[Basilissa]

Re: STOP being Left-handed!!!

Hahahaha don't think about it because then it all falls apart, right?

The Messiah will lead the Jewish people to full Torah observance. The Torah states that all mitzvot remain binding forever, and anyone coming to change the Torah is immediately identified as a false prophet. (Deut. 13:1-4)

Jesus is not a prophet.

Also please note that Jesus did say that all Old Testament laws are to be followed:

Matthew 5:17-19
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Throughout the Christian "New Testament," Jesus contradicts the Torah and states that its commandments are no longer applicable. For example, John 9:14 records that Jesus made a paste in violation of Shabbat, which caused the Pharisees to say (verse 16), "He does not observe Shabbat!"

Are you seriously suggesting, that causing a miracle which allowed a blind man to see, is sin?!

Wow.

Also, learn Hebrew if you are going to cite from the Old Testament as your proof because English translations are not equivalent, such as the word alma not meaning a virgin giving birth at all, but just a young woman.

From the little I know, the meaning of עלמה in this verse really depends on how do you translate אוֹת in the same sentence, as a "sign" or a "miracle". Throughout the Old Testament, the meaning of אוֹת really depends on the context, and it has been translated accordingly in different verses. I realize that the context of Isaiah 7:14 is murky, and you will find people arguing both ways, depending on their preconceived notions. I understand your ideological stance is that in this case, it means just ordinary sign, and my ideological stance is that it means a miracle. I doubt we'll be able to reach a consensus here.

Really, to believe you know better than the Jewish people about their own writings and you have not even bothered to learn the language of the bible. Beyond arrogance!

I hope you'll get a chance to talk Hebrew with either Dr. Pendergrast or Dr. White.

[Jonathan Thomas]

Re: STOP being Left-handed!!!

I think the Jews thought they were superior because their bible expressed as much, the Greeks thought they were superior because their gods decreed it, the Egyptians thought they were superior because of their beliefs and so on ad nauseum. Today's superiors will be tomorrows vanquished oppressors and their victory will prove their chosen status. Who is right and who is wrong is more often than not, determined by who has the biggest stick sadly.

Late in my part of the world Elmer,but I appreciate talking rationally, (that goes to a couple others as well) I had almost left thinking that everyone on here only had insults and slurs to throw around and no wisdom. Your comment will bring me back tomorrow.

[Elmer G. White]

Re: STOP being Left-handed!!!

Regarding Isiah 7:14:

the meaning of עלמה in this verse really depends on how do you translate אוֹת in the same sentence, as a "sign" or a "miracle". Throughout the Old Testament, the meaning of אוֹת really depends on the context, and it has been translated accordingly in different verses. I realize that the context of Isaiah 7:14 is murky, and you will find people arguing both ways, depending on their preconceived notions. I understand your ideological stance is that in this case, it means just ordinary sign, and my ideological stance is that it means a miracle. I doubt we'll be able to reach a consensus here.

Indeed, Sister in Christ, an interesting verse and an interesting study in Linguistic Creation Science. Let us look at the unambiguous KJV form of this verse:

Isaiah 7:14
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Now let's turn to the Leningrad Codex and the ambiguous Hebrew form of this verse:
לָ֠כֵן יִתֵּ֨ן אֲדֹנָ֥י ה֛וּא לָכֶ֖ם אֹ֑ות הִנֵּ֣ה הָעַלְמָ֗ה הָרָה֙ וְיֹלֶ֣דֶת בֵּ֔ן וְקָרָ֥את
שְׁמֹ֖ו עִמָּ֥נוּ אֵֽל׃

For your convenience, I've highlighted in red the word "hā-‘al-māh", the word that has raised so much unbelief among secularists. What does it mean? The Hebrew word is admittedly ambiguous in its meaning. It is a feminine word with the definite article הָ and derives from the masculine form עָ֫לֶם . That means simply "youth". The feminine word has meanings more diverse: girl, maid, maiden, virgin. Which one is the one we should follow? Here we must turn to those who were alive during the times when the Prophet was alive. How can we do that? Simply by seeing how people who spoke different tongues translated that verse during antiquity. These were the scolars who were immersed in that culture and knew it inside out. How did they decipher this word with many meanings?

