anything at all. I note your complete lack of Bible references to explain away my misguided and unlearned beliefs regarding Satan and hell. You resort to the typical "the books you mentioned are crap anyhow" (Psalms and Ecclesiastes) instead of actually refuting my comments using the very book you say you know inside and out and the which you claim I know nothing about.
“Is the Bible meant to be taken literally or is it all metaphor or parable-like.” The easiest answer to this is that the Bible assumes some intelligence from the reader. When is says “God created man”, God assumes we’ll take this literally. When the Bible says “Hell and death were cast into the lake of fire”, God assumes we’ll take this metaphorically. He assumes as such given the context in which the verse is contained and also additional references to said event/verse in other places in Scripture. For example, God creating man is never described as a metaphorical event anywhere else in the Bible. For example, the concept of dross is repeated often, always in a metaphorical context (à la Ezek 22).
Martin, what contradictions did I point out? Respond to my critiques of the verses you provided for your defense of hell as a place of eternal torment and we’ll chat. My “arguments are weak”. Lol Then it should be any problem explaining WHY they’re weak. Go on, the floor is all yours.
“It’s funny that all the quotes being given for hell as a non-existence are old testament.” What’s funny about it? Hell was around in the OT, right? Yet it’s not mentioned. God doesn’t even warn the Israelites about the pull of the devil and He never threatens eternal punishment in a fiery afterlife. Why not? What I think is equally as funny is that all the supposed proof for hell stems from a few scattered verses in the NT which completely contradict the overall Bible message concerning the death-state and the number of judgments that are to occur (which would happen to be one, not two).
Abraham's Bosom
If there’s no Scriptural evidence for Abraham’s Bosom, then how can you claim that the reference Job makes to death is actually referring to a mythical place that has no footing in the Bible? No. Instead Job is making a perfectly clear statement regarding the equality and finality of death.
Fallen Angels & Demons
The Isaiah 14 "proof" that Lucifer is Satan is the oldest trick in the book. Read the context. Who does the BIBLE say Lucifer is?
Revelation 12 is the second oldest trick in the book. Revelation 1:2 “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must SHORTLY COME TO PASS; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:” Tell me Martin, how can the book of Revelation contain a historical account of the fall of Satan and his evil angel hordes if the prophetical book of Revelation only contains things which “shortly must come to pass”?
Seems like you’ve been duped along with the rest of mainstream Christianity. Two supposed references to the existence of Satan and the answer is so clear about who they’re NOT talking about, it’s completely inexcusable why people continue to use them as a defense of their Satan doctrine. You say you know the Bible inside and out and yet you’ve fallen into the same trap as most others…
As for demons, what’s your definition of a demon? Who or what do you think they are?
I'm still waiting for Martin to answer the quesion about where Scripture says hell was originally made for the devil and his angels.
Do you people have ADD?
I already quoted it.
HERE IT IS AGAIN...
Matthew 25:41 - JESUS EXACT WORDS
"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."
Confirm by the "rock"
of his church, Peter.
2 Peter 2:4
"For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment"
I'm beginning to think I'm arguing with people who can't read or remember what they actually read.
As for you Jason, i gave you the exact words of your christ to answer to and you have pussy-footed around them as usual.
You are worse than Al Gore in debates when it comes to directly answering anything.
You are great at dodging and distracting instead of being honest about the inconsistencies and contradictions in black and white and also philosophically which are blatantly obvious to so many..
Not everything in Revelation is a future event. Back to Chapter 12, which many respected scholars believe is a flash back of sorts.
You must be clueless to think that it does not reference Jesus birth and his escape to Egypt and the later establishment of the christian faith. This is also the chapter that talks about the devil or Satan and his fallen angels.
Are you too pig-headed to read it in black and white or must you pontificate and use clever analogy and more religious trickery to avoid the obvious?
ANSWER MY PREVIOUS QUESTION SO I CAN SEE WHAT KIND OF BRAIN WASHING I AM DEALING WITH...
How about classifying yourself, Jason, what denomination are you?
Or more accurately, if non-denom where do you attend?
Hell
Eternal fire is hell? Geesh, now I’m really confused. Is hell eternal fire or is hell a gloomy dungeon?
Matthew 25:41 - Where exactly does Jesus say that hell is a place of eternal suffering and torment originally created for the devil and his angels…? Did you read my last post? I'd like to hear your thoughts:
--
Fire is used in Scripture for utter destruction, not for preservation in torment. Consider that Sodom and Gomorrha were destroyed by fire and brimstone and are now set forth as "an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." (Jude 7, Gen. 19:24). Are these cities still burning?
--
Also, have a quick look at verse 45. The word "punishment" is translated from the Greek word, "kolasis" which means "a pruning". This denotation is in complete harmony with the Scriptural teaching on the punishment of the wicked. Jesus said that the wicked would be cast like branches into the fire. (John 15:6). The Psalmist said they would be "cut off" (Psa. 37:9) and "shall not be". (Psa. 37:10). Malachi states that the wicked will be burnt like stubble leaving them "neither root nor branch" (Mal. 4:1), like "ashes" to be trodden under foot. (Mal. 4:3). This is not the kind of language one would associate with immortal souls in torment for eternity!
All throughout Scripture, and it’s no different in this chapter, the concept of life vs. death is taught. Never once is it life vs. eternal agony in hell. Jesus will give the righteous eternal life. The unrighteous will receive eternal death (i.e. never to be resurrected).
2 Peter 2:4 You do a great job of ignoring my arguments ☺ Here it is again:
--
Here’s the fundamental problem with angels being tormented in hell:
1) The wages of sin is death. (Romans 6:23)
2) If divine angels were sinners, then they would die.
3) But Jesus said angels do not die. (Luke 20:36)
4) Therefore, the angels which sinned were human, not divine angels.
I personally like to include verse 5 in the mix when quoting from this section. Reading the entire context does magical things! There's an interesting and clearly deliberate contrast here. God spared not those which sinned, and spared not the old world, but saved Noah from the flood. Clearly one and the same incident is referred to here - the flood. Those that sinned were killed in the flood, but Noah was saved.
