[Seventy]

Rev.Rodimer said that if anyone objected to their interpretation that we should point them out. Well here's mine from Jeb Thurmond.

But how do you know Jesus is white?

First let's agree on these definitions:

Ruddy: rosy-cheeked, sunburnt
fair countenence: white face and facial features (nose is not hooked or flat, for example)

Jesus was a Nazarite:

Her Nazarites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy in body than rubies - Lamentations 4:7

Jeb uses this bit of scripture to prove his assertion that Jesus was white. He even points out that Jesus was Nazarite. Now I have noticed that this site uses the literal reading of the Bible, just as he has done here. So lets see what are the "literal" requirements to be a Nazarite.

The vows that is required are here:

Abstain from wine, wine vinegar, grapes, raisins.

"For John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine, and
you say, 'He has a demon.' The Son of Man came eating and drinking,
and you say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax
collectors and "sinners."'" (Matthew 11:18 & Luke 7:33-34)

And here.

"A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put
the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus'
lips. When he had received the drink, Jesus said, "It is finished."
With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit." (John 19:29-30)

Clearly he is not abstaining from wine

Next....

Avoid corpses and graves, even those of family members, and any structure which contains such.


The Resurrection of Lazarus:

(John 11-15) Jesus tells them plainly of Lazarus’ death.

Then Jesus said to them plainly, "Lazarus is dead. And I am glad for your sakes that I was not there, that you may believe. Nevertheless let us go to him."

So when Jesus came, He found that he had already been in the tomb four days. Martha said to Jesus, "Lord, if You had been here, my brother would not have died. But even now I know that whatever You ask of God, God will give You.

Therefore, when Jesus saw her weeping, and the Jews who came with her weeping, He groaned in the spirit and was troubled. And He said, "Where have you laid him?" They said to Him, "Lord, come and see." Then Jesus, again groaning in Himself, came to the tomb

It was a cave, and a stone lay against it. Jesus said, "Take away the stone." Martha, the sister of him who was dead, said to Him, "Lord, by this time there is a stench, for he has been dead four days.

Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead man was lying. And Jesus lifted up His eyes and said, "Father, I thank You that You have heard Me. And I know that You always hear Me, but because of the people who are standing by I said this, that they may believe that You sent Me." Now when He had said these things, He cried with a loud voice, "Lazarus, come forth!" And he who had died came out bound hand and foot with graveclothes, and his face was wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, "Loose him, and let him go."

So it is clear that Jesus did not avoid corpses, graves, and any structure which contains such. So since this seems to prove that Jesus wasn't Nazarite, that means Jeb's interpretation of the scripture is wrong also.

But I would add this: "And He who was sitting was like a jasper stone and a sardius in appearance...Rev4:3. I'll leave it up to you interpretation if this is white or not.

[Levi Jones]

This is well thought out and you put a lot of work into it. I really appreciate that.

Do you have anything else on Jesus being a descendant of David and therefore ruddy complected?

Jesus was descended from King David, also white, and who was a victim of anti-White racism:

And when the Philistine looked about, and saw David, he disdained him: for he was but a youth, and ruddy, and of a fair countenance. - 1 Samuel 17:42

God chooses prophets and rulers of nations by simply choosing the white person:

Again, Jesse made seven of his sons to pass before Samuel. And Samuel said unto Jesse, The LORD hath not chosen these.

And Samuel said unto Jesse, Are here all thy children? And he said, There remaineth yet the youngest, and, behold, he keepeth the sheep. And Samuel said unto Jesse, Send and fetch him: for we will not sit down till he come hither.
And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and withal of a beautiful countenance, and goodly to look to. And the LORD said, Arise, anoint him: for this is he. Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren: and the Spirit of the LORD came upon David from that day forward. So Samuel rose up, and went to Ramah. - 1 Samuel 16:10-13

[Zechariah Smyth]

I too appreciate your study of Scripture. You simply would not believe how many people come here and post "your a fagget" or some iteration thereof.

Thank you.

There are many parts of the Bible that at first glance seem to be at odds with another part, but since that is an impossibility I dig a little deeper and discover gems like:

(Isaiah 55:8-9) "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts."

Our ways are not His ways.

Simple!

