Stephen

Actually, i think they alluded to the war being either World War 1 or 2.

So it wasn't in a god's heavenly realm (wherever that may be) at all then but here on earth. Well at least that sounds a little more believable even though "she" says it was

the "war" written about nearly 2,000 years ago in Revelation.

I have always had good reason to believe that when the New Testament scriptures talk about "the kingdom of heaven" that it actually was a place on this earth and not some up in the sky realm. It appears, going by the responses I have had on this thread, that I could well be on the right track.

thanks again.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Outplayz

JW's have told me this war already happened... the one in Revelation.

Did they tell you when it had happened? Who won?

god "cast down satan", If so when and what for?

Who started the war? What was the war over?

I would be sincerely grateful for any extra input. Thank you

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

So can I safely say then that when Christians talk about a "war" in heaven, they are telling lies, mistaken, or simply repeating something they do not understand?

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@keithprosser

I have to ask if you mean was he so charged 'in real life' or 'does the text say he was charged with insurrection?'.

I have explained now many times keith we are talking scriptures because Christians believe them as true. We have to start from this point of belief that they are TRUE.

SO , what do the scriptures say on this matter of Jesus and insurrection?

Then tell me who you believe this insurrection was committed against. IF NOT the Romans , then who?

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@ethang5

Keith likes to throw scraps to atheists like you.

I don’t need “scraps” you clown. I have enough evidence to prove these gospels are so unreliable that they should be slung in the nearest bin.

The bottom line is that his answer to your question was No. And he gave 2 reasons why. .

Stop Putting words into his mouth. He has answered and he, in truth cannot come off the fence or make up his mind. One minute he can see the deviousness of the gospel writers and then he seems to have a change of heart. . I am sure he will clear that up when he is good and ready.

I will ask you again. Is Mark's gospel wrong, yes or no.

Both Of these Jesus' were charged with sedition and both went to the cross for it. FACT

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@keithprosser

The big question is whether it was the Romans or the Jewish priests that wanted Jesus dead.

There is no doubt that Jesus was a problem to the priesthood. They were concerned about Jesus’ actions and worried that they may be replaced. It was extremely lucrative to be a priest in Jerusalem, Jesus was correct in saying that it was a “den of thieves” the exchange rates were extortionate. But they needn’t have worried too much because Jesus played right into the hands of the Romans when he openly called himself Messiah on his deliberate loud entrance into Jerusalem on a donkey/ass. This was a clear and direct challenge to the Roman authorities.

According to the text there is no doubt that it was the priests and the Romans were merely employed as their unwilling executioners.

I agree it looks that way at first reading, but the evidence completely goes against this when these scriptures are scrutinised.

But it is possible that is purepro-Roman/anti-Jewish 'spin' and it was the Romans who arrested, tried and executed Jesus and the priests had nothing to do with it.

That is what the evidence points to as I have already mentioned and will repeat: Jesus was punished by Romans, in accordance with Roman law. and Roman procedures.And he was punished by crucifixion a penalty exclusively reserved for those guilty of crimes against the Empire.

He must have done something to provoke the Empire, which he did. Claiming To be “King of the Jews” was a highly charged political act of sedition or lese-majesty, and a capital crime under Roman law if it led to a rebellion,which it did and it caused the death of Jews.

No doubt other theories and scenarios are equally 'possible', and there isn't enough material to decide between them asto 'what really happened'.

According to Christians the gospels tell us “what really happened”!

I keep saying it. if Christians believe the scriptures to be factually true then it is only from their stance that these scriptures can be looked at , studied and scrutinised. We have to look at them from the starting point that they are true.

Jews died during this rebellion that the writers want to hide or at least play down. this wouldn't look very good now would it, the prince of peace taking part in rebellious acts that caused the deaths of his own countrymen and supporters?

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@ethang5

ethang5. If you are going to quote keith prosser at least be courteous enough to quote his full reply to my question and do not amalgamate two separate posts as if they are one. This is disgraceful behaviour for any member to stoop to.. What you have done above is purposeful and wilful deceit of the worst kind. You should be banned for that. imo

keithprosser at post 45 above actually responds to my question thus:

Stephen wrote: Not with a charge of insurrection and sedition against Rome.You do agree that this was the charge don’t you?

keithprosser wrote :No. Or sort of!

You should be banned for such a wilful act of deceitfully and intentionally, misleading the members here.

You are an absolute disgrace.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Barabbas

-->

@keithprosser

Stephen wrote:Not with a charge of insurrection and sedition against Rome. You do agree that this was the charge don’t you?

Keithprosser wrote:
No. Or sort of!

If Barabbas and Jesus were brought before a Roman Procurator Pontius Pilate for insurrection and sedition as the bible clearly states, then who was this insurrection and sedition committed against?

If official documents ever existed on the 'trial',they may well have specified 'insurrection'

The bible does “specify that it was "insurrection" though doesn’t it? And Christians believe it that these scriptures to be impeachable and are the gospel, you keep missing this point. And I keep saying if Christians believe the scriptures then it is only from their stance that these scriptures can be looked at , studied and scrutinised. We have to look at them from the starting point that they are true.

rather then 'blasphemy' because i doubt blaspheming YHWH was a crime in Roman law.

No it wasn’t a crime under Roman law.This is what the gospels say of the accusations levelled against Jesus by the Sanhedrin Council:

Mark tellus at 15:3 that “the chief priests accused him of many things: but he answered nothing”. Luke 23:2 has it, “and they began to accuse him, saying, we found this fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding giving tribute [Tax] to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ a King”.And John 18:30 tells us “If he were not a malefactor [criminal], we wouldn't have delivered him up unto thee”. So we have the charges ranging from lying, blasphemy, many things, sedition against Rome and just being a criminal.And also according to Mark 15:10 we can add pure envy, “For he knew that the chief priests had delivered him for envy”.

