Bible disproven! No, seriously. Game over. No misinterpretation possible

[Beerina]

The Bible says Man shall live no more than 120 years.

But there are several well-documented cases of people living to at least 121.

http://www.answers.com/topic/supercentenarian


122 years, 164 days is the record, of the 120 year max post-Patriarch era (http://www.answers.com/topic/supercentenarian)



Well, it was a good theory while it lasted.

[Fizzer]

Originally posted by Beerina
The Bible says Man shall live no more than 120 years.


Where?

[Beerina]

Originally posted by Moses, (Genesis 6:3) NKJV
And the Lord said, "My Spirit will not strive (abide) with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years."

Note Bible detractors and apologists usually fight over some patriarchs living past 120 even after this cork is put in lifespans by Yaweh.

Let's grant them their equivocations for now. They cannot claim the Bible is true since 120+ year olds have existed in modern times. Their only hope is that there is an error or a fraud going on by these people (or on their behalf.)

[Marquis de Carabas]

Genesis.

6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

Although it doesn't seem to me that the verse sets a firm limit, particularly since there are biblical figures in Genesis later than chapter 6 who exceed the limit.

For example, just 13 verses later...

6:16 And these are the names of the sons of Levi according to their generations; Gershon, and Kohath, and Merari: and the years of the life of Levi were an hundred thirty and seven years. [emphasis mine]

[Beerina]

So you're using the fact that the Bible contradicts itself internally (lists people older than 120 after the 120 year limit is set) as proof the Bible is not contradicting reality?

As a point of rhetoric, I don't know I'd be so quick to go there...

[Marquis de Carabas]

No, I'm saying that 6:3 only fails against your 122 year 164 day old if it is taken as a firm limit. Nothing in the wording of 6:3 indicates it should be (there's no "The Lord thy God doth not round" verses floating aound), and the fact that people in the same chapter do outlive 120 years is a pretty strong indication that your interpretation is, in a word, fugged.

[Beerina]

No, I'm saying that 6:3 only fails against your 122 year 164 day old if it is taken as a firm limit. Nothing in the wording of 6:3 indicates it should be (there's no "The Lord thy God doth not round" verses floating aound

Well, if creating the earth in 6 days can be rounded to 4.7 billion years, then I guess 120 years can be rounded to 122 or 400 or 600, no problem.

Still, it sounds like an awfully solid dividing line to me. 120 years is 120 years. Why claim 120 if very few, if anyone, actually lived anywhere near that age? Why not 100 or 90 if God is just heaving a "ballpark" number out there? And that still doesn't address the issue that 120 is nowhere near 400 or 600 years.

[TragicMonkey]

Perhaps God is just really, really bad at math and numbers.

[c4ts]

Originally posted by Beerina
The Bible says Man shall live no more than 120 years.

But there are several well-documented cases of people living to at least 121.

http://www.answers.com/topic/supercentenarian


122 years, 164 days is the record, of the 120 year max post-Patriarch era (http://www.answers.com/topic/supercentenarian)



Well, it was a good theory while it lasted.

You know, given all the super-long lifespans of the characters in the Bible, I don't think they were using the same calendar we have with a 365 day year. One year was probably a whole lot shorter.

[Beleth]

Originally posted by Beerina
The Bible says Man shall live no more than 120 years.

But there are several well-documented cases of people living to at least 121.

http://www.answers.com/topic/supercentenarianAll of which are women, not men.

According to that link, there is no verification that the one man who might have been 120 years old actually was over 120 years old.



Because even the Devil's Advocate can quote Scripture,
I remain,
Beleth.

[Zep]

Originally posted by c4ts
You know, given all the super-long lifespans of the characters in the Bible, I don't think they were using the same calendar we have with a 365 day year. One year was probably a whole lot shorter. About 0.0003 of a second, actually.

[c4ts]

Originally posted by Zep
About 0.0003 of a second, actually.

What I meant was how they divided up the days into a year. For all I know "year" could have been every time the season changed, the tenth time the moon began another cycle, or every 100 days. Remember that calendars are just measuring devices, like the metric system. I don't know enough about archeology but I'll google it and see what I come up with.

[Beerina]

Originally posted by Beleth
All of which are women, not men.

According to that link, there is no verification that the one man who might have been 120 years old actually was over 120 years old.



Because even the Devil's Advocate can quote Scripture,
I remain,
Beleth.

We'll have to go to those who understand translations more.

My Spirit will not strive (abide) with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years."

Are "man", "he", and "his" referring to humankind in general, or males in general?

This could be it. This could be the weaselloophole! Yaweh was referring to males, not to humans in general, hence females may go past 120!

And therefore we may conclude with mathematical certitude that the 121 year old man was a liar, pretending to be his older brother, as suggested, and we should go urinate on his Hellfire-bound grave.

[2sonn]

The verse that mentions 120 years is Genesis 6:3. “And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.” This passage is part of the introduction to the story of Noah and the ark. If you read the context of the passage it becomes clear that he is not saying that he is putting a 120 year limit on people’s lifespans, men's or women's. What he is saying is that he will destroy ALL of mankind in 120 years. A few verses later it adds that Noah found favor in God’s eyes, and so not all were destroyed. That passage about 120 years is, therefore, simply saying how long humankind would have before the flood.

[Achán hiNidráne]

Perhaps God is just really, really bad at math and numbers.

Well, he does think that Pi equals 3.

[Kthulhut Fhtagn]

The verse that mentions 120 years is Genesis 6:3. “And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.” This passage is part of the introduction to the story of Noah and the ark. If you read the context of the passage it becomes clear that he is not saying that he is putting a 120 year limit on people’s lifespans, men's or women's. What he is saying is that he will destroy ALL of mankind in 120 years. A few verses later it adds that Noah found favor in God’s eyes, and so not all were destroyed. That passage about 120 years is, therefore, simply saying how long humankind would have before the flood.

That depends on your translation. Several translations do specifically state that 120 years is the limit which Yahweh placed on human lives. However, none say this is the timeline in which he decided to flood the Earth.

“1 And after a time, when men were increasing on the earth, and had daughters, 2 The sons of God saw that the daughters of men were fair; and they took wives for themselves from those who were pleasing to them. 3 And the Lord said, My spirit will not be in man for ever, for he is only flesh; so the days of his life will be a hundred and twenty years. 4 There were men of great strength and size on the earth in those days; and after that, when the sons of God had connection with the daughters of men, they gave birth to children: these were the great men of old days, the men of great name.
5 And the Lord saw that the sin of man was great on the earth, and that all the thoughts of his heart were evil. 6 And the Lord had sorrow because he had made man on the earth, and grief was in his heart. 7 And the Lord said, I will take away man, whom I have made, from the face of the earth, even man and beast and that which goes on the earth and every bird of the air; for I have sorrow for having made them. 8 But Noah had grace in the eyes of God.
9 These are the generations of Noah. Noah was an upright man and without sin in his generation: he went in the ways of God. 10 And Noah had three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
11 And the earth was evil in God's eyes and full of violent ways. 12 And God, looking on the earth, saw that it was evil: for the way of all flesh had become evil on the earth.
13 And God said to Noah, The end of all flesh has come; the earth is full of their violent doings, and now I will put an end to them with the earth. 14 Make for yourself an ark of gopher wood with rooms in it, and make it safe from the water inside and out. 15 And this is the way you are to make it: it is to be three hundred cubits long, fifty cubits wide, and thirty cubits high. 16 You are to put a window in the ark, a cubit from the roof, and a door in the side of it, and you are to make it with a lower and second and third floors. 17 For truly, I will send a great flow of waters over the earth, for the destruction from under the heaven of all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything on the earth will come to an end. 18 But with you I will make an agreement; and you will come into the ark, you and your sons and your wife and your sons' wives with you. 19 And you will take with you into the ark two of every sort of living thing, and keep them safe with you; they will be male and female. 20 Two of every sort of bird and cattle and of every sort of living thing which goes on the earth will you take with you to keep them from destruction. 21 And make a store of every sort of food for yourself and them. 22 And all these things Noah did; as God said, so he did.”

1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. 4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God. 10 And Noah begat three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
11 The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. 12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.
13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth. 14 Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch. 15 And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits. 16 A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it. 17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die. 18 But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee. 19 And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female. 20 Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive. 21 And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them. 22 Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he.

1 The number of people increased all over the earth, and daughters were born to them. 2 The sons of God saw that the daughters of other humans were beautiful. So they married any woman they chose. 3 Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not struggle with humans forever, because they are flesh and blood. They will live 120 years." 4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, as well as later, when the sons of God slept with the daughters of other humans and had children by them. These children were famous long ago.
5 The LORD saw how evil humans had become on the earth. All day long their deepest thoughts were nothing but evil. 6 The LORD was sorry that he had made humans on the earth, and he was heartbroken. 7 So he said, "I will wipe off the face of the earth these humans that I created. I will wipe out not only humans, but also domestic animals, crawling animals, and birds. I'm sorry that I made them." 8 But the LORD was pleased with Noah.
9 This is the account of Noah and his descendants. Noah had God's approval and was a man of integrity among the people of his time. He walked with God. 10 He had three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
11 The world was corrupt in God's sight and full of violence. 12 God saw the world and how corrupt it was because all people on earth lived evil lives.
13 God said to Noah, "I have decided to put an end to all people because the earth is full of their violence. Now I'm going to destroy them along with the earth. 14 Make yourself a ship of cypress wood. Make rooms in the ship and coat it inside and out with tar. 15 This is how you should build it: the ship is to be 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high. 16 Make a roof for the ship, and leave an 18-inch-high opening at the top. Put a door in the side of the ship. Build the ship with lower, middle, and upper decks. 17 I'm about to send a flood on the earth to destroy all people under the sky-every living, breathing human. Everything on earth will die. 18 "But I will make my promise to you. You, your sons, your wife, and your sons' wives will go into the ship. 19 Bring two of every living creature into the ship in order to keep them alive with you. They must be male and female. 20 Two of every type of bird, every type of domestic animal, and every type of creature that crawls on the ground will come to you to be kept alive. 21 Take every kind of food that can be eaten and store it. It will be food for you and the animals." 22 Noah did this. He did everything that God had commanded him.

1 And it cometh to pass that mankind have begun to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters have been born to them, 2 and sons of God see the daughters of men that they are fair, and they take to themselves women of all whom they have chosen. 3 And Jehovah saith, 'My Spirit doth not strive in man -- to the age; in their erring they are flesh:' and his days have been an hundred and twenty years. 4 The fallen ones were in the earth in those days, and even afterwards when sons of God come in unto daughters of men, and they have borne to them -- they are the heroes, who, from of old, are the men of name.
5 And Jehovah seeth that abundant is the wickedness of man in the earth, and every imagination of the thoughts of his heart only evil all the day; 6 and Jehovah repenteth that He hath made man in the earth, and He grieveth Himself -- unto His heart. 7 And Jehovah saith, 'I wipe away man whom I have prepared from off the face of the ground, from man unto beast, unto creeping thing, and unto fowl of the heavens, for I have repented that I have made them.' 8 And Noah found grace in the eyes of Jehovah.
9 These are births of Noah: Noah is a righteous man; perfect he hath been among his generations; with God hath Noah walked habitually. 10 And Noah begetteth three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
11 And the earth is corrupt before God, and the earth is filled with violence. 12 And God seeth the earth, and lo, it hath been corrupted, for all flesh hath corrupted its way on the earth.
13 And God said to Noah, 'An end of all flesh hath come before Me, for the earth hath been full of violence from their presence; and lo, I am destroying them with the earth. 14 'Make for thyself an ark of gopher-wood; rooms dost thou make with the ark, and thou hast covered it within and without with cypress; 15 and this is that which thou dost with it: three hundred cubits is the length of the ark, fifty cubits its breadth, and thirty cubits its height; 16 a window dost thou make for the ark, and unto a cubit thou dost restrain it from above; and the opening of the ark thou dost put in its side, -- lower, second, and third stories dost thou make it. 17 And I, lo, I am bringing in the deluge of waters on the earth to destroy all flesh, in which is a living spirit, from under the heavens; all that is in the earth doth expire. 18 'And I have established My covenant with thee, and thou hast come in unto the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy son's wives with thee; 19 and of all that liveth, of all flesh, two of every sort thou dost bring in unto the ark, to keep alive with thee; male and female are they. 20 Of the fowl after its kind, and of the cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the ground after its kind, two of every sort they come in unto thee, to keep alive. 21 'And thou, take to thyself of all food that is eaten; and thou hast gathered unto thyself, and it hath been to thee and to them for food.' 22 And Noah doth according to all that God hath commanded him; so hath he done.

