Names of God

[Tumah]

Judges in 31 states in the US have the power to put people to death? Not for working on Sunday they don't.

Yes, but your accusation was that Jewish rabbis had the power to put people to death. I'm pointing out that this isn't a good point, because judges in the US have that power too.

You don't know who the High Sparrow is? Seems you're not as smart as you thought you were.

I never made the claim to know of things outside Jewish texts. Nor did I make the claim that you were ignorant of anything besides Jewish texts.

You don't claim to know how the Sanhedrin dressed? There are various artist images and movies but we don't really know for sure. But, we kind of know people. How did ancient people in powerful positions dress? In rags or expensive clothes?

Since everyone is different, I guess it would depends on the individual's inclination.

Didn't these Sanhedrin have the power to judge the king?

Originally yes. But because of an incident where they judged the king wrongly, the prohibited themselves from judging any king not of the Davidic line. Only kings from the Davidic line could be judged, because they can become judges. Other kings can't judge or be judged.

If the temple was destroyed by the Romans how could it then be conquered by the Crusades and Saladin? Rome destroyed it in 70. The first crusade captured Jerusalem in 1099. Saladin captured Jerusalem in 1187. You got your history mixed up. If I made a mistake like that you would be calling me "ignorant" but I can be the better man and not do that to you.

I haven't made a mistake though. You were talking about the Temple, not Jerusalem. At least, if you switched from talking about the Temple to Jerusalem, you neglected to mention it in your response.

Why did I ask you whether you would accept Moses telling you that Jesus is the son of God? Because you are a unique personality experiment. Humans have greatly inflated ego's. I'm always curious about the many personality experiments that God is conducting. It takes time but I can figure people out by their actions and answers. The more I learn about humans, the more I learn about God.

In one post you tell me that you have your path and I have mine. In another post you ask me whether I would accept your path.

Would I kindly quote the verse where the ten commandments says that those who violate the sabbath should be put to death? I would have to look it up but I believe you said earlier that the ten commandments is only in two places so you already know them both. You're just going to change the meaning of the words from "thou shalt not violate the sabbath" to "treat others as you wish to be treated" or something.

I've already provided the chapters and verses that contain the ten commandments. Here is a link to a Christian site for both chapters, so you know that I'm not pulling your leg.
Bible Gateway passage: Exodus 20:1-17 - New International Version
Bible Gateway passage: Deuteronomy 5:6-21 - New International Version

I have a habit of not providing any evidence or knowledge of the matter? And you've provided evidence? Show me a fireball from heaven. Has science found a single one? Show me a God caused drought? Just one. How about manna from heaven? Got any? You just need to show me one. How about the fragments of the ten commandments? Got those? Moses cane? The Ark of the Covenant? You have some stories that were written long ago by humans who didn't understand science and thought that the ground shaking was an angry God because they didn't know about Plate Tectonics.

I haven't made claims about any of these things to you. I'm not asking you for evidence about random things in the Book of Uranus, I'm asking you for evidence for the claims that you're making regarding the rabbis and priests.

Herman Melville didn't claim that the book "Moby Dick" was given to him by God and that he was the chosen one. I'm familiar with the content, just not in the way you are. My claims were about my version of the text, not yours.

Maybe, but you were speaking about depictions in the Book of Uranus regarding Jesus' life. That's about as relevant as depiction in Moby Dick about Ishmael.

Also, since you like to point out ignorance. A invalid argument is one where ones conclusion does not agree ones premise. Validity has nothing to do with truth. I can say "Men always were hats. John is a man. Therefore, John always wears a hat." That is a valid statement even though it is not true. It's a common mistake among those who have not studied ancient Greece philosophy.

And this is relevant because...?

I'm hung up on the ten commandments and not so much on the other supposed commandments? Because the other commandments are not commandments. A Jewish religious leader who writes a temple policy book that one day finds itself being included into the bible does not make it God's law.