What some New Testament readers may not be aware of is that claiming to be “King of the Jews” was a highly charged political act of sedition or lese-majesty, and a capital crime under Roman law if it led to a rebellion, which by all accounts, this is what happened and the gospel writers have tried to play it down. WHY!? The question is as obvious as the answer is as I Have already explained.

.

I read the pronoun 'him' as referring to Barabas, (not Jesus) and other translations are less unambiguous.

At least you can say it is ambiguous.

There are many references from biblical scholars and theologians that say exactly the same as this>>>

Barabbas Had been charged with the crime of treason against Rome—the same crime for which Jesus was also convicted".<<<<<<< see that. "THE SAME CRIME"

There is no doubting what these two were charged with, offences against the Roman empire. These Are undeniable facts..

These gospel writers even go as far as to say :>>

“You have brought this Man to me, as one who misleads the people. And indeed, having examined Him in your presence, I have found no fault in this Man concerning those things of which you accuse Him no, neither did Herod,for I sent you back to him; and indeed nothing deserving of death has been done by Him. I will therefore chastise Him and release Him”Luke 23:13-16.NKJV

Yet Mark Tells us that Jesus is warned to get out of the city because Herod wanted him dead!

The same day there came certain of the Pharisees, saying unto him, Get thee out, and department: for Herod will kill thee. Mark 13:31. KJV

So one can plainly see that this whole story is a nonsense from beginning to end.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

The problem with the Tree of Kowledge of Good and Evil.

-->

@Tradesecret

Well you might know - but the bible is pretty clear there was only one couple - Adam and Eve.

LIAR!!!!!

So. the FIRST creation according to "THE BIBLE"of male and female humans goes like this:>>

Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion etc etc.

Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

It then continues with a chapter further on Chpt 2 informing us that god needed labourers “to till the land” . So a God sets about a second creation of man but giving the reader more details of how he went about creating this second human male.

The SECOND couple were, according to THE BIBLE , created separate and from different materials. Read for yourself and deny away until your heart's content.

Genesis 2:7 And the Lord god Formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. It goes on to say heathen put this man into the garden,

Then!

This God decides that because the man shouldn’t be alone without a mate/helper so he goes to a third creation of a human, this time a female. But this creation is like no other.

Genesis 2:21 Andthe Lord God Caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

22 Andthe rib, which the Lord God Had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

So to deny these separate accounts of creation and say that the bible "makes it pretty" clear there is "only one couple" is you simply lying again. It is there for all to read, and there is no getting away from it.

This is why your questions will remain unanswered because they are not the questions of the text.

So are you now saying that I have not produced text from the bible are you saying those verses I have posted are fake and are not even in the Bible?

They are from the bible and anyone can check them out . They are exactly as I say they are and you can't get around them without admitting the bible is at fault. So stop lying! The truth is that two writers of the creation are giving their separate and different accounts which make the whole story debatable if not totally unreliable , you know that is the the truth.

Now either the bible and it's writers who are at fault and mistaken, which throws doubt on the whole story or there were as the bible CLEARLY shows that there are indeed two couples created. WHICH IS IT?

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@keithprosser

Amendment to my post 42 above above:

@keithprosser wrote: It is possible Pilate tried every trick he could think of to get Jesus off,

Not with a charge of insurrection and sedition against Rome. You do agree that this was the charge don’t you?

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/547

Historical writings do not paint the relationship between Rome and the Jews as being anything but full of tension and animosity.

HISTORY, yes it does doesn't it. But one would never know that from reading the scriptures would they.

I'm pretty sure that in the Gospel according to Matthew there is even an account of Herod ordering the execution of all the kids under the age of 2.

There is. But the thread is not about the relationship between the Herodians/Herod and the Jews. it is clearly about the relationship between ROME and the JEWS. Why have you not noticed that? No one is even talking about Herod or his crimes. We are discussing the crimes of Jesus Barabbas and Jesus the Messiah. We are discussing Pilates role in the matter of crimes against Rome. Why are you not understanding this?

So Mr. Gnostic smarty pants, what were the gospel writers desperately trying to hide?

Answered. For christ sake ! read post 40 above.

And you still haven't told us which Jesus was crucified have you? Was it Jesus Barabbas or Jesus the Messiah?

And could you help me out on this thread?

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

In my experience, believers believe what they want to believe!

Not just your experience. I think everyone knows that.

It is possible Pilate tried every trick he could think of to get Jesus off,

Not with a charge of seduction against Rome. You do agree that this was the charge don’t you?

or he could have rubber-stamped his execution without a second thought.

Which is the case.

or even with sadistic relish.

More's the case

We don't know what happened -we only know what MML+J say happened.

Yes you have said that already and like I have said above, we have to look atthis from the Christian standpoint. They believe the gospels to be the god inspired gospel truth. If these scriptures are to be challenged one can only challenge them on the standpoint Christians believe them to be true.

Of course for reason for saying 'Happened' is that X really did happen, but IMO there isn't much of that in the Gospels!

But that isn’t quite correct is it. I Agree we do not get a lot of “why X happened” because like I have said many times, we usually only ever get half stories.

But in this case we do have the crime and we do have the punishment/s.

It is beyond doubt that the role of the Romans in Jesus’ execution had to be whitewashed and presented as sympathetically as possible. Thus Pilate is depicted in the Gospels As a decent, reasonable and tolerant man, who consents only reluctantly to the crucifixion. But history tells us different.

Philo of Alexandria for instance describes Pilates “cruel and sadistic” nature towards the Jews. These Gospel writers have simply taken liberties with history.

We get from the gospellers that the Jewish council was not allowed to pass death sentences and this is the reason they took him to Pilate. This is just lies. They stoned Stephen to death, Jesus’ brother James the Just was "thrown from the pinnacle of the temple, and was beaten to death with a club". The wanted to stone an adulteress, until Jesus Stepped in with his famous “ he who is without sin cast the first stone” .So we can see , this story about Pilate being kind to Jews at passover and letting a murdering rebel go free, is cobblers.

