Giving 10% - Stated clearly in the Bible. (CHC just obeying)
-
Originally posted by Aneslayer:
1. Its debunked.
2. The link you provided does not contain adam to Jesus = 4000years. Have the decency to read your own link before posting, thank you.
3. Then read it to understand. Ask what you don't understand. I may answer. Which concludes you didn't read and just throw a random link....
1. It's not debunked.
2. And you should have the decency to read first before making accusations. The first link http://www.hebroots.com/lul7_8.html you missed this:
*****************************************************************
* *
* SUMMARY OF THE TIME FROM ADAM TO JESUS *
* *
* Adam to Abraham .................. 1948 yrs *
* Abraham to Egypt ................. 290 yrs *
* *
* From Egypt to Moses: (X) Let X = 63 63 yrs *
* *
* X = (Kohath to Amram to Moses) *
* *
* Moses to the Exodus .............. 80 yrs *
* Exodus to death Joshua ........... 70 yrs *
* Judges to Samuel ................. 450 yrs (Acts 13:20) *
* Kings of Judah ................... 513 yrs *
* Babylonian Captivity ............. 586 B.C.E. *
* --------------- *
* Adam to Jesus 4000 yrs *
* *
*****************************************************************
The second link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_Bible you missed this1948 AM 1976 BCE Abram born, son of Terah What does 1976 BCE means? Bacon Chicken and Egg? LOL!
Did you finish school? Or even attended school?
3. LOL! You give link, I give link lor. You don't justify why should I?
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
1. It's not debunked.
2. And you should have the decency to read first before making accusations. The first link http://www.hebroots.com/lul7_8.html you missed this:
*****************************************************************
* *
* SUMMARY OF THE TIME FROM ADAM TO JESUS *
* *
* Adam to Abraham .................. 1948 yrs *
* Abraham to Egypt ................. 290 yrs *
* *
* From Egypt to Moses: (X) Let X = 63 63 yrs *
* *
* X = (Kohath to Amram to Moses) *
* *
* Moses to the Exodus .............. 80 yrs *
* Exodus to death Joshua ........... 70 yrs *
* Judges to Samuel ................. 450 yrs (Acts 13:20) *
* Kings of Judah ................... 513 yrs *
* Babylonian Captivity ............. 586 B.C.E. *
* --------------- *
* Adam to Jesus 4000 yrs *
* *
*****************************************************************
The second link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_Bible you missed this1948 AM 1976 BCE Abram born, son of Terah
What does 1976 BCE means? Bacon Chicken and Egg? LOL!
Did you finish school? Or even attended school?
3. LOL! You give link, I give link lor. You don't justify why should I?
1. http://www.trueorigin.org/henke_helium_archive2.asp
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood.html2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham
Since the 1970s, efforts to reconstruct a patriarchal age for Israel's past have come to an end as most historians of ancient Israel have abandoned the conclusions of earlier scholarship,[10] as there is nothing specific in the Genesis stories that can be definitively linked to known history in or around Canaan in the early second millennium BCE. There is no solid evidence for any date during that period, as none of the kings mentioned are known, neither the anonymous Pharaoh who enlists Joseph into his services. Some scholars argue that historical inaccuracies exist, such as: the reference to Abimelech "King of the Philistines", when the Phlistines had not settled in Palestine until the later end of the millennium. Abraham coming from "Ur of the Chaldeans", when the Babylonians were not known as Chaldeans until a much later time. Laban identified as an Aramean, when Arameans did not become a known political entity before the 12th century BCE.[11]3. Yup. Concluded: BIC didn't read.
-
Originally posted by Aneslayer:
1. http://www.trueorigin.org/henke_helium_archive2.asp
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood.html2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham
Since the 1970s, efforts to reconstruct a patriarchal age for Israel's past have come to an end as most historians of ancient Israel have abandoned the conclusions of earlier scholarship,[10] as there is nothing specific in the Genesis stories that can be definitively linked to known history in or around Canaan in the early second millennium BCE. There is no solid evidence for any date during that period, as none of the kings mentioned are known, neither the anonymous Pharaoh who enlists Joseph into his services. Some scholars argue that historical inaccuracies exist, such as: the reference to Abimelech "King of the Philistines", when the Phlistines had not settled in Palestine until the later end of the millennium. Abraham coming from "Ur of the Chaldeans", when the Babylonians were not known as Chaldeans until a much later time. Laban identified as an Aramean, when Arameans did not become a known political entity before the 12th century BCE.[11]3. Yup. Concluded: BIC didn't read.
