For the fake postmodern profit. LOL

PostmodernProphet said:
you and the Rev Phelps agree that everything in the Bible must be translated literally.....
Click to expand...

You attempt to slither away from the obvious fact that the flood story is nothing more than mythological nonsense.

Mythological nonsense != literal truth. I don't think it must be translated literally. I think it is mostly fairy tale.
 
I never ceased to be amazed how those that say they DON"T believe in God or the Bible, on JPP, tend to spend way more time trying to convince others to go along with their beliefs, then those who claim to believe do trying to convince them to believe in God and the Bible.

Just wondering, what with all the times this has come up, are the non-believers trying to convince the believers or are they trying to convince each other?? :dunno:
 
PostmodernProphet said:
actually, I thought I was advocating applying intelligent exegesis in studying scripture.....something everyone is not only entitled to do, but expected to do.....

not sure what you mean by "accounted for by the natural sciences" but I wonder why you're concerned about it......you don't seem to care that claims like abiogenesis and humans evolving from single celled organisms aren't accounted for by the natural sciences.....

and obviously those portions which ARE poetry ought to be examined as "just" poetry.....do you "update" Sandburg because his writing is just poetry?......
Click to expand...

Great, then we can do away with your unintelligent claims that the Bible provides any moral certainty on issues like abortion or sexuality.

I mean, you have tried to force a fit between facts provided by science and your flood story.

Those are accounted for by the natural sciences.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
You attempt to slither away from the obvious fact that the flood story is nothing more than mythological nonsense.

Mythological nonsense != literal truth. I don't think it must be translated literally. I think it is mostly fairy tale.
Click to expand...
so, do you think it impossible for most of humanity to have been wiped out in a flood and the survivors passed the story on their descendants?.....
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
Great, then we can do away with your unintelligent claims that the Bible provides any moral certainty on issues like abortion or sexuality.

I mean, you have tried to force a fit between facts provided by science and your flood story.

Those are accounted for by the natural sciences.
Click to expand...
agreed...anyone who pays any attention at all to biology should abhor the killing of unborn children as well as recognize that normal sex occurs between members of those opposite, rather than those same......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
obviously you wouldn't want to mention them, since they have no parallel in the Ten Commandments......nothing about other gods, nothing about idols.....nothing about Sabbaths or parents....nothing about coveting......monetary compensation instead of prohibition for lying or adultery.......

guess all you can say about Nammu is that he was against killing and stealing.....Hammurabi has even less to compare.....
Click to expand...

LOL! The MORTAL King of Kings in those days wanted TOTAL worship. Back in those days you bowed to kings. Not to statues. Therefore they wanted you to serve no other king. Idols? The new kings would not allow old ancestral worship and would demand total loyalty from it's newly conquered citizens. Statues usually representing honored ancestors were usually destroyed so as to stop future revolts in their names.

Actually look at the laws. There is something about coveting. Why don't you research all the Laws that were known at the time. Some requested compensation, others death. You will see. There is noting supernatural about the laws of the god of the jews.lol

Remember eye for an eye?

Leviticus 24:19-21

19 If a man injures his neighbor, just as he has done, so it shall be done to him: 20 fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth; just as he has injured a man, so it shall be inflicted on him. 21 Thus the one who kills an animal shall make it good, but the one who kills a man shall be put to death.

Code of Hammurabi.

Law #196. "If a man destroy the eye of another man, they shall destroy his eye. If one break a man's bone, they shall break his bone. If one destroy the eye of a freeman or break the bone of a freeman he shall pay one mana of silver. If one destroy the eye of a man's slave or break a bone of a man's slave he shall pay one-half his price."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urukagina

Urukagina's code has been widely hailed as the first recorded example of government reform, seeking to achieve a higher level of freedom and equality It limited the power of the priesthood and large property owners, and took measures against usury, burdensome controls, hunger, theft, murder, and seizure (of people's property and persons); as he states, "The widow and the orphan were no longer at the mercy of the powerful man".
 
PostmodernProphet said:
should be obvious....when did they start counting......did they start counting?......was the length of life an issue before death came into the picture?......

did it start with his creation or did it start with the fall?......
Click to expand...

Idiot alert!!!!! If Adam had Seth when he was 130 years old? That's when he was created. Man was ALWAYS mortal. The original sin nonsense and we die because of Adam's sin is even more nonsense. Proof that Adam was not immortal?

1.Genesis 3:22
Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”—

It shows that Adam had to eat from the tree of life to live forever. Nor did Adam die after eating the fruit.

Tree of life was probably a narcotic plant.lol
 
Last edited:
PostmodernProphet said:
well, granted I don't believe that life spontaneously crawled out of a puddle of mud, I don't believe human beings and sphagnum moss have a common ancestor, and I don't believe gravity caused dust to form into suns and planets which then created gravity.....but other than that, I don't know why you have to call my cosmology ridiculous....../grins....
Click to expand...

It's more believable then a god ripping out Adam's rib to make Eve. Why would he even need a rib if he can magically create things?lol
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Prove it. :)
Click to expand...

Well you idiot. The authors of the Bible's book of Genesis were human. And they account for the estimates from Adam to Abraham to add up to 1656 years(That's IF you believe humans lived to 1000 years old. Also, human historians put Abraham at about 2000 B.C.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham#CITEREFMcNutt1999

The Bible's internal chronology places Abraham around 2000 BCE, but the stories in Genesis cannot be related to the known history of that time and most biblical histories accordingly no longer begin with the patriarchal period.

So count with me! Adam 4000 BCE. ABRAHAM 2000 BCE. Today 2014 A.D. = About 6000 years old.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top