The Sanhedrin council could have put Jesus to death themselves by stoning had they waited just a few hours after Passover and there would have been no reason to involve Pilate or Rome, at all.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Mopac

So are you going to tell us the underlying story the gospellers are desperately trying to hide?

Not on this thread. This thread is about the rebellious insurrection and actions and murder, that happened during the rebellion involving Jesus Barabbas and Jesus the Messiah, that caused the deaths of many of his own people.

It was only via a slip I believe, that we know that there was even a rebellion AT ALL!. If it wasn't for one single verse, in the whole of the gospels, Mark's gospel, one would have thought that Roman and Jew got along just dandy. But we know that not to be true either, don't we?

And you still haven't told us which Jesus was crucified have you? was it Jesus Barabbas or Jesus the Messiah?

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Barabbas

But not necessarily against Rome as you dishonestly assert.

"Barabbas had been charged with the crime of treason against Rome—the same crime for which Jesus was also convicted".<<<<<<< see that.

Stop calling me a liar until you believe you have evidence proving me to be liar.

You haven't produced evidence to the contrary, why is that? And you haven’t told us or shown any proof to the contrary have you? Why Is that? If it wasn’t against Rome, them who was the insurrection against? You haven't quite managed to work a way around that sticky point , have you? I stick to what I know, this insurrection was, without any doubt committed against state of Rome during a rebellion , a rebellion that these gospel writers are trying to play down.

You are the one saying the text is untrue.

I have no reason to believe what Mark has tosay on this matter is untrue. Like I have said. It supports my argument and sodo the other three gospels that all mention Barabbas being at the trial along with Jesus ..The point you just cannot face and is sticking in your throat is that Mark goes further and tells us that Barabbashad committed “insurrection with him” <<<<<You must close your eyes or have a mental blockage when you get to that part.

Mark 15:7.

And There was one named Barabbas,which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection.

This does not mean they knew each other or worked together.

You clown. Read The above, are you saying Mark's gospel is wrong and untrue. Read it again slowly:

“Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him,

And without logic or reason your poor reading comprehension and bias made you believe"them" meant Jesus and Barabbas,

But it doesn’t say THEM does it you clown. Read it again:

Mark 15:7.

And there was one named Barabbas,which lay bound with them that had made insurrection WITH HIM, who had committed murder in the insurrection.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+15%3A7&version=KJV the "them" is the collective you clown.

So now your turning to bare faced lies. Lies that can be easily confirmed by anyone by a click of the mouse at their fingertips.

Mark's gospel clearly makes the point that this “insurrection” was committed by both Jesus BARABBAS and JESUS the MESSIAH

Why are you angry anyway?

I am not angry. I'm enjoying watching you make some of the biggest ball drops in the history of biblical research. I find you hilarious like a clown, my granddaughter could run rings around you and she's only five.

Barabbas had been charged with the crime of treason against Rome—the same crime for which Jesus was also convicted".<<<<<<< see that. "THE SAME CRIME"

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Barabbas

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@keithprosser

The first isn't biblical

I am only interested in the biblical belief of a "war" in heaven.

The other war is the war described in Revelation which will occur at the end of days.

So it hasn't happened yet then? Or it has happened and we don't have record of it or should I say the bible doesn't record it?

Currently the 'war' consists of god and the devil trying to gain individual souls.

This implies then that there is a war going on as we speak, would I be correct? - from a biblical point of view.

Or so it is said - I am not sure all of it is true.

So, then it didn't happen a long time ago at the beginning of time?

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@keithprosser

The evangelists wrote those passages in the way they wrote them - IMO - to deflect the blame for Jesus' death away from the Romans and onto the Jews.

Well when we consider "murder, insurrection" which, without doubt was committed against the Rome and Romans and that crucifixion was strictly a ROMAN punishment for acts against the state and add Marks comment on the matter, then it all points to you being correct, doesn't it?

I think it is impossible to know what -if anything - really happened;

Of course we won't but you are forgetting that this is Christian dogma and belief. They believe it. It is up to those who don't believe these scriptures to break this story down and expose it for what it is: false certainly in part.. I believe these two were charged for crimes against the state. I believe as you say, the free pass story is a deflection from Rome's participation. After all , we couldn't have the Roman Church being the murderers of its namesake, the very name the Christian Church is supposedly founded on, now could we.

Whether the text is true or false -or how true or how false - is unknowable,

But the Christians believed them to be god inspired gospel truth, so we have to take it from that position and look at these scriptures from that position

but the fact the passages exist implies a desire to exonerate Pilate

I agree.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

Now war arose in heaven,

Do you mean there was no war in heaven?

Michael and his angels fighting against the dragon. And the dragon and his angels fought back, but he was defeated,

So this happened in heaven?

and there was no longer any place for them in heaven.

So we can safely assume in this case that heaven is a place?

And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world—he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

Thrown down from heaven?

That's all I found in a quick search. Maybe there is more? I don't know.

That's good of you to take the time Jayne. Thank you.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@janesix

What Bible verse/s are you referring to?

Not any Jayne. I was discussing heaven over the last three months with various christians divisions and at various meetings the subject of "heaven". The phrase "war" in heaven came up often but these groups couldn't expand on it.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

When did it happen? Who won? Or hasn't it happened yet?

Did a god "cast out satan", If so when and what for?

Who started the war? What was the war over?

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@keithprosser

What really happened cannot be known or ascertained,

I am not sure to which part or parts you refer. But whether this passover release was true or not it doesn't hide the fact that Jesus Messiah and Jesus BARABBAS were BOTH in front of Pontius Pilate on the charge of "insurrection" the gospels state this clearly. Someone died in that rebellion and Jesus was there in the thick of it. The scriptures clearly state these facts.

One simply has to ask why these gospellers have left out this pivotal part of the Jesus story. They are simply trying to push the "prince of peace" angle and it is falling apart in front of our eyes. All of his chosen 12 were known zealots. But according to ethang5 Mark has made up his story and his gospel isn't true at all.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

Yes you did. You saidBarabbas..."committed sedition against Rome..."That is untrue.