So why describe angels “chained in darkness”? Because chains or bonds are used as a symbol of death. Psalm 18:4-5 (NLT): "The ropes of death surrounded me; the floods of destruction swept over me. The grave wrapped its ropes around me; death itself stared me in the face." Note also "the floods of destruction". Great symbolic language describing the Flood...
No eternal damnation here. Just a simple, overwhelming death.
--
Your rebuttal?
Advice
Lol Hey Martin, take your own advice: stop pussy footing and dodging. ☺ Where’s the rebuttal for Abraham’s Bosom? Where’s the rebuttal for the rich man and Lazarus? Where’s the answer to what those immortal worms are in Matthew 5? Why not answer who and what you think demons are? Where’s your answer to who Lucifer is in Isaiah 14 or how many judgments the Bible teaches are to occur? What about how death and hell were both cast into hell in Revelation 20? If all angels are ministering spirits how can some not be? Martin, you do a lot of talking and blaming but you’re coming across as quite the hypocrite.
Revelation
“Not everything in Revelation is a future event.” Again, let me repost the verse that introduces the entire book. Maybe you didn’t read it: “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must SHORTLY COME TO PASS; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:”
What part of this verse suggests that there are things in the book that have already come to pass?????
BTW, you’re absolutely right, I’m completely clueless about Chapter 12 referencing Jesus’ birth. Why? Because Revelation is a book containing THINGS WHICH MUST SHORTLY COME TO PASS. That’s right: THINGS WHICH MUST SHORTLY COME TO PASS. Is this thing on…?
You’re a funny guy. You read the entire 12th chapter of Revelation and somehow, magically, you pick out exactly ONE symbol as being literal – the man child. How do you do it? Lol Incredible powers of deduction, perhaps? Anti-religion trickery, perhaps?
And then you even suggest that Revelation 12 talks about Jesus’ flight into Egypt!! Incredible!!! Doesn’t verse 5 talk about the man-child being caught up to heaven BEFORE the woman fled into the wilderness? Well now, you’ve got quite the problem on your hands: How could the child be Jesus if he was in heaven before Mary fled to Egypt and how could he be in heaven immediately after his birth if he didn’t ascend until after his resurrection?
But you know your Bible inside and out. This shouldn’t be any problem for you to clear up. ;)
No, the man-child is absolutely not Jesus. It cannot be Jesus because Revelation is a book containing THINGS WHICH MUST SHORTLY COME TO PASS. There are many possibilities about who the woman and child might be, including Constantine (represented by the child) and the members of the Church (represented by the woman). Speaking of respected scholars, Hippolytus (200AD) and Andreas (520AD) both believed in a variation of the former.
The use of symbolism in Revelation, which makes up the vast majority of the book, follows the consistent use of symbolism right throughout the entire Bible. Unlock the meaning of the symbols and you unlock the meaning of the book. FYI, the symbol used most frequently to represent Israel is a woman. Likewise in the New Testament, the symbol used almost exclusively to represent the Christian body is a woman… Coincidence? There’s no such thing ☺
NOTE: We can already see that the male child is being presented in a manner which makes him look like Christ, and yet a way which proves to us that he cannot possibly be Christ. Coincidence? There’s no such thing ☺
Ultimately, and in the same manner, Revelation 12 does not include a historical account of fallen angels and Satan. Sorry. ☺
Uou don’t believe in the Bible & God…Why do you care what I or any other Christian actually believes??? Bizarre.
And you’ll be pleased to know that I haven’t been brainwashed. Give me a little more credit please, Maybe you’ve been brainwashed to think I’ve been brainwashed…oh the fun we could have. ;) Follow the link in my profile and you’ll find out everything you’ll need to know. If you’d like to continue this discussion on my site, just let me know. It’s been a blast!
You really need to get laid, Jason.
Your ability to explain away everything with "hidden knowledge" and clever conceptual application is most amusing. You are very good at bullshitting yourself about being right about everything.
The average believer reads the best selling NIV, which has sold 250 millions copies worldwide.
The average pastor spoon feeds his flock to make sure they come to church and pay their tithes so he can keep his "business" running.
The average christian is a moron.
If god's word is for everyone, everyone should be able to read, comprehend and understand it easily.
That is not the case.
If is filled with confusion, contradictions, historically inaccurate statements and downright silly and impossible supernatural events.
You are definitely above average in your knowledge but refuse to admit that perhaps you don't know it all.
I will look at your profile and site links if it makes you feel important, but still do not understand why you don't just come out and say what religion you are.
Splitting hairs over what kind of angels Peter was talking about or having to know the ancient Greek or Aramaic or what the term "fire" represents metaphorically or philosophically is a sad example of how the bible is convoluted, poorly written piece of spiritual fiction.
If this is the best your supreme being can do in terms of a piece of literature no wonder the world is so f--ked up.
Jason the Christadelphian...
That explains it!!!
Aren't you the weirdos that teach a man should NEVER have long hair even though most images of Christ show him with long hair.
There are even groups of Christadelphians who teach a woman should never have short hair either as backed up by many scriptures.
I remember Christadelphians protesting christian heavy metal bands like Stryper in the 80s simply because of their hair.
I am arguing with a wacko.
You do realize your "flavor" of christianity is classified as a cult by many mainstream theologians and masters of apologetics, don't you?
"Christadelphian teaching bears certain important doctrinal resemblances to traditional Armstrongism and the Jehovah’s Witnesses: rejection of the Trinity as Satanic; Christ’s atonement for past sins only; the necessity of good works for salvation; the impersonality of the Holy Spirit; a denial of eternal punishment and so on." John Ankerberg
Hey Martin, you seem more then just a bit threatened by Christadelphians. What'd they do to you, show you how little you actually know about the Bible? :)
Posting the same comments three times in the different posts isn't just stupid, it speaks volumes about your fear of having a serious and intelligent Bible conversation. Grow up - no one's interested in hearing you whine about wackos and weirdos.