1. LOL! You're a joke. Taking on Kent Hovind means you have debunked creationism?
2. You're still a joke. So how long between Abraham to Jesus? 2 billion years? LOL!
3. Yes, I didn't read. I did not even claim to have read it. And why should I? Most likely you didn't read it either. Just dropping a random link only. How about I throw you a 500 page book and conclude you didn't read the next day? Duh.
Your silly juvenille tactics are juvenillingly silly indeed. You must be so desperate that you are resorting to hurling weblinks now? Why? You butthurt?
-
yes! everyone is a joke!!
-
Joke, yes, the bible is a joke. joker
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Begging the question, on what basis do you say that Jesus was not teaching in hyperbole?
As for me, my evidence is that none of Jesus' hearers started amputating themselves and gorging out their eyes. His hearers did not take it literally, so why you pushing it? The Jews know what is hyperbolic teaching, you don't. It is your ignorance at work here, not my problem. I understand the Scriptures, you don't.
Bottom line: Yours is the kind of wooden literalism that is DANGEROUS. Yet this is precisely the strawman argument you are using.
BIC
Lol. Wow a christian telling me not to take the bible literally and not to obey it. Strange huh? Picking and choosing which to obey and which to not.
Are you reading in context?
Why is chopping off hands not possible if jesus is the old testament god?
All throughout the bible, the bible god did USE a lot of violent methods to teach humans a lesson, from floods, to fire, to stoning to ripping up bodies.
-
no la TCMC, you are wrong la.... not because what u said is wrong... but it is just that you cannot be right.
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
BIC
Lol. Wow a christian telling me not to take the bible literally and not to obey it. Strange huh? Picking and choosing which to obey and which to not.
Are you reading in context?
Why is chopping off hands not possible if jesus is the old testament god?
All throughout the bible, the bible god did USE a lot of violent methods to teach humans a lesson, from floods, to fire, to stoning to ripping up bodies.
Wow, Tcmc, you are really into building strawman arguments!
You completely missed the point of my post. Of course I am reading in context. Question is, are you interpreting it correctly? Can you name some reputed Bible scholars or teachers or commentaries that agree with your interpretation? If not, why not?
-
Originally posted by [imdestinyz]:
no la TCMC, you are wrong la.... not because what u said is wrong... but it is just that you cannot be right.
Why poison the well?
You really (as in really really honestly) think Tcmc is right in saying that Jesus is teaching that His listeners should be lopping off their limbs and gouging out their eyes?
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Why poison the well?
You really (as in really really honestly) think Tcmc is right in saying that Jesus is teaching that His listeners should be lopping off their limbs and gouging out their eyes?
no... but i really really think that you not only disagree with everything that has a differing opinion... but you really really like to stick your opinion into others. So the impression got across is the "im the only right and you are wrong"you no nid to agree with TCMC/aneslayer and others, but no it doesn't mean it becomes the "im the only right and you are wrong"
im not poisoning the well... im just bringing out what i saw from this thread.
i rmb a forummer hardcore atheist saying that you are forcefully sticking your ideas into others.... it has became quite evident.
-
Did someone mess with my previous post here? Looks like it's cut top and bottom, left the incomplete quote of a link... What happened?
-
Originally posted by [imdestinyz]:
no... but i really really think that you not only disagree with everything that has a differing opinion... but you really really like to stick your opinion into others. So the impression got across is the "im the only right and you are wrong"you no nid to agree with TCMC/aneslayer and others, but no it doesn't mean it becomes the "im the only right and you are wrong"
im not poisoning the well... im just bringing out what i saw from this thread.
i rmb a forummer hardcore atheist saying that you are forcefully sticking your ideas into others.... it has became quite evident.
