This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - agnostic
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
61
« on: July 22, 2021, 10:38:11 AM »
The 'rapture' is a lie, from the father of lies. Sometimes bad theology just comes from bad reading comprehension, which is a much more widespread problem in the field of "Bible study" than is usually acknowledged. Not everything you disagree with needs to be attributed to a conspiracy by the supreme architect of all evil in the universe. Sheesh.
62
« on: July 22, 2021, 10:32:58 AM »
But you do have an example of a Christian state that wasn't brutal, right? What is that example, and what happened to the State? This refusal to cite sources (and then pretend they're not refusing) is a recurring problem across all their threads. Someone is engaging in a fundamentally dishonest approach to these discussions.
63
« on: July 21, 2021, 06:04:26 PM »
It was exactly 2000 years from Adam until Abram (Narrator: It wasn't. OP is playing loose with their math, using contradicting versions of the Bible, and in some cases completely making up information to achieve a desired theological outcome.)
64
« on: July 21, 2021, 09:44:13 AM »
Eleven paragraphs, and you still didn't cite where the Torah says The Law contained a conditional provision which, if broken, would destroy the deal for all time. Do you genuinely not understand how disingenuous that is?
65
« on: July 20, 2021, 05:18:55 PM »
There are *many* passages I could cite you, indicating such. Okay. Start here: The Law contained a conditional provision which, if broken, would destroy the deal for all time. You said this near the start of the thread. Both Fenris and I asked -- about five or six times now -- for you to cite the part(s) of the Torah which say this. And you conspicuously won't.
66
« on: July 19, 2021, 08:28:54 PM »
Leviticus 26:21-28 describes two sets of punishments, against the House of Israel, Leviticus 26:21-22, multiplied by seven and against the House of Judah; Leviticus 26:23-45. Israel is named precisely once in Leviticus 26, in verse 46, as "the people of Israel", where context plainly shows it refers to every person who had followed Moses to Mount Sinai after the escape from Egypt. Judah is not named a single time in the chapter. There's no justification for this arbitrary chopping of 26:21-22 as "against the House of Israel" or 26:23-45 as "against the House of Judah". Why do the two people with the theologies most hostile to Jews keep making up details nowhere to be found in the Bible, where those made-up details promote an antisemitic supersessionist theology? Seriously? How is this dishonesty at all excusable?
67
« on: July 19, 2021, 08:22:40 PM »
Do you, though? I would insist not, given both you and I have asked them to provide chapter and verse demonstrating The Law contained a conditional provision which, if broken, would destroy the deal for all time. and they've ignored/refused each time we've asked.
68
« on: July 19, 2021, 08:18:16 PM »
Can you stop ignoring people when they ask you to cite sources? I would insist you cite any source from the first century or earlier which claims this. This is the third time in this thread. I know it's a recurring problem in other threads too. "Moses and Elijah" do not symbolize "the Law and the Prophets." Cite a source contemporary to the New Testament, or predating it, that says this. Yes, he denied being the literal Elijah There's that mental gymnastics I was referring to. John didn't deny being the "literal" Elijah. John denied being Elijah without qualification. Not once does the Bible make any distinction between a "literal" or "metaphorical" Elijah. This is yet another idea Christians have to make up ad hoc to reconcile a plain contradiction. In other words, the prophecy was not about reincarnation or ghosts coming back from the dead. Elijah never died in the Old Testament. He was taken to heaven. That's why Malachi has a prophecy that Elijah will return before the day of judgment: because he didn't die. The Jews didn't get it. There's that obligatory comment degrading "the Jews"... You're entitled to your view. But I think Jesus said what he said, and the NT authors properly represented what he taught. The problem is not that we disagree. It happens all the time in biblical studies, and I'm totally fine with it! The problem is the Christian view here was made up for the purpose of explaining a question about the story. That's why I keep asking you to "cite sources from the first century or earlier" that support your claim that Moses and Elijah symbolize "the Law and the Prophets". It's also why you keep ignoring my request/refusing to cite any sources. There aren't any sources to cite, because the idea didn't exist until after Christians starting reading the transfiguration story and asked "why Moses and Elijah?" Either that, or you're completely unable to make sense of an obvious inferrence? The anti-Jewish interpretation is not an "obvious inference" when the story is about Jewish disciples of a Jewish preacher claiming to be the Jewish messiah who was sent by the Jewish God as foretold by the Jewish law and the Jewish prophets. The anti-Jewish interpretation is only "obvious" within an antisemitic supersessionist theology that looks for interpretations of the Bible that are the least charitable to Jews.