1 Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. 3 Then the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
5 Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 The LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 The LORD said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD.
9 These are the records of the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his time; Noah walked with God. 10 Noah became the father of three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
11 Now the earth was corrupt in the sight of God, and the earth was filled with violence. 12 God looked on the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth.
13 Then God said to Noah, “The end of all flesh has come before Me; for the earth is filled with violence because of them; and behold, I am about to destroy them with the earth. 14 “Make for yourself an ark of gopher wood; you shall make the ark with rooms, and shall cover it inside and out with pitch. 15 “This is how you shall make it: the length of the ark three hundred cubits, its breadth fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits. 16 “You shall make a window for the ark, and finish it to a cubit from the top; and set the door of the ark in the side of it; you shall make it with lower, second, and third decks. 17 “Behold, I, even I am bringing the flood of water upon the earth, to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life, from under heaven; everything that is on the earth shall perish. 18 “But I will establish My covenant with you; and you shall enter the ark—you and your sons and your wife, and your sons’ wives with you. 19 “And of every living thing of all flesh, you shall bring two of every kind into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. 20 “Of the birds after their kind, and of the animals after their kind, of every creeping thing of the ground after its kind, two of every kind will come to you to keep them alive. 21 “As for you, take for yourself some of all food which is edible, and gather it to yourself; and it shall be for food for you and for them.” 22 Thus Noah did; according to all that God had commanded him, so he did.

[Kthulhut Fhtagn]

Genesis.



Although it doesn't seem to me that the verse sets a firm limit, particularly since there are biblical figures in Genesis later than chapter 6 who exceed the limit.

For example, just 13 verses later...

Marquis; you're quoting Exodus 6:16 not Genesis 6:16.

This is what Genesis 6:16 says: Make a roof for it and finish the ark to within 18 inches of the top. Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks. (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen%206:16)

And you already know what Exodus 6:16 says (http://bible.cc/exodus/6-16.htm).

14 These are the heads of their fathers' families: the sons of Reuben the oldest son of Israel: Hanoch and Pallu, Hezron and Carmi: these are the families of Reuben. 15 And the sons of Simeon: Jemuel and Jamin and Ohad and Jachin and Zohar and Shaul, the son of a woman of Canaan: these are the families of Simeon. 16 And these are the names of the sons of Levi in the order of their generations: Gershon and Kohath and Merari: and the years of Levi's life were a hundred and thirty-seven. 17 The sons of Gershon: Libni and Shimei, in the order of their families. 18 And the sons of Kohath: Amram and Izhar and Hebron and Uzziel: and the years of Kohath's life were a hundred and thirty-three. 19 And the sons of Merari: Mahli and Mushi: these are the families of the Levites, in the order of their generations. 20 And Amram took Jochebed, his father's sister, as wife; and she gave birth to Aaron and Moses: and the years of Amram's life were a hundred and thirty-seven. 21 And the sons of Izhar: Korah and Nepheg and Zichri. 22 And the sons of Uzziel: Mishael and Elzaphan and Sithri. 23 And Aaron took as his wife Elisheba, the daughter of Amminadab, the sister of Nahshon; and she gave birth to Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar. 24 And the sons of Korah: Assir and Elkanah and Abiasaph: these are the families of the Korahites. 25 And Eleazar, Aaron's son, took as his wife one of the daughters of Putiel; and she gave birth to Phinehas. These are the heads of the families of the Levites, in the order of their families. 26 These are the same Aaron and Moses to whom the Lord said, Take the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt in their armies. 27 These are the men who gave orders to Pharaoh to let the children of Israel go out of Egypt: these are the same Moses and Aaron.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Marquis; you're quoting Exodus 6:16 not Genesis 6:16.
Mea culpa.

My only excuse is judging by the time of that post, I was at work, and judging by the date of that post, my boss was a bucking fitch, so I was probably in a rush to get that out before I got busted.

[SezMe]

This thread is certainly proof that resurrection is possible.

[lionking]

Yeah, for a moment there I thought Zep was back on the scene.

[UnrepentantSinner]

BRAINS!!!
:zombie:

[Scazon]

A few verses later it adds that Noah found favor in God’s eyes, and so not all were destroyed.

What, God didn't KNOW that he was going to find Noah was OK?

[skeptic griggsy]

Folks, mean-spirited men out of their own imaginations just made up Yahweh and the Tanakh! It takes faith, the we just say so of credulity to believe their scam!
Peole didn't live very long back then. Those men just made up those great ages. No rational person can believe anything they say!
They thought that the Deluge was justice rather than the cruelty it shows. No sane being would cause such! Behold how apologists like Gleason L. Archer ever use rationalizations for such evil!
Scholars show that the Tanakh poses false history- no stay in Egypt, no Exodus and David and Solomon probably were chieftains.
That Yahweh sure got his jollies in the Deluge and the genocide! The ole boy sure had such low self-esteem that He demanded that people worship Him or else. No God has the right to demand worship and judge us! It is a one-way street: God would have to do what I state @ the definitive ...
We new atheists just love to show up God! We go for the jugular.
Selah.

[Ron_Tomkins]

Come on now, this can't possibly be the best example to demystify the bible.

[Oliver]

"The bible is disproven" is a ridiculously stupid claim in the first place.

First it has to be proven. ;):)

[phantomb]

The Bible says Man shall live no more than 120 years.

Obviously we are talking about biblical years, each of which being equal to 1/120 of a given person's total life span.

[ImaginalDisc]

What I meant was how they divided up the days into a year. For all I know "year" could have been every time the season changed, the tenth time the moon began another cycle, or every 100 days. Remember that calendars are just measuring devices, like the metric system. I don't know enough about archeology but I'll google it and see what I come up with.


I think this is more likely what some ancient civilizations, like the Babylonians if memory serves, did. Some of their mythical kings were claimed to lived hundreds of years. Standard mythical claims.

[hubbub2]

Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas:


Genesis.


Quote:
6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
Although it doesn't seem to me that the verse sets a firm limit, particularly since there are biblical figures in Genesis later than chapter 6 who exceed the limit.

For example, just 13 verses later...


Quote:
6:16 And these are the names of the sons of Levi according to their generations; Gershon, and Kohath, and Merari: and the years of the life of Levi were an hundred thirty and seven years. [emphasis mine]


Yes, but, Levi wasn't a REAL Christian! (Oh c'mon...you knew it was gonna be said at some point.) :p

[Radrook]

excerpt
“The length of our days is seventy years — or eighty, if we have the strength; yet their span is but trouble and sorrow, for they quickly pass, and we fly away” (Psalm 90:10).

Neither Genesis 6:3 nor Psalm 90:10 are God-ordained age limits for humanity. Genesis 6:3 is a prediction of the timetable for the Flood. Psalm 90:10 is simply stating that, as a general rule, people live 70-80 years (which is still true today).
http://www.gotquestions.org/age-limit.html

[Radrook]

The Bible says Man shall live no more than 120 years.

But there are several well-documented cases of people living to at least 121.

http://www.answers.com/topic/supercentenarian


122 years, 164 days is the record, of the 120 year max post-Patriarch era (http://www.answers.com/topic/supercentenarian)



Well, it was a good theory while it lasted.

Have another irrefutable idea?

[AWPrime]

What I meant was how they divided up the days into a year. For all I know "year" could have been every time the season changed, the tenth time the moon began another cycle, or every 100 days. Remember that calendars are just measuring devices, like the metric system. I don't know enough about archeology but I'll google it and see what I come up with.
Well they started out as nomads, that would seem to point to a moon calendar. And character with an age of 600 in that calender would actually be 50 years old. It sounds quite reasonable.

[Wildy]

I think this is more likely what some ancient civilizations, like the Babylonians if memory serves, did. Some of their mythical kings were claimed to lived hundreds of years. Standard mythical claims.

I don't know about the Babylonians. I know the Sumerians did, their line of kings has kings that ruled for thousands of years.

[Baby-Girl]

Hiya, i know im late into this thread, but this actually something im very interested in, for the main reason that i don't understand it all.
So question 1. Everyone is pointing out faults with "God", if god isnt true, then what is?
2. I personally dont believe in anything at the min, however, i do have a little baby boy, nearly 1, and if anything was to ever happen to him, i would like to think, that he wasnt just dead and buried, his soul, was up there, and someone (Maybe "God") was looking after him, making him his toast for breakfast, playing hide and seek all day, that kinda thing ya know.
Maybe a religion should be left alone rather then taring someones beliefs, faith, and love for a greater being.
I know 2-3 people, who believed in God once a loved one passed on, just because, it gave them hope got them through everyday, and hey, maybe that is what religion is about?
Im just throwing ideas out there thats all :)
So if "God" Isnt true, and all of these quotes are proving him wrong, then what is right? What is the truth?
Chrisitna :)

[jmontecillo01]

I know 2-3 people, who believed in God once a loved one passed on, just because, it gave them hope got them through everyday, and hey, maybe that is what religion is about?

First, I am an agnostic.

If your faith and beliefs gives you comfort and hope, who am I to deny these from you. Just never allow yourself to be exploited because of these beliefs.

There was a time when I questioned my beliefs (Christianity). I then concluded that religion and faith's use, is to give us hope. It gives us comfort at the time of grief and sorrow. Take for example the Isralites. Thousands of years of persecution and they survived as a nation because of their beliefs.

[Baby-Girl]

First, I am an agnostic.

If your faith and beliefs gives you comfort and hope, who am I to deny these from you. Just never allow yourself to be exploited because of these beliefs.

There was a time when I questioned my beliefs (Christianity). I then concluded that religion and faith's use, is to give us hope. It gives us comfort at the time of grief and sorrow. Take for example the Isralites. Thousands of years of persecution and they survived as a nation because of their beliefs.


Well said! I think sometimes people can criticise religion to much, and the funny thing is, we will probably never really know or agree on everything to do with religion, everyone's faith is different, and i just wish i knew were my "faith" was!
Im thinking ill stick with my faith in a bottle of tia maria tonight!

[I Ratant]

Obviously we are talking about biblical years, each of which being equal to 1/120 of a given person's total life span.
.
By Jove, you've got it!

[I Ratant]

The verse that mentions 120 years is Genesis 6:3. “And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.” This passage is part of the introduction to the story of Noah and the ark. If you read the context of the passage it becomes clear that he is not saying that he is putting a 120 year limit on people’s lifespans, men's or women's. What he is saying is that he will destroy ALL of mankind in 120 years. A few verses later it adds that Noah found favor in God’s eyes, and so not all were destroyed. That passage about 120 years is, therefore, simply saying how long humankind would have before the flood.
.
"Noah died 350 years after the Flood, at the age of 950 "
sez Wiki.
120 years, that's enough time for Noah's family to schlepp all those pairs and 7's of animals from the ends of the erath to the Middle East.

[Kthulhut Fhtagn]

“The length of our days is seventy years — or eighty, if we have the strength; yet their span is but trouble and sorrow, for they quickly pass, and we fly away” (Psalm 90:10).

Neither Genesis 6:3 nor Psalm 90:10 are God-ordained age limits for humanity. Genesis 6:3 is a prediction of the timetable for the Flood. Psalm 90:10 is simply stating that, as a general rule, people live 70-80 years (which is still true today).
http://www.gotquestions.org/age-limit.html

Emphasis mine. Just out of curiosity Radrook, what exactly is God-ordained and if he hasn't specifically confirmed it for us how exactly do we determine what is God-ordained if the mere fact that it exists in the bible is not enough to determine that it is God-ordained?

[millwallfan]

The Bible says Man shall live no more than 120 years.

But there are several well-documented cases of people living to at least 121.



Well, it was a good theory while it lasted.

that proves doctors are god

[ImaginalDisc]

Sumerians, yes.

That's who I was thinking of. Thanks.

[Lanzy]

Yes by Jove you have done it. You have found the single, only possible thing in the bible that has been proven wrong. Well Done! I'm sure there will be a big bible burning tonight.

[skeptic griggsy]

As the Tankh and the Testament are just like faith, the we just say so of credulity, one finds that those unbalanced men just made up all those years.
Were one to encounter those prophets or Yeshua nowadays, one would run from them! Rational persons put no credence in the miracles and the taling snake and donkey.
Yet billions of people exude the superstition built on all that.Even, Gardner falls for faith, albeit in an attenuated form.

[Beerina]

The verse that mentions 120 years is Genesis 6:3. “And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.” This passage is part of the introduction to the story of Noah and the ark. If you read the context of the passage it becomes clear that he is not saying that he is putting a 120 year limit on people’s lifespans, men's or women's. What he is saying is that he will destroy ALL of mankind in 120 years. A few verses later it adds that Noah found favor in God’s eyes, and so not all were destroyed. That passage about 120 years is, therefore, simply saying how long humankind would have before the flood.

and...

excerpt“The length of our days is seventy years — or eighty, if we have the strength; yet their span is but trouble and sorrow, for they quickly pass, and we fly away” (Psalm 90:10).

