Could All Help With Signing My Petition
Seasonal1 min ago
Hell...
289 Answers
Justify it?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by nailit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
naomi - // AH, theland came up with the Adam and Eve fur outfits story in an attempt to justify God’s apparent need to kill in order to save. He knows it makes no sense. //
I'm glad it's not just me who cannot fathom out where he has got this nonsense from.
If it says in a book that an animal was killed, how do we know that Adam or Eve didn't kill it? They were the ones who needed the covering.
But then again, why didn't God whistle up a thermal blanket for them - not beyond his powers is it - if you believe he is all-powerful, as Theland and his fellow fervents constantly tell us he is.
I'm glad it's not just me who cannot fathom out where he has got this nonsense from.
If it says in a book that an animal was killed, how do we know that Adam or Eve didn't kill it? They were the ones who needed the covering.
But then again, why didn't God whistle up a thermal blanket for them - not beyond his powers is it - if you believe he is all-powerful, as Theland and his fellow fervents constantly tell us he is.
Theland - // To me it makes more sense to believe God slaughtered an animal to cover their sin. //
Just because it 'makes more sense to you' does not bolster your argument for one second.
You are literally making this up as you go along!
It 'makes more sense to me' that Adam or Eve would find a dead animal and use its skin - why is that not any more valid an argument than yours?
Do you have trouble admiting when you are unable to argue a point to its conclusion?
I think you do.
Just because it 'makes more sense to you' does not bolster your argument for one second.
You are literally making this up as you go along!
It 'makes more sense to me' that Adam or Eve would find a dead animal and use its skin - why is that not any more valid an argument than yours?
Do you have trouble admiting when you are unable to argue a point to its conclusion?
I think you do.
Zacs - // Theland has said 'I don't consider myself as superior, but I believe my faith is correct, with nothing added or taken away from Gods word' //
I have said several times to Theland, and been ignored or course, that interpretation is the most moveable feast of all.
He does it when it suits - which is not a problem, as long as you don;t deny doing it, and he does.
It's like plaiting fog!!
I have said several times to Theland, and been ignored or course, that interpretation is the most moveable feast of all.
He does it when it suits - which is not a problem, as long as you don;t deny doing it, and he does.
It's like plaiting fog!!
Its all nuts anyway....
Old Testament God did NOT absolutely require sacrifice to forgive sin.
Many, many times all he required was repentance.
(Not withstanding he enjoyed the smell of burning flesh)
BUT the NT theology that a sacrifice (a human one at that) had to be made to atone for the sins of mankind is absolutely bogus and found nowhere in the Old testament.
New Testament writers habitually misquoted Old Testament writers to full fill their own agendas...often misquoting them because they were using the septuagint rather than Hebrew originals.
Which also raises a point....
Why did the authors of the New Testament write in Greek and quoted from the (corrupted) Greek septuagint?
Which was a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures.
Didnt the Hebrews at the time of Jesus have any Hebrew Scrolls?
Its all nuts.
Why would Juadaic converts to Christianity (who were natural Aramaic speakers) write in Greek?
(Leaving aside the fact that most of the population at that time were illiterate...fishermen etc)
Old Testament God did NOT absolutely require sacrifice to forgive sin.
Many, many times all he required was repentance.
(Not withstanding he enjoyed the smell of burning flesh)
BUT the NT theology that a sacrifice (a human one at that) had to be made to atone for the sins of mankind is absolutely bogus and found nowhere in the Old testament.
New Testament writers habitually misquoted Old Testament writers to full fill their own agendas...often misquoting them because they were using the septuagint rather than Hebrew originals.
Which also raises a point....
Why did the authors of the New Testament write in Greek and quoted from the (corrupted) Greek septuagint?
Which was a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures.
Didnt the Hebrews at the time of Jesus have any Hebrew Scrolls?
Its all nuts.
Why would Juadaic converts to Christianity (who were natural Aramaic speakers) write in Greek?
(Leaving aside the fact that most of the population at that time were illiterate...fishermen etc)
Theland - // God shedding the blood of an animal to cover their sins is the first example of a blood sacrifice, and forms the beginning of a recurring pattern of atonement in blood. //
Your tendency to make things up to bolster up your creaking assertions is turning into a habit, but nevermind, there is plenty of evidence to prove what nonsense you are offering -
https:/
Your tendency to make things up to bolster up your creaking assertions is turning into a habit, but nevermind, there is plenty of evidence to prove what nonsense you are offering -
https:/
Nailit, your questions on theology can be answered ..... eventually, by anybody with hours to spare on their hands.
Just throwing out random questions does not mean you have won any argument if answers don't come flooding back to you.
Personally, I don't have the time or the inclination to chase after your variety of unconnected questions.
Count me out.
Just throwing out random questions does not mean you have won any argument if answers don't come flooding back to you.
Personally, I don't have the time or the inclination to chase after your variety of unconnected questions.
Count me out.
Theland, is this going to be your response every time from now on? the suggestion that everything you say can be proved by anybody but it won't be you because you haven't the time or inclination. In other words your truth is there but you can't be bothered to find it and provide this proof. You are now asking us to prove you're right and yet you still deny you are being devious.