Yours in Christ,

Z. Smyth

[Faith_Machine]

Seventy, with regards to that vinegar-soaked sponge, it's my understanding that it was being used to torment Jesus, not to provide him with an enjoyable libation. I'm sure somebody here will correct me if I'm mistaken.

But anyway, why don't you tell us all about yourself? How did you come to know the Lord, how many sons do you have, which of the World Wars was your favorite, that sort of thing.

[Mary Etheldreda]

Originally Posted by Seventy

So it is clear that Jesus did not avoid corpses, graves, and any structure which contains such. So since this seems to prove that Jesus wasn't Nazarite, that means Jeb's interpretation of the scripture is wrong also.

I'm confused. Where do you read how close Jesus was to the tomb? Lazarus came to Jesus after his decomposed body was miraculously regenerated (or whatever it was the LORD did to replace billions of decomposed cells, restoring the bacterial fauna that contributes to things like digestive health, etc).

[Seventy]

Originally Posted by Levi Jones

This is well thought out and you put a lot of work into it. I really appreciate that.

Thank you for you compliment. I am confused as to why I got gigged 10 points for composition though? I mean, my post looks that same as many of the posts on this site. Oh well,such is life.

Do you have anything else on Jesus being a descendant of David and therefore ruddy complected?

I have no problem with "your" understanding of the geology of Jesus. What I have an issue with is the flawed scripture that led to the flawed conclusion that Jesus was white. In my opinion,this is what I view all religions as being capricious dogma. Any interpretation of the scripture will be accepted regardless of how flawed it is.

But to answer your question, Jesus was not a descendant of David. To understand anything in the Torah one must look at the original Hebrew. It is a established fact that the Christians distorted, changed and misinterpreted many of the Hebrew words in order to fit things into their beliefs.He was not descended from the House of David if you read and adhere to Jewish law. There tribal identification comes from the father's side, and not the mother.

Joseph was descended from David, (I'm privy to the many contradictions between his genealogy, but you pointing them out will only prove my view) and the immaculate conception is accepted doctrine. Therefore Jesus was not related to Joseph, and not a descendant of King David.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...AKz9c2Tp68xwKQ

16 and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah.

[Seventy]

Originally Posted by Zechariah Smyth

I too appreciate your study of Scripture. You simply would not believe how many people come here and post "your a fagget" or some iteration thereof.

Thank you.

In my opinion, those people should be shown the door. I see no need at all for insulting, and degrading anybody just because they don't attune to your view. To disrespect a person's belief is to disrespect the whole being.

There are many parts of the Bible that at first glance seem to be at odds with another part, but since that is an impossibility I dig a little deeper and discover gems like:

(Isaiah 55:8-9) "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts."

Our ways are not His ways.

Simple!

Yours in Christ,

I've heard this many time before, and I view it as not being able to reconcile a glaring contradiction. Would it change your belief if Jesus was not Nazarite? Would you leave the church if Jesus was some other nationality? Noticed I didn't use the word "race", because back then the word wasn't used.

[Levi Jones]

Originally Posted by Seventy

I view all religions as being capricious dogma. Any interpretation of the scripture will be accepted regardless of how flawed it is.

Then, how is it that you know your testament if you don't believe?

Originally Posted by Seventy

There tribal identification comes from the father's side, and not the mother.

I think you meant to say the opposite of that. You meant it comes from the mother and not the father. I don't understand when exactly the Jews went from patrilineage to matrialineage, but all of the Old Testament begats are through the male relative. Shall I post the scriptures for you or do you know what I'm talking about?

Joseph was descended from David, (I'm privy to the many contradictions between his genealogy, but you pointing them out will only prove my view) and the immaculate conception is accepted doctrine. Therefore Jesus was not related to Joseph, and not a descendant of King David.

Don't you know? It turns out Jesus' mother was also a descendant of David.

[Didymus Much]

Originally Posted by Seventy

...I see no need at all for insulting, and degrading anybody just because they don't attune to your view...

I agree with that, but this:

... To disrespect a person's belief is to disrespect the whole being...

is so much claptrap. Don't you think that allowing people to hold onto views grounded in falsehood unchallenged does them a disservice, and actually shows disrespect?

[Seventy]

Originally Posted by Faith_Machine

Seventy, with regards to that vinegar-soaked sponge, it's my understanding that it was being used to torment Jesus, not to provide him with an enjoyable libation. I'm sure somebody here will correct me if I'm mistaken.