Neither Genesis 6:3 nor Psalm 90:10 are God-ordained age limits for humanity. Genesis 6:3 is a prediction of the timetable for the Flood. Psalm 90:10 is simply stating that, as a general rule, people live 70-80 years (which is still true today).
http://www.gotquestions.org/age-limit.html

Except that the 6:3, the 120 years line, is smack dab in the middle of a discussion of "the sons of God" mating with women to produce the mighty men of old; men of reknown.

So it refers to something to do with that, not to the Noah story that follows shortly.

This New American Standard is how I interpreted the sentence: 3 Then the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.”

It sounds like he's saying Man's days (whatever that is) will be 120 years, as opposed to something less because Man is flesh.

Does this make sense in the context of Patriarchs and/or giants and/or men of olde and reknown, who may have lived > 120 years, demigods or otherwise?


In that context, it definitely seems God is concerned that some kind of supernatural creatures are freely mating with human women and producing powerful, long-living hybrids who tend to accomplish great things.

This seems to concern God, and rightly so, who thus limits the age to 120 years, no more.

So it does not seem obvious that it refers to the remaining years before the flood.


Yes by Jove you have done it. You have found the single, only possible thing in the bible that has been proven wrong. Well Done! I'm sure there will be a big bible burning tonight.


Well, this chain of reasoning sounds even worse:

1. The Bible is true
2. Some modern humans have lived more than 120 years
3. The Bible says nobody (presuming not to include the last of the Patriarchs) will live more than 120 years

Therefore something must be wrong. Must be #3.

[tomwaits]

Maybe it's because the Torah was compiled from several different sources... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis)

[skeptic griggsy]

I'l cite a source that reveals how this putative revelation has no substance!
And its Yahweh-Yeshua should be in the penitentiary of oblivion!

[Iconoclast08]

Note Bible detractors and apologists usually fight over some patriarchs living past 120 even after this cork is put in lifespans by Yaweh.

Let's grant them their equivocations for now. They cannot claim the Bible is true since 120+ year olds have existed in modern times. Their only hope is that there is an error or a fraud going on by these people (or on their behalf.)

No, man! No, no, no!!!
Didn't David Henson tell you?
Jeebus just forgot to add in the confidence interval!

[ParrotPirate]

Perhaps God is just really, really bad at math and numbers.

And existing and stuff.

[David Henson]

Kthulhut Fhtagn got it right.

In the days of Noah the average lifespan was more than 120 years, and Psalm 90:10 plainly states that the average lifespan was 70 - 80 years. Not 120. It doesn't make sense that God had made the command that men would live to be 120 when the math points to God saying that it would be 120 years and exactly 120 years later the flood came.

From Genesis 5:1-29 to 7:6 - that is from Adam's creation until the flood, was 1,656 years.

Adam's creation to Seth's birth 130 years.
To the birth of Enosh ...............105 years.
To the birth of Kenan .................90 years.
To the birth of Mahalalel ............70 years.
To the birth of Jared ..................65 years.
To the birth of Enoch ...............162 years.
To the birth of Methuselah .........65 years.
To the birth of Lamech .............187 years.
To the birth of Noah .................182 years.
To the Flood .............................600 years.

From the time Noah became a father (there is some dispute about whether Japheth or Shem is the oldest) till the time of the flood, was 100 years. (Genesis 5:32; 7:6) All of Noah's sons were grown and married when Noah was told to build an ark. (Genesis 6:18)

Shem's first son was born when Shem was 100 years old. Two years after the flood (Genesis 11:10) so this means that Shem was born when Noah was 502 years old. Since Ham was the youngest (Genesis 9:24) Japheth was obviously the firstborn son born 2 years earlier, when Noah was 500. (See paragraph above).

Genesis 5:28-31 - And Lamech lived on for a hundred and eighty-two years. Then he became father to a son. And he proceeded to call his name Noah, saying: "This one will bring us comfort from our work and from the pain of our hands resulting from the ground which Jehovah has cursed." And after his fathering Noah Lamech continued to live five hundred and ninety-five years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters. So all the days of Lamech amounted to seven hundred and seventy-seven years and he died.

Noah is born.

Genesis 5:32 - And Noah got to be five hundred years old. After that Noah became father to Shem, Ham and Japheth.

Next verse. Noah is five hundred years old with three sons.

Genesis 6:1-3 - Now it came about that when men started to grow in numbers on the surface of the ground and daughters were born to them, then the sons of the [true] God began to notice the daughters of men, that they were good-looking; and they went taking wives for themselves, namely, all whom they chose. After that Jehovah said: "My spirit shall not act toward man indefinitely in that he is also flesh. Accordingly his days shall amount to a hundred and twenty years."

Shem lived to be 600 years old. Not 120. (Genesis 11:10-11) In fact, go over the histories of the sons of Noah in Genesis 11:12-32 and tell me how many of them didn't live only to be 120 years old.

Genesis 11:12-32 - And Ar‧pachshad lived thirty-five years. Then he became father to Shelah. And after his fathering Shelah Arpachshad continued to live four hundred and three years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.

And Shelah lived thirty years. Then he became father to Eber. And after his fathering Eber Shelah continued to live four hundred and three years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.

And E′ber lived on for thirtyfour years. Then he became father to Peleg. And after his fathering Peleg Eber continued to live four hundred and thirty years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.

And Peleg lived on for thirty years. Then he became father to Reu. And after his fathering Reu Peleg continued to live two hundred and nine years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.

And Reu lived on for thirty-two years. Then he became father to Serug. And after his fathering Serug Reu continued to live two hundred and seven years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.

And Serug lived on for thirty years. Then he became father to Nahor. And after his fathering Nahor Serug continued to live two hundred years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.

And Nahor lived on for twenty-nine years. Then he became father to Terah. And after his fathering Terah Nahor continued to live a hundred and nineteen years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.

And Terah lived on for seventy years, after which he became father to Abram, Nahor and Haran.

And this is the history of Terah.

Terah became father to Abram, Nahor and Haran; and Haran became father to Lot. Later Haran died while in company with Terah his father in the land of his birth, in Ur of the Chaldeans. And Abram and Nahor proceeded to take wives for themselves. The name of Abram's wife was Sarai, while the name of Nahor's wife was Milcah, the daughter of Haran, the father of Milcah and father of Iscah. But Sarai continued to be barren; she had no child.

After that Terah took Abram his son and Lot, the son of Haran, his grandson, and Sarai his daughter-in-law, the wife of Abram his son, and they went with him out of Ur of the Chaldeans to go to the land of Canaan. In time they came to Haran and took up dwelling there. And the days of Terah came to be two hundred and five years. Then Terah died in Haran.

Not one of them. And I am making it up that man having only 120 years left, in context, meant 120 years till the flood, whereas the skeptic have reason to believe that it is the average lifespan of man?

An aside: 1 Peter 3:20 - who had once been disobedient when the patience of God was waiting in Noah's days, while the ark was being constructed, in which a few people, that is, eight souls, were carried safely through the water.

The patience of God in Noah's day while the ark was being constructed - was, in your opinion - 1 week. The eternal God. 1 week. Seven days. And a rest.

. . . . meanwhile, back in ancient earth . . .

Genesis 6:4-8 - The Nephilim proved to be in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of the [true] God continued to have relations with the daughters of men and they bore sons to them, they were the mighty ones who were of old, the men of fame.

Consequently Jehovah saw that the badness of man was abundant in the earth and every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only bad all the time. And Jehovah felt regrets that he had made men in the earth, and he felt hurt at his heart. So Jehovah said: "I am going to wipe men whom I have created off the surface of the ground, from man to domestic animal, to moving animal and to flying creature of the heavens, because I do regret that I have made them." But Noah found favor in the eyes of Jehovah.

Noah . . . Noah . . . Noah. Now, he was 500 years old . . . sometime in the past . . . keep that in mind.

Genesis 6:9-12 - This is the history of Noah.

Noah was a righteous man. He proved himself faultless among his contemporaries. Noah walked with the [true] God. In time Noah became father to three sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth. And the earth came to be ruined in the sight of the [true] God and the earth became filled with violence. So God saw the earth and, look! it was ruined, because all flesh had ruined its way on the earth.

Again it says that he had three sons, so this isn't a chronological account, strictly speaking. It already said he had three sons.

Genesis 6:13-22 - After that God said to Noah: "The end of all flesh has come before me, because the earth is full of violence as a result of them; and here I am bringing them to ruin together with the earth. Make for yourself an ark out of wood of a resinous tree. You will make compartments in the ark, and you must cover it inside and outside with tar. And this is how you will make it: three hundred cubits the length of the ark, fifty cubits its width, and thirty cubits its height. You will make a tsohar [roof; or, window] for the ark, and you will complete it to the extent of a cubit upward, and the entrance of the ark you will put in its side; you will make it with a lower [story], a second [story] and a third [story].

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The Adam Clarke Commentary

"God, displeased with these connections and their consequences, limits the continuance of the old world to one hundred and twenty years,"

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible

"yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years:
meaning not the term of man's life, reduced to this from the length of time he lived before the flood; but this designs the space that God would give for repentance, before he proceeded to execute his vengeance on him; this is that "longsuffering of God" the apostle speaks of in the afore mentioned place, "that waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was preparing"; and so both the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan interpret it of a space of an hundred and twenty years given them to repent: now whereas it was but an hundred years from the birth of Japheth to the flood, some think the space was shortened twenty years, because of their impenitence; but it is more probable what Jarchi observes, that this decree was made and given out twenty years before his birth, though here related, by a figure called "hysteron proteron", frequent in the Scriptures."

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The 1599 Geneva Study Bible

And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always d strive with man, for that he also [is] flesh: yet his days shall be an e hundred and twenty years.

(d) Because man could not by won by God's leniency and patience by which he tried to win him, he would no longer withhold his vengeance.
(e) Which time span God gave man to repent before he would destroy the earth, (1 Peter 3:20).

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible

"A reprieve granted, notwithstanding: Yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years; so long I will defer the judgment they deserve, and give them space to prevent it by their repentance and reformation. Justice said, Cut them down; but mercy interceded, Lord, let them alone this year also; and so far mercy prevailed, that a reprieve was obtained for six-score years. Note, The time of God's patience and forbearance towards provoking sinners is sometimes long, but always limited: reprieves are not pardons; though God bear a great while, he will not bear always."

[Darth Rotor]

And what about Methuselah?

Methus'lah lived nine hundred years
Methus'lah lived nine hundred years
But who calls dat livin'
When no gal'll give in
To no man what's nine hundred years

Summary:

Methuselah "Man of the dart/spear", is the oldest person whose age is mentioned in the Hebrew Bible, given as 969 years. Extra-biblical tradition records that he died 7 days before the beginning of the Great Flood. Methuselah was son of Enoch and the grandfather of Noah.

Maybe he lost the will to live when his spear could no longer point to the target ...

[sadhatter]

Stuff like this always boils down to christians being able to change the meaning of whatever word they want. Whenever scripture is contradictory, a word changes meaning. For an example, a day is no longer a day...it is whatever would suit christanities argument.

If you can just arbitrarily change word meaning, anything is correct. Look, the answer to 10+10 is apples. Because in the way i used it apples meant twenty.

I find that type of argumentation sad. I mean how do they know when the bible says thou shalt not kill, kill actually doesn't mean sell tomatoes? Or when it says thou shalt not covet thine neighbors ass, it is actually talking about his/her ass, as opposed to donkey.

It seems the bible is unclear only when it is something they don't like.

[David Henson]

Stuff like this always boils down to christians being able to change the meaning of whatever word they want. Whenever scripture is contradictory, a word changes meaning. For an example, a day is no longer a day...it is whatever would suit christanities argument.

If you can just arbitrarily change word meaning, anything is correct. Look, the answer to 10+10 is apples. Because in the way i used it apples meant twenty.

I find that type of argumentation sad. I mean how do they know when the bible says thou shalt not kill, kill actually doesn't mean sell tomatoes? Or when it says thou shalt not covet thine neighbors ass, it is actually talking about his/her ass, as opposed to donkey.

It seems the bible is unclear only when it is something they don't like.

It isn't that we change the words to suit our meaning, it is that the original language sometimes is mistaken to be something else which you may be used to.

I want to know what the Bible says - what it was meant to say when it was written, not whatever is convienienant for me.

Take day for example. If the Bible says that the universe was created in 6 days, for hundreds of years they thought that that meant that it was created in 144 hours, but even though the translation says "days" that word was used in many ways then (the Hebrew yohm) and now. So in order for me to convince myself that that is true I have to look for evidence of it.

It isn't that I want it to be more compatible with science, nor is it that I want it to be more compatible with tradition. It is that I want to know what it meant.