Nope it is not untrue . tocommit “insurrection “is to also commit sedition.

Mark15:7.
And There wasone named Barabbas, which lay bound with them thathad madeinsurrection with him, who had committed murder intheinsurrection.

I know I'm correct. Barabbas hadnot been charged with a crime against Rome.

Doyou now,
TheAramaic Bible has to say about BARABBAS; take your pick they were in front ofPilate for both crimes

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
And therewas one who was called Barabbas, who was bound with those who had madesedition, who had committed murder in the sedition.
KingJames 2000 Bible
And therewas one named Barabbas, who lay bound with them that had made insurrection withhim, who had committed murder in the insurrection.

In Matthew 27:16 Barabbas is called a“notorious prisoner.” In Mark 15:7, echoed in Luke 23:19, he was “in prison with therebels who had committed murder duringthe insurrection” against the occupying Roman forces.
Encyclopaedia Britannica

Theevidence is overwhelming that these were crimes against Rome. If you want todeny that be my guest but you will have to show us who the insurrection wasagainst if it was not Rome.

Don’tjust keep calling me a liar. Prove it. Jesus and BARABBAS were broughtbefore Pilate Both on charges of sedition. Read it again slowly. “thathad made insurrection with him”

They BOTHtook part in this biblically documents episode of insurrection , if it wasn’tagainst Rome then who was against. Let us see your evidence for you claims orshut up and go away.

I know itnot nice for you to face and a bitter pill for you to swallow. So unless youcan prove Mark's gospel to be untrue and that this evangelist is telling lies , youwill have to put up with this truth or produce some evidence that MARK’S gospelis fake and untrue.

At least I post what Mark says, I don't hide it and then pretend he said nothing.

So have I about 6 times now here it is again I am not hiding marks verses, why would i. they prove my point you clown .

Mark 15:7 King James Version (KJV)
And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection.

This isyour post 12 on page one. You got all confused with Barnabas and Barabbas, youfool. Check for yourself Post twelve YOUR POST you mention BARNABAS not me, youclown.

POST 12 ethang5 wrote: Nowheredoes it say Barnabas' crimes were against Rome. This is just anotherlittle"addition" our bible expert has inserted into the text.Barabbas was charged by Jews under Jewish law for violating Jewish law.

You see. I didn't say BARNABAS you did. this thread is about BARABBAS.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+27%3A15-26&version=NRSV

To continue from the op

It is Barabbas which means: (/bəˈræbəs/; Aramaic: ישוע בר אבא‎ Bar ʾAbbaʾ, literally "son of the father". And most interesting is the fact that Matthew's gospel tells his full name: it is Jesus Barabbas!

Pilate said tothem,“Whom do you want me to release for you, Jesus Barabbas or Jesus whois called the Messiah?”Matthew 27:15-17

So the obvious question at this juncture just has to be: which“Jesus” was actually crucified ?

Mark 15:7.

INSURRECTION!!!!!!!?

WITH HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?

And for those interested; an insurrection is a violent uprising against a government, and in this case Rome.

What Insurrection?

Nowhere in the whole of the New Testament is there a report of rebellious “insurrection” apart from this one single verse. NOWHERE!

In fact the gospels give the impression that everyone, Jew and Roman, was getting along swimmingly in Palestine at the time of Jesus and everyone was happy and content with their lot. But, of course, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

No, the nearest we ever get to anyone losing their temper and throwing their weight about is, of all people, Jesus himself as some of the gospels attest, he overturned the tables and complained about “his father’s house being turned into a den of thieves”, and then he left after being told control “rebuke” heisman.

Luke 19:39

And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke the disciples.

That’s it! That’s the nearest we get to bad and unruly behaviour from Jesus himself, his disciples or anyone for that matter.

So the question is:

Why have these gospellers left out such a major event in the life of Jesus the Messiah, an event where the bible clearly states a violent and murderous “insurrection” had taken place where someone had been wilfully killed and Jesus had taken part in this violent“insurrection” "WITH HIM" :Barabbas?

One has to scan very closely and scrutinise the scriptures to get any clue to support the reported “insurrection “in Mark's gospel.And the clue is there and I believe there are extra biblical clues too that supports Marks claim that this violent rebellion did take place and had happened during Jesus’ ministry. And that these writers of the gospel truth are desperately trying to hide the full gospel truth about Jesus and the man he actually was in reality..

This must surely be a bitter pill for Christians , but it is clearly there Mark's gospel tells it all.

And, as I have already pointed out. If this passionate passover ritual was as common as the bible states, the Roman Procurator would never release anyone who had commited murder and insurrection against the state.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@disgusted

So where were the multitudes that welcomed him into Jerusalem? Why did they not come out in support?

A1+

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

All texts recovered from ancient times is proof of history, but no, not the bible. That's the one exception.

Just read slowly your own words above. And think! Text recovered from ancient times ARE MOST CERTAINLY PROOF of>>>>> HISTORY<<<<<< you fool, and that includes THE BIBLE. HOWEVER!!!!!! it doesn't necessarily follow that whatever is in those ancient text is true..

This is why they have to be studied and compared to other texts of the period or as near as possible to the period the text is believed to be from.

This is exactly the process BIBLICAL SCHOLARS , authors, and theologians use to come to a conclusion. They just do not simply go by faith.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

All texts recovered from ancient times is proof of history, but no, not the bible. That's the one exception.

I have to keep repeating myself to you over and over. What is the matter with you. I believe there were once so called "gods" on this earth and I don't rely totally on the bible for that belief.. I believe there was a Jesus. I don't rely totally on the bible for that belief , either.

I believe many things in this book you call the Holy Bible. but what I also believe is that there is beyond doubt another UNDERLYING STORY that these gospellers are desperate to hide especially the New Testament. Do you actually believe I am the only person in the whole of the world who has ever questioned these scriptures in depth? Grow up!