And how do they differ from the ten commandments?

There is such a thing as proof? What is proof to you? I can explain it to you but I'd rather hear your guess first.

I think proof would be historical documentation preferably by multiple unrelated authors with no stake in the claim.

The Wiki page you posted says that some editions of the Talmud say that Jesus was hanged, not stoned as you claimed.

Right, but if someone was hanged by the court, then he must have been stoned first. That's standard procedure and congruent with the penalty that he had incurred.

Also, don't you think that some Jewish religious leaders may have written some things down that were not exactly true after Jesus was executed to discredit Him and His earthly family?

Anything is possible.
Don't you think its possible that the NT authors embellished a story about one of the minor historical messianic claimants and turned it into the miraculous story you have now?

It is almost as if Jesus teachings started to become accepted by Jews.

You keep switching back and forth about whether Jesus teachings was accepted by the Jews...

They no longer put people to death for adultery. They no longer put people to death for working on Friday

Yes, but as we're discussed, you have no proof that this was done as a result of the NT's portrayal of Jesus' teaching and in fact a topical study of the text indicates that they had stopped prior to Jesus' death.

Incidentally, they also no longer put mass murderers to death either.

and to this day they no longer follow Moses laws.

So far, this claim has yet to be substantiated.

You think that following tradition and rituals is what God wants. Primitive humans came up with all kinds of crazy ideas in an attempt to win God's favor. There is nothing you can do to win God's favor.

That's one possibility. Albeit not one that I believe is true, nor one that you've proven to be.

If having a life isn't good enough then there is nothing that can satisfy you.

There's that non sequitur again. Wouldn't it be easier to write out the thought process that takes you between two different subjects, so that we can both follow?

I admit that I haven't learned Hebrew nor have I read your version of the Old Testament.

Judging from your posts until now, it doesn't seem as though you've read anyone's version of the "Old Testament" or you wouldn't be saying some of the things that you have been. If you did, its been so long, you don't remember it anymore.

To you anyone who can't read Hebrew is ignorant.

No. To me, anyone who makes statements about a text they have not read is ignorant. You make be very knowledgeable about mechanical engineering. I have no idea. But you've displayed your ignorance when it comes to the Tanach. You simply don't seem to know what the text actually says. So when it comes to this subject, you are ignorant.

Seems the rest of the world has done okay without it though.

Have they?

You know we have the wheel now, right?

There's that non-sequitur again.

 

[Super Universe]

You're quite insulting. You have been insulting for awhile. You know that means you're losing the argument, right?

The old Jewish laws are unaceptable by my standards? Correct. And what country puts people to death for working on a certain day? None. The only thing we have now that is close to what the ancient primitive Jews had for laws is ISIS, oh, and possibly Saudi Arabia.

The way "an eye for an eye" was enforced is by value? Correct. Saudi Arabia still uses that as a law.

Forgiveness is a concept mentioned in the Torah? So you agree with Jesus teachings? Oh, you're trying to say that the Jews came up with it first, just like everything else probably.

You're really stuck on this proof thing. You think people only believe things that are proven. Try and prove something to me, pick anything, I can deny it till the end and there is nothing you can do about it. Proof is in the eye of the beholder. It's not something that is absolute but that wasn't in your book so you never learned it.

Proof is something that agrees with a person's already accepted standards. You can show someone something that they don't believe and they may come to accept it over time but at first they will refuse to believe it. See, you learned something and didn't have to use Hebrew after all.

I'm conflating two different concepts? I really wasn't but I'm not surprised you're confused. You have trouble with allegory and symbolism. You're very black and white, plain. I bet you don't know a single joke. I can tell you the one about the Rabbi who walks into a bar... Nevermind, you wouldn't get it.

It doesn't matter whether you agree with the law, it only matters that you do what the judge says? You know, that is the most telling statement you've made so far. God gave you laws that you didn't want to follow any longer so you made up this scheme that a Jewish judge can over ride God's laws to get you out of it.

My book probably has a lot of mistakes? You're the one debating the meaning of words in your own book. Seems your writers weren't very clear about what they were trying to say, were they?

Christians have a history of changing the meaning of words? I wonder who they got it from?

Hanging was done after the stoning? Okay, but the reference you provided doesn't say that. You claimed Jesus was stoned to death while it says Jesus was hanged.

God always was? In a time reference that is true. There was no such thing as time until God came into existence. Are you familiar with something called the quantum flux? Probably not. Things can pop into existence and then pop back out again.

Cain was afraid of being killed by animals? Spin! Cain pleaded that whoever finds me will kill me, not some animal. What you're doing, trying to alter the meaning of the stories, is called lying. You're lying about religious text and you're doing it on purpose.

Cain could have been killed by a future relative? A relative that wasn't even born yet. Cain would have about a 15 year head start.

The truth is there were other people. The reason Cain was afraid was because Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel, did not mark themselves with tribal tattoo's. The more primitive humans had tribal tattoos on their shoulders that were a warning to other hunters that if you killed a person their tribe would retaliate against yours. So then, your book says, the Lord put a tribal mark on Cain.

Then, your book says, "Do not put tattoo marks on yourselves" because the tribal tattoo helped keep groups separate when they should have been working together. You think people need to learn Hebrew to understand your book better. Really, all someone has to do is study primitive cultures.

Also, the primitive humans were hunters and did not know how to farm. Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel were farmers. The hunters thought it was too much work so they were against learning how to farm. They didn't realize it would produce much more food so they would not learn how to farm until much later in human history. That is why the writer of Genesis put in that the "Lord" looked with favor on Abel's offering of meat but not with Cain's offering of fruits of the soil.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Are you having fun, Tumah? Maybe you should let the other fellow win a little bit, so that it doesn't look like a set up.

 

[Rival]

No Tumah don't let him win!!! Know no mercy!! EYE FOR AN EYE!

 

[Tumah]

You're quite insulting. You have been insulting for awhile. You know that means you're losing the argument, right?

No, I didn't know that. You have so much to teach. Does it teach that in your book as well?

The old Jewish laws are unaceptable by my standards? Correct. And what country puts people to death for working on a certain day? None.

That's good, since its prohibited for non-Jews to take Saturday off by Jewish Law. So its better if they work. Thanks for that assurance.

The only thing we have now that is close to what the ancient primitive Jews had for laws is ISIS, oh, and possibly Saudi Arabia.

No, I think Jewish Law is a lot more complicated than anything ISIS might have. Probably KSA as well.

The way "an eye for an eye" was enforced is by value? Correct. Saudi Arabia still uses that as a law.

No, in KSA it looks like they actually do the same thing that was done to them. That's not enforcing by value, that's enforcing by crime. Jewish Law requires that you pay the value of the eye in exchange for the damaged eye.

Forgiveness is a concept mentioned in the Torah?

Sure it is. G-d is called the forgiving in Nehemia. Deutronomy 30 talks about forgiving us when we repent. Forgiveness is a part of love really.

So you agree with Jesus teachings?

I agree with the parts that are correct.

Oh, you're trying to say that the Jews came up with it first, just like everything else probably.

Surely its not to crazy to say that a Jew might teach Jewish insights to his followers?

You're really stuck on this proof thing. You think people only believe things that are proven. Try and prove something to me, pick anything, I can deny it till the end and there is nothing you can do about it. Proof is in the eye of the beholder. It's not something that is absolute but that wasn't in your book so you never learned it.

Proof is something that agrees with a person's already accepted standards. You can show someone something that they don't believe and they may come to accept it over time but at first they will refuse to believe it. See, you learned something and didn't have to use Hebrew after all.

I did learn something. But I don't think its what you intended to teach me.

I'm conflating two different concepts? I really wasn't but I'm not surprised you're confused. You have trouble with allegory and symbolism. You're very black and white, plain. I bet you don't know a single joke. I can tell you the one about the Rabbi who walks into a bar... Nevermind, you wouldn't get it.

People have told me that I am humorless and take things too seriously. You're on point with that, I admit.

It doesn't matter whether you agree with the law, it only matters that you do what the judge says?

No, I said it doesn't matter if you agree with the sentence. Although it is true, that you should abide by the laws of the country you reside in whether you agree with them or not.

You know, that is the most telling statement you've made so far.

Yes, it means I'm a good citizen.

God gave you laws that you didn't want to follow any longer so you made up this scheme that a Jewish judge can over ride God's laws to get you out of it.

There are no laws that that can be overridden by judges, so I don't think this scheme has happened. The problem stems from your lack of understanding the nature of the Law.

My book probably has a lot of mistakes? You're the one debating the meaning of words in your own book. Seems your writers weren't very clear about what they were trying to say, were they?

I think they were pretty clear as I have no problem understanding it in its native language. Perhaps the problem lays at the feet of the translators.

Christians have a history of changing the meaning of words? I wonder who they got it from?

Oh, so you agree with me about that now?

Hanging was done after the stoning? Okay, but the reference you provided doesn't say that. You claimed Jesus was stoned to death while it says Jesus was hanged

Actually, the reference I provided brings both versions as you mentioned earlier. I'm only explaining what the other version means.

God always was? In a time reference that is true. There was no such thing as time until God came into existence. Are you familiar with something called the quantum flux? Probably not. Things can pop into existence and then pop back out again.

Time didn't come into existence until G-d began to create the universe. G-d transcends time.

Cain was afraid of being killed by animals? Spin! Cain pleaded that whoever finds me will kill me, not some animal. What you're doing, trying to alter the meaning of the stories, is called lying. You're lying about religious text and you're doing it on purpose.

No, that's just what the text literally says, "and it will be, all [who] find me will kill me". It doesn't say anything about it being a person who he was afraid of. It sounds like it was anything.

Cain could have been killed by a future relative? A relative that wasn't even born yet. Cain would have about a 15 year head start.

Cain was killed by a future relative.

The truth is there were other people. The reason Cain was afraid was because Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel, did not mark themselves with tribal tattoo's. The more primitive humans had tribal tattoos on their shoulders that were a warning to other hunters that if you killed a person their tribe would retaliate against yours. So then, your book says, the Lord put a tribal mark on Cain.

...And now, the evidence...

Then, your book says, "Do not put tattoo marks on yourselves" because the tribal tattoo helped keep groups separate when they should have been working together. You think people need to learn Hebrew to understand your book better. Really, all someone has to do is study primitive cultures.

No, this is a completely different word then the one by Cain. The reason why it was prohibited to make tattoos is because it was common to get a tattoo of one's favorite idol. So this was another way to separate us from idol worshipers.

Also, the primitive humans were hunters and did not know how to farm. Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel were farmers. The hunters thought it was too much work so they were against learning how to farm. They didn't realize it would produce much more food so they would not learn how to farm until much later in human history. That is why the writer of Genesis put in that the "Lord" looked with favor on Abel's offering of meat but not with Cain's offering of fruits of the soil.

There seems to be at least one step that you're missing here in your explanation.

Thankfully it seems you forgot about the second part of the post. I can't say I'm upset.

 

[Super Universe]

Yes, but your accusation was that Jewish rabbis had the power to put people to death. I'm pointing out that this isn't a good point, because judges in the US have that power too.


I never made the claim to know of things outside Jewish texts. Nor did I make the claim that you were ignorant of anything besides Jewish texts.

Since everyone is different, I guess it would depends on the individual's inclination.


Originally yes. But because of an incident where they judged the king wrongly, the prohibited themselves from judging any king not of the Davidic line. Only kings from the Davidic line could be judged, because they can become judges. Other kings can't judge or be judged.


I haven't made a mistake though. You were talking about the Temple, not Jerusalem. At least, if you switched from talking about the Temple to Jerusalem, you neglected to mention it in your response.


In one post you tell me that you have your path and I have mine. In another post you ask me whether I would accept your path.


I've already provided the chapters and verses that contain the ten commandments. Here is a link to a Christian site for both chapters, so you know that I'm not pulling your leg.
Bible Gateway passage: Exodus 20:1-17 - New International Version
Bible Gateway passage: Deuteronomy 5:6-21 - New International Version


I haven't made claims about any of these things to you. I'm not asking you for evidence about random things in the Book of Uranus, I'm asking you for evidence for the claims that you're making regarding the rabbis and priests.


Maybe, but you were speaking about depictions in the Book of Uranus regarding Jesus' life. That's about as relevant as depiction in Moby Dick about Ishmael.


And this is relevant because...?


And how do they differ from the ten commandments?


I think proof would be historical documentation preferably by multiple unrelated authors with no stake in the claim.


Right, but if someone was hanged by the court, then he must have been stoned first. That's standard procedure and congruent with the penalty that he had incurred.

Anything is possible.
Don't you think its possible that the NT authors embellished a story about one of the minor historical messianic claimants and turned it into the miraculous story you have now?


You keep switching back and forth about whether Jesus teachings was accepted by the Jews...


Yes, but as we're discussed, you have no proof that this was done as a result of the NT's portrayal of Jesus' teaching and in fact a topical study of the text indicates that they had stopped prior to Jesus' death.

Incidentally, they also no longer put mass murderers to death either.

So far, this claim has yet to be substantiated.

That's one possibility. Albeit not one that I believe is true, nor one that you've proven to be.

There's that non sequitur again. Wouldn't it be easier to write out the thought process that takes you between two different subjects, so that we can both follow?


Judging from your posts until now, it doesn't seem as though you've read anyone's version of the "Old Testament" or you wouldn't be saying some of the things that you have been. If you did, its been so long, you don't remember it anymore.


No. To me, anyone who makes statements about a text they have not read is ignorant. You make be very knowledgeable about mechanical engineering. I have no idea. But you've displayed your ignorance when it comes to the Tanach. You simply don't seem to know what the text actually says. So when it comes to this subject, you are ignorant.

Have they?

There's that non-sequitur again.

My accusation was that no judge should put someone to death for working on Friday. I have no problem with capital punishment for murder.

You never claimed to know of things outside Jewish texts? It's very apparent. Nor did you make a claim that I was ignorant of anything beside Jewish texts? Okay, I will take that as a somewhat apology. And I agree, I am ignorant of Jewish texts, but so is most of the world and they're making some fantastic discoveries.

You can't get to the truth by only reading a few ancient texts. People alter stories over time. Parchment was subject to the elements and being eaten by bugs. Buildings would catch fire and burn down because of the fires used for heating, cooking, and light, so stories had to be written down again from memory. They finally started using copper plate but even copper tarnishes.

Since everyone is different it would depend on an individual's inclination on how the Sanhedrin may have dressed? They were the judges who were over the other judges so they very likely wore robes of the same color and style so that everyone recognized them as the Sanhedrin. Do I have proof of it? Nothing you would ever accept.

The Crusades and Saladin couldn't capture the temple because it was already destroyed by the Romans? Okay, fine. Some part of the temple remains, the wall is still there.

Our paths are not that different in some ways, it just depends on how you loot at it. Someone might think that American's and Canadian's are very much alike but try and tell that to an American or Canadian and they will argue against it.

Exodus 31:15 "Work shall be done for six days, but the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death." Now, what is your spin going to be?


I was not speaking about depictions in the Book Uranus. I don't know that book if there is one.

The correct use of the word valid is relevant because you've used it incorrectly. Isn't the correct understanding and use of words your thing? Oh, maybe it has to be a Hebrew word? And you've studied Hebrew and you know most of the world hasn't so you're an expert who likes to go around correcting peoples translation. Well, valid and invalid concepts come from Greek philosophy, they're not Hebrew. You stepped out of your area of expertise.

The ten commandments was supposed to be God's law. I know you think that the entire Old Testament is God's exact words but it's not.

Proof would be historical documentation with multiple unrelated authors with no stake in the claim? Every tribe has stories, that does not make them true and it certainly does not mean that they have really come from God.

The standard was that a person would be stoned to death and then hanged so that's what had to be done? But that's not what it says. You're trying to change the meaning again.

Anything is possible? Not really. Once an unchangeable standard is set they become laws that cannot be broken, even by God. Humans make rules then violate them. God doesn't do that but He is all knowing and we aren't. The universe has physical laws that no being can violate, not even Jesus.

I keep switching back and forth on whether Jesus teachings was accepted by the Jews? I'm not switching back and forth, I don't know why Jews stopped following the ten commandments just after Jesus lived.

It's unsubstantiated that the Jews no longer follow Moses laws? It's fact. But to you the facts change depending on translation.

I've displayed ignorance when it comes to the Tanach? I never quoted or attempted to quote any part of the Tanach. You don't own human history.

And you know we've been to the moon also? No Hebrew needed to do that.

 

[rosends]

I've displayed ignorance when it comes to the Tanach? I never quoted or attempted to quote any part of the Tanach.

You may want to reread your post, numbered 32. Especially the first few words...where you attempt to quote the Tanach. You wrote

"God said "I am" "

In fact, the response by Tumah to you was driven precisely by that attempt at a direct quote (I note you put quotation marks around the word "I" and "am"). Your misquoting the text is exactly the ignorance which is being pointed out to you.

 

[Super Universe]

No, I didn't know that. You have so much to teach. Does it teach that in your book as well?


That's good, since its prohibited for non-Jews to take Saturday off by Jewish Law. So its better if they work. Thanks for that assurance.

No, I think Jewish Law is a lot more complicated than anything ISIS might have. Probably KSA as well.


No, in KSA it looks like they actually do the same thing that was done to them. That's not enforcing by value, that's enforcing by crime. Jewish Law requires that you pay the value of the eye in exchange for the damaged eye.


Sure it is. G-d is called the forgiving in Nehemia. Deutronomy 30 talks about forgiving us when we repent. Forgiveness is a part of love really.

I agree with the parts that are correct.

Surely its not to crazy to say that a Jew might teach Jewish insights to his followers?


I did learn something. But I don't think its what you intended to teach me.


People have told me that I am humorless and take things too seriously. You're on point with that, I admit.


No, I said it doesn't matter if you agree with the sentence. Although it is true, that you should abide by the laws of the country you reside in whether you agree with them or not.

Yes, it means I'm a good citizen.

There are no laws that that can be overridden by judges, so I don't think this scheme has happened. The problem stems from your lack of understanding the nature of the Law.


I think they were pretty clear as I have no problem understanding it in its native language. Perhaps the problem lays at the feet of the translators.


Oh, so you agree with me about that now?


Actually, the reference I provided brings both versions as you mentioned earlier. I'm only explaining what the other version means.


Time didn't come into existence until G-d began to create the universe. G-d transcends time.


No, that's just what the text literally says, "and it will be, all [who] find me will kill me". It doesn't say anything about it being a person who he was afraid of. It sounds like it was anything.


Cain was killed by a future relative.


...And now, the evidence...


No, this is a completely different word then the one by Cain. The reason why it was prohibited to make tattoos is because it was common to get a tattoo of one's favorite idol. So this was another way to separate us from idol worshipers.


There seems to be at least one step that you're missing here in your explanation.

Thankfully it seems you forgot about the second part of the post. I can't say I'm upset.

Complicated doesn't make something moral.

In Saudi Arabia they actually practice an eye for an eye? They try to but you can't always recreate the crime exactly so they attempt to get it close. Either way, it's very primitive law that comes from Hammurabi's laws which was probably handed down from primitive people who lived before Babylon.

Jewish law enforces an equal value punishment? Maybe now it does. In ancient times it didn't.

You agree with the Jesus teachings that you deem to be correct? Okay, I will bite, which parts are not correct? I assume you mean the story of Mary's being a virgin and giving birth? That was made up by the early writers of the books of the New Testament to try and make Jesus more special in the eyes of the people. The early Christians exaggerated.

A Jew might teach Jewish insights to his followers? Even though you are trying to make the claim that it is Jewish, forgiveness of others was not a concept that Jews ever preached. I doubt they preach forgiveness even today but I've never been to a synagogue for prayer so I could be wrong. Even for Christians the idea of forgiveness is a tough one to follow.

People have told you that you are humorless and take things too seriously? Every one should know one good joke.

You don't have to agree with the sentence to execute someone? The international courts have ruled since WW2 that "I was just following orders" is not an acceptable excuse. You have to know that killing someone is legal, justifiable.

There are no laws that can be over ridden by judges? Incorrect. Supreme Court judges determine whether laws are Constitutional or not. They can and do determine whether a law continues to be enforceable or not. Also, in the US, a jury can find a person innocent if they disagree with the law.

You say it's true that you should abide by a country's laws whether you agree with them or not? Not always. Years ago, in the US people of color couldn't sit at the front of the bus. Sometimes it takes disobeying the law in order to change them.

I agree with you that Christians have changed the meaning of words? I don't know of any specific case where a Christian changed the meaning of a word but I absolutely believe there were outright lies told. Mary was not a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus.

Do you agree that ancient Jewish texts are stories that were written into books that were destroyed by the numerous battles, destroyed or damaged by fire, eaten by bugs, and had to be re-written and copied many times so there might be some errors and even outright lies in them?

Time didn't come into existence until God began to create the universe. Oops, you're correct. Heaven is non-space/time.

Cain was killed by a future relative? I'm going to regret this, where does it say that?

You want the evidence that there were other people with Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel? It's in your book. It's always been there but it's confusing because at one point it says one thing and then it says something contradictory. The old stories are a mixture of wheat and chaff. You're trying to make sense of it by changing the name of the chaff to wheat when the chaff should just be thrown out.

The tattoo's were idols? I didn't know that, could be. Makes some sense. Each tribe could have used a tattoo of it's god on their shoulder.

 

[Super Universe]

You may want to reread your post, numbered 32. Especially the first few words...where you attempt to quote the Tanach. You wrote

"God said "I am" "

In fact, the response by Tumah to you was driven precisely by that attempt at a direct quote (I note you put quotation marks around the word "I" and "am"). Your misquoting the text is exactly the ignorance which is being pointed out to you.

I've never read the Tanach so how could I quote it?

You don't own human history. You don't even own Jewish history. There's more than one write and re-write and copy of the ancient books, something you seem to be very ignorant of.

 

[rosends]

I've never read the Tanach so how could I quote it?

You don't own human history. You don't even own Jewish history. There's more than one write and re-write and copy of the ancient books, something you seem to be very ignorant of.

I don't have to own human history -- I don't even know where I would put it if I DID own it. But you made a claim and presented a quote. If you were doing so in the absence of knowledge then that reflects poorly on you.

 

[Super Universe]

I don't have to own human history -- I don't even know where I would put it if I DID own it. But you made a claim and presented a quote. If you were doing so in the absence of knowledge then that reflects poorly on you.

No person has all of the information. I guarantee you that the ancient Jews didn't have a clue as to why meteors fall from the sky, why comets appear and leave, about why weather patterns can change to cause drought, or what causes the ground to shake, or the real causes of disease, or the real causes of genetic defects, but that sure as heck didn't stop them from blaming God for all of it.