So I look at the facts. The Hebrew word yohm was used in various ways, to mean any period of time - from a few hours (a watch in the night) to thousands of years (Judgment Day, for example) to harvest season, to expressions like "In the day of Moses." So I have something. Then I look at, lets say the creation account and I see that the term day is used in three different ways. Day as the daylight hours in a figurative sense, day as in day and night, and the entire period of creation as one day consisting of six.

Then I see Paul mention that the seventh day is still going on thousands of years after it started and it is pretty obvious that a day doesn't mean a literal 24 hours.

Then you have to look at translation. Well, you might think, someone screwed up the translation, and that might sometimes be the case, but in the case of day, as much as it seems like it might be, it isn't. What are they going to translate yohm as? Day is the closest that I can think of, and you start thinking that day isn't that different than the Hebrew yohm.

In my grandfather's day doesn't mean that my grandfather lived to be 24 hours old. We use it similar to the way they used yohm in the creation account. Daylight hours, day and night, or in a figurative sense for any period of time great or small.

The real problem is that you gave the Bible a quick glance or heard some Evolutionist who doesn't know any better argueing creationism with some Creationist who didn't know any better as well. You have that argument stuck in your beliefs and you can't shake it. You don't care anyway.

[David Swidler]

Taking "day" as a non-24-hour period doesn't work in context:

It was evening; it was morning; day one, etc.

The only way to understand that is a literal day in its simplest sense. It's clear from the context that Genesis intends "day" as such. But that doesn't perforce mean that believing it requires accepting it as history.

[tsig]

It isn't that we change the words to suit our meaning, it is that the original language sometimes is mistaken to be something else which you may be used to.

I want to know what the Bible says - what it was meant to say when it was written, not whatever is convienienant for me.

Take day for example. If the Bible says that the universe was created in 6 days, for hundreds of years they thought that that meant that it was created in 144 hours, but even though the translation says "days" that word was used in many ways then (the Hebrew yohm) and now. So in order for me to convince myself that that is true I have to look for evidence of it.

It isn't that I want it to be more compatible with science, nor is it that I want it to be more compatible with tradition. It is that I want to know what it meant.

So I look at the facts. The Hebrew word yohm was used in various ways, to mean any period of time - from a few hours (a watch in the night) to thousands of years (Judgment Day, for example) to harvest season, to expressions like "In the day of Moses." So I have something. Then I look at, lets say the creation account and I see that the term day is used in three different ways. Day as the daylight hours in a figurative sense, day as in day and night, and the entire period of creation as one day consisting of six.

Then I see Paul mention that the seventh day is still going on thousands of years after it started and it is pretty obvious that a day doesn't mean a literal 24 hours.

Then you have to look at translation. Well, you might think, someone screwed up the translation, and that might sometimes be the case, but in the case of day, as much as it seems like it might be, it isn't. What are they going to translate yohm as? Day is the closest that I can think of, and you start thinking that day isn't that different than the Hebrew yohm.

In my grandfather's day doesn't mean that my grandfather lived to be 24 hours old. We use it similar to the way they used yohm in the creation account. Daylight hours, day and night, or in a figurative sense for any period of time great or small.

The real problem is that you gave the Bible a quick glance or heard some Evolutionist who doesn't know any better argueing creationism with some Creationist who didn't know any better as well. You have that argument stuck in your beliefs and you can't shake it. You don't care anyway.

I have heard that fervent prayer for inspiration and deep meditation works quite well.

If god inspired the Bible writers then why not the Bible hearers?

By becoming wise they became fools and misread the clear words of god.

[ScannerHead]

Stuff like this always boils down to christians being able to change the meaning of whatever word they want.


What it REALLY boils down to, is people who are the least qualified trying to pick a theoretical fight over meaningless stuff like this.

[David Henson]

What it REALLY boils down to, is people who are the least qualified trying to pick a theoretical fight over meaningless stuff like this.

I don't agree with that at all. First of all who is "qualified?" I don't think that anything should be limited to scolars or priests. Priests are often fixed upon tradition, and those sorts of influences are pretty well documented, but scholars can be influenced as well. Ultimately it is up to the individual, though, as can be seen by the skeptic, especially the militant atheist none of it really matters to them. It becomes like listening to talk radio or Fox Noise.

I think that this point is far from meaningless.

[David Henson]

Taking "day" as a non-24-hour period doesn't work in context:

It was evening; it was morning; day one, etc.

The only way to understand that is a literal day in its simplest sense. It's clear from the context that Genesis intends "day" as such. But that doesn't perforce mean that believing it requires accepting it as history.

A Religious Encyclopaedia (Vol. I, p. 613): "The days of creation were creative days, stages in the process, but not days of twenty-four hours each." - Edited by P. Schaff, 1894.

Day in the Bible:

Seasons (Summer / Winter) - Zechariah 14:8

Harvest season - Proverbs 25:13 / Genesis 30:14

A thousand years - Psalm 90:4 / 2 Peter 3:8, 10

Judgment Day (Many years) - Matthew 10:15; 11:22-24

All six creation days as one - Genesis 2:4

The seventh day (day of rest continuing thousands of years later) - Hebrews 4:4-5, 11 / See Psalm 95:11

The Hebrew week, with the seventh day of rest, was modeled after the creation, but that doesn't mean that the days of creation, the evening and the morning, were literally evenings and mornings. There were periods of creation where, to the angels, things were revealed and periods where they were in the darkness about what was taking place.

Just as the morning (or dawn) or evening (twilight) of ones life may be taken figuratively, so are those in the creation account.

On the one hand all of the examples in the language and the text itself indicates that.

Now none of this really matters from a scientific perspective when trying to establish some sort of creationist / evolutionist debate because, as most Biblical scholars agree, even before that was an issue, the first verse of Genesis chapter 1 states, according to an accurate understanding of the Hebrew language (See My post on the subject somewhere here, I can't even remember what it was called . . . Seven Days?), the creation itself was finished. (Genesis 1:1)

The creation was complete before the first creative day. So, the six "days" of creation were simply a preparation of the already completely created heavens and earth. There is no reason at all to think that the "days" of creation were literal, 144 hours, except for possibly an uninformed glance and tradition.

[Jungle Jim]

A Religious Encyclopaedia (Vol. I, p. 613): "The days of creation were creative days, stages in the process, but not days of twenty-four hours each." - Edited by P. Schaff, 1894.

Day in the Bible:

Seasons (Summer / Winter) - Zechariah 14:8

Harvest season - Proverbs 25:13 / Genesis 30:14

A thousand years - Psalm 90:4 / 2 Peter 3:8, 10

Judgment Day (Many years) - Matthew 10:15; 11:22-24

All six creation days as one - Genesis 2:4

The seventh day (day of rest continuing thousands of years later) - Hebrews 4:4-5, 11 / See Psalm 95:11

The Hebrew week, with the seventh day of rest, was modeled after the creation, but that doesn't mean that the days of creation, the evening and the morning, were literally evenings and mornings. There were periods of creation where, to the angels, things were revealed and periods where they were in the darkness about what was taking place.

Just as the morning (or dawn) or evening (twilight) of ones life may be taken figuratively, so are those in the creation account.

On the one hand all of the examples in the language and the text itself indicates that.

Now none of this really matters from a scientific perspective when trying to establish some sort of creationist / evolutionist debate because, as most Biblical scholars agree, even before that was an issue, the first verse of Genesis chapter 1 states, according to an accurate understanding of the Hebrew language (See My post on the subject somewhere here, I can't even remember what it was called . . . Seven Days?), the creation itself was finished. (Genesis 1:1)

The creation was complete before the first creative day. So, the six "days" of creation were simply a preparation of the already completely created heavens and earth. There is no reason at all to think that the "days" of creation were literal, 144 hours, except for possibly an uninformed glance and tradition.

Is there any reference in the bible to a "day" being millions of years? That is, after all, the time line we're on.

[David Henson]

Is there any reference in the bible to a "day" being millions of years? That is, after all, the time line we're on.

We are not on a time line at all. Genesis 1:1. God created the heavens and the earth. Done. Action complete.

The "days" of creation are preparation of the already created earth for habitation. How long in between Genesis 1:1 and the first creative "day?"

No one knows.

[154]

"Time" is a distinctly relative physical property.

If the reporter/observer is outside this physical dimension, "time" is irrelevent and only a concern for those who desire to be hung up on it, for whatever their own reasons.

[PDoug]

The Bible says Man shall live no more than 120 years.

But there are several well-documented cases of people living to at least 121.

http://www.answers.com/topic/supercentenarian


122 years, 164 days is the record, of the 120 year max post-Patriarch era (http://www.answers.com/topic/supercentenarian)



Well, it was a good theory while it lasted.


Note the following:

Genesis 6

3 Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days will be a hundred and twenty years."

The scripture does not say that men will live no more than 120 years; it says that man will live 120 years. Since there has been a wide variation in the age of men since that time in the Bible, a literal interpretation of the scripture cannot be correct. There are those who believe 120 years means 120 Jubilees, which equals about 6,000 years. (http://rapturewatch.cephasministry.com/368%20his%20days%20shall%20be%20120.html) This means that the current version of man, will be around for about 6,000 years before he disappears. The 6,000 year limit should be around 2028 (http://www.tntrevealed.org/booklet/00/00/00/time_line_1_adam_to_yeshua_10_27_07.pdf).

Please be careful how you interpret the Bible.

[pgwenthold]

Why mess around with this arbitrary stuff? Go straight to the logical contradiction

1) The bible says God is Love
1 John 4:8
"The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love."

2) The bible says Love is not Jealous
1 Corinthians 13:4:
Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant,

3) The bible says God is Jealous
(this is all over the old testament, including)
Deuteronomy 4:24
"For the LORD your God is a consuming fire, a jealous God"

(we could also question the part about Love not being boastful or arrogant, but we'll stick with direct statements)

These are direct quotes (New American Standard edition) from the bible that cannot all be true.

[PDoug]

Why mess around with this arbitrary stuff? Go straight to the logical contradiction

1) The bible says God is Love
1 John 4:8
"The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love."

2) The bible says Love is not Jealous
1 Corinthians 13:4:
Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant,

3) The bible says God is Jealous
(this is all over the old testament, including)
Deuteronomy 4:24
"For the LORD your God is a consuming fire, a jealous God"

(we could also question the part about Love not being boastful or arrogant, but we'll stick with direct statements)

These are direct quotes (New American Standard edition) from the bible that cannot all be true.


Again, it is important to establish proper context when you interpret the scriptures. For most godly qualities, there are deficient counterparts. There is godly love, forgiveness, retribution, anger, jealousy, etc. There is also ungodly love, forgiveness, retribution, anger, jealousy, etc. When God says that we are not to be jealous, He is referring to ungodly jealousy - not godly jealousy. Similarly when God talks about having love, He is referring to godly love, not ungodly love which does not measure up to His.

Isaiah 64

6 All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away.

The above is why Paul repeatedly stated in his letters, that we are saved by faith and not by works. Legitimate faith (http://pdouglas.blogspot.com/2005/01/having-faith-correctly.html) causes a person to be united with God, and take on God's qualities - including godly love, forgiveness, retribution, anger, and jealousy. Without a person uniting with God, he can only produce ungodly love, forgiveness, retribution, anger, jealousy, etc.

[pgwenthold]

Again, it is important to establish proper context when you interpret the scriptures.


Context? The context is clear.

God is love
Love is not jealous
God is a jealous God




For most godly qualities, there are deficient counterparts. There is godly love, forgiveness, retribution, anger, jealousy, etc. There is also ungodly love, forgiveness, retribution, anger, jealousy, etc. When God says that we are not to be jealous, He is referring to ungodly jealousy - not godly jealousy.


I'm not talking about whether it is ok for god to be jealous or not. It doesn't matter. I'm saying that THE BIBLE SAYS

God is love
Love is not jealous
God is a jealous God




Similarly when God talks about having love, can only produce ungodly love, forgiveness, retribution, anger, jealousy, etc.

He doesn't refer to god as "having love," he says that God IS love.

The bible doesn't say, "Non-god love is not jealous," it says

God is love
Love is not jealous
God is a jealous God

[Drewbot]

Wasn't Noah like 620 years old when he built the ark?

My bad, I was thinking of SHEM being 600.

Noah, was 500 when he built the ark

[Ladewig]

"Time" is a distinctly relative physical property.

If the reporter/observer is outside this physical dimension, "time" is irrelevent and only a concern for those who desire to be hung up on it, for whatever their own reasons.

I would expect a omnipotent, omniscient, transdimensional Being, when writing a missive to people trapped in a timeline, would use words and phrases that allow the people to understand what is happening. I would especially expect that if the fate of the entire world depending on the people interpreting the document correctly.

[PDoug]

Context? The context is clear.