You don't share my view, so what, I don't care. I simply highlight verses for you to explain away, not for me to explain. It is for you to defend these verses if you so choose to do, not me. I only have to defend my OPINIONS.

Telling me I am going to "burn in hell" is not addressing these queries, is it , you silly little man.

You don't agree. I don't care. I will continue to highlight this false narrative that we have been fed for over 2,000 years.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

Yes you did. You said Barabbas..."committed sedition against Rome..." That is untrue. It is not found in the text.

That is correct it was BARABBAS I clearly state BARABBAS andNOT Bar N abas.!. Learn to take note of the detail in both of these names

BARABBAS

BAR - N – ABAS. And Learn to read too.

It's in the text.

This “Roman “reprieve” may well be in the biblical text,I know it is in the BIBLICAL text, I posted it myself up above. You claim it is true BUT !as usual, without any evidence. I want you to find me evidence that this was a common practice at every passover. You haven’t been able to do that, simply because there isn’t any, nowhere, in any history at all. Scholars have been looking for any single piece extra biblical evidence for this claim for over 200 years and have come up with nothing,

If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar's friend:

O dear, and I Am sure that scared the hell clean out of of Pilate and this vicious Jew hater who had murdered hundreds if not thousands of JEWS just caved in with immediate effect at the thought that the JEWS would be his friend. I bet he was shaking in his Toga. Get real,for Christ’s sake!

You failed to post the crowd threatening Pilate with a charge of disloyalty to Caesar, and then pretended that there was no reason for Pilate to acquiesce and allow the conviction of Jesus.

I haven’t failed at anything and I haven’t “pretended” anything. The verses that you again accuse me of lying about and making up are there for anyone who is interested and chooses to read them.

The story, beyond all doubt is yet again one of those half told stories that the bible insistently keeps throwing up.

And you certainly don't understand the implications of what Mark is saying. Look at it again, read it slowly, you just may get a clue as to the REAL REASON why your man - god Jesus Was executed in the vile and barbaric fashion he was.

Don't forget, S_L_OW_L_Y now.

Mark 15:7.

And There was one named Barabbas, which laybound with them that had made insurrection with him,who had committed murder in the insurrection.

He will accept Barabbas as real in order to advance the loony theory that the bible is false.So one half of a verse that he will insist is true, he will use to "prove" the same bible false.

That is what I mean by biblical "half stories". AND it is "the bible" itself "proves" it to be full of contradictions and half stories.

I haven't even started on this particular half story. There is more, to it with supporting evidence for my claims. YES evidence something that you are totally averse to.

Your posts are easy and fun to debunk.

O, I am glad, and so happy that you find them fun, because I have lots more . ☺☺☺☺☺☺☺

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

Read the bible.Stephen tends to leave pertinent parts out and then pretend the bible doesn't address those parts.

Nope the scriptures only mention BARABBAS when it comes to the trial. Stop telling lies. If you know different please put up your evidence.

Nowhere does it refer to Barnabas' crimes were against Rome.

I haven’t said he has.I have said BARABBAS did. see the difference?

Yes. He had to. Andtradition held that it was ALWAYS a criminal released.

There is no evidence for this reparation. It has never been recorded in Roman history or Jewish history. I would like to see your evidence.

So the crowd, growing dangerously into a mob, threatened Pilate.

You have no evidence for that. The crowded threatened Pilate!!! There would have been slaughter had thathappened. Let us see you evidence of the threat towards Pilate.

A criminal in custody at the time of Jesus' trial.

Yes he was and the scriptures make it clear AS I HAVE SAID ABOVE, when quoting directly from Marks Gospel:

Mark 15:7.

And There was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection.

Can you read the above. MARK STATES that BARABBAS had took part in an insurrection and had murdered someone. It would have hardly been a Jew. Unless the Jew was a traitor.

Role for what? Was he in a play?

The insurrection..

No one. He was just a criminal they had arrested before Jesus' trial.

"Just a criminal"? Taking part in a insurrection against the state is a little bit more that being just a common criminal.

These are some of the most famous passages in all history.

And more famous than someone like you will ever understand.

That is how thinking people know you are once again trying to fake what the bible says,

I haven’t substituted anything.Those verses are from the scriptures. If you don’t believe they are them is all you have to do is produce those you believe I have substituted.

.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Outplayz

It's says more lies in your OP

Then Point them out and stay on topic. This thread about Barabbas and what these scriptures have to say about him. Those verses are from the scriptures if you believe they are lies then simply say why?

It is my business it is my thead.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Outplayz

Do you really believe the earth is flat?

This thread is not about flat earthers. Sod off and start a thread of your own on the subject .

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+27%3A15-26&version=NRSV

Not unusual for these scriptures we come across yet another half story told by the gospellers. It concerns a character that the gospellers seem reluctant and forced to mention and is only mentioned once in each of the four gospels.

It is Barabbas which means: (/bəˈræbəs/; Aramaic: ישוע בר אבא‎ BarʾAbbaʾ, literally "son of the father". And most interesting is the fact that Matthew tells us full name: itis Jesus Barabbas!

Now at the festival the governor was accustomed to release a prisoner for the crowd, anyone whom they wanted. 16 At that time they had a notorious prisoner,called Jesus Barabbas. 17 So after they had gathered, Pilate said to them,“Whom do you want me to release for you, Jesus Barabbas or Jesus who is called the Messiah?”Matthew 27:15-17

Somebibles do omit the name Jesus.

The gospel story goes like this: Jesus is arrested and put on trial, sentencedand then offered a reprieve, and it is here that a gospel untruth is written.

The gospels claim that Pilate offered this reprieve “because it was customary for the Governor to release a prisoner at the Feast of Passover.” WHAT WHAT ABSOLUTE COBBLERS! This is simply not true, there never was such a custom and not a single biblical researcher of the Gospels has been able to find one scrap of evidence for this.. And even if this was true, It would hardly be the case that Pilate would release anyone accused of murder as Jesus Barabbas was.

Let’s read the passages from the gospellers:

Mathew 27:16.

