Shocked To Find Out Yahweh Was Originally A Canaanite God Who Had A Wife, Asherah

[SeekingAllTruth]

First off you don't know what you are talking about. Your problem is the Bible is just so accurate - your unbelief causes you to think it had to be written after the fact. When in reality God is just flat out awesome.

When the writer of the book himself states when he was writing, I don't listen to faithless unbelievers trying to convince me it isn't so.

The messiah will be born in Bethlehem

Matthew forgot to check that Micah was referring to a clan of people named Bethlehem Ephrathah

"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah..."

Matthew wanted it to be a town of Bethlehem, not a tribe. Bethlehem Ephrathah refers to the descendants of Ephratah. In other words, Micah was referring to a person with the first name, Bethlehem, not a town. Matthew should have read 1 Chronicles 2:50

"These were the descendants of Caleb. The sons of Hur the firstborn of Ephrathah"

 

[TrueBeliever37]

You have that sooooooooo backwards. You are putting "God glasses" on. That does not allow you to interpret the Bible correctly because you do not understand what it is.

And you also just broke the Ninth Commandment. Why do people that claim to be Christians do this so often when their book of myths is threatened. Seriously you need to study that Commandment. I do not believe that it was written after the fact due to my unbelief, that is the sort of sin that you perform all the time. I base my disbelief upon the evidence. Once again the article that I posted listed some of the evidence. Is it your fear that kept you from reading it?

Like I said, I don't listen to faithless unbelievers who dispute the word of God. It is unbelief when you don't believe what God's word says. When Jeremiah or Daniel say they wrote it during the time of a certain king for instance and you choose not to believe it - that is unbelief.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

The messiah will be born in Bethlehem

Matthew forgot to check that Micah was referring to a clan of people named Bethlehem Ephrathah

"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah..."

Matthew wanted it to be a town of Bethlehem, not a tribe. Bethlehem Ephrathah refers to the descendants of Ephratah. In other words, Micah was referring to a person with the first name, Bethlehem, not a town. Matthew should have read 1 Chronicles 2:50

"These were the descendants of Caleb. The sons of Hur the firstborn of Ephrathah"

Laugh all you want. But be not deceived; God is not mocked: For whatsoever a man soweth that shall he also reap. Galatians 6:7-8

 

[Subduction Zone]

Like I said, I don't listen to faithless unbelievers who dispute the word of God. It is unbelief when you don't believe what God's word says. When Jeremiah or Daniel say they wrote it during the time of a certain king for instance and you choose not to believe it - that is unbelief.

No, choice is your sin. When one uses rational thought one cannot choose. And the Bible is not "God's word". To even claim that you have to use a verse from a book that was not written by Paul.

The people with the absolute worst understanding of the Bible are fundamentalists. The supposed names of the books are often human additions to them.

Once again, check out how real historians know that some books were not written by the names on the titles.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Laugh all you want. But be not deceived; God is not mocked: For whatsoever a man soweth that shall he also reap. Galatians 6:7-8

No one is mocking God. Well you might be. Poor understandings are being mocked. Now you know how Matthew screwed up. How do you explain Luke's ten year pregnancy of Mary?

 

[TrueBeliever37]

No one is mocking God. Well you might be. Poor understandings are being mocked. Now you know how Matthew screwed up. How do you explain Luke's ten year pregnancy of Mary?

Your posts seem so strange sometimes. I have no idea what you are talking about concerning Matthew. And you gave no reference whatsoever to back up your claim of a ten year pregnancy.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your posts seem so strange sometimes. I have no idea what you are talking about concerning Matthew. And you gave no reference whatsoever to back up your claim of a ten year pregnancy.

That is because you do not read and understand your Bible.