God is love
Love is not jealous
God is a jealous God


The following is a restatement of what you wrote, for clarity:

God is [righteous] love
[Righteous] love is not [unrighteously] jealous
God is a [righteously] jealous God

The point God makes throughout the scriptures, is that your qualities must be righteous or godly - whatever they are. It is not that you must never display anger or jealousy, it is that you must never display unrighteous anger or jealousy. The qualification is extremely important, and is implied by the contexts of scriptures. E.g. the jealousy God displays is often times over someone forsaking righteousness that comes only from Him, for unrighteousness that comes from His enemies. His jealousy is a fair and balanced jealousy, that has both the person's and God's interests at heart. When God acts on His jealousy, He always does so in a fair and righteous manner. On the other hand, when people act out of jealousy, there are unrighteous components involved in their actions.


He doesn't refer to god as "having love," he says that God IS love.


Having love and being love is one and the same. If a person is united with God, and God is love, then the person becomes God and love at the same time.

[tsig]

Again, it is important to establish proper context when you interpret the scriptures. For most godly qualities, there are deficient counterparts. There is godly love, forgiveness, retribution, anger, jealousy, etc. There is also ungodly love, forgiveness, retribution, anger, jealousy, etc. When God says that we are not to be jealous, He is referring to ungodly jealousy - not godly jealousy. Similarly when God talks about having love, He is referring to godly love, not ungodly love which does not measure up to His.

Isaiah 64

6 All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away.

The above is why Paul repeatedly stated in his letters, that we are saved by faith and not by works. Legitimate faith (http://pdouglas.blogspot.com/2005/01/having-faith-correctly.html) causes a person to be united with God, and take on God's qualities - including godly love, forgiveness, retribution, anger, and jealousy. Without a person uniting with God, he can only produce ungodly love, forgiveness, retribution, anger, jealousy, etc.

Does that mean I get to drown the whole world? (except for some pets)

[Ron_Tomkins]

The Bible says Man shall live no more than 120 years.

But there are several well-documented cases of people living to at least 121.

http://www.answers.com/topic/supercentenarian


122 years, 164 days is the record, of the 120 year max post-Patriarch era (http://www.answers.com/topic/supercentenarian)



Well, it was a good theory while it lasted.

Wellll.... uhh .... it uhh....... it..... it was a Miracle!! A Miracle!! Hallelujaaah!!

[tsig]

The following is a restatement of what you wrote, for clarity:

God is [righteous] love
[Righteous] love is not [unrighteously] jealous
God is a [righteously] jealous God

The point God makes throughout the scriptures, is that your qualities must be righteous or godly - whatever they are. It is not that you must never display anger or jealousy, it is that you must never display unrighteous anger or jealousy. The qualification is extremely important, and is implied by the contexts of scriptures. E.g. the jealousy God displays is often times over someone forsaking righteousness that comes only from Him, for unrighteousness that comes from His enemies. His jealousy is a fair and balanced jealousy, that has both the person's and God's interests at heart. When God acts on His jealousy, He always does so in a fair and righteous manner. On the other hand, when people act out of jealousy, there are unrighteous components involved in their actions.





Having love and being love is one and the same. If a person is united with God, and God is love, then the person becomes God and love at the same time.

Since I am become god and the ruler of the Universe it looks like their may be a war in heaven.

[Ron_Tomkins]

Kthulhut Fhtagn got it right.

In the days of Noah the average lifespan was more than 120 years, and Psalm 90:10 plainly states that the average lifespan was 70 - 80 years. Not 120. It doesn't make sense that God had made the command that men would live to be 120 when the math points to God saying that it would be 120 years and exactly 120 years later the flood came.

From Genesis 5:1-29 to 7:6 - that is from Adam's creation until the flood, was 1,656 years.

Adam's creation to Seth's birth 130 years.
To the birth of Enosh ...............105 years.
To the birth of Kenan .................90 years.
To the birth of Mahalalel ............70 years.
To the birth of Jared ..................65 years.
To the birth of Enoch ...............162 years.
To the birth of Methuselah .........65 years.
To the birth of Lamech .............187 years.
To the birth of Noah .................182 years.
To the Flood .............................600 years.

From the time Noah became a father (there is some dispute about whether Japheth or Shem is the oldest) till the time of the flood, was 100 years. (Genesis 5:32; 7:6) All of Noah's sons were grown and married when Noah was told to build an ark. (Genesis 6:18)

Shem's first son was born when Shem was 100 years old. Two years after the flood (Genesis 11:10) so this means that Shem was born when Noah was 502 years old. Since Ham was the youngest (Genesis 9:24) Japheth was obviously the firstborn son born 2 years earlier, when Noah was 500. (See paragraph above).

Genesis 5:28-31 - And Lamech lived on for a hundred and eighty-two years. Then he became father to a son. And he proceeded to call his name Noah, saying: "This one will bring us comfort from our work and from the pain of our hands resulting from the ground which Jehovah has cursed." And after his fathering Noah Lamech continued to live five hundred and ninety-five years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters. So all the days of Lamech amounted to seven hundred and seventy-seven years and he died.

Noah is born.

Genesis 5:32 - And Noah got to be five hundred years old. After that Noah became father to Shem, Ham and Japheth.

Next verse. Noah is five hundred years old with three sons.

Genesis 6:1-3 - Now it came about that when men started to grow in numbers on the surface of the ground and daughters were born to them, then the sons of the [true] God began to notice the daughters of men, that they were good-looking; and they went taking wives for themselves, namely, all whom they chose. After that Jehovah said: "My spirit shall not act toward man indefinitely in that he is also flesh. Accordingly his days shall amount to a hundred and twenty years."

Shem lived to be 600 years old. Not 120. (Genesis 11:10-11) In fact, go over the histories of the sons of Noah in Genesis 11:12-32 and tell me how many of them didn't live only to be 120 years old.

Genesis 11:12-32 - And Ar‧pachshad lived thirty-five years. Then he became father to Shelah. And after his fathering Shelah Arpachshad continued to live four hundred and three years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.

And Shelah lived thirty years. Then he became father to Eber. And after his fathering Eber Shelah continued to live four hundred and three years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.

And E′ber lived on for thirtyfour years. Then he became father to Peleg. And after his fathering Peleg Eber continued to live four hundred and thirty years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.

And Peleg lived on for thirty years. Then he became father to Reu. And after his fathering Reu Peleg continued to live two hundred and nine years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.

And Reu lived on for thirty-two years. Then he became father to Serug. And after his fathering Serug Reu continued to live two hundred and seven years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.

And Serug lived on for thirty years. Then he became father to Nahor. And after his fathering Nahor Serug continued to live two hundred years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.

And Nahor lived on for twenty-nine years. Then he became father to Terah. And after his fathering Terah Nahor continued to live a hundred and nineteen years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.

And Terah lived on for seventy years, after which he became father to Abram, Nahor and Haran.

And this is the history of Terah.

Terah became father to Abram, Nahor and Haran; and Haran became father to Lot. Later Haran died while in company with Terah his father in the land of his birth, in Ur of the Chaldeans. And Abram and Nahor proceeded to take wives for themselves. The name of Abram's wife was Sarai, while the name of Nahor's wife was Milcah, the daughter of Haran, the father of Milcah and father of Iscah. But Sarai continued to be barren; she had no child.

After that Terah took Abram his son and Lot, the son of Haran, his grandson, and Sarai his daughter-in-law, the wife of Abram his son, and they went with him out of Ur of the Chaldeans to go to the land of Canaan. In time they came to Haran and took up dwelling there. And the days of Terah came to be two hundred and five years. Then Terah died in Haran.

Not one of them. And I am making it up that man having only 120 years left, in context, meant 120 years till the flood, whereas the skeptic have reason to believe that it is the average lifespan of man?

An aside: 1 Peter 3:20 - who had once been disobedient when the patience of God was waiting in Noah's days, while the ark was being constructed, in which a few people, that is, eight souls, were carried safely through the water.

The patience of God in Noah's day while the ark was being constructed - was, in your opinion - 1 week. The eternal God. 1 week. Seven days. And a rest.

. . . . meanwhile, back in ancient earth . . .

Genesis 6:4-8 - The Nephilim proved to be in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of the [true] God continued to have relations with the daughters of men and they bore sons to them, they were the mighty ones who were of old, the men of fame.

Consequently Jehovah saw that the badness of man was abundant in the earth and every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only bad all the time. And Jehovah felt regrets that he had made men in the earth, and he felt hurt at his heart. So Jehovah said: "I am going to wipe men whom I have created off the surface of the ground, from man to domestic animal, to moving animal and to flying creature of the heavens, because I do regret that I have made them." But Noah found favor in the eyes of Jehovah.

Noah . . . Noah . . . Noah. Now, he was 500 years old . . . sometime in the past . . . keep that in mind.

Genesis 6:9-12 - This is the history of Noah.

Noah was a righteous man. He proved himself faultless among his contemporaries. Noah walked with the [true] God. In time Noah became father to three sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth. And the earth came to be ruined in the sight of the [true] God and the earth became filled with violence. So God saw the earth and, look! it was ruined, because all flesh had ruined its way on the earth.

Again it says that he had three sons, so this isn't a chronological account, strictly speaking. It already said he had three sons.

Genesis 6:13-22 - After that God said to Noah: "The end of all flesh has come before me, because the earth is full of violence as a result of them; and here I am bringing them to ruin together with the earth. Make for yourself an ark out of wood of a resinous tree. You will make compartments in the ark, and you must cover it inside and outside with tar. And this is how you will make it: three hundred cubits the length of the ark, fifty cubits its width, and thirty cubits its height. You will make a tsohar [roof; or, window] for the ark, and you will complete it to the extent of a cubit upward, and the entrance of the ark you will put in its side; you will make it with a lower [story], a second [story] and a third [story].

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The Adam Clarke Commentary

"God, displeased with these connections and their consequences, limits the continuance of the old world to one hundred and twenty years,"

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible

"yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years:
meaning not the term of man's life, reduced to this from the length of time he lived before the flood; but this designs the space that God would give for repentance, before he proceeded to execute his vengeance on him; this is that "longsuffering of God" the apostle speaks of in the afore mentioned place, "that waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was preparing"; and so both the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan interpret it of a space of an hundred and twenty years given them to repent: now whereas it was but an hundred years from the birth of Japheth to the flood, some think the space was shortened twenty years, because of their impenitence; but it is more probable what Jarchi observes, that this decree was made and given out twenty years before his birth, though here related, by a figure called "hysteron proteron", frequent in the Scriptures."

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The 1599 Geneva Study Bible

And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always d strive with man, for that he also [is] flesh: yet his days shall be an e hundred and twenty years.

(d) Because man could not by won by God's leniency and patience by which he tried to win him, he would no longer withhold his vengeance.
(e) Which time span God gave man to repent before he would destroy the earth, (1 Peter 3:20).

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible

"A reprieve granted, notwithstanding: Yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years; so long I will defer the judgment they deserve, and give them space to prevent it by their repentance and reformation. Justice said, Cut them down; but mercy interceded, Lord, let them alone this year also; and so far mercy prevailed, that a reprieve was obtained for six-score years. Note, The time of God's patience and forbearance towards provoking sinners is sometimes long, but always limited: reprieves are not pardons; though God bear a great while, he will not bear always."

So, Beerina, in case you needed a good example of how people, when they just want to believe, will modify their mental construct through any excuse so their pet beliefs remain intact; there you go.

[tsig]

The Bible says Man shall live no more than 120 years.

But there are several well-documented cases of people living to at least 121.

http://www.answers.com/topic/supercentenarian


122 years, 164 days is the record, of the 120 year max post-Patriarch era (http://www.answers.com/topic/supercentenarian)



Well, it was a good theory while it lasted.

I always thought the biggest contradiction is the OT vs the NT. In the OT god is smiting, appearing, and drowning the whole of the human race like rats but in the NT we get a wishy-washy kind of god that never seems to be present let alone do any smiting.

[PDoug]

Does that mean I get to drown the whole world? (except for some pets)


I don't understand what you mean.

[PDoug]

Since I am become god and the ruler of the Universe it looks like their may be a war in heaven.


When the scriptures say that God is one, it means that all those who make up the heirarchy of God, are constrained to be united and act in one accord. A being who belongs to the Godhead, would first have to abandon the Godhead (and be no longer God), before he could seek to wage war on the Godhead. That is what happened with Lucifer.

[RoboTimbo]

When the scriptures say that God is one, it means that all those who make up the heirarchy of God, are constrained to be united and act in one accord. A being who belongs to the Godhead, would first have to abandon the Godhead (and be no longer God), before he could seek to wage war on the Godhead. That is what happened with Lucifer.

It being a committee would explain a lot of the screwups.

[Lord Emsworth]

The Gospel according to PDoug?