• Peshitta, Syriack (or Aramaic) uses the word ܒܬܘܠܬܐ (b't, uwlt'eh). Admittedly, perhaps Christians who wanted to promote Jesus translated this, but it is still much more unambiguous,meaning virgin or chaste girl. One point for "virgin".
• Greek LXX translates the verse as διὰ τοῦτο δώσει κύριος αὐτὸς ὑμῖν σημεῖον ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Εμμανουηλ. Justin supported this over the suggestion of Aquila and Theodotion who used νεᾶνις. Now, we must remember who the translators of LXX were. They were Jewish scholars. They would have had an interest in presenting the Hebrew word accordingly. They chose παρθένος, a woman who has never had sexual intercourse. Virgin-slut 2-0.
• Of course, in this rare case even the vulgar Vulgate supports the "virgin" alternative with ...virgo concipiet et pariet filium... 3-0.

A text produced by Jews in Hebrew was translated by Jews who knew Hebrew extrely well into Greek and the resulting translation included the word "virgin". Justin has here much more backup than Aquila or his pals.

The people who were there during the ancient times had no doubts about the translation. A virgin. The OT does predict Jesus. Praise God!


Yours in Christ,

Elmer

[Basilissa]

Re: STOP being Left-handed!!!

From the little I know, the meaning of עלמה in this verse really depends on how do you translate אוֹת in the same sentence, as a "sign" or a "miracle". Throughout the Old Testament, the meaning of אוֹת really depends on the context, and it has been translated accordingly in different verses. I realize that the context of Isaiah 7:14 is murky, and you will find people arguing both ways, depending on their preconceived notions. I understand your ideological stance is that in this case, it means just ordinary sign, and my ideological stance is that it means a miracle. I doubt we'll be able to reach a consensus here.

Regarding Isiah 7:14:

Indeed, Sister in Christ, an interesting verse and an interesting study in Linguistic Creation Science.

Thank you, Dr. White!

Also, on second thought, no matter how we translate אֹ֑ות in this verse, it had to be a virgin birth one way or another. I mean, Prophet Isaiah would not bother calling a regular birth a "sign" - to be a sign, a birth has to be special, such as a baby with two heads, a baby with no head, or - yep, you guessed it - a regular-looking baby born of a virgin. (Of course, she was not a virgin afterwards, because the baby Jesus had to go out "that way.").

[Jonathan Thomas]

Re: STOP being Left-handed!!!

Elmer,

In the original Hebrew, the 10thCommandment prohibits taking, not coveting. The biblical Jubilee year is namedfor an animal’s horn and has nothing to do with jubilation. The pregnant womanin Isaiah 7:14 is never called a virgin. Psalm 23 opens with an image of God’smight and power, not shepherding. And the romantic Song of Solomon offers asurprisingly modern message.
But most people who read the Bibledon’t know these things, because extensive translation gaffs conceal theBible’s original meaning.
The mistakes stem from five flawedtranslation techniques: etymology, internal structure, cognates, oldmistranslations, and misunderstood metaphor.
The tenth Commandment, commonly butwrongly translated as “thou shalt not covet,” illustrates how internalstructure or etymology can be misleading. Like the English “host” and “hostile”that share a root but don’t mean the same thing, the words for “desirable” and“take” in Hebrew come from the same root. It’s the second word, “take,” that appearsin the Ten Commandments. But translators, not recognizing that related wordscan mean different things in this way, misunderstood the Hebrew and wronglytranslated the text as “thou shalt not covet” for what should have been “thoushalt not take.” (Learn more:
The translation “Jubilee year” resultsfrom a mistaken application of cognates (similar words in different languages).In the original Hebrew, the year was called the “year of the horn,” or, inHebrew, “the year of the yovel.” The Latin for yovel is iobileus, which just happens to sound likethe Latin word iubileus, connectedto the verb iubilare, “tocelebrate.” The English “Jubilee year” comes from the Latin. (A similar Latincoincidence gave rise to the notion that the fruit in the Garden of Eden was anapple.)
Starting about 2,300 years ago, theHebrew Bible was translated into a Greek version now known as the Septuagint.One shortcoming of that translation is its inattention to near synonyms. Forinstance, the Hebrew words for “love,” “mercy” and “compassion” are frequentlymixed up, because they mean nearly the same thing. Likewise, because most youngwomen in antiquity were virgins and most virgins were young women, theSeptuagint wasn’t careful to distinguish the words for “virgin” and “youngwoman” in translation.
This is how the Hebrew in Isaiah 7:14— which describes a young woman giving birth to a boy who will be namedEmmanuel — ended up in Greek as a virgin giving birth. Though these facts aboutGreek and Hebrew are generally undisputed among scholars, the translation errorremains, both because people are usually unwilling to give up familiartranslations, and also perhaps because the Gospel of Matthew describes thevirgin birth of Jesus by quoting the mistaken Greek translation of Isaiah 7:14.
Metaphors are particularly difficultto translate, because words have different metaphoric meanings in differentcultures. Shepherds in the Bible were symbols of might, ferocity and royalty,whereas now they generally represent peaceful guidance and oversight. So theimage of the Lord as shepherd in Psalm 23 originally meant that the Lord wasmighty, fierce and royal. The impact was roughly the same as “the Lord is a manof war.” But in most English-speaking cultures, “the Lord is my shepherd” conveysa wholly different, and therefore inaccurate, image.
Similarly, kinship terms like“father,” “brother,” “sister,” etc. were used in the Bible specifically toindicate power structure. This is why the romantic Song of Solomon — theBible’s only full length treatise on relationships — says “my sister, my bride”or “my sister, my spouse.” On its face, that English translation is not onlyunromantic but in fact felonious. The original point, however, was that thewoman in this relationship should be the man’s equal.
In these and many other instances,improved translation techniques bring us closer to the original intent of theBible. And like a newly restored work of art, the Bible’s original beautyshines the brighter for it.