Are you seriously admitting that you do not know of Luke's error that has Mary pregnant ten years?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Here is something I found:
There are 2 views of this prophecy: 1) Is that it occured in 588BCE, 2 years after Ezekiel made his prophecy(590BCE); which sets the Destruction of Jerusalem at 607BCE, instead of 587BCE. Egypt, being carried off in captivity, and so are those reminants of Jersalem who fled to Egypt in defiance of Jeremiah's prophecy(Jer. 42:15,16,19; 43:10,11) This date would allow for a 40 year captivity period, ending with an alliance of Nabonidus(Babylon) with King Amasis II of Egypt. Since Egypt had already been taken captive-it was reduced to a 'vassal state' by the later date-agreeing with the prophecy of Ezekiel.
However, all of this fails if the Babylonian captivity stated in 568BCE; then Egypt would have only been captive 21 years, and even if there were no alliance between Babylon and Egypt(from the Nebuchnezzar Inscription tablet in the British Museum) Cyrus would have freed ALL captives 8 years later, in 539BCE.
Although Egypt had long ceased from the Age of the Pharoah's of being a world power, there's no conclusive source to prove(or disprove) that one would not be able to walk from one end to the other for 40 years. Given that assertion, it suggests the prophecy would have to wait until the end times to be fulfilled.
To me, all this "40 years" stuff we constantly run across in the OT doesn't pass the smell test. Everything in the Bible is 40 years or 40 days, maybe 40 hours or even 40 minutes, but it's always the number 40. This smacks of Jewish Kabbalah mysticism to me. Numbers have symbolic means to the Jews that's why they always have Yahweh doing things for 40 years--Hebrews wandering in Sinai for 40 years; Egypt desolate for 40 years; Moses, Elijah and Jesus fasted in the desert for 40 days each; Ezekiel laid on his right side for 40 days to “bear the iniquity” of Judea’s sins; Three kings reigned for 40 years each: Saul, David and Solomon; God destroyed every living thing on Earth by flooding it for 40 days and on and on. It's all too much to be believed.

Thank you for your comprehensive rely.
I've never read the Jewish Kabbalah ( however, I think it's more than 40 pages )
I counted that the number 40 appears over 90 times, but I don't see any symbolic reasoning significance to that number.
What I do find of interest is: when there is a connection from the 'past to the future' -> see Judges 5:31; Matthew 13:43
There the number 40 is in connection to a forty-year period of peace that followed the deliverance of the Israelites from Canaanite oppression.
This peace points ahead -> ahead to the foreshadowed time of Jesus' going forth, and then there will be a peaceful 1,000-year reign over Earth.
In this case, the number 40 isn't attached to other occurrences with the number 40.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

Thank you for your comprehensive rely.
I've never read the Jewish Kabbalah ( however, I think it's more than 40 pages )
I counted that the number 40 appears over 90 times, but I don't see any symbolic reasoning significance to that number.
What I do find of interest is: when there is a connection from the 'past to the future' -> see Judges 5:31; Matthew 13:43
There the number 40 is in connection to a forty-year period of peace that followed the deliverance of the Israelites from Canaanite oppression.
This peace points ahead -> ahead to the foreshadowed time of Jesus' going forth, and then there will be a peaceful 1,000-year reign over Earth.
In this case, the number 40 isn't attached to other occurrences with the number 40.

I'm not knowledgeable about the relationship between numbers in the Bible. I just know that God uses 40 so much that it has to be man's mystical invention, not God. Sort of like men writing the Bible arbitrarily using the number 40 for this prophecy or that one. It's just too coincidental that a God finds a particular number so critical to his workings.

 

[We Never Know]

They do not even need a testable hypothesis for God. They only need a hypothesis that explains what we observe. They cannot do that. The idea of trying to refute their own ideas is anathema to them. This is not about the existence or the non-existence of God. It is about the existence or non-existence of an event that would have left evidence. The evidence that we observe tells us that there was no flood.

Now I have heard that some Christians that God cleaned up his mess. Of course ultimately that is a claim that God lied since the "clean up" left the Earth looking billions of years old and a world that regularly had rain for all of that time. And that is only the geological evidence against the flood.

I do not demand that they "prove God" I only demand that they show that there is evidence for the Flood of Noah.

I don't come on and post much but at times I come on and read a lot. I have seen many many times where you tell others to present scientific evidence for God, which you know isn't possible.

The majority of your post are borderline personal attacks stating or claiming that others,,, don't have a clue, don't know what evidence is, are lying for Jesus/God, don't understand evidence, don't know or understand fallacies, their beliefs are lies/false, they don't know what a debate is, they don't know how to read the bible, they don't understand science, they must have not finished high school, they don't understand math, etc.... I could go on but I see no point.

If you have concluded that what other people think or believe in are wrong because you don't agree, does that make what you say right or just your opinion?

Many seem to think that expressing their doubts overrides what others think and believe, making themselves right and others wrong.

Respect should be shown for everyone. Showing respect doesn't mean you have to agree with the thoughts or beliefs of others. It means recognizing that people are smart, resilient and competent even if what they think or believe doesn't agree with you.

We have to be careful to not dehumanize those we disagree with because in our own self-righteousness we can become the very thing we despise and criticize in others.

If the mods deem this as an personal attack upon you, then I guess I will get a warning or suspension for stating what I think like you do everyday.