“You really need to get laid…” – In all seriousness, what’s your problem?
“As far as something constructive, you have yet to offer anything thought provoking and have resorting to judging me personally instead of being able to debate my points with any elegance or proof of your own.” Your hypocrisy is nothing short of laughable.
“Your ability to explain away everything with "hidden knowledge" and clever conceptual application is most amusing. You are very good at bullshitting yourself about being right about everything.” Hidden knowledge? Ummmm…what’re you talking about? If you have a problem with something I said, then use your Bible knowledge and simply explain it to me.
I have no problem admitting I don’t know it all, but I certainly know enough about mainstream Christian doctrines to know they’re wrong. And as for God’s word being for everyone, it is. It’s a simple, simple book to understand. But people are lazy – they want salvation spoonfed to them and the responsibility of such is left with ‘educated’ church ‘leaders’ who are more intent on spreading a socially acceptable Bible message because it brings in more money then actually teaching people what God says about death and the soul and heaven and the nature of Christ and baptism. This isn’t the fault of God, it’s the fault of selfish, greedy man.
The reason why people think the Bible is difficult to understand is because of the huge variety of doctrines in Christianity, most of which contradict someone else’s doctrines. So from an outside perspective, it’s a real mess. However, it’s certainly not difficult to pick the right doctrines from the wrong doctrines. Any doctrine that isn’t based on Scripture (purgatory, infant sprinkling, etc.) is wrong because it’s man-made and any doctrine that produces Biblical contradictions (the Trinity, immortal soul, etc.) is wrong because the Bible is infallible. And that’s about it. See, the responsibility rests with the individual to search out the truth for him or herself. If they can’t be bothered to do so, it has nothing to do with the Bible, it has everything to do with human nature.
What “religion” I belong to has no bearing in the least on anything discussed here or elsewhere. People want to know because it’s far easier to criticize a religion then it is a specific belief. There’s less Bible work involved. Yours is a case in point.
And the only thing that’s been convoluted so far have been your answers to my responses. You don’t respond because you don’t know the answers, and that’s completely alright. Just admit as such and we’ll go from there.
Hell/Heaven
1. Is hell eternal fire or is hell a gloomy dungeon?
2. Where is the concept of two judgments taught in Scripture?
3. Deut 12:31 "You shall not worship the LORD your God in that way; for every abomination to the LORD which He hates they have done to their gods; for they burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods.” God considers the burning of sons and daughters an “abomination”. It doesn’t make sense then why God would consider it acceptable to burn the wicked in hell for all eternity. Response?
4. Matthew 25:41 - Where does Jesus say that hell is a place of eternal suffering and torment originally created for the devil and his angels…?
5. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire and brimstone and are now set forth as "an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." (Jude 7, Gen. 19:24). Are these cities still burning? Yes or no?
6. If hell is a literal place described in Revelation, how is it that death and hell were literally cast into hell? (Rev. 20)
7. David isn’t in heaven (Acts 2:34) and no one has ever seen God (John 1:18). If heaven-going is indeed a Bible-based doctrine, how can these verses be explained?
Death
1. Ecc 3:19-20 “For what happens to the sons of men also happens to animals; one thing befalls them: as one dies, so dies the other. Surely, they all have one breath; man has no advantage over animals, for all is vanity. All go to one place: all are from the dust, and all return to dust.” If man has no advantage over the animals and animals aren’t taught as having immortal souls, then neither do we. Response?
Fallen Angels
1. Who does the Bible say Lucifer is in Isaiah 14?
2. 2 Peter 2:4 – This isn’t “splitting hairs” – this is showing why angels can’t sin. It’s a fundamental point that undermines the entire concept of fallen angels.
1) The wages of sin is death. (Romans 6:23)
2) If divine angels were sinners, then they would die.
3) But Jesus said angels do not die. (Luke 20:36)
4) Therefore, the angels which sinned were human, not divine angels.
Your response?
3. “All angels are ministering spirits” – explain this in light of the belief in fallen angels. How can "all" actually mean "some"?
4. How can Revelation 12 contain a historical account of the fall of Satan and his angels if the book contains “things which must shortly come to pass”? (Rev 1:2)
Abraham’s Bosom
1. If there’s no Scriptural evidence for Abraham’s Bosom, then on what grounds do you claim that the reference Job makes to death is actually referring to a mythical place that isn’t even found in the Bible?
I’m sincerely interested in reading your answers. So far you’ve been “pussy-footing” and “dodging” like it was nobody’s business. ;)
"the Bible is infallible"
If this is what you truly believe than you are a fool like most religious people.
The bible has been proven to be historically inaccurate on a great number of issues as well as on a number of scientific ones.
Explain this one to me...
WHAT about the flood "story" and Noah's Ark? Is it truth or a lie as presented in the black and white?
According to the book of Genesis, god killed all of creation (plants and animals) and all humans but the 8 Jews in Noah's family with a global worldwide flood that left no scientific eveidence... AND all this happened within the last 5000 - 6000 years!
Are you now turning off your brain and telling me that over the course of a few thousand years all those animals and plants went through super fast micro-evolution and that from 8 jewish people we got all the races re-established on earth such as White, Mediterranean, Hispanic, African, Caribbean, Indian, Nepalese, Maldivian, Sri Lankan, Bangladeshi, Chinese, Japanese, South-East Asian, Arabic, Egyptian or Maghreb?
8 genetically jewish people are responsible for the creation of 15 - 20 races and 6 billion people over only 50 to 60 generations.
The MATH and the DNA do not add up.
It is scientifically impossible.
Hey Martin, where's the scientific evidence that something can be created from nothing?
I love how you continue to avoid talking about Bible verses. How on earth did you ever get to know the Bible inside and out? Cut a hole in one and crawl out the other side?
I am done splitting hairs over stupid interpretation and hidden meanings. Time to go for the jugular.
If the bible is pure truth than creation account is true and a literal six days and a literal one man and one woman made us all.
And also the flood story is 100% true according to you even though there is no hard proof and simple biology and geology.
What about bats...