[tsig]

I don't understand what you mean.

I was referring to this comment:

Faith causes a person to be united with God, and take on God's qualities - including godly love, forgiveness, retribution, anger, and jealousy. Without a person uniting with God, he can only produce ungodly love, forgiveness, retribution, anger, jealousy, etc.

[tsig]

When the scriptures say that God is one, it means that all those who make up the heirarchy of God, are constrained to be united and act in one accord. A being who belongs to the Godhead, would first have to abandon the Godhead (and be no longer God), before he could seek to wage war on the Godhead. That is what happened with Lucifer.

If god can be constrained the he's not god.

[tsig]

The Gospel according to PDoug?

Yes it's completely amazing to read the words of the lord right here on JREF as typed out by PDoug.

Problem is there are others who are also claiming to be speakers for god here so I'm kinda in a quandary about who is Right.

[RoboTimbo]

Yes it's completely amazing to read the words of the lord right here on JREF as typed out by PDoug.

Problem is there are others who are also claiming to be speakers for god here so I'm kinda in a quandary about who is Right.

Funny how they never argue with each other here.

[PDoug]

If god can be constrained the he's not god.


If God is a hierarchy of beings, wherein one Lords over others, doesn't it mean that the more elevated God can and does restrain the less elevated? Doesn't it also mean that the God who is at the top of the hierarchy (the God of Gods) cannot be constrained - because there is no one above him to do so? Therefore all Gods but the God of Gods can and are constrained. Note also the following:

Romans 8

9 You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.

John 10

34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are gods’?

The scriptures above show that those who have faith are gods, and are constrained by a superior God.

[David Henson]

Why mess around with this arbitrary stuff? Go straight to the logical contradiction

1) The bible says God is Love
1 John 4:8
"The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love."

2) The bible says Love is not Jealous
1 Corinthians 13:4:
Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant,

3) The bible says God is Jealous
(this is all over the old testament, including)
Deuteronomy 4:24
"For the LORD your God is a consuming fire, a jealous God"

(we could also question the part about Love not being boastful or arrogant, but we'll stick with direct statements)

These are direct quotes (New American Standard edition) from the bible that cannot all be true.

There are different words in the Bible that express different meanings for love. That is something to remember, but more importantly here is that according to the Bible there are positive and negative aspects of jealousy. (Proverbs 14:30 / 2 Corinthians 12:20 - Zeceriah 1:14 / 2 Corinthians 11:2)

For example, the exclusive sexual devotion that is demanded from a husband or wife is a positive jealousy, and similar to the spiritual devotion Jehovah asks of his followers in the Hebrew scriptures. But the spiteful fleshly desire which can lead to hate, anger like Cain against Abel is negative.

[elbe]

anger like Cain against Abel is negative.

That anger that the OT god pretty much defined?

For that matter, in my own reading (http://elbebeta.blogspot.com/2009/06/biblical-bordom-genesis-4.html) of Gen4, god instigated the entire thing - he's, you know, kind of a jerk.

[cienaños]

DH! Where you been? I missed you!

There are different words in the Bible that express different meanings for love. That is something to remember, but more importantly here is that according to the Bible there are positive and negative aspects of jealousy. (Proverbs 14:30 / 2 Corinthians 12:20 - Zeceriah 1:14 / 2 Corinthians 11:2)

For example, the exclusive sexual devotion that is demanded from a husband or wife is a positive jealousy, and similar to the spiritual devotion Jehovah asks of his followers in the Hebrew scriptures. But the spiteful fleshly desire which can lead to hate, anger like Cain against Abel is negative.

LOL. You've got it man!

It's utterly irrational, archaic, offensive... just, get rid of it.

[Aepervius]

This thread is certainly proof that resurrection is possible.

2005, 2008, 2010.

This thread is not proof of resurection, but of serial necromanty.

[tsig]

There are different words in the Bible that express different meanings for love. That is something to remember, but more importantly here is that according to the Bible there are positive and negative aspects of jealousy. (Proverbs 14:30 / 2 Corinthians 12:20 - Zeceriah 1:14 / 2 Corinthians 11:2)

For example, the exclusive sexual devotion that is demanded from a husband or wife is a positive jealousy, and similar to the spiritual devotion Jehovah asks of his followers in the Hebrew scriptures. But the spiteful fleshly desire which can lead to hate, anger like Cain against Abel is negative.



By associating spiritual with sexual devotion you just might get a doctrine that will attract followers. Of course Joe Smith Jr. and some Tantric cults got there ahead of you but never be afraid to adopt good ideas.

[tsig]

Funny how they never argue with each other here.

That comes after they defeat the common enemy.

[pgwenthold]

There are different words in the Bible that express different meanings for love.

Let us go to "Young's Literal Translation."

1 John
he who is not loving did not know God, because God is love

Corinthians
The love is long-suffering, it is kind, the love doth not envy, the love doth not vaunt itself, is not puffed up,

No, the literal translation of the words is love. You might think if they meant something else, the literal translation would have said something else.

[elbe]

No, the literal translation of the words is love. You might think if they meant something else, the literal translation would have said something else.

In his defense, english only has one word for love while greek (and possibly hebrew) have multiple with different meanings. I could always check my concordance at home which specifies what greek or hebrew word was used in each verse.

ETA: From biblegateway I looked at the greek for 1 John and 1 Corinthians, and they both use the same word for love, αγαπη, which seems to be of the parental, unconditional love type - not really fitting in the the whole jealous god thing.

[pgwenthold]

In his defense, english only has one word for love while greek (and possibly hebrew) have multiple with different meanings. I could always check my concordance at home which specifies what greek or hebrew word was used in each verse.

ETA: From biblegateway I looked at the greek for 1 John and 1 Corinthians, and they both use the same word for love, αγαπη, which seems to be of the parental, unconditional love type - not really fitting in the the whole jealous god thing.

OK, so according to the Greek...

God is parental, unconditional love
Parental, unconditional love is not jealous
and
God is jealous (regardless of whether my specific passage was it, as I said, it is all over the OT)

So David Henson and DougP, your attempted apologetics fail. Completely. You tried to make stuff up, to add to the bible, to impose meaning on it that wasn't there.

No, this is a logical contradiction.

[elbe]

So David Henson and DougP, your attempted apologetics fail. Completely. You tried to make stuff up, to add to the bible, to impose meaning on it that wasn't there.

No, this is a logical contradiction.

I can't exactly blame them, reconciling the "loving" god of the NT with the murderous bastard of the OT takes, I'm sure, some serious mental gymnastics - assuming you even pay that much attention to what the OT actually says instead of cherry picking a verse or two to suit your needs.

I liked the honesty of at least one xian I met once who said the NT represented a personality shift in god to a more loving god and less vengeful.

[pgwenthold]

I can't exactly blame them, reconciling the "loving" god of the NT with the murderous bastard of the OT takes, I'm sure, some serious mental gymnastics - assuming you even pay that much attention to what the OT actually says instead of cherry picking a verse or two to suit your needs.

I liked the honesty of at least one xian I met once who said the NT represented a personality shift in god to a more loving god and less vengeful.

This is the one possible outcome. That God changed. However, doesn't the bible also say that God is always the same?

[elbe]

This is the one possible outcome. That God changed. However, doesn't the bible also say that God is always the same?

Malachi 3:6 seems the most specific, but that's OT (interestingly, in a passage where god is being a jerk). He might still be able to become nicer without changing the fundamentals of who he is (omnipotent, "omniscient", etc.).

But then, is that like the question of if god can create a stone so big he can't lift it? Can god change the unchangable? I don't know, that might be a more interesting philosophical question.

[pgwenthold]

Malachi 3:6 seems the most specific, but that's OT (interestingly, in a passage where god is being a jerk). He might still be able to become nicer without changing the fundamentals of who he is (omnipotent, "omniscient", etc.).

But then, is that like the question of if god can create a stone so big he can't lift it? Can god change the unchangable? I don't know, that might be a more interesting philosophical question.

The most common rebuttal to the contradiction is that God transcends logic, kind of like the "can god create a stone so large he can't lift it." Unfortunately, if that is the approach, then the discussion is over, because "contradiction" is a logical concept, so if you throw out logic, then there is no contradiction that can ever be had, so it doesn't make any sense to even talk about contradictions in the bible.

[PDoug]

OK, so according to the Greek...

God is parental, unconditional love
Parental, unconditional love is not jealous
and
God is jealous (regardless of whether my specific passage was it, as I said, it is all over the OT)

So David Henson and DougP, your attempted apologetics fail. Completely. You tried to make stuff up, to add to the bible, to impose meaning on it that wasn't there.

No, this is a logical contradiction.


What stuff did I try to make up? The behavior of the Holy Spirit differs from the behavior of the flesh, as the two have opposing natures. Therefore you wold expect love, etc. produced by the Holy Spirit, to be different from love, etc. produced by the flesh. Understanding the Bible is much more than understanding the texts it was translated from. In all languages, you have to establish the proper context of a passage, in order to understand what it means. In a sense, understanding the Bible, is like deciphering clues to a treasure, like in the movie National Treasure (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0368891/).

[elbe]

The most common rebuttal to the contradiction is that God transcends logic, kind of like the "can god create a stone so large he can't lift it." Unfortunately, if that is the approach, then the discussion is over, because "contradiction" is a logical concept, so if you throw out logic, then there is no contradiction that can ever be had, so it doesn't make any sense to even talk about contradictions in the bible.

True, but the mortal world described in the bible should still be logical, even if god isn't doesn't play by the same rules. But then you delve into an argument about god interfering with mortals and it all goes up in smoke. You reach a point where believing in god is illogical because you can never be sure he/she/it/they is what it "claims" to be.

[elbe]

Understanding the Bible is much more than understanding the texts it was translated from. In all languages, you have to establish the proper context of a passage, in order to understand what it means.[/url].

In the case of the situations like the words for love, like it's use of Agape, the word chosen is an aspect of it's context - ignoring that is ignoring the context. When multiple words can be chosen to best represent the idea being written, the word used is meant to tell the reader what it's meaning is. Writing the equivalent sentence in greek that says "I love (agape) you" but then claiming it's true meaning is "I love (eros) you" is disingenuous - you're lying to your readers. Do you think the bible author's are lying to you?

[PDoug]

I can't exactly blame them, reconciling the "loving" god of the NT with the murderous bastard of the OT takes, I'm sure, some serious mental gymnastics - assuming you even pay that much attention to what the OT actually says instead of cherry picking a verse or two to suit your needs.

I liked the honesty of at least one xian I met once who said the NT represented a personality shift in god to a more loving god and less vengeful.


Just as we respond differently to different situations, God did the same throughout the Old and New Testaments. God was nicer to the Christians in the New Testament, because they had authentic faith. God got repeatedly furious with the Jews, because they refused to have faith, and kept tripping up over the law. Also the Old Testament highlighted people worshipping false gods and doing other really bad stuff, which always infuriates God. This type of stuff was not shown much in the New Testament. So God really doesn't change. It is just that He has many facets, and different ones are outlined in the Old and New Testaments.

[elbe]

Just as we respond differently to different situations, God did the same throughout the Old and New Testaments. God was nicer to the Christians in the New Testament, because they had authentic faith. God got repeatedly furious with the Jews, because they refused to have faith, and kept tripping up over the law. Also the Old Testament highlighted people worshipping false gods and doing other really bad stuff, which always infuriates God. This type of stuff was not shown much in the New Testament. So God really doesn't change. It is just that He has many facets, and different ones are outlined in the Old and New Testaments.

But the people didn't change. During both OT and NT times people believed in a variety of gods, so if it pissed of god during the OT, why not during the NT? He probably would have had more (in quantity) devout followers during the OT than the NT, because it was a very, very new branch of judaism at that point - since it basically is about the founding and initial spread of the xianity, as opposed to entire countries of his chosen people from the OT. The god of the OT is different from the god of the NT, for that matter the god of the OT is different at different parts of the book. You can try to rationalize the differences, but they are still there.

[Ron_Tomkins]

This just in: Delusional people can't be convinced with logical arguments, no matter how crystalline clear coherent they are.

[PDoug]

But the people didn't change. During both OT and NT times people believed in a variety of gods, so if it pissed of god during the OT, why not during the NT? He probably would have had more (in quantity) devout followers during the OT than the NT, because it was a very, very new branch of judaism at that point - since it basically is about the founding and initial spread of the xianity, as opposed to entire countries of his chosen people from the OT. The god of the OT is different from the god of the NT, for that matter the god of the OT is different at different parts of the book. You can try to rationalize the differences, but they are still there.