Barabbas is a “notable prisoner”.

Mark 15:7.

And There was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had madeinsurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection.

Luke 23:18-19.
And they cried out all at once, saying, Away with this man, and release unto us Barabbas:
(Who For a certain sedition made in the city, and for murder, was cast into prison.)

John: 18-40.
Then cried they all again,saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber.

So we simply have to challenge this and ask ourselves;

Would Pilate release a notorious robbing, murdering insurrectionist who had committed sedition against Rome or would he have released a peaceful sandal wearing Jew who tells all his followers to render unto Caesar?

We have to remember Pilate could find absolutely nothing at all that warranted execution by crucifixion.

So we are left yet again asking more questions about these unreliable gospels that tell us only half stories.

Who was Barabbas?

What was is role?

who was he to Jesus?

And that verse from Mark above should really get anyone who is interested, thinking.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

The problem with the Tree of Kowledge of Good and Evil.

The points have been explained -

The trouble with you being the pompous fool that you are, is that you are so used to people asking you questions because they have not even read the scriptures for themselves maybe since school or never read them at all. You are used to feeling superior over anyone who you believe has not a clue. But when you do come up against someone who has studied these anomalous biblical half stories, you are taken off guard, are unprepared, and simply lack the knowledge to respond to depth questions. This because you are so used to the everyday bilical queries about god and his actions or inaction, that most people have and ask about, especially when they are in grief, despair and down and discouraged, It is here you take full advantage to fill their heads with gospel untruths.

Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts; comes to mind

Now you have nothing left but resort to barefaced lies. You have address absolutely nothing at post 66 above .

God, the bible states clearly created two pairs of humans.

From post 66 above questions you have ignored and not even attempted to answer

Which pair were expelled from the garden?

The punishment for Adams defiance was to be sentenced to till the land. But this was the reason he was created for in the first place. Explain that.

Why did god create two pairs of humans?

Had this god forgot that he had created the first pair so just went about creating a second pair?

Why in the second and third creations was themale created out of the dirt and one created via a complicated operation where the male was put to sleep and a part taken from him to create the female?

Just to add, the biblical patriarch Abraham worshipped Mesopotamian gods thousands of years before MOSES DECIDED there was only one god. because as you WELL KNOW his homeland was Ur of the Chaldees, the ancient city of Mesopotamia.

But I will keep that argument for another entire thread.

And you still have some catching up to do on this thread you are now giving a wide berth.

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/506?page=2&post_number=33

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Mopac

You say yo me

Mopac wrote: Jesus is the fulfillment of scripture. You don't know Jesus.

I say you have no evidence: and you come back with this

Mopac wrote: You have no evidence for that claim.

As if you have shown me evidence. You haven't shown me a single thing that supports your claim that "Jesus is the fulfilment of the scriptures".

That is my evidence you fool. Otherwise I am sure you would have produced evidence.

And your arrogance makes you unworthy to receive evidence.

That means you have none. You don't understand your own damn scriptures. You are a fool.

Your crusade is misguided.

What "crusade" would that be?

Maybe in the future you will realize that,

I only realise that the scriptures are nonsense, that is to they make absolutely no sense.

but I am not going to be able to convince you.

Not if you cannot answer questions concerning your own claims, your not. That's the trouble, you are laim, you do not know your own scriptures , your very limited knowledge of them is that of a child repeating the nativity scene verbatim.

Lets test my opinion of you, and how little you know these scriptures.

Why do the gospel writers play down the temple confrontation (turning over of the tables Matthew 21:12-13), when in truth it was a full blown insurrection and not a 10 minute hissy fit thrown by Jesus as the scriptures would have us believe?

Let us all now see the depth of your biblical knowledge of these scriptures.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Mopac

Why should I listen to you when you respond to half of my sentences?

I have said above already that you don't have to listen to me. I don't care. But you making claims then refusing to support them just makes you look stupid.

Jesus is the fulfillment of scripture. You don't know Jesus.

You have not a single shred of evidence to prove that. If you sincerely believe you do have evidence for your claim,, start a thread on it explaining how you know and why you believe it to be so.

I can safely take you that you do not have any evidence for that claim and are just spouting stuff for the sake of, it. Nothing new there then. This is what most Christians do when they , like you, have painted themselves into a corner.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

The problem with the Tree of Kowledge of Good and Evil.

-->

@Grugore

.people have been answering your questions

Stop telling lies and address those questions I have raised at post 66 above.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

Your arguing against the scriptures

I am. I am saying they are unreliable and problematic as they have come down to us and have been taught to us. I am saying there is definitely another underlying story that the gospellers are desperate to hide.

You don't know the intent of scriptures.

I don't think you do . The scripture wasn't written for the likes of me or you in the 121st century. You and Christians as a whole lose sight of the fact the this Jesus was a JEW. He was King of the JEWS, He was High Priest of the JEWISH church and he should have ruled over a JEWISH nation.

Jesu would have been appalled that a whole new religion had sprang up in his name.

Jesus is the fulfillment of scripture. You don't know Jesus.

You have not a single shred of evidence to prove that. If you sincerely believe you do have evidence for your claim,, start a thread on it explaining how you know and why you believe it to be so.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

You don't understand my religion,

If it is Christianity I understand perfectly the underlying story of The Christ and his failed mission. Which is something you could never face and or admit.

so I have no good reason to accept that you can be right.

Of course you don't. I don't expect you to. i just want explanations and answers. I am not here to defend the scripture, that is up to you should you decide to.

It works like this. I highlight what I believe to be a problem with the scripture, and I say why believe it to be a problem. It is then up to or anyone else to explain away the problem that I have highlighted if you/they choose to do so. I don't care what you think of me, it is irrelevant what you think of me.

You don't even understand what you are arguing against.

Well I shall make it clear AGAIN. I am arguing that the scriptures, as they have come down to us, are unreliable and problematic in the extreme. These gospellers cannot even agree on the day that the Christ was crucified can they? Of all the dates to get confused about they have to pick the day that Christianity stands on, and they couldn't get that right.