Somehow, quite perversely, they changed from "fowls" to mammals between the time Moses (according to literalists) wrote the Pentateuch and now.
What about polar bears?
How did Noah get polar bears on the ark and how did they survive in the desert conditions of the middle east? Or did they "evolve" from a sole bear species Noah saved over a few decades as some looney bible literalists suggest.
What about the dinosaurs?
How and when does their undeniable existence factor in?
What about carnivourous plants? What purpose would a non-sentient life that kills sentient life for food serve? Are venus fly traps pre-fall or post-fall creations?
What about parasites and viruses? What would god re-introduced them or perhaps introduce them in the first place when there only purpose is to kill and destroy other beings? Were they all on the ark? Why didn't they kill off the crew and animals then? They could not have survived in salt water. Why are they still around?
I love how you keep your nose in the bible and the bible alone, because other truth and fact and science and logic and reason and common f--king sense are a threat to your silly, poorly thought out religion.
Religious fanatics are sad and pathetic and weak which is why you cling to some imaginary best friend for your self-wroth and self-esteem.
I always thought the kid's that had best friends were a little weird. The adults who will not give them up are just plain psycho.
Jehovah and Christ will soon be joining Zeus and Hercules, Amen-Ra and Osiris, Odin and Loki and other dead gods on the shelf of mythology where they belong.
Probably not in our lifetime, but hopefully before this type of insanity ruins humanity's chance of survival or advancement.
The Order of Creation
…is a bottomless can of worms for literal bible readers, especially if one takes literally and in their most obvious meanings both Genesis 1 and 2, which don't match in many particulars.
But consider just a couple of minor difficulties in the first chapter.
For one, the light of day is created before the sun from which it comes.
If we assume it was some divine form of light, requiring no material source, then what need of the sun?
In the same curious order were plants created before the sun, which is needed for photosynthesis.
THE BIBLE IS A CRUEL
JOKE ON MANKIND.
Genesis 1 - creation story.
God makes animals and plants first.
Gen 1:9 earth was barren
Gen 1:11 god makes plants
Gen 1:20-23 god makes fish and birds, and takes a breather
Gen 1:24-25 God makes the rest of the animals
Gen 1:26-27 God makes man (both sexes) and refers to himself as us, so is easily diagnosed schizophrenic.
Genesis 2 - creation story #2.
God makes man first, than makes plants and then animals for him to inspect.
Gen 2:4-6 earth was barren.
gen 2:7 god made man (male only)
Gen 2:8 god plants a garden
Gen 2:18 god made a mistake and man is lonely so he makes him some pets
Gen 2:19-20 god makes the animals for man, but nothing turns him on
Gen 2:21-22 god knocks man out and steals his parts to make a woman so man can finally have sex like all the other animals.
This shit is ridiculous!
IF THE BEGINNING OF THE BOOK CAN'T TELL IT STRAIGHT HOW CAN THE REST BE TRUSTED?
What about Carnivores?
Gen 1:30
"And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food." And it was so."
One of the more bizarre creationist notions is that before the "Fall", all creatures lived in perfect harmony, and all ate plants (it seems to have something to do with death not existing until Adam bit the fruit). Thus we have an idyllic Eden, with herbivorous cheetahs, eagles, rattlesnakes, wolves, tarantulas, and presumably tyrannosauri and velociraptors. Indeed, the lion could lie down with the lamb. But then there's me and my dumb questions: Unless the carnivores evolved really rapidly after the "Fall", they came originally equipped as they are now–with claws, incisors, fangs, web-spinning apparatus, etc. What need would an herbivorous rattlesnake have for venomous fangs? Why would a cheetah need blazing speed, unless to run down impala–and why would the impala need to be fast unless to escape speedy cheetahs? Why would those infamous peppered moths have needed camouflage? Why would a skunk need its stink, or a porcupine its quills? What sort of grass did a tyrannosaurus eat with its steak-knife teeth? No matter how hard I try, I can't imagine without amusement a black widow trapping what–berries?–in her web, then envenomating them until they quit struggling! A bison is "designed" as a herbivore, and has been one for a long, long time. Your housecat is plainly "designed" as a meat-eater, and would clearly have a devil of a time trying to graze for a living.
Please explain the Great White Shark eating plants... What plants would it possibly eat? SEAWEED?
Jaws was a "veggie" before Eve ate the forbidden fruit?
Stupid. Dumb. Ignorant.
Ridiculous. Laughable.
The Bible.
It's OK to admit you don't know and your bible is f--king clueless too.
No no no, that's not how it works. You take time to answer MY questions first, the same ones you've been ignoring for a while now, then I'll happily answer yours.
1. Is hell eternal fire or is hell a gloomy dungeon?
2. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire and brimstone and are now set forth as "an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." (Jude 7, Gen. 19:24). Are these cities still burning? Yes or no?
3. If hell is a literal place described in Revelation, how is it that death and hell were literally cast into hell? (Rev. 20)
4. David isn’t in heaven (Acts 2:34) and no one has ever seen God (John 1:18). If heaven-going is indeed a Bible-based doctrine, how can these verses be explained?
5. Who does the Bible say Lucifer is in Isaiah 14?
6. How can Revelation 12 contain a historical account of the fall of Satan and his angels if the book contains “things which must shortly come to pass”? (Rev 1:2)
7. If there’s no Scriptural evidence for Abraham’s Bosom, then on what grounds do you claim that the reference Job makes to death is actually referring to a mythical place that isn’t even found in the Bible?
8. Where's the scientific evidence that something can be created from nothing?
Jason, you are obviously a religious control freak and need to steer this "debate" so just to amuse you and see what pathetic answers you have for the moronic Noah myth and the idiocy of the literal creation story I will oblige.
1. ANSWERED
There is no hell. It is just an imaginary place. You are not tricking me into answering that one your way with two stupid choices.
2. ANSWERED
Sodom and Gomorrah could possibly made up places as well. If they were destroyed it was by natural, not supernatural means, perhaps a meteorite. brimstone which is actually the element know as sulfur is something found deep within the earth and there is little possibility it could have come from the sky and survive atmospheric entry without burning up before hitting the ground unless the meteorites were very large and then many would have left impact craters near the Dead Sea, none of which can be found.