No need for others to aid you,I'll concede that you are correct. I have no qualms about doing so. But what about my first piece of evidence?

"For John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine, and
you say, 'He has a demon.' The Son of Man came eating and drinking,
and you say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax
collectors and "sinners."'"

Jesus seems to be contrasting himself with John the Baptist.He said that John
did not eat bread nor drink wine, but Jesus did eat and drink. Furthermore,
because Jesus ate and drank, He was called a glutton and a
drunkard. To me this implies that Jesus drank wine.

But anyway, why don't you tell us all about yourself? How did you come to know the Lord,

I have,it's in the introduction section.

how many sons do you have

Not relevant to this discussion.

which of the World Wars was your favorite

WW2 is my favorite for many reasons. One specific reason is that is ended one of the most vile instance of man's inhumanity to man.

[Levi Jones]

Originally Posted by Seventy

WW2 is my favorite for many reasons. One specific reason is that is ended one of the most vile instance of man's inhumanity to man.

It also started those inhumanities. 20 million Russians, 20 million Chinese, 8 million Germans, 3 million Dutch West Indies, half a million French, 1 million French Indo Chinese, 2 million Indians, 3 million Japanese, 5 million Poles, 1 million Romanians, 1 million Yugoslavs, 1 million combined U.S. and British losses, 300,000 Jews.

Tragedy indeed.

[Seventy]

Originally Posted by Mary Etheldreda

I'm confused. Where do you read how close Jesus was to the tomb?

Are you being pedantic? I can use this same line of reasoning with many assertions that is said on this site. This is why I posted the most evidence concerning this subject,I knew that some one was going to take this path.

Lazarus came to Jesus after his decomposed body was miraculously regenerated

I'm confused, how far did Lazarus have to walk to get to Jesus?

The Orthodox Word says he did.

http://orthodoxword.wordpress.com/20...t-from-cyprus/

Before entering the tomb, He prayed to the Father than He called Lazarus out.

Lazarus came out of the grave as he had been buried: clothed in shroud and with his face covered in veil.

Are you saying they are wrong, and you are right?

(or whatever it was the LORD did to replace billions of decomposed cells, restoring the bacterial fauna that contributes to things like digestive health, etc).

I Have no idea what this has to do with distance.

[Seventy]

Originally Posted by Didymus Much

is so much claptrap. Don't you think that allowing people to hold onto views grounded in falsehood unchallenged does them a disservice, and actually shows disrespect?

If this is the case,why does this site object to people coming here ant saying that you have it all wrong. Aren't you doing yourself a disservice by holding on to beliefs that even the church itself has said should not be taken literally?

If you stuck to the facts about Noah's flood,you personally would have to rely on speculation and supposition to explain it. Where as I would use math and physics, something that is real and provable to show where it could not have happen.

So lets not be hypocritical.

[Seventy]

Originally Posted by Levi Jones

It also started those inhumanities. 20 million Russians, 20 million Chinese, 8 million Germans, 3 million Dutch West Indies, half a million French, 1 million French Indo Chinese, 2 million Indians, 3 million Japanese, 5 million Poles, 1 million Romanians, 1 million Yugoslavs, 1 million combined U.S. and British losses, 300,000 Jews.

Tragedy indeed.

Noticed I said "one of the most" inheritances. I meant this to be inclusive,but I purposely left the ambiguity in there to see how it would be interpreted. I see some vindication of my reason to do so in your numbers. Why are the number of Jews in the thousands, and the rest is in the millions? I think I know why, but I rather you tell me.

[Faith_Machine]

Originally Posted by Seventy

Aren't you doing yourself a disservice by holding on to beliefs that even the church itself has said should not be taken literally?

Which church are you referring to, friend?

[Levi Jones]

Originally Posted by Seventy

Noticed I said "one of the most" inheritances. I meant this to be inclusive,but I purposely left the ambiguity in there to see how it would be interpreted. I see some vindication of my reason to do so in your numbers. Why are the number of Jews in the thousands, and the rest is in the millions? I think I know why, but I rather you tell me.

I have no idea. I guess I could have said, "over a quarter million" like I said, "half a million for France." I also combined the British and American losses into 1 million, when I could have said, "half a million each."

It's purely semantics.