Believing in the existence of God, and incorrectly putting your faith in Him, is not the same as having faith correctly (http://pdouglas.blogspot.com/2005/01/having-faith-correctly.html). The early Christians had faith correctly; the Jews in the Old Testament did not. God treated them differently as a result. It is that simple. As for there being several Gods referenced throughout the Bible. That's true. But all members of the Godhead have a common righteous nature, and they all behave essentially the same.

[elbe]

This just in: Delusional people can't be convinced with logical arguments, no matter how crystalline clear coherent they are.

True enough, but now I get to think about if god can change the unchanged - specifically if god, if he so chose to (and was real, natch), could stop being god and become permanently mortal. Not like sharing his power with his demi-god son, or even temporary visits ala the Alanis-god(ess). Maybe he can. Maybe he already has (if we blindly accept the bible to be true) and that's why there are no more of those fun little one-on-one visits he liked to do in genesis. At some point god may have given up his divinity after deciding his children didn't need him anymore, settled down on earth, found himself a nice mortal woman (he does like the mortal women), maybe had some kids, and grew old and died.

You know what? I think that's a more fitting end to the biblical story than anything I've heard from the religious.

[PDoug]

This just in: Delusional people can't be convinced with logical arguments, no matter how crystalline clear coherent they are.


Who exhibits delusional behavior?

[MarekM]

In a sense, understanding the Bible, is like deciphering clues to a treasure, like in the movie National Treasure (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0368891/).

What leads you to believe there's a treasure to find?

[elbe]

Believing in the existence of God, and incorrectly putting your faith in Him, is not the same as having faith correctly (http://pdouglas.blogspot.com/2005/01/having-faith-correctly.html). The early Christians had faith correctly; the Jews in the Old Testament did not. God treated them differently as a result. It is that simple. As for there being several Gods referenced throughout the Bible. That's true. But all members of the Godhead have a common righteous nature, and they all behave essentially the same.

They can only have faith correctly if they know how to have faith correctly. Look at Cain and Abel, both made a sacrifice to god, but only Abel's sacrifice was looked favorably upon. Did god bother to tell Cain what he expected? If he had I saw no reason Cain wouldn't have met it. If he hadn't then god is punishing people by his own, unwritten, unjust rules. So now you are saying that for thousands of years god continued to punish people for not doing what they didn't know they were even supposed to until he bothered to go down and tell them? That is insane, you know that? I'm pretty sure I've seen psychological experiments that worked like that, it was basically torture for the poor subject when they could never figure out the rules of the game.

God, that's some of the most perverse rationalization I've seen for xianity.

[PDoug]

What leads you to believe there's a treasure to find?


Luke 12

33 Sell what you possess and give donations to the poor; provide yourselves with purses and handbags that do not grow old, an unfailing and inexhaustible treasure in the heavens, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys.

Given that I find Christianity authentic, I believe the above is true.

[MarekM]

Luke 12

33 Sell what you possess and give donations to the poor; provide yourselves with purses and handbags that do not grow old, an unfailing and inexhaustible treasure in the heavens, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys.

Given that I find Christianity authentic, I believe the above is true.


Are you at least aware of the obvious circular reasoning? If so, why doesn't that bother you?

[David Henson]

Let us go to "Young's Literal Translation."

1 John
he who is not loving did not know God, because God is love

Corinthians
The love is long-suffering, it is kind, the love doth not envy, the love doth not vaunt itself, is not puffed up,

No, the literal translation of the words is love. You might think if they meant something else, the literal translation would have said something else.

Even still after all of these years I am constantly amazed at the atheists ability to completely abandon logic.

Love. The love you feel for your mother, for your wife, for your dog, for literature, for ice cream, for yourself are not the same. So, the variation in meaning of the word love in the Bible differs from our own, only in that we have one word with many meanings and they had many words translated the same with different meanings.

So the obtuse atheists can argue that the literal translation says love so can only mean one thing - even though in my previous post it was only mentioned as an aside having almost nothing to do with the point, or they can say, once again, that we are changing the meaning by having a broader sense of the text.

Anyway, the atheist idea that the God of the so called Old Testament was any more hateful and mean than the God of the so called New Testament is just stupid. First of all they are the same and secondly the so called New Testament has Armageddon!

[carlitos]

Luke 12

33 Sell what you possess and give donations to the poor; provide yourselves with purses and handbags that do not grow old, an unfailing and inexhaustible treasure in the heavens, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys.

Given that I find Christianity authentic, I believe the above is true.

So you sold your possessions and gave them to the poor?

[elbe]

So the obtuse atheists can argue that the literal translation says love so can only mean one thing - even though in my previous post it was only mentioned as an aside having almost nothing to do with the point, or they can say, once again, that we are changing the meaning by having a broader sense of the text.

I must have missed the part where I said love can only mean one thing when I talked about how love can mean many things. Oh how we do miss such obvious things!

Context, my dear boy, context! The word chosen in the original greek coupled with what the orthodox understanding of use of the word "love" result in an internal conflict between the passages. If you move beyond context to support you claim for a passage's meaning, you've moved into the realm of "making crap up" to support your position.

[MarekM]

Love. The love you feel for your mother, for your wife, for your dog, for literature, for ice cream, for yourself are not the same. So, the variation in meaning of the word love in the Bible differs from our own, only in that we have one word with many meanings and they had many words translated the same with different meanings.

Why couldn't god, who is apparently infinitely wiser than us mere mortals, used modifiers to clarify what he meant by "love"? Couldn't he have foreseen our current struggles with the meaning? Or is this just a game for him? Maybe he likes to see us confused. If the confusion keeps us out of heaven, well, that's just our problem.

[PDoug]

Are you at least aware of the obvious circular reasoning? If so, why doesn't that bother you?


What circular reasoning is that? If the things about Christianity you are able to verify are seen to be true, why is it unreasonable to believe in the things you cannot verify? If you find the claims of someone to be true, and you find the person to be good and trustworthy, do you think it is unreasonable to believe the person about things you cannot verify? Do you trust people when they make claims you cannot verify? Do you have any friends?

[PDoug]

So you sold your possessions and gave them to the poor?


I've lost my possessions like Job, on account of having faith.

[David Henson]

Why couldn't god, who is apparently infinitely wiser than us mere mortals, used modifiers to clarify what he meant by "love"? Couldn't he have foreseen our current struggles with the meaning? Or is this just a game for him? Maybe he likes to see us confused. If the confusion keeps us out of heaven, well, that's just our problem.

Nonsense! The atheists are not confused, they are mocking and obtuse. Willfully ignorant. Do you think if I clarified for you the original language or pointed out the obvious flaws in your native language you would change your approach? It has nothing to do with it.

It is actually quite interesting to watch. It reminds me of Jesus' illustration that the children could understand but the educated Jewish religious leaders couldn't.

[MarekM]

What circular reasoning is that?

If I'm reading you correctly, you're basically saying you know your treasure map will lead you to treasure because you have a treasure map. Do you see any inherent problems with this reasoning? What if there are dozens of other treasure maps that mark the treasure in a different place?

If the things about Christianity you are able to verify are seen to be true, why is it unreasonable to believe in the things you cannot verify?

Islam gets a lot of things right as well. Do you believe Muhammad is the final prophet?

If you find the claims of someone to be true, and you find the person to be good and trustworthy, do you think it is unreasonable to believe the person about things you cannot verify?

How have you determined the bible to be "good and trustworthy" when it comes to its supernatural claims?

Do you trust people when they make claims you cannot verify?

If the claim sounds reasonable, probably. If the claim sounds unreasonable, probably not.

Do you have any friends?

Is the bible your friend?

[elbe]

Nonsense! The atheists are not confused, they are mocking and obtuse. Willfully ignorant.

Yes, I would agree that atheists tend not to be confused about the meanings of religious passages - being completely irrelevant (though, to be honest, Gen 20:17-18 makes no sense to me within the context of Gen20). Mocking? Yes, clearly. Obtuse? Only when it makes the mocking better.

Ignorant, though, I would whole heartily disagree with. Some of the most biblically literate people I've ever met were atheists - I imagine it to be because they aren't wearing blinders when they read it. The bible is an important work who's understanding helps to open up whole worlds in classic and modern art and literature (redundant? maybe). Why wouldn't people who want to further their own understanding of humanity read such an important book?

The xians, though, seem to much prefer staying in the shallow waters, focusing on the passages that support their world views, to confirm what they already know: that they are right. While simultaniously ignoring and rationalizing away verses that might upset their happy little reality. I find it very childish. But obviously I'm just an atheist, so what do I know, right?

[MarekM]

Nonsense! The atheists are not confused, they are mocking and obtuse. Willfully ignorant. Do you think if I clarified for you the original language or pointed out the obvious flaws in your native language you would change your approach? It has nothing to do with it.

As an atheist, I can say you are at least wrong about me. I don't believe the claims of christianity, in part, because of the mental gymnastics it requires to make sense of it all.

The OT god was an *******, murdering and torturing innocents for no reason other than the fact he was unhappy with his own creation. Then we get to the NT where we're supposed to believe god is caring and loving and is really looking out for our best interests. Oh, but most of us won't get to heaven anyway.

On its face, it doesn't make sense. God should have been aware of this. God could have made it clear. He didn't.

[Ron_Tomkins]

Who exhibits delusional behavior?

The people who believe in things for which there are no more evidence than there is for the existence of fairies or dragons.

[dio]

Nonsense! The atheists are not confused, they are mocking and obtuse. Willfully ignorant.

Hmmm...
If genesis says the sun was created on day 4 and the plants on day 3, that's what I understand.
You have to apply your Olympic level mental gymnastics to somehow make it work, with your "all completed in day 1 but some ulterior preparation :confused: required" mumbo jumbo.
The creation account is wrong. There was no global flood. You are the willfully ignorant one.



It is actually quite interesting to watch. It reminds me of Jesus' illustration that the children could understand be indoctrinated but the educated Jewish religious leaders couldn't.

Here, I fixed it for you.

[PDoug]

The people who believe in things for which there are no more evidence than there is for the existence of fairies or dragons.


Read here (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5722025&postcount=202).

[carlitos]

The post you linked is called "argument from incredulity."

ETA, re: "indoctrination"
zxJyfqeaKU8

[Resume]

The post you linked is called "argument from incredulity."

ETA, re: "indoctrination"
zxJyfqeaKU8

With a side of bald assertion.

[vIQleS]

The following is a restatement of what you wrote, for clarity:

God is [righteous] love
[Righteous] love is not [unrighteously] jealous
God is a [righteously] jealous God


I'm confused. Why do you think that you can just stick words in?

Does anybody else want to lock PDoug and Kathy in a room together? Just to see what happens...

So you sold your possessions and gave them to the poor?

PS - I've just been reading Bart Ehrman's Di Vinci Code book, and in it he explains that Jesus (He seems to be assuming that Jesus actually existed) was an apocolypical prophet. He believed that the world was coming to an end. (And soon)

I'm guessing that's where the "give your possesions away" business comes from...

[Ron_Tomkins]

Read here (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5722025&postcount=202).

I have read, and thus concluded you are within the category of deluded.

[elbe]

PS - I've just been reading Bart Ehrman's Di Vinci Code book, and in it he explains that Jesus (He seems to be assuming that Jesus actually existed) was an apocolypical prophet. He believed that the world was coming to an end. (And soon)

I'm guessing that's where the "give your possesions away" business comes from...

Well, from my understanding, Paul seemed to believe the second coming would be within his own lifetime so argued that people should give up their unholy lives and dedicate themselves to the new church of the demi-god. I've heard that used to explain his, apparent, dislike of women.

[elbe]

I have read, and thus concluded you are within the category of deluded.

If it makes PDoug feel any better: many, many people are deluded to some degree or another. Good people, smart people, and great people. It doesn't diminish who they are, but they are still deluded.

[tsig]

What stuff did I try to make up? The behavior of the Holy Spirit differs from the behavior of the flesh, as the two have opposing natures. Therefore you wold expect love, etc. produced by the Holy Spirit, to be different from love, etc. produced by the flesh. Understanding the Bible is much more than understanding the texts it was translated from. In all languages, you have to establish the proper context of a passage, in order to understand what it means. In a sense, understanding the Bible, is like deciphering clues to a treasure, like in the movie National Treasure (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0368891/).

So gods' message was never intended for the majority of humans but only for a select few?

[tsig]

Just as we respond differently to different situations, God did the same throughout the Old and New Testaments. God was nicer to the Christians in the New Testament, because they had authentic faith. God got repeatedly furious with the Jews, because they refused to have faith, and kept tripping up over the law. Also the Old Testament highlighted people worshipping false gods and doing other really bad stuff, which always infuriates God. This type of stuff was not shown much in the New Testament. So God really doesn't change. It is just that He has many facets, and different ones are outlined in the Old and New Testaments.

Your god keeps looking more and more human all the time.

Do only true Scotsmen have authentic faith?

[tsig]

I've lost my possessions like Job, on account of having faith.