3. ANSWERED
Rev 20:13 "The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. 14Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire."
Again dead, conscious people in Hades (a greek concept) being sent to the a "lake of fire" which is reference many times a eternal place in the bible referenced just 5 verses earlier in verse 10!!!
Rev 20:10 And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
It is mentioned just 5 verses prior and you are asking me to prove it!
Are you sure you don't have f--king ADD or perhaps selective memory?
4. ANSWERED
Jesus said "I say unto this day you will be with me in paradise (heaven)" to one of the other men on the cross did he not?
Again in Matthew 22:30
"At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven."
Jesus references this actual place multiple times all over the gospels. Matthew 24:36, Matthew 28:2, Matthew 28:18, Mark 12:25, Mark 13:32, and so on and so on.
Is Jesus AGAIN lying and Christadelphians are the ultimate holder of TRUTH?
5. ANSWERED
Good one. Lucifer is not mentioned by name. Some, like you say it is about the king of babylon, most historical christianity say that verse 12 "How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn!" is referencing Lucifer's fall from heaven and perhaps insinuating his influence over Babylon.
The devil/satan/lucifer is referenced as the morning star in Rev 2:27 "He will rule them with an iron scepter; he will dash them to pieces like pottery'— just as I have received authority from my Father. 28 I will also give him the morning star."
6. ANSWERED
Chapter 12 was a back story you stubborn fool. Just because verse 1:2 talks of the future does not meant the allegory is not obviously referencing the past events with imagery. 99% of biblical scholars agree. Your silly cult is one of a few sects that does not.
Verses 7-9 7And there was war in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. 9The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him."
These verses make a mockery of your "no literal devil" and "no fallen angels or demons" doctrines.
7. ANSWERED
Oh, but it is in the bible, Jesus referred to it in his parable in Luke 16:22. It was only a parable, but the belief of this place was so widespread that he referenced it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosom_of_Abraham
Does Job reference it, who cares?
Isn't this the book that has Satan playing mind games with Job, who is basically a decent guy?
Job 1:6 "One day the angels [a] came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan [b] also came with them. 7 The LORD said to Satan, "Where have you come from?"
Satan answered the LORD, "From roaming through the earth and going back and forth in it."
8 Then the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil."
9 "Does Job fear God for nothing?" Satan replied. 10 "Have you not put a hedge around him and his household and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, so that his flocks and herds are spread throughout the land. 11 But stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face."
12 The LORD said to Satan, "Very well, then, everything he has is in your hands, but on the man himself do not lay a finger."
Then Satan went out from the presence of the LORD. "
Why then does your idiotic church claim Satan was not an angelic being, but merely "evil" that is in our sin nature. Is it another lie or trick from god in his infallible book? Or blatent stupidity on the part of your cult?
8. ANSWERED
"Where's the scientific evidence that something can be created from nothing?" The weakest fall back arguement against evolution by creationists.
Scientific evidence shows that energy transforms or takes on different forms it never is created or destroyed, it goes on and on and on. There is no proof that there ever was nothingness. The universe may have just always been around in one form or another and is always changing, expanding, collapsing, etc. It is primitive to think all things need a beginning and and end. Energy is cyclical. Only your version of the story begins with a void of nothingness. Science's does not.
Now answer me about the "veggie" Jaws and coconut eating baby T-Rex and spiders weaving webs to trap fallen berries on Noah's magical boat that survived god's imaginary flood.
Oh, and 8 genetically Jewish people are responsible for the creation of 15 - 20 races and 6 billion people over only 50 to 60 generations.
This will be fun, I'm sure.
Don't forget the two - out of order contradictory creation stories.
Explain those without pathetic rationalizations, bible man.
Martin, I’m not a control freak, I’m just asking that you answer my questions which you’ve been avoiding for so long.
1. Hell - Fire or Gloom? I gave you two options because you’ve attempted to defend the idea that hell exists in Scripture. You’ve provided two different description of what hell is – eternal fire and a gloomy dungeon. Hence my question.
As a refresher, your words: “You must be one of the "sects" of the christian cult that thinks hell is a permanent second death and your soul no longer exists. EVEN though there are many many scriptures that point to a place of suffering originally made for the devil and his angels, but is now available to human souls that reject christ. Even Jesus called hell a place of suffering and torment and of weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Also, “FYI: Hell is a physical as well as spiritual place or your body would not be able to exist there.” You obviously think that hell as a place of suffering exists in the Bible. Here’s my question again: Is hell eternal fire or is hell a gloomy dungeon?
2. Eternal Fire I’m not interested in your scientific explanation of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. We’re discussing Scripture.
Pro-hell people use the Bible phrase “eternal fire” to describe hell and its environment. Instead, it’s simply a phrase that communicates eternal destruction (not suffering). The reason for this is the verse in Jude 7 which talks about the two cities burning for eternity. So, if you think people burn for eternity in hell in “eternal fire”, then the question remains: Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire and brimstone and are now set forth as "an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." (Jude 7, Gen. 19:24). Are these two cities still burning?
3. Hell - Revelation So what’s your answer to my question?
"Fire and brimstone" is used figuratively, not literally in Revelation. Consider the evidence:
1. In the first occurrence of the expression, "fire and brimstone" is said to issue from horses' mouths. (Rev. 9:17). This is certainly not a literal hell-fire.
2. If literal torment in hell were intended, then the language of the passage would require Jesus to be with his angels in hell, since it is stated: "He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels . . . and the Lamb." (Rev. 14:10).
3. Consistency demands that if "tormented with fire and brimstone" is literal, so mush "the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation". (Rev. 14:10). But the latter is an obvious figure drawn from Jer. 25:15. Why then insist on literal fire and brimstone?