69
« on: July 19, 2021, 03:42:46 PM »
Actually, I really dislike the word "transfiguration." It doesn't roll off the tongue. The Greek word just means "change"... "transform" if you want two syllables. Can we translate it that way?
70
« on: July 19, 2021, 12:37:46 PM »
This is the most negative and uncompelling reason I've ever seen for preaching the Gospel. Who could've guessed that a theocratic worldview which justifies the history of Christian-ruled governments but compartmentalizes every atrocity they committed with "no true Scotsman" even while advocating for the same practices that led to those atrocities would actually repel members of groups who would be persecuted under its dominion.
71
« on: July 19, 2021, 12:24:50 PM »
Jews will not accept this because they have a vested interest in preserving ((their)) religion You say this like it's some kind of profound observation that members of Judaism... want to preserve Judaism, and hence disagree with an objectively errant take on their religious beliefs. that had, in reality, been vacated and delegitimized by God. As you've been told several times, the Torah contains provisions for when the covenant is broken, how covenant-breakers may be disciplined, and how they may be restored. When the terms of a contract explicitly say "if you break this contract, I will punish you and then restore you", and you pretend that last part doesn't exist, it makes it really hard to believe you're being intellectually honest with this topic. Probably why you made this claim, but are ignoring my request for you to cite your sources. The Law contained a conditional provision which, if broken, would destroy the deal for all time. You're going to need to provide a chapter and verse from Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, or Deuteronomy. I can't think of a single point that says what you're claiming it says. Did I ever get an answer to this?
I also keep seeing a lot of really bold claims like this in these threads, with no evidence to back it up even when asked.
72
« on: July 19, 2021, 12:15:54 PM »
Anti-Semitic? No I am anti the godless and Jesus rejecting people, of every race or nation. I recall someone posting one of the most tired antisemitic conspiracy theories about "the Rothchilds" in another thread...
73
« on: July 18, 2021, 09:00:52 PM »
Plus The Law contained a conditional provision which, if broken, would destroy the deal for all time. You're going to need to provide a chapter and verse from Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, or Deuteronomy. I can't think of a single point that says what you're claiming it says.
Did I ever get an answer to this? I also keep seeing a lot of really bold claims like this in these threads, with no evidence to back it up even when asked.
74
« on: July 18, 2021, 08:56:44 PM »
When a theology says that an ethno-religious group is intrinsically blind (by God? by satan? both, it often seems like) such that they are unable to read their own holy book, understand it, or elucidate anything of value in it... that's an inherent prejudice against that ethno-religious group. Supersessionism is antisemitic.
And as much as I anticipate getting some flak for saying that so bluntly, it's still entirely accurate.
Four of the recent threads are orbiting right around this supersessionist/antisemitic "Jews are blind and can't read their own Bible" theology, if not dropping right into its gravity.
For a religion that began as a Jewish sect of Jews who kept the Jewish law and Jewish holidays and followed (who they believed to be) the Jewish messiah because they believed the Jewish prophecies which repeatedly said that the Jewish God would exalt the Jewish nation... there is a lot of really blatant antisemitism in the form of Christianity being pushed in these recent threads.