So that is my current opinion on the matter.

What is?

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Mopac

Yes, it is commonly accepted that the Jesus of the gospel accounts peached for around 3 years.

Then why do you say he "preached for some 30 odd years" when you know that to be wrong?

As for everything else, I already know better to correct you, because you'll just ignore it anyway.

I won't ignore anything. I never do. I even take the time to read your pointless links that explain absolutely nothing.

I will be interested to know why on the one hand Samuel called everyone "fools" via god's message to the Israelites for wanting a king and then went and anointed a king going against his god's judgment? You don't have an answer do you.

Instead I will say that you are off the mark.

That is no answer is it. That tells us all here that you simply do not have an answer, do you? YOU NEVER DO have a single answer to questions concerning your own statements, EVER

But I will say this... Everything is done according to God's will,

Well it wasn't was it? THE ANOINTING OF SAUL WAS AGAINST GOD'S WILL.God told the Israelites they were fools for wanting a king, he told them, he(god) was their king, but Samuel went ahead and anointed Saul as king of Israel anyway. It doesn't make sense and you can't explain it.

whether or not how things are done make sense to you or fit your own arbitrary sense of aesthetics.

No they don't, on the surface. It shouldn't stop you explaining this anomaly though, should it? You brought it into the conversation not anyone else. it is up to you to explain it. Tick tock, tick tock, tick tock.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

The problem with the Tree of Kowledge of Good and Evil.

-->

@Grugore

Never mind your threats to members. just start answering some of the questions raised above. Or go away.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

When the Israelites demanded a King, Godd used the prophet of Samuel to tell them that they were fools, because God is their King.

Well god didn't "use Samuel" very well did he?

Because the man selected to become the first monarchical ruler of Israel was Saul, son of Kish, a wealthy Benjamite. And who was it that anointed SAUL first king of Israel?

YES!!!!!!

SAMUEL!!!!!!!!!

It makes absolutely no sense does it that one the one hand SAMUEL was calling everyone " FOOLS", yet he, god's being high priest went ahead and anointed a king anyway. Why did he go against his god's judgment? Why did he not say 'I will have no part of this'?

Let's hear your explanation.

The Jesus Christ of Christian theology is not a man who lived and preached for 30 something odd years,

You don't have a clue about your own scriptures do you. Jesus' ministry " preached" last at least 12 months and two years. at most.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

Can you tell the difference between these definitions?

-->

@Mopac

If I speak the truth, this truth came from God, not me.

"IF" you speak the truth? Indeed. What you are repeating I will assume, comes from the bible, such unreliable text if ever there was. What your god, an old ancient god, teaches you is not love and and live in peace as you would like to believe. I am just grateful that the hebrews - come - Israelis have grown out of the ways of this vicious and ancient, jealous god of old and no more do they stone people to death, no more do they commit genocide at his will or wage wars because of his Jealousy as they certainly did at one time. It is about time you followed suit and grew up yourself mopec.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

The problem with the Tree of Kowledge of Good and Evil.

Now it has been established that this story actually concerns flesh and blood beings, one that is not a reptile of any kind and one that is not omnipresent or omnipotent,we can move on to the more pertinent questions and see what our resident theist have to make of them.

It clearly states the Adam was punished for his defiance. But look at the punishment>>

Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. Genesis 3:23

But this,to the close reader, shouldn’t make absolutely any sense at all and make no difference to Adam either! Because this "punishment" of labour in the fields was what this god had intentionally and specifically had created Adam for, if these scriptures are to be believed.As chapter 2 of Genesis makes perfectly clear:

Genesis 2:5"And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God Has not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground".?????

And we also don't know, and the bible doesn’t explain which couple had listened to the flesh and blood Serpent Lord ?

Was it the first pair of Genesis 1:27 “So God Created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them”?

Or was it the other two, the male /female pair that was created at Genesis 2:7 and Genesis 2:22?

Why did god create two pairs?

Had this god forgot that he had created the first pair so just went about creating a second pair?

Why in the second and third creations was themale created out of the dirt and one created via a complicated operation where the male was put to sleep and a part taken from him to create the female?

These are questions the theists are frightened to address because they are complicated if these scriptures are to be believed and taken seriously.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Mopac

"Beloved,believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God:

“Try” Does that mean question?

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@RationalMadman

The answer is blatantly because Jesus Christ is called Jesus Christ.

Well it is actually a title - Jesus THE Christ . It simply means Jesus - The Anointed. I am puzzled then why Jesus or how Jesus can be The Anti Anointed when he is the Anointed.

Can you put me right on that?

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Tradesecret

And in any event, it is you or stephen who conveniently use parts of the bible to selectively make points - but intentionally relegate passages which clearly say there is only one God to almost nothing.

Not at all. I will say here and now, the god of the ISRAELITES says to his own people that ' he is the only god to be worshipped and by his own people.. This is what you are denying and ignoring or it simply has never dawned on you. The Israelite god was not a god of all people of all nations , he says so himself.

There is one of those verses that clearly states , this god in particular, has chosen HIS PEOPLE and only HIS PEOPLE should worship him AND NOT ANY OTHER GODS OF THE OTHER TRIBES.

LOOK FOR YOURSELF AND BEGIN TO UNDERSTAND WHAT HAD GONE ON:>>>>

When Elyon divided the nations,when he separated the sons of Adam, he established the borders of the nations according to the number of the sons of the gods.

Yahweh’s portion was his people, [Israel]his allotted inheritance. (Deut. 32:8–9)

Do you not see or understand what has gone on here. This Israelite god divided up the earth into four portions, One for himself and HIS CHOSEN and three for the individual sons of adam and their generations. So that is four parts or "corners" with the middle east / Israel in particular including Jerusalem at its centre for his own portion. LOOK>>>>"Yahweh’s portion was his people", called ISRAEL.

And you have the nerve to imply that I don't have a brain.