4. A figurative interpretation of "fire and brimstone" is in keeping with the general symbolic character of the Revelation. The woman = "that great city" (Rev. 17:18); water = "peoples" (Rev. 17:15); the Lamb similarly represents Jesus Christ. (Rev. 17:14).
b. The lake of fire is clearly the “second death”. This second death is the final judgment of the wicked after which they will cease to exist. Their death and destruction will be completely and absolutely eternal. I don’t understand the symbols in Revelation well enough to offer an explanation of what it all means, but from a simple reading of the context and understanding the figurative overtone of the book I know enough to say what it’s NOT talking about. And tormenting in hellfire isn’t what’s meant in this book.
4. Heaven-Going Not answered. David isn’t in heaven (Acts 2:34) and no one has ever seen God (John 1:18). If heaven-going is indeed a Bible-based doctrine, how can these verses be explained?
b. Jesus spent the next three days in the grave. Explain then how paradise can be heaven.
c. They will be “like the angels in heaven” (Mat 22:30). This is a comparison between angels and the righteous. How do you get heaven-going out of this verse? The resurrection happens on earth (1 Cor 15:52), immediately prior to God’s kingdom being established on earth.
5. Lucifer The King of Babylon is Lucifer. Isa 14:4 “That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say…” The real identity of Lucifer is so clear, it’s shocking to see so many people trying to turn him into something else. Lucifer is NEVER described as anything other then the king of Babylon. Too many problems arise if Lucifer is in fact Satan. For example:
1. Is Satan really accompanied by the sound of harps? (vs.11).
2. Is Satan to be covered by worms in the grave (vs. 11) or is he not rather to be cast into the lake of fire? (Rev. 20:10).
3. Why is Satan desirous of a place "in the sides of the north"? (vs. 13).
4. If Satan is a rebel angel, why is he called "the man"? (vs. 16).
5. What land has Satan possessed, the destruction of which merits him dishonourable burial? (vs. 20).
6. Where are Satan's people buried? (vs. 20) Is not the lake of fire said to be the common receptacle of Satan and his cohorts?
The simple explanation is this: "Ascending to heaven" is a Biblical idiom for increase in pride or exaltation, and "falling from heaven", an idiom for complete humiliation. See Jer. 51:53 (refers to Babylon); Lam. 2:1; Matt. 11:23 (refers to Capernaum).
6. Revelation - Past or Future How can Chapter 12 be a “back story” if the entire book contains “THINGS WHICH MUST SHORTLY COME TO PASS”? Maybe it's because it helps with your interpretation of this chapter...
If Revelation 20 IS a back story, how did the child (supposedly Jesus) ascend to heaven before the woman (supposedly Mary) flees to Egypt?
“These verses make a mockery of your "no literal devil" and "no fallen angels or demons" doctrines.” That’s rather amusing considering you’re basing your entire argument on non-literal elements ☺
If you’d like more information on why the dragon and stars in this chapter aren’t talking about the devil and his angels, I’d be more then happy to oblige.
7. Abraham's Bosom in the Book of Job Your words: “As far as Abraham's Bosom, there is no scripture for it.” Now you’re saying there is. Pick one.
BTW, if Abraham’s Bosom is a waiting place for those who “lived in faith”, according to the bizarre description in the link you provided, what on earth are the wicked doing there? (Job 3:17)
“Does Job reference it, who cares?” It matters because this is the whole point of the discussion!! Job describes the death state and it doesn’t include torment in hell – instead it talks about death being the great equalizer – everyone, the wicked and righteous, go to the SAME PLACE.
You’re actually making this much more complicated then it needs to be. Read all of Job 3. It describes an incredibly tortured man wracked with grief and the overwhelming sense of loss. Job is on the verge of giving up – he wonders why he couldn’t have just died from birth (3:11), and instead of experiencing the things he had just gone through, he would have been at rest (dead) with all the other dead people. Simple stuff that actually makes sense.
b. Job 1:6 – “Satan” is nothing more then an adversary. The word itself doesn’t in any way denote a supernatural evil being. The simple fact is we’re not told who the adversary is and it really doesn’t matter because the whole book is dedicated to Job’s reaction to the events in his life. Consider also that Job never attributed his afflictions to a rebel angel. His declaration was simply: "The hand of God hath touched me". (Job 19:21 cf. 2:10). Even Job's brethren, sisters and acquaintances acknowledged that the evil was brought upon Job by the LORD: "they bemoaned him, and comforted him over all the evil that the LORD had brought upon him." (Job 42:11).
8. Something From Nothing So what you’re saying is that science (which is actually nothing more then a few guys who published a paper) has conjured up this idea that energy has just always existed. This sounds an awful lot like faith. It also sounds an awful like an adequate description of God. ☺
It’d probably be worthwhile if you noted that this “cyclical energy” idea is nothing more than a theory based around certain assumptions.
9. Two Creations Read Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. You'll see that they describe the same creation but from two different perspectives: God's and Adam's. The former is macro view, the latter is a micro view from within the Garden of Eden. The first is relevant to God, the second is relevant to man. For example, the boundaries of the Garden and a description thereof are found in Chapter 2 but not 1. Sea creatures are mentioned in Chapter 1 but not 2. The creation of woman is expanded on in Chapter 2 but simplified in 1. The creation of the moon, sun, stars, land, water, etc. are found in Chapter 1, but not 2 (since Adam was created afer all these things happened).
One creation, two viewpoints.
Jason, you are so thoroughly brainwashed you have rationalized away everything just like I said you would.
Arguing with you is pointless as you cherry pick the scriptures to prove the Christadelphian point of view as instructed by your cult leaders.
You completely ignore the plain and obvious scriptures I provided that clearly disprove your points and offer random, segmented "sound bites" from all over the bible to piece together your ridiculous defenses as proof you are "right."
I know, you are probably going to think you "won" something here but the sad truth is that you are lost in a blind religion and will never admit the obvious errors both in your bible and in your particular sect of the christian cult.
The problem with most religion and religious people is the obsessing with being right or having the "truth" to the point that they will twist and distort and manipulate words from a ancient book to their liking and their liking alone.
Your counterpoints were weak at best and I leave you with these knowing you will explain this away with not proof but religious defense based on assumption.