75
« on: July 18, 2021, 12:15:06 PM »
But I did know some Jews expected Elijah to return before Messiah comes. Judaism expects Elijah to return because Malachi 4 says he will return. And indeed he did come--Jesus identified John the Baptist as the one portrayed in the image of Elijah. John denied being the fulfillment of Malachi 4's prophecy about Elijah when he was asked directly in John 1:21. I'm fully aware of the mental gymnastics performed to reconcile the two ideas, but the Occam's Razor here is it's a contradiction. I do think Moses represented the Law, and Elijah represented the Prophets, because that's what they did. This is the most transparently circular argument I've read in a long time. "I think this because this is what I say it is." Hence why I said It's a super popular Christian claim that "Moses and Elijah represent the Law and Prophets," but I would insist you cite any source from the first century or earlier which claims this. My point is this -- "Moses and Elijah symbolize the Law and the Prophets" is a claim Christians made up to explain the presence of Moses and Elijah in the transfiguration story because (surprise) the antisemitism present throughout Christian history (starting in the late first century) led Christians to completely ignore the Jewish traditions that converge in the transfiguration story. Well yea, remember that Jesus told Peter that upon him, as apostle, the Church would be built. We have to wonder why Mark and Luke both omitted the "on this rock" story completely but kept the transfiguration story if the former was so absolutely essential to understanding the latter. It's because the two stories have nothing to do with each other. meaning that Moses and Elijah are to be ignored before the voice of Messiah. The story says no such thing. You're making up details about the story, and changing other details, to force it into the supersessionist/antisemitic box you want Christianity to be. The transfiguration's purpose -- based on its direct reference to Malachi's prophecy about Elijah, its echo of the Sinai revelation, and the belief that Moses would return alongside Elijah, among other possible allusions to end times beliefs held by Jews at the time -- was to show that the end times had arrived. It's purpose was not to tell people to ignore the Jewish laws and Jewish prophets so that the Jewish religion would be replaced with a new anti-Jewish religion. If was, it would be in complete contradiction to the Torah's testimony of itself that its laws were "eternal," "forever," "perpetual," "for all generations," never to be added to or subtracted from.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
|
Is free will a failed concept?
by Sojourner
Yesterday at 09:47:23 PM
|
Watcha doing?
by Slug1
Yesterday at 09:00:15 PM
|
The Jews will be kept safe in the Great Tribulation
by Slug1
Yesterday at 08:56:56 PM
|
Do you know then God of Jesus?
by Athanasius
August 14, 2024, 03:37:17 AM
|
Jesus God
by Athanasius
August 13, 2024, 05:42:24 PM
|
I got saved
by Fenris
August 13, 2024, 01:12:01 PM
|
How to reconcile?
by Fenris
August 08, 2024, 03:08:32 PM
|
Problem solved
by Sojourner
August 04, 2024, 05:25:26 PM
|
Quotable Quotes
by Sojourner
August 04, 2024, 04:35:36 PM
|
Plea deal for the 9/11 conspirators
by Fenris
August 04, 2024, 01:59:43 PM
|
The New Political Ethos
by RabbiKnife
July 31, 2024, 09:04:59 AM
|
Trump shooting
by Fenris
July 25, 2024, 11:50:40 AM
|
woke
by Sojourner
July 24, 2024, 11:32:11 AM
|
The Rejection of Rejection
by Fenris
June 27, 2024, 01:15:58 PM
|
Eschatology - Introduction PLEASE READ
by Stephen Andrew
June 22, 2024, 05:39:59 AM
|
Baptism and Communion
by Stephen Andrew
June 22, 2024, 05:35:20 AM
|
Faith and peace
by Stephen Andrew
June 22, 2024, 05:32:43 AM
|
Is the US its own worst enemy?
by Sojourner
June 11, 2024, 11:58:28 AM
|
Telling people about offerings
by tango
June 06, 2024, 10:57:09 PM
|
Matthew 24 - carefully analyzed.
by Kfawn
June 06, 2024, 09:32:53 PM
|
|
|