No sweat, according to the story you'll get them all back tenfold.

[elbe]

No sweat, according to the story you'll get them all back tenfold.

Better than if he showed his faith by emulating Lot - remember, god wants you to show you aren't a sinner by getting date-raped by your daughters.

[tsig]

As an atheist, I can say you are at least wrong about me. I don't believe the claims of christianity, in part, because of the mental gymnastics it requires to make sense of it all.

The OT god was an *******, murdering and torturing innocents for no reason other than the fact he was unhappy with his own creation. Then we get to the NT where we're supposed to believe god is caring and loving and is really looking out for our best interests. Oh, but most of us won't get to heaven anyway.

On its face, it doesn't make sense. God should have been aware of this. God could have made it clear. He didn't.

Oh and he died for us in the NT in the OT god was really big on humans dieing for him.

[tsig]

I'm confused. Why do you think that you can just stick words in?

Does anybody else want to lock PDoug and Kathy in a room together? Just to see what happens...



PS - I've just been reading Bart Ehrman's Di Vinci Code book, and in it he explains that Jesus (He seems to be assuming that Jesus actually existed) was an apocolypical prophet. He believed that the world was coming to an end. (And soon)

I'm guessing that's where the "give your possesions away" business comes from...

The Antichrist?

[pgwenthold]

Nonsense! The atheists are not confused, they are mocking and obtuse. Willfully ignorant.

I have to admit, I find it pretty funny. Atheists are mocking, obtuse, willfully ignorant, and delusional, all because we don't unquestionably accept claims such as that when the bible says love, it does not really mean love, and stuff like that.

Shoot, I went to "Young's Literal Translation" and elbe pulled out the original greek in order to see if it said anything different, finding out that it doesn't, and WE are the ones who are ignorant and confused?

[Iamme]

Reading these religious posts in all these religious threads is a hoot. So many atheists here trying to convince each other there is no God. When you know there just has to be one. Based on simple heirarchy of order in the way we have moon, earth, Sun, galaxy, universe, ? Or - worker, boss, boss of boss, corporation, shareholders. That kind of stuff. Why do we think there is no order or "brain" higher than us?

We all know that space aliens had to come here and help make those 800 ton slabs in South America, with the laser-like grooves in them, that no stone tools could have whittled away. Aliens did it. Aliens with hyper speed travel and knowledge of anti gravity and how to cut hard objects with precision. All those monoliths were put up about the same time period to show the world that something impossible was indeed possible. And if there are aliens, that means there is something smarter than us. And if they are smarter than us, why not something smarter than the aliens, that even made the aliens.

You know that a woman can't have evolved to be almost pregnant with an almost womb, the way you think you so easily get off the hook with saying an eye first only let us see light, and evolved to be more complex. Almost uterus, doesn't cut it. Almost sperm doesn't cut it. Almost penis fitting vagina, doesn't cut it. Almost a mouth to eat with doesn't cut it. Or a mouth without a stomach to go with it, at the same time. And on and on.

You think all those odd creatures that found some niche on where to live just happened by chance, to find their way say under the ground to grovel? Why? What for? When instead they could have forked the way WE forked, so they too could have cars, cell phones, computers, travel in the air and go on vacations to tropical paradises sipping pina colatas. Let alone the whys for every creature there is, in the air, sea and land, and under the land to live.

How come we just so happen to conveniently have a force field around the Earth, and conveniently have radio waves, x-rays, fuels, ingredients to make artificial fertilizer to grow more food..... and all that?, so we can cruise around in super sophisticated GPS and tv equipped Suv's with all these fancy gizmos?

How come the guy who took Darwin to the Galapogos saw the same as Darwin, and believed MORE in God, rather than less?

Any evidence of evolution does not prove a thing. We know that if science is correct - that basically everything evolved from hydrogen, becoming more complex. But it did not JUST happen. There were some very needed laws to allow everything as we know it, to happen. Who/what gave these laws? These laws are what God laid his foundation with. He probably knew he did not even have to guide everything along, as he knew after the foundation was laid, that it just had to be.......perfect, in the end.

He knew there would be ocean currents to temper and clean the oceans. He knew there would no only be be air, but wind for all the right reasons. He knew there would be water for man to tap in underground, even if he lived on land masses way away from the seas. He knew man could heat himself in the coldest of winter. Or cool himself down in the hottest of summer. He knew that since ice had to form on top that the fish would live. He knew that water boiling at 212 would be beneficial. It goes on and on for an eternity, of all the right things that had to and were known by God, that would happen, to advance creation to get to us to the point so we could look upon the creation.

That is why we are here. God wanted to show his creation to us, and to show he exists.

[pgwenthold]

Reading these religious posts in all these religious threads is a hoot.

blah

blah

blah.

In the words of a great character in one of the best atheist movies ever...

"You are a sad, strange, little man, and you have my pity. Farewell."

[elbe]

Some people's delusions go beyond belief in an imaginary being...

[RoboTimbo]

Reading these religious posts in all these religious threads is a hoot.

<snipped the aliens and stuff>

I thought at first this was parodying a religious woo wacker. It's scary sometimes to realize you're incorrect.

[dio]

So many atheists here trying to convince each other there is no God. When you know there just has to be one.

No.
Atheist are not trying to convince anybody.

You lunatics are trying to convince everybody that there is a god, but not just any god, but your god.

Guess what: wishful thinking (there just has to be one) is not enough. It's stupid.
Bring some evidence. Ooops, there is none. Nevermind.

[Ladewig]

with the laser-like grooves in them, that no stone tools could have whittled away. Aliens did it.

What are you talking about?

[tsig]

Reading these religious posts in all these religious threads is a hoot. So many atheists here trying to convince each other there is no God. When you know there just has to be one. Based on simple heirarchy of order in the way we have moon, earth, Sun, galaxy, universe, ? Or - worker, boss, boss of boss, corporation, shareholders. That kind of stuff. Why do we think there is no order or "brain" higher than us?

We all know that space aliens had to come here and help make those 800 ton slabs in South America, with the laser-like grooves in them, that no stone tools could have whittled away. Aliens did it. Aliens with hyper speed travel and knowledge of anti gravity and how to cut hard objects with precision. All those monoliths were put up about the same time period to show the world that something impossible was indeed possible. And if there are aliens, that means there is something smarter than us. And if they are smarter than us, why not something smarter than the aliens, that even made the aliens.

You know that a woman can't have evolved to be almost pregnant with an almost womb, the way you think you so easily get off the hook with saying an eye first only let us see light, and evolved to be more complex. Almost uterus, doesn't cut it. Almost sperm doesn't cut it. Almost penis fitting vagina, doesn't cut it. Almost a mouth to eat with doesn't cut it. Or a mouth without a stomach to go with it, at the same time. And on and on.

You think all those odd creatures that found some niche on where to live just happened by chance, to find their way say under the ground to grovel? Why? What for? When instead they could have forked the way WE forked, so they too could have cars, cell phones, computers, travel in the air and go on vacations to tropical paradises sipping pina colatas. Let alone the whys for every creature there is, in the air, sea and land, and under the land to live.

How come we just so happen to conveniently have a force field around the Earth, and conveniently have radio waves, x-rays, fuels, ingredients to make artificial fertilizer to grow more food..... and all that?, so we can cruise around in super sophisticated GPS and tv equipped Suv's with all these fancy gizmos?

How come the guy who took Darwin to the Galapogos saw the same as Darwin, and believed MORE in God, rather than less?

Any evidence of evolution does not prove a thing. We know that if science is correct - that basically everything evolved from hydrogen, becoming more complex. But it did not JUST happen. There were some very needed laws to allow everything as we know it, to happen. Who/what gave these laws? These laws are what God laid his foundation with. He probably knew he did not even have to guide everything along, as he knew after the foundation was laid, that it just had to be.......perfect, in the end.

He knew there would be ocean currents to temper and clean the oceans. He knew there would no only be be air, but wind for all the right reasons. He knew there would be water for man to tap in underground, even if he lived on land masses way away from the seas. He knew man could heat himself in the coldest of winter. Or cool himself down in the hottest of summer. He knew that since ice had to form on top that the fish would live. He knew that water boiling at 212 would be beneficial. It goes on and on for an eternity, of all the right things that had to and were known by God, that would happen, to advance creation to get to us to the point so we could look upon the creation.

That is why we are here. God wanted to show his creation to us, and to show he exists.

I see, god exists because humans exist.

[pgwenthold]

No.
Atheist are not trying to convince anybody.

I wouldn't necessarily say that. There could certainly be atheists who are trying to convince theists there is no god.

However, that's not what Iamme said, which was "atheists are trying to convince _each other_ there is no god."

Why in the bloody heck would atheists be trying to convince other atheists that there is no god?

That is all aside from the fact that, in the current thread, we were only talking about the bible, and the leap to "no god" is a complete non-sequitor. Proving that the bible contains contradictions says nothing about the concept of god, and, shoot, for most christians, says nothing about the christian god, even.

But that is Iamme...

[cienaños]

Even still after all of these years I am constantly amazed at the atheists ability to completely abandon logic.

Love. The love you feel for your mother, for your wife, for your dog, for literature, for ice cream, for yourself are not the same. So, the variation in meaning of the word love in the Bible differs from our own, only in that we have one word with many meanings and they had many words translated the same with different meanings.

So the obtuse atheists can argue that the literal translation says love so can only mean one thing - even though in my previous post it was only mentioned as an aside having almost nothing to do with the point, or they can say, once again, that we are changing the meaning by having a broader sense of the text.

Anyway, the atheist idea that the God of the so called Old Testament was any more hateful and mean than the God of the so called New Testament is just stupid. First of all they are the same and secondly the so called New Testament has Armageddon!


Are you saying the word "love" not only varied in meaning back during the BibLexicon of 'Love' Age, but also, and separately so, today "love" has an entire new block of meaning found both in that exact same BibLexicon of 'Love' Age book plus the Everything Learned Since Then Supplemental?

Do you take VISA?

[pgwenthold]

Are you saying the word "love" not only varied in meaning back during the BibLexicon of 'Love' Age, but also, and separately so, today "love" has an entire new block of meaning found both in that exact same BibLexicon of 'Love' Age book plus the Everything Learned Since Then Supplemental?

Do you take VISA?

I wonder, do folks like David Henson apply the same amount of gymnastics to the other parts of the bible?

How about, "For God so loved the world, he gave us his only son..."? Why doesn't that love mean something other than love?

You can apply this to any word. How about "raised"? As in "Jesus was raised from the dead." You know, a lot of people (often atheists) contend that this is not actually referring to physical raising of a dead body bringing it back to life. Does David Henson consider that a possible, too, or will he remain "willfully ignorant"?

I have a common description about how christians read the bible:
1) If it is in the bible and is verifiably true, it is true
2) If it is in the bible and is verifiably false, it is either a mistranslation or out of context
3) If it is in the bible and is not verifiable, it is true

Why is it that none of the stuff that is "verifiably true" and "non-verifiable" is ever thought to be a mistranslation or out of context?

[skeptic griggsy]

John Loftus and Richard Carrier's anthology,"The Christian Delusion," keel hauls ChriStinsanity and Moses's Folly.
Miklos Jako in "Confronting Believers," keel hauls the scam of the ages -Yeshua as a great moral leader when the dead man was just another sick cult leader! Jako, deist ,however, errs about atheism. Read his pungent commentary on Christianity.
pgwenthold, faith doth that to
people.
McGrath and Spong find hope throughout that egregious anthology and find the morality there secondary.
Yes, that hope exhumed by the Deluge and so forth!
Cienanos, sure. Lo, Yeshua and Paul ,that sophist, speak of love that includes having slaves,etc.!
Faith doth that to people!
I recommend these blogs:
Carneades@aimoo and
IgnosticMorgan's Blog@WordPress
for seriious inquirers.

Faith doth that to people!

[Skeptical Greg]

Shem's first son was born when Shem was 100 years old.
..................


So, do you think he had a lot of daughters?
Are we supposed to believe these guys were practicing birth control, performing a lot of abortions, or what ?

[elbe]

So, do you think he had a lot of daughters?
Are we supposed to believe these guys were practicing birth control, performing a lot of abortions, or what ?

Daughters weren't important enough to record, obviously.

There's an early genesis account about abraham traveling that I enjoy. It mentions all the stuff he brought with him, money, animals, servants, slaves, furniture, and, least importantly, his wife. Sarah certainly got the short end of the stick on that marriage.

[tsig]

Daughters weren't important enough to record, obviously.

There's an early genesis account about abraham traveling that I enjoy. It mentions all the stuff he brought with him, money, animals, servants, slaves, furniture, and, least importantly, his wife. Sarah certainly got the short end of the stick on that marriage.

He only brought her because one of the burros was sick.