Bible contradiction on Language...
Genesis 10:5
"From these the coastland peoples of the Gentiles were separated into their lands, everyone according to his language, according to their families, into their nations."
Genesis 10:20
"These were the sons of Ham, according to their families, according to their languages, in their lands and in their nations."
Genesis 10:31
"These were the sons of Shem, according to their families, according to their languages, in their lands, according to their nations."
TWO VERSES LATER, MAGICALLY EVERYONE SPEAKS THE SAME LANGUAGE!!!
Genesis 11:1
"Now the whole earth had one language and one speech."
Also, defend the silly bible notion that ALL animals as "intelligently designed" were at one time herbivores as stated in Genesis 1:30.
Gen 1:30
"And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food." And it was so."
Were they "intelligently re-designed", like Animals 2.0 after sin or the flood or something? STUPIDITY.
You simply can't. It is just a f--king story book. it is a fable, a poorly put together work of ignorant fiction that worked well on ignorant primitive nomads like the early Hebrews.
For today's modern thinking man, it does not work unless you willingly turn off your brain and believe as a child believes in Santa Claus.
Are you so ignorant you cannot tell when someone is bullshitting you?
Obviously not, if you cling to this book and your cult so tightly you cannot use common sense and logic to see reality right in front of your nose.
Good luck wasting your life over a book of lies and don't drink the Kool-aid.
P.S. I do know the bible better than you as you ignore scripture so simple a child could understand and you try to diffuse it with typical cult-like segmentation of verses and concepts found elsewhere. Your type of apologetics is common is Mormonism, Jehovah's Witness, and other mainline christian cult organizations. Not impressed.
“Jason, you are so thoroughly brainwashed you have rationalized away everything just like I said you would.” It’s easy to rationalize when one is dealing with blatant false doctrine (using a comparison of angels and humans to prove people go to heaven?…ouch)
“Arguing with you is pointless as you cherry pick the scriptures to prove the Christadelphian point of view as instructed by your cult leaders.“ I have a cult leader? Must have missed that memo…Who is it?
"You completely ignore the plain and obvious scriptures I provided that clearly disprove your points and offer random, segmented "sound bites" from all over the bible to piece together your ridiculous defenses as proof you are "right."" I’m not saying I’m right. I’m saying your points are wrong and then providing explanations why.
“I know, you are probably going to think you "won" something here but the sad truth is that you are lost in a blind religion and will never admit the obvious errors both in your bible and in your particular sect of the christian cult.” We still don’t seem to be any closer to actually discussing the Bible. I’m sure you’ll get there soon.
“The problem with most religion and religious people is the obsessing with being right or having the "truth" to the point that they will twist and distort and manipulate words from a ancient book to their liking and their liking alone.” Sure, like slotting Abraham’s Bosom into the book of Job, right? That was one heck of a twist and distort!
“Your counterpoints were weak at best and I leave you with these knowing you will explain this away with not proof but religious defense based on assumption.” If it’s assumption, then I fully expect you to point out as such. I wouldn’t let me get away with assumption either.
Speaking of proof, I ask simple questions and when you can’t answer, you resort to personal attacks and claim you know more then me. Why? You’re not even trying to defend yourself, which I find oddly suspicious. If you don’t know the answers, that’s alright. I’m not expecting to convert you but the least I can do is give you enough information to not avoid the same mistakes next time you happen to be talking to a cultish Bible troll.
Genesis 10
Ah, here we go.
Yup, it’s a good point. On the surface, and depending which version you’re reading from, this could present some problems. I’ve never looked at this until now so these are cursory comments. “Language” in verse 10:5 isn’t the same Hebrew word as “language” in 11:1. “Speech” is different from both as well. “Speech” and “language” are used separately again in Exodus 4:10 where Moses says “…I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue.” The word “tongue” here is the same word as “language” in 10:5. Maybe “tongue/language” means “accent”...Ohhhhh, I think we're onto something. Everyone spoke the same language but there were different accents, split up by family, which would make sense.
Dozens of countries speak English today but it’s pretty easy to tell who’s from Australia, who’s from South Africa and who’s from Boston. Interesting. See? I just learnt something.
Nonetheless, it’s unfortunately not a contradiction.
Herbivores
God created animals as herbivores. He physically changed them along with their relationship with man sometime after the Fall. What am I supposed to be defending?
For someone who knows the Bible better then me, I do note your complete lack of effort in showing me the error of my ways. I’m ready to learn, I have no problem learning but I’ll defend my right to question and refute anything that’s presented until I’m shown with confidence that the Bible unequivocally says I’m wrong. The very fact you believe Paradise is heaven based on Luke 23:43 tells me, and loudly so, that you don’t actually know your Bible at all. Or maybe you do and you’re just a little hazy on heaven and hell. Who knows.
Jason, you live in a mental bubble where you bible could never be wrong. Perhaps you are one of those people who can never be wrong as well.
I'm sure your close friends might agree in secret and if there is a woman in your life, she might be frustrated and disgusted with your know-it-all self righteous attitudes.
A few conversation on the web are enough to know you are an arrogant and smug man who can never be open to the possibility that you are wrong in any fashion or your answers are not THE ultimate answers.
If you think your two answers on language contradictions and all animals being herbivores is proof of anything you are good at only convincing yourself.
To lie to yourself and believe that the Great White Shark or sharks in general were at one time herbivores reeks of complete ignorance and an unwillingness to even hint that maybe some things in the bible are absurdly wrong.
Spiders spin webs for what reason? To catch living things.
They have paralyzing venom for what reason?
To render the victim helpless yet keep them alive because they only eat live food.
God waved his magic wand and re-designed the entire f--king world and how everything interacts?
When?
At the sin in Eden when death entered the world or after the ark landed when he allowed humans to eat animals.
You again avoided the fact that there are plants that kill animals for food and yet the divine book of all knowledge known as the bible never mentions it. Did god have a brain fart?