How is it that you know your testament if you don't believe in Jesus?

[Didymus Much]

Originally Posted by Seventy

If this is the case,why does this site object to people coming here ant saying that you have it all wrong...

Because these people do not have it all wrong. They are the most Biblically accurate Christians I have ever come across.

... Aren't you doing yourself a disservice by holding on to beliefs that even the church itself has said should not be taken literally?...

Which church would that be? Please, do not say Roman Catholic. With the amount of their BS that directly contradicts the Bible they have no claim to name "Christian" to begin with.

...If you stuck to the facts about Noah's flood,...

And just what would those "facts" be?

...you personally would have to rely on speculation and supposition to explain it. Where as I would use math and physics, something that is real and provable to show where it could not have happen...

Logic, science and "proof" all go out the window quite easily when someone says, "God did it".

...So lets not be hypocritical.

I'll hold you to that. You're welcome to do the same for me.

[Rev. M. Rodimer]

Originally Posted by Seventy

If this is the case,why does this site object to people coming here ant saying that you have it all wrong. Aren't you doing yourself a disservice by holding on to beliefs that even the church itself has said should not be taken literally?

Didymus is an atheist. I see you are, too.

What "church" said the Bible shouldn't be taken literally? The Catholic Cult? They're Hellbound idolators who think their "pope" can speak for God.

If you stuck to the facts about Noah's flood,you personally would have to rely on speculation and supposition to explain it.

Why would I need "speculation and supposition"? The Bible makes it clear that when God made the earth, there was a firmament above it, and waters above the firmament. Then, when it was time for the Flood, He opened windows in the firmament and let the water flow down to drown all the people, and babies, and bunnies, and bees, and puppy dogs.

Where's the speculation there?

Where as I would use math and physics, something that is real and provable to show where it could not have happen.

Really? OK, show that it could not have happened.

Take care in your explanation to include plate tectonics, including uplift and deformation of the crust from the weight of concentrated water, as one would see if a sudden deluge covered the planet and then began deforming the crust through its massive weight, uplifting certain areas and compressing others.

[Mary Etheldreda]

Originally Posted by Seventy

Are you being pedantic?

Never.

Originally Posted by Seventy

The Orthodox Word says he did.

http://orthodoxword.wordpress.com/20...t-from-cyprus/

Why should I care what an orthodox church member thinks? I care about what God wants me to do, and to that end I read the Holy Bible, King James Version.

Originally Posted by Seventy

Are you saying they are wrong, and you are right?

The LORD Himself is very clear that orthodox cathlics are not Christians.

[Seventy]

Originally Posted by Rev. M. Rodimer

Didymus is an atheist. I see you are, too.

Atheists,at least the ones I know don't defend God, or any religion. But this is what he seems to be doing. Have you seen me defend God? No,you haven't.

What "church" said the Bible shouldn't be taken literally? The Catholic Cult? They're Hellbound idolators who think their "pope" can speak for God.

Yes,the Catholic Church is one. I'm surprised that you have this view looking at all of what they have done in the name of God. Can you edify me on this matter? What is the difference between the Pope, and a pastor/preacher? They both seems to be speaking for God.

Why would I need "speculation and supposition"?

I don't think I said this to you.

The Bible makes it clear that when God made the earth, there was a firmament above it, and waters above the firmament. Then, when it was time for the Flood, He opened windows in the firmament and let the water flow down to drown all the people, and babies, and bunnies, and bees, and puppy dogs.

Where's the speculation there?

There is none, but there is another interpretation of this. One that I know you will not agree with so I would mention it. What I think you are doing is responding to a post I made to another member. Can't he defend himself?

Really? OK, show that it could not have happened.

Take care in your explanation to include plate tectonics, including uplift and deformation of the crust from the weight of concentrated water, as one would see if a sudden deluge covered the planet and then began deforming the crust through its massive weight, uplifting certain areas and compressing others.

Ok, now I see. You are taking up his fight. I really don't have to go that deep,but what I do need is the numbers you want me to use for the dimensions of the Ark,the number of species there are/were, and which flood story are we going to use. (Genesis Chapter 7 verse 17) or (Genesis Chapter 7 verse 24)


The reason I want you to supply them so the claim I used bad data in my calculations. And one last question,are we going to be addressing ships ballast systems and operations?