Aside from this there exists the factthat Isaiah 7:14 is not a messianic prophecy at all but an answer to king Azah aboutthe state of his kingdom and the threat of damascus and samaria. The Christian translationutilizes mistranslation, tense changes, and taking verses out of context. The originalprophecy HAD to be fulfilled within 13 years of the time said prophecy wasgiven because isaiah was talking about a woman pregnant AT THE TIME, (probablythe kings wife) and jewish law dictates that aboy is responsible for his own actions at age 13. Not age 713. In addition, thechild would be named emmanuel meaning god is with us which was a way ofanswering in the affirmative to the king. Important to note that christiansnever even named him this. By the way, this prophecy came to pass aboutthirteen years later when damascus and samaria fell. Exactly as isaiah said.
Also,the septuagint translation has been proven not to be linguistic proof of anykind because the rabbis who made the translation placed in the Talmud TractateMegilla 9ª-9b fifteen key passages in order to always be able to compare theoriginal with possible later corruptions. Turns out they were right to do so asto date 13 of the 15 have been altered by christian translations.

Thoughat this point we do not even need to look at the word almah, (as the prophecyis not even related to a messiah but was a specific prophecy to king Azahsquestion, and is recorded in the jewish bible as having happened exactly howwas prophecied and within the specified time frame—not 700 years later), letsdo so quickly.

Almahis translated as greek parthenos which christians are eager to point as proofof virginity. The problem here is twofold. First, rabbis did the translation,not prophets which could lead to error, and more importantly, if one looks atthe septuagint translation of genesis, the word parthenos is used to refer to aNON virgin. Namely, a young woman (dinah) who had been raped. So definitely nota virgin. And looking outside the bible, in real world examples of the word one can seethat almah is a stage of life, not having to do with virginity at all;

"Almah" was one of a list of sequential"terms, each depicting a fresh stage of life".[5] (spellingsper Gesenius translated to English):
·yeled (יָ֫לֶד) or yaldah (ילדה)- boy/girl (kids).
·"Tinok" ("תינוק) - suckling baby boy. Derives fromthe words "yonek or yanak (יוֹנֵ֔ק) which meanssuckle.
·olal (עוֹלָל) - a toddler, asuckling who also eats food. Translated as "young child" in Lamentations 4:4(KJV).
·gamul (גָּמוּל) - weaned child(gamal).
·taph (טָף) - young child, one whostill clings to mother. Derived from the word for brisk, small, tripping stepsof young children.
·elem (עָ֫לֶם) or almah (עַלְמָה)- firm and strong child. (Between five-seven years of age and thirteen years ofage.)[6]
·na'ar (נַ֫עַר) or na'arah (נַעֲרָה)- "independent or free child" (from a root meaning "to shakeoff"). Aged 13+.[6] Also "handmaid","servant" or just "girl". In modern hebrew it is a commonlyused in the meaning of "teenage boy" and "teenage girl",respectively, and the root is also used to for similar terms such as"youth", ("Noar", נוֹעַר) and teen spirit ("RuachNeurim", רוח נעורים)