Why? Because the primitives in the desert that wrote most it never seen a carnivorous plant and the book was not written by god or as inspired by god, but by limited men with limited knowledge of biology, geology, and astronomy.
I do not believe in heaven or hell.
But it is clear from scriptures it is an eternal place of suffering without all the bullshit twisting and distorting that you and your cult seem to like to do. If 99% of christianity believes this doctrine and you are the odd man out, than the widely accepted doctrine of hell is what most find to be true for most religious folks..
As far as saying Job referencing Abraham's Bosom YOU are putting words in my mouth. How christ like, to bear false witness.
I never said for sure, I said "probably" which means there is a good likelihood and besides you were completely ignorant of such a place until I brought it up to begin with.
Bottom line, the bible is far from perfect about a great number of things and is nothing more than a book of fables and myths.
If you choose to live your life fooled and deceived to the real truth about the bible as a flawed piece of literature than you are the one who will lose on all that this life truly has to offer in terms of cultures, experiences, and real knowledge in trade for a man made delusion designed to control the ignorant masses with fear so long ago.
All of your defending and arguing is based on the protection of something that quiets your fears about death with a faux promise of afterlife to the point where you and most religious people are so afraid to live the only life they really have.
I pity you, sir, and
others like you.
“Jason, you live in a mental bubble where you bible could never be wrong. Perhaps you are one of those people who can never be wrong as well.” Martin, considering you use personal opinion as truth and steer clear of quoting from the Bible to debunk my beliefs, your statement is most amusing. I’m making comments on Scripture which you seem unwilling to be a part of, even given your vast and superior knowledge level and willingness to engage in a debate.
“I'm sure your close friends might agree in secret and if there is a woman in your life, she might be frustrated and disgusted with your know-it-all self righteous attitudes.” And I’m just as sure you’re wrong. Next.
“A few conversation on the web are enough to know you are an arrogant and smug man who can never be open to the possibility that you are wrong in any fashion or your answers are not THE ultimate answers.” And I’ve continued to leave the door wide open for you to chime in at any point and explain the truth to me. Yet for some reason, you keep turning down the offer…
“If you think your two answers on language contradictions and all animals being herbivores is proof of anything you are good at only convincing yourself.” And I'll continue to think this is proof until you explain why it isn't. Now's your big chance.
“To lie to yourself and believe that the Great White Shark or sharks in general were at one time herbivores reeks of complete ignorance and an unwillingness to even hint that maybe some things in the bible are absurdly wrong.” If I’m lying to myself it’s only because everyone who brings up these same arguments never offers anything in return except the same, tired, schoolyard insults. Apparently you’re no different.
“Spiders spin webs for what reason? To catch living things. They have paralyzing venom for what reason? To render the victim helpless yet keep them alive because they only eat live food.” And this proves what exactly?
“God waved his magic wand and re-designed the entire world and how everything interacts?” Er, yes. I thought I had already made that clear.
“When? At the sin in Eden when death entered the world or after the ark landed when he allowed humans to eat animals?” Yes.
“You again avoided the fact that there are plants that kill animals for food and yet the divine book of all knowledge known as the bible never mentions it. Did god have a brain fart?” I’ll stop avoiding facts as soon as you figure out you’ve got one to share. What exactly is your question?
“Why? Because the primitives in the desert that wrote most it never seen a carnivorous plant and the book was not written by god or as inspired by god, but by limited men with limited knowledge of biology, geology, and astronomy.” I have no idea what this means.
“I do not believe in heaven or hell.” Of course you don’t. “But it is clear from scriptures it is an eternal place of suffering without all the twisting and distorting that you and your cult seem to like to do.” Teach me, oh wise one, because Job has the upper hand right now: Job 3:13-19 "For now should I have lain still and been quiet, I should have slept: then had I been at rest, With kings and counsellors of the earth, which built desolate places for themselves; Or with princes that had gold, who filled their houses with silver: Or as an hidden untimely birth I had not been; as infants which never saw light. There the wicked cease from troubling; and there the weary be at rest. There the prisoners rest together; they hear not the voice of the oppressor. The small and great are there; and the servant is free from his master."
“If 99% of christianity believes this doctrine and you are the odd man out, than the widely accepted doctrine of hell is what most find to be true for most religious folks.” What’s true for most religious folks is they don’t read their Bibles. Kind of like you (e.g. paradise is heaven)
“As far as saying Job referencing Abraham's Bosom YOU are putting words in my mouth. How christ like, to bear false witness.” I’ll take it up with my God. He’ll understand.
“I never said for sure, I said "probably" which means there is a good likelihood and besides you were completely ignorant of such a place until I brought it up to begin with.” So it’s a ‘good likelihood’ that Job is referencing a mythical place that isn’t found anywhere in Scripture…? Well then, you obviously don’t have proof to back up your point so I’m just going to go ahead and ignore your opinion until you bring something intelligent to the table.
BTW, if Abraham’s Bosom is a waiting place for those who “lived in faith”, according to the bizarre description in the link you provided, what are the wicked doing there? (Job 3:17)
“Bottom line, the bible is far from perfect about a great number of things and is nothing more than a book of fables and myths.” Bottom line, you’re afraid of quoting Scripture. A bit out of your league it would appear.
“If you choose to live your life fooled and deceived to the real truth about the bible as a flawed piece of literature than you are the one who will lose on all that this life truly has to offer in terms of cultures, experiences, and real knowledge in trade for a man made delusion designed to control the ignorant masses with fear so long ago.” For a flawed piece of literature, you sure do have trouble with it.
“All of your defending and arguing is based on the protection of something that quiets your fears about death with a faux promise of afterlife to the point where you and most religious people are so afraid to live the only life they really have.” If that’s the best you can do, atheism is in a sad state of affairs. You’d think you guys would have come up with something a little more intelligent and stimulating by now.
“I pity you, sir, and others like you.” I’m honoured I made the list.
Where's Martin? Maybe he got lost at a porn convention...?
violence is fun! exciting! gives pleasure...
sex likewise.
love&hate too
im sure the bible agrees (except with the hate part)...some interpretation of some random part.
Post a Comment