You are wrong.
I don't disagree with everything, that's an over-exaggeration! I disagree when people say things about Christianity or the faith that are not true. You can say you like blue colour or D13 durians and I won't even make a quip.
How is it possible to stick my opinions on someone? Not once did I say my opponent MUST believe as I do or else..... I thinkI have given good arguments that are compelling and which also explain why my opponent is wrong on the issues debated. I never said I am always right either. I give reasons for my beliefs and even explain why the other side is wrong. If the argument is good and correct, just give credit where it is due. Why need to make the kind of remark that say "Yah la yah la, your always right la!"????
-
nono u din stick... just that everyone is confused :)
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
BIC
Lol. Wow a christian telling me not to take the bible literally and not to obey it. Strange huh? Picking and choosing which to obey and which to not.
Are you reading in context?
Why is chopping off hands not possible if jesus is the old testament god?
All throughout the bible, the bible god did USE a lot of violent methods to teach humans a lesson, from floods, to fire, to stoning to ripping up bodies.
Told you he is so self righteous which is a sin. Everything people say here have to be approved and agreed by him, very much like he is higher than god.
-
Originally posted by SJS6638:
Told you he is so self righteous which is a sin. Everything people say here have to be approved and agreed by him, very much like he is higher than god.
One big ad hominem post!
-
When there is no argument or counter argument, there is no ad hominem. Only insults....
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Wow, Tcmc, you are really into building strawman arguments!
You completely missed the point of my post. Of course I am reading in context. Question is, are you interpreting it correctly? Can you name some reputed Bible scholars or teachers or commentaries that agree with your interpretation? If not, why not?
BIC,
I am interpreting according to the bible god's character.
As in, he has literally used very violent methods to deal with sin and sinful people before. So why wasnt it possible for jesus (who is also the ot god) to use violent methods to deal with sin which he hates?
I mean there IS a possibility right
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
BIC,
I am interpreting according to the bible god's character.
As in, he has literally used very violent methods to deal with sin and sinful people before. So why wasnt it possible for jesus (who is also the ot god) to use violent methods to deal with sin which he hates?
I mean there IS a possibility right
That judgement for sin can be violent is not the issue. The issue is whether your interpretation is correct. Answer is NO because you failed to note the peculiarities of the Hebrew language.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
That judgement for sin can be violent is not the issue. The issue is whether your interpretation is correct. Answer is NO because you failed to note the peculiarities of the Hebrew language.
BIC, then you are saying there's zero possibility that god might have meant it for literal?
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
BIC, then you are saying there's zero possibility that god might have meant it for literal?
EVERYTHING also is possible if that is how you want to argue. It is also POSSIBLE that to gouge out your eyes means to take out eye shit. To cut off your hand can also possibly means to shave your arm pit hair. Possible only mah, right? Anything also possible if you have a big imagination.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
EVERYTHING also is possible if that is how you want to argue. It is also POSSIBLE that to gouge out your eyes means to take out eye shit. To cut off your hand can also possibly means to shave your arm pit hair. Possible only mah, right? Anything also possible if you have a big imagination.
BIC
but then why is it always the violent verses that modern man deem as not applicable today????
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
BIC
but then why is it always the violent verses that modern man deem as not applicable today????
Which "violent" verses do you think should be applicable today? Why?
-
The BIC is like those stuidents on debate on TV. Must must win, even if it has to be sinning to get to win, sin !
-
Originally posted by SJS6638:
The BIC is like those stuidents on debate on TV. Must must win, even if it has to be sinning to get to win, sin !
Another ad hominem post. Tsk tsk.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Which "violent" verses do you think should be applicable today? Why?
Er. I cant decide. I am just wondering how christians decide which verse is applicable and not.
But if we talk about an overview, how many percent of the verses/commandments do christians actually practice literally?
E.g women cover hair, must have long hair, tongues must be interpreted, turn the other cheek for enemy to slap, sell everything to follow jesus, guys cannot wear headdress in church, women to keep silent and only men can lead in the household, and then there are the OT commandments that are not practiced mostly.
Why most of christians dont practice these verses anymore when christians a few decades ago still do?