Have a great weekend.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't come on and post much but at times I come on and read a lot. I have seen many many times where you tell others to present scientific evidence for God, which you know isn't possible.

Have I? I bet that I haven't. You probably misinterpreted a post. You just tried to read into a post something that was not there. You probably did that in the past.

The majority of your post are borderline personal attacks stating or claiming that others,,, don't have a clue, don't know what evidence is, are lying for Jesus/God, don't understand evidence, don't know or understand fallacies, their beliefs are lies/false, they don't know what a debate is, they don't know how to read the bible, they don't understand science, they must have not finished high school, they don't understand math, etc.... I could go on but I see no point.

You are again not being entirely honest. I will gladly point out that I have not seen an apologist that is not a liar for Jesus. That does not mean that the people that I am have a discussion with are liars. Again you appear to be reading into posts what you want to see, not what was in there. I do remember this as a constant M.O. of yours.

If you have concluded that what other people think or believe in are wrong because you don't agree, does that make what you say right or just your opinion?

Now I know that I have explained this countless times. And it supports my earlier claims. No, I can back up my claims with valid evidence. It is why I harp on the concept of evidence constantly. Creationists have none. They seem to know it and they refuse to learn the basics of evidence. Okay, that's enough of your nonsense for now.

 

[We Never Know]

Have I? I bet that I haven't. You probably misinterpreted a post. You just tried to read into a post something that was not there. You probably did that in the past.

You are again not being entirely honest. I will gladly point out that I have not seen an apologist that is not a liar for Jesus. That does not mean that the people that I am have a discussion with are liars. Again you appear to be reading into posts what you want to see, not what was in there. I do remember this as a constant M.O. of yours.



Now I know that I have explained this countless times. And it supports my earlier claims. No, I can back up my claims with valid evidence. It is why I harp on the concept of evidence constantly. Creationists have none. They seem to know it and they refuse to learn the basics of evidence. Okay, that's enough of your nonsense for now.

You just proved my post. Thanks.

You can back up your claims with evidence you say? Back up how you can say they are lying for Jesus when in your mind Jesus as they believe didn't exist. How can they lie for somebody/something that didn't exist?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You just proved my post. Thanks.

You can back up your claims with evidence you say? Back up how you can say they are lying for Jesus when in your mind Jesus as they believe didn't exist. How can they lie for somebody/something that didn't exist?

LOL, still the same as always. You are still apparently purposefully misinterpreting posts. I don't see how anyone could be so wrong on purpose.

Try again.

 

[We Never Know]

LOL, still the same as always. You are still apparently purposefully misinterpreting posts. I don't see how anyone could be so wrong on purpose.

Try again.

Again you prove my post. I'm wrong, I misinterprets posts and you are right. Talk about one being blind to themselves.

Good night.

 

[We Never Know]

LOL, still the same as always. You are still apparently purposefully misinterpreting posts. I don't see how anyone could be so wrong on purpose.

Try again.

One question before I go...
Lets say that I believe in God however I can't show scientific evidence that I'm right or God is real.
How can you show I am wrong, that God doesn't exist and what scientific evidence would you use? Hint you can't use anything from the bible being its a book of unproven myths and isn't scientific.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Again you prove my post. I'm wrong, I misinterprets posts and you are right. Talk about one being blind to themselves.

Good night.

It is not worth my time to help you. I would need to hold your hand and treat you as a two year old as I walked you through the posts that you insist on misinterpreting. Find a way to make it worth my time and I will do it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

One question before I go...
Lets say that I believe in God however I can't show scientific evidence that I'm right or God is real.
How can you show I am wrong, that God doesn't exist and what scientific evidence would you use? Hint you can't use anything from the bible being its a book of unproven myths and isn't scientific.

Sorry, money talks. Make it worth my time. There is no point in trying to help someone that insists on getting everything wrong.

 

[We Never Know]

It is not worth my time to help you. I would need to hold your hand and treat you as a two year old as I walked you through the posts that you insist on misinterpreting. Find a way to make it worth my time and I will do it.

Your post is condescending as usual.

 

[We Never Know]

Sorry, money talks. Make it worth my time. There is no point in trying to help someone that insists on getting everything wrong.

Your post is condescending as usual. Plus you cant answer so your just make up excuses lol

 

[TrueBeliever37]

That is because you do not read and understand your Bible.

Are you seriously admitting that you do not know of Luke's error that has Mary pregnant ten years?

You are a poor debater. Let's just stop here.