-->
@Stephen
One cannot "mumble" the written word. Jesus!! , you really say some of the dumbest things.
Here's a great example of ignoring obvious context. What I said was you come across in your posts as someone who mumbles so others won't understand what you're saying, not that you literally mumble written words. For one, you don't answer questions directly.....if you answer at all. Or, if you don't like the question, you claim it's irrelevant. Or, you just give half answers hoping to get out of a dilemma.
Another ignorant and stupid statement. I highlight these ambiguous biblical contradictory anomalies in the hope that YOU & other apologist will examine them and offer an explanation. But YOU never can> Not without rewriting the scriptures and putting words into the mouths of bible authors. You are, for some reason , of the belief that presetting yourown thoughts and beliefs as fact should somehow suffice. It doesn't. And neither does YOU trying to explain these biblical contradictory anomalies away by talking about things that don't even appear in the scripture to explain them away either.
You don't want an explanation. You want us to look at your supposed contradictions, and agree with you. You're questions are not questions, but statements. Like what Larry King does. I haven't made anything up. Everything I've stated is nothing new and understood by numerous bible scholars and ministers. I actually only scratch the surface at best.
You're comments are actually nothing new either. Even militant atheists who run talk shows and websites, who are supposedly well versed in the Bible do the same thing. I think some of them just go through scriptures, find one's that appear to say something controversial in contemporary terminology, and without any study beyond that make a claim posing questions that are not really questions. And then when someone answers the questions that they don't really want an answer for, they simply claim, like you do, that the person is rewriting the scripture. And that's kind of like mumbling.
But that is exactly what YOU and your fellow apologist often do. You say words such as"kill" does not mean kill when it is spoken by god and you introduce ancient translations into theargument when it suites you to do so, as some kind of evidence to support your ridiculous claims.. You did this also with the words "all" and " everything". You have denied that in the case of god creating"everything", or "all" things it doesn't actually mean everything or all things.
And you're mumbling again. This is not an adequate quotation by the way.
"There's no need to look at original language and translation, historical back ground,cultural context, etc."
I'll add the first sentence to the quotation
"You seem to have this idea that if something appears contradictory there's no further examination needed. There's no need to look at original language and translation, historical back ground, cultural context, etc."
But yes, it is exactly what we do. We look at original language and translation, historical back ground, cultural context, etc. I don't think that's what you're meaning to say though. And no, we do not say kill doesn't mean kill. We do acknowledge that there are different meanings to the word kill. Even today we all understand this. If a pro boxer says he's going to kill his opponent in their upcoming bout, do you think that boxer should be arrested for admitting to a murder plot?
Don't cross thread an old argument. It is strictly against forum rules to do so. You lost that argument once, so save it for that particular thread or start a thread of your own on the matter.
For one thing, this is my thread. So you have permission to address that topic. And, you did a cross thread in your prior statement.
"But that is exactly what YOU and your fellow apologist often do. You say words such as"kill" does not mean kill when it is spoken by god and you introduce ancient translations into the argument when it suites you to do so, as some kind of evidence to support your ridiculous claims.. You did this also with the words "all" and "
everything". You have denied that in the case of god creating"everything", or "all" things it doesn't actually mean everything or all things."
And in one of those cross threads you're referring to (with my permission) I gave you contemporary examples of how all and everything have different meanings. Like "A great time was had by all", and "everything that could go wrong, went wrong". You completely ignored it by the way. Was that because you lost the argument since you seem to think that a non-response means just that?
I asked who was going to kill Cain when according to the bible at that time-"this day" -, there were only three people on the planet? If there were others tell us who they were, where did they come from? And supply the evidence that supports your claim.
I don't need to prove anything to you. You need to prove to me that they were the only three people on the planet. The scriptures indicate that Adam and Eve had numerous children, Cain and Abel had been alive for a good period of time (well into adulthood), and it actually wouldn't be logical for Adam and Eve not to have been sexually active during Cain and Abel's lifetime. And it's fairly clear that his fear was to be murdered by vengeful relatives for murdering Abel. Do you think they waited for Abel's murder to start reproducing all those children?
I've said enough. The BOP is on you.
It is funny . Given that on one hand your op bangs on about life in imprisonment and death for murderers in the 21st century and the we have first murderer on the planet get the rest of the planet to roam around on, raise a family and live to over 700 years. It is ridiculously "funny".
It doesn't matter what you think of Cain's punishment. You don't know what his life was like for 700 years. You're rewriting the story. If Cain couldn't bear the idea of being removed from God's presence, a theme we saw with both King David and Jesus, then who are you to rewrite the event?
And why do you quote only part of my statements, and add your own quotations?
Deary me, there there , poor sole and never mind. He had just murdered his brother out of what appears to be jealousy - a trait inherited from god himself when he created us in his image - no doubt. But was granted his life to roam the world, settle down, build a family and live to over 700 year sold. Yes, far "too much to bare" for anyone I should imagine.Sentenced to 700 years on planet death row! WOW! It must have all been pure torture for the lad. Certainly no mercy shown there was there. Yes it is hilariously funny when read slowly,isn't it.“The LordGod, merciful and gracious, long suffering, and abounding in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin …” Exodus 34:6-7.
Some of your arguments come across as personal issues as opposed to logical arguments. I know I asked you before, and I have no reason to think you'll answer this time, but here goes.
When you're addressing God, are you addressing him as a real person, or a fictional one?