And there is only one way to tell you this. If these scriptures are to be believed then Christians have been worshiping the wrong god for over 2,000 years.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Tradesecret

Tradesecret Wrote; Yes [ Grigore]I agree with that understanding. Good to see others have a brain as well.

But this BIBLICAL below verse clearly contradicts what Grigore only thinks one of those verses means and he hasn't made clear at all to which he is referring.

"Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people" (Ex. 22:10)

How someone "understands" something doesn't make it true and doesn't make it fact. And I see you still have ignored the questions. What is the matter with you?

When Elyon divided the nations,when he separated the sons of Adam, he established the borders of the nationsaccording to the number of the sons ofthe gods.

Yahweh’s portion was his people, [Israel]his allotted inheritance. (Deut. 32:8–9)

The god of the Hebrews Confessed that he was jealous of other gods. If there were no other gods what had he to be jealous of?

Moses was told strictly not to make images of other gods or to worship any other gods or images, if there are no other gods how could anyone make an image of other gods?

and

How could anyone possible worship any other gods if there wasn't any other gods?

Here is just a few of the references to other gods that I quickly scrambled together from for those reading here, and that both the people and your particular god acknowledged and recognised. There are many more but I think I have proved my point and you have failed again.

And God said, Let US make man in our image, after OUR likeness: Genesis 1:26

“ let US go down and confuse their language sothey will not understand each other.”Genesis 11:7

“You shall have no other gods before me”.Exodus.20:3

Ye shall not go after other gods, of the gods ofthe people which are round about you; Deuteronomy 6:14-16

God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods..... Psalm 82

I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children ofthe most High."TheLord is a great God, and a great King aboveall gods" . Ps.95:3.

For the Lord is agreat God, and a great King above all gods. Psalm 95:3
Psalm 135:5
For I know that the Lord isgreat, and that our Lord is above all gods.

The jewish list of commandments simply says:

“You shall not recognize the gods of others in My presence".(Sh’mot 20:1-5).

"Woe Unto us! who shall deliverus out of the hand of these mighty Gods? these are the Gods that smote the Egyptians with all theplagues in the wilderness" (1 Sam. 4:8).

Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged to Danielthat "your God is a God of gods, and a Lord of kings,..."(Dan. 2:47).

Hespoke of Daniel as one "inwhom is the spirit of the holy gods" andtold Daniel "I know that the spirit of the holy gods isin thee"(Dan. 4:8-9, 18)

Hisqueen also spoke of Daniel as one"in whom is the spirit of the holy gods"and said that he had "wisdom like the wisdom of the gods"(Dan. 5:11).

"Thou shaltnot revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thypeople" (Ex. 22:10)

Joshuaexclaimed, "The LORD Godof gods, the LORD God of gods, he knoweth, "(Josh. 22:22;see 22:5)

"Thehouse which I build is great: for great is our God above all gods" (2 Chron. 2:5).

When Elyon divided the nations, when he separated the sons ofAdam,he established the borders of the nationsaccording to the number of the sons of the gods.Yahweh’s portion was his people, [Israel]his allotted inheritance. (Deut. 32:8–9)

Do not follow other gods, the gods of the peoples around you (Deut. 6:14)
But you must not turn away from all the commandments I amgiving you today, to either the right or left, nor pursue other gods and worship them (Deut. 28:14–15).

When Mosesand the children of Israel sang praises to the LORD they sang, "Who islike unto thee, 0 LORD, amongthe gods? who is like thee, glorious in holiness fearful inpraises, doing wonders?" (Ex. 15:11).

Moses also spoke' of, "The LORDyour God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great god, a mighty, . . ." (Deut. 10:17).

Mostinteresting it that in the Greek speaking world of St Paul & Baranbas, it was believedZeus/Jupiter and Mercurius/ mercury had come to them as Paul andBarnabas;

12 And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because hewas the chief speaker.
13 Then the priest of Jupiter, which was before their city, broughtoxen and garlands unto the gates, and would have done sacrifice with thepeople. Acts 14:12-13

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Grugore

In this verse,

Which verse

other gods are simply things that take the place God in our lives. Like your Nintendo

But this verse below states CLEARLY not to revile other gods- plural; that is to say do not criticize in an abusive or angrily insulting manner.

"Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people" (Ex. 22:10)

So that cannot be correct now can it. so you are talking absolute nonsense AGAIN.

AND YOU MUST HAVE MISSED THESE VERY TELLING VERSES AND QUESTIONS: You keep doing this.

The god of the Hebrews Confessed that he was jealous of other gods. If there were no other gods what had he to be jealous of?

Moses was told strictly not to make images of other gods or to worship any other gods or images, if there are no other gods how could anyone make an image of other gods?

and

How could anyone possible worship any other gods if there wasn't any other gods?

The truth is there are many gods, over 50! in the bible that clearly identified by name specifically. Get over it. there was more that one god.

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Grugore

I believe I explained that in the link I posted. Did you even read it?

No you haven't posted a link on this thread, Stop telling lies and simply answer the question or go away.

Here they are again, take you time. I am sure I will find your answers absolutely fascinating.

The god of the Hebrews Confessed that he was jealous of other gods. If there were no other gods what had he to be jealous of?

Moses was told strictly not to make images of other gods or to worship any other gods or images, if there are no other gods how could anyone make an image of other gods?

and

How could anyone possible worship any other gods if there wasn't any other gods?

And while we are on the subject of multiple gods (that you deny exist/ed, maybe you can explain the verses below?

These two are very revealing in my opinion. And from the lips of the Hebrew god himself:

"Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people" (Ex. 22:10)

REVILE! That Is to say not to criticize in an abusive or angrily insulting manner.

AGAIN how could anyone "revile" these other gods if - according to you - they didn't even exist?

And this Hebrew god amongst gods also commanded,

"In all things that I have said unto you be circumspect: and make no mention of the name of other gods, neither let it he heard out of thy mouth" (Ex.23:13).

Created:

6 years ago

0

Posted in: