1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Jesus Resurrection

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by Prometheus85, Sep 13, 2018.

  1. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,386
    Ratings:
    +552
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    The posts are becoming to large again. But so many important things need to be addressed. It will take way too much time to address it all. Sorry, im pressing reset and im gonna pick one of what i think is a worthy point.
     
  2. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,386
    Ratings:
    +552
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    Septuagint 250 BC: Goshen of Arabia

    1. The Septuagint (LXX) was translated in Alexandria, Egypt around 250 BC.
    2. Referencing the time of Abraham to Jacob, the Septuagint LXX, translates Gen 45:10; 46:34 as, "Goshen of Arabia". This is used as proof that in 250 BC, well before Paul's time of writing Gal 4:25, that everything east of the Nile, including the wilderness of Egypt (Sinai Peninsula) was considered Arabia. It is suggested that the Septuagint merely reflected the geographical understanding of the time.
      1. "You shall settle in the land of Goshen [of Arabia], and you shall be near me, you and your children and your children’s children, as well as your flocks, your herds, and all that you have." (Genesis 45:10)
      2. "you shall say, ‘Your servants have been keepers of livestock from our youth even until now, both we and our ancestors’—in order that you may settle in the land of Goshen [of Arabia], because all shepherds are abhorrent to the Egyptians.”" (Genesis 46:34)
    3. Considering many of the geographers of the time, like Herodotus: 484 BC, had no concept of the Sinai Peninsula or the Gulf of Aqaba, the translators copied this error from their contemporary geographers. The Holy Spirit did not make this mistake, and the works, "of Arabia" are not in the original Hebrew text.
    4. No one actually believes that the Holy Spirit had the phrase "Goshen of Arabia" in the original. We all understand it was a textual gloss of the worse kind: Adding to the word of God something that is factually untrue. The Septuagint translators added the words, "of Arabia" because the maps of Herodotus, Hecataeus, Hesiod and Hecataeus that they had before them were wrong.
      1. We couldn't find an English Bible that adds the words, "of Arabia" proving that modern translators reject it.
      2. The Massoretic Hebrew text of the Old Testament (1000 AD) does not add the words "of Arabia".
    5. The Romans renamed the Sinai Peninsula "Arabia" only after 106 AD.
    6. "The degree of correspondence between the Septuagint and the Hebrew Masoretic text varies greatly. In Genesis, the correspondence is usually very close. In Job, not so close. There are many places where the Septuagint departs from the Hebrew far more dramatically than in Gen. 45:10 & 46:34. And in fact, some scholars argue that in some instances where the Masoretic text and the Septuagint differ, the Septuagint rather than the Masoretic text preserves the original meaning. Seemingly not put off by the discrepancies in meaning between the Hebrew text and the Septuagint, the New Testament writers quoted from the Septuagint freely." (Jeff Smelser, NTGreek.net)
    7. "Region of Egypt which the Israelites inhabited during their sojourn in that country. It is described as situated on the eastern frontier of Lower Egypt (Gen. xlvi. 28, 29; Ex. xiii. 17; I Chron. vii. 21), forming an outpost of it (Gen. xlvi. 34); apparently not at all (or scantily) inhabited by Egyptians (ib.), but, in the estimation of shepherds, evidently "the best of the land" (ib. xlvii. 6,11), since Pharaoh's cattle grazed there (6). According to verse 11 "the land of Rameses" is synonymous with "the land of Goshen." "Goshen" alone (without the addition "land of") is used only in xlvi. 28, 29. In these two verses it may designate a city, as the LXX. understands it, which here renders "Goshen" by "Heroonpolis," adding in verse 28 to "unto Goshen" the words "into the land of Ramesses"; in xlv. 10 the LXX. transliterates "Gesem of Arabia." This name "Arabia" means, in Egyptian usage, either, generally, all land east of the Nile or, as a special district, the "nome Arabia," the 20th of Lower Egypt. Heroonpolis or Heropolis (according to the excavations of Naville, modern Tell al-Mas-Khua) was, however, the capital of the 8th or Heroopolitan nome, east of the Arabian. Nevertheless, the name "Arabia" seems to be used by the LXX. in the special sense, for in the reign of Ptolemy II. the Greek administration seems to have treated the neighboring 8th and 20th nomes as one district (comp. the "Revenue Laws of Ptolemy Philadelphus," ed. Grenfell, 1896, p. l.). Later, the two districts seem to have been separated again (comp., e.g., Ptolemy, "Geographia," iv. 5, 53)." (Jewish Encyclopedia, Goshen)
    Conclusion:

    1. It is clear that the Septuagint translators were wrong when they called Goshen "of Arabia" at the time of Abraham
      1. This error was due to the fact that ancient geographers of the time did not even understand the Gulf of Aqaba existed.
      2. Had they knew their geography better, they never would have called this section of land Arabia. The locals living their knew is was not Arabia.
    2. The Holy Spirit did not allow Paul to make the same mistakes as the some of the Geographers of his day.
    3. The Septuagint (LXX) was translated in Alexandria, Egypt around 250 BC and we know from Herodotus that several towns deep in the Nile Delta of Egypt near the great Pyramids were called "Towns of Arabia".
    4. Herodotus knew full well that Arabia proper was nowhere near Egypt. His comments that lead some to put "Arabia in Egypt" are rather simple to explain:
      1. "Arabian cities" in the Nile Delta are merely Arab immigrants who formed a majority population in a city inside Egypt. There is a "China Town" in ever major city, but we all know where China is not.
      2. 2. The references to the "Arabian Sea" and the "Arabian Mountains" does not mean Arabia inside Egypt, west of the Red Sea or even close by. These references simply mean the Egyptian mountain range flanged entire length the Arabian Sea which separated Egypt from the territory of Arabia proper.
    5. Herodotus calls Pithon in the Eastern Nile Delta beside Goshen, AN ARABIAN TOWN!
    1. "Arabian town of Patumus [Pithom, Tell el-Maskhuta, near Goshen]" (Herodotus, History 2.158.2)
    1. This is helpful in understanding why the Translators of the LXX, who performed their translation work IN EGYPT would say Goshen was of Arabia.
    1. When those bent on keeping Mt. Sinai out of Saudi Arabia quote ancient historians who say Hebrew Goshen in Egypt was in fact Arabia, you wonder why the Israelites ever left?
    2. It simply trashes the Bible story like putting Kadesh Barnea inside the promised land at Qudeirat.

    Septuagint 250 BC: Goshen of Arabia
     
  3. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,386
    Ratings:
    +552
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    From the geological survey

    "Thus the SG decided to find a general name for all rocks generated by combustion metamorphism and an agreement was found for the term burned (or burnt) rock, which has been defined as follows: Burned rock: General term for a compact, vesicular or clinkery, glassy to holocrystalline metamorphic rock of various colours, ..."

    Your source you gave me also said metamorphic rock happens by heat.

    Well, that means burnt too.

    If all this dont mean burnt, what the hell does it mean?
     
    #1423 Jollybear, Nov 22, 2018
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2018
  4. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,386
    Ratings:
    +552
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    The appeal to authority fallacy is when you use or quote an authority or expert in the field that you agree with, but this authority has not provided evidence, only assertion. Any so called evidence is just a masked assertion that is debunked.

    You have committed this fallacy.

    And id like to respond to all the other points, but, if i do that, 2 things will happen. Allot of time will be used and second youl have two many posts to deal with which means youl give me sloppy responses. So, id like you to put in a good effort on those 2 points above.
     
  5. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    27,259
    Ratings:
    +15,105
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Too bad that you do not understand that phrase. Where did you get that from? Why didn't you include the link? I can Google search and found where that came from. It does not support your claim when you include your source. That tells me that you either used a lying source that did not properly link their quote or you were being dishonest yourself. Now I do not think that you would be dishonest yourself. That means that someone lied to you again and you believed them because you are so desperate to cling to your myth.
     
  6. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    27,259
    Ratings:
    +15,105
    Religion:
    Atheist
    When you write such a post you should be the last person to complain about "sloppy responses". I counted thirteen grammatical errors in that short segment of your post.
     
  7. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,386
    Ratings:
    +552
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    The source you gave me is here

    Metamorphic rock - Wikipedia

    "Metamorphic rocks arise from the transformation of existing rock types, in a process called metamorphism, which means "change in form".[1] The original rock (protolith) is subjected to heat (temperatures greater than 150 to 200 °C) and pressure (100 megapascals (1,000 bar) or more), causing profound physical or chemical change. The protolith may be a sedimentary, igneous, or existing metamorphic rock."

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjABegQIDBAE&usg=AOvVaw3-iwwwGWddiSVPhddYTYR0

    Its a download, thats why i didnt put it in the first time. But, there it is.

    "Thus the SG decided to find a general name for all rocks generated by combustion metamorphism and an agreement was found for the termburned (or burnt) rock, which has been defined as follows: Burned rock: General term for a compact, vesicular or clinkery, glassy to holocrystallinemetamorphic rock of various colours, "

    What does this mean to you if not burned?

    Are you just arguing just to argue or something?
     
  8. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,386
    Ratings:
    +552
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    Instead of counting grammer errors, why not focus on the points made?
     
  9. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    27,259
    Ratings:
    +15,105
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Quote mining is a form of lying. At best you did not understand your source. The quote that you used was taken out of contact. My source refuted your claim, even if you did not understand it.

    Since you clearly have no clue why can't you act properly? Ask questions politely and properly. That means no leading questions.
     
  10. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    27,259
    Ratings:
    +15,105
    Religion:
    Atheist
    You have not made any points. That is the problem You have only made false claims that you have not been able to properly support. And once again, you accused someone else of your wrongdoings. This is not proper Christian behavior.
     
  11. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,386
    Ratings:
    +552
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    Ok, ill ask you politely.

    PLEASE tell me what the 2 quotes mean if they dont mean burnt?
     
  12. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,386
    Ratings:
    +552
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    Not proper christian behavior huh? Lol, thats funny!
     
  13. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    27,259
    Ratings:
    +15,105
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Your source referred to a rather rare type of metamorphism, one where fire was actually involved. Coal beds at times catch on fire and can metamorphose rocks next to them. That was burnt. You see you did get your quote from a dishonest source. If you had read it you would have seen that. My quote had nothing to do with metamorphism.

    By the way, your question was neither proper nor polite. I still explained your errors to you. Next time try harder.
     
  14. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    27,259
    Ratings:
    +15,105
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I can see someone that does not follow the instructions of his own belief. It is amazing how many Christians of weak faith are willing to lie for Jesus. You really do not want to go down that road.

    You should remember that most atheists in the U.S. became atheists through a superior understanding of the Bible.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,386
    Ratings:
    +552
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    So......it......is.......burnt. you just said it.

    Metamorphic rock happens two ways, heat or pressure or a combination. Metamorphic means the rock changes form or color.
     
  16. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,386
    Ratings:
    +552
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    I think your a an internet troller. I really believe this. I see it in your actions.

    More like an inferior understanding. Practically almost no understanding. Just alot of pretending to understand. Alot of arrogance from what i see.

    Heck, even if i became an atheist (which that wont happen), gauss what? I most definitely would not want to hang out with them, they seam to consistently (by my limited experience) to be too arrogant, know it all actors.
     
  17. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    27,259
    Ratings:
    +15,105
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Wrong again, heat does not mean "burnt". You lose again.

    Is a diamond "burnt"?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    27,259
    Ratings:
    +15,105
    Religion:
    Atheist
    No, I merely get tired to people that cannot debate honestly or logically. I have offered to help you to learn but your run away from such offers. Calling someone a troll is a violation of the rules here. I would suggest a retraction.

    Wrong again. You keep demonstrating that you do not only not understand the sciences, you have no understanding of the Bible either. You pick and choose which parts you want to believe. And atheists only appear to be arrogant because they are constantly dealing with people that are ignorant and dishonest. Seriously, change your attitude. Learn from your errors and the attitude that you get from atheists will change. But if you keep demanding that 2 + 2 = 5 and that others do not understand because they can prove you to be wrong you will only get what you perceive to be "arrogance" from them.

    You should be trying to learn why you are wrong, not constantly demonstrating how little you know or how far you are willing to go in supporting wrong or even dishonest claims, as you did by quoting a dishonest creationist source.
     
  19. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,386
    Ratings:
    +552
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    Wer not talking diamonds. Wer talking metamorphic rock. The ones at jebul al lawz.

    And yes, some metamorphic rock is that way due to heat. Sometimes its due to pressure. But, the heat ones are burnt.

    Its right there in the 2 sources in the former posts. It says "BURNT". The EXACT word used. And no, it did not come from a creationist site either.
     
  20. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,386
    Ratings:
    +552
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    Oh ya? Well i get tired of people who keep saying im not debating honestly without just refutting the point at hand. Constantly saying im dishonest IN ITSELF makes YOU dishonest.

    Calling someone dishonest is also breaking the rules. I would suggest you retract as well.

    Oh so basically AGREE with your beliefs or i dont get respect?

    K i s s my a s s. Go preach somewhere else. Im borderline ready to report you again. THIS IS A WARNING TO YOU. Apparently rules dont work on you, do they? You grow up being a rebel or something?

    I did not quote a creationist source. The same source you gave "burnt" was in it.

    Also, if you are adament that im wrong, show me HOW i am, quit preaching that im wrong. Just show how i am.
     
Loading...