And though i know wikipedia has many flaws,lets see what they say;

The masculine equivalent of almah is elem ("עלם"in Arabic ghelam غلام) meaning "youth" or "young man of the ageof puberty".[2] Feminizingthese terms would result in "young woman" or "young woman of theage of puberty". Gesenius defines the word as a "girlof marriageable age". In modern Hebrew almah means ayoung woman or girl, a young or unmarried woman.[3]
The notion of marriageability is typically partof the definition of almah. In the ancient Near East girls had value as potentialwives and bearers of children. Carolyn S. Leeb points out: "A wife, whocame into her husband's household as an outsider, contributed her labor and herfertility. Her task was to build up the bet 'ab by bearingchildren, particularly sons".[4] This samesense of marriageability does not accrue to the masculine elem[citation needed] even thoughthey also have entered puberty, but it does apply to "bachur"[citation needed] or"young warrior", when boys have matured to the point of being able tosupport a new household.

Is abit circumspect that the ONLY people who contiinue to insist that the word canONLY mean virgin are those people whose religion would fall apart without thatdefinition.


sorry for mistypes or anything unclear. had written out much more, being attentive to detail and computer died. Will post the other things the original contained later. it was a bit long winded anyway lol

[Jonathan Thomas]

Re: STOP being Left-handed!!!

James,

No it is not wrong but your comments were never in any way meant in the context you are now proclaiming. Rather, it was just slanderous filthy talk with the intention of inflaming as well as degrading me. Neither of which works because people who use such tactics are quite transparent and easy to dismiss as uneducated perverts who only resort to said insults in order to make them feel better about their own filthy habits. Just like a cheating husband will always be paranoid that his wife is cheating. I respond only out of concern so maybe you won't rot in hell. Get right with your God before it's too late

[Basilissa]

Re: STOP being Left-handed!!!

wall of text copied from three sources

Before Elmer addresses your points, I will provide bibliography you forgot to include.

The main part of your post is copied and pasted from here:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-joel-hoffman/five-mistakes-bible-translation_b_1129620.html

This seems to be your second source for some parts after fonts change:

https://outreachjudaism.org/the-virgin-birth/

(It's the only one that seems to be paraphrased rather than copied and pasted, though - or maybe I missed the specific paragraph you copied from)

And the rest of the post, starting around the word list, comes straight out from Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almah

(You rearranged that text while copying and pasting, but it's still all there).

I know you just forgot to mention that you were going to copy and paste some stuff instead of writing your own take on the issue. That's why I'm including the sources for you. I know you would never want to come out as someone who shamelessly plagiarizes stuff he/she doesn't really know much about.



I love feeling being helpful.

[Joanna Lytton-Vasey]

Re: STOP being Left-handed!!!

Sister Basilissa, thank you for doing that little bit of research - easy as it was - so that we didn't have to. It was so very obviously cobbled together - the font changes, the words run together where there was a line-break on the website, etc. Also, when copying other people's work it is unwise to include their rookie errors and failures of capitalization and so forth.

I have already sent that Dolores woman a message asking her what the consequences of such blatant plagiarism would be for a student at her secular university. She knows nothing about Jesus, but a fair bit about cheating!

[Jonathan Thomas]

Re: STOP being Left-handed!!!

Basilisk,

Wow, what a detective. Did you not see that my original was erased? The point of the post was not author ownership but valid points that I had expanded upon before my comp died. As I said, I will post the rest, but as I am busy and did not want to try rewriting from memory at the time. Do not see the problem and in fact seems much more blatantly obvious that these are truths as many many people have both deliberated and published these thoughts. Elmer only needs what I posted in order to continue our conversation. And it is a bit funny that more often than not your "proofs" are copied from biblical passages that you quote. The point is to debate and spread wisdom lady, not act smart.

[Jonathan Thomas]

Re: STOP being Left-handed!!!

Plagiarism would be turning in work and asking for credit. I am pretty sure we are not in school...

Do I tell you that you are unoriginal and guilty of plagiarism when you quote from the bible? no. Because you never said you came up with it, just like I did not. Try focusing on the material not the source. This just seems like an ineffective sidestep in an effort to not look at uncomfortable truths

[Jonathan Thomas]

Re: STOP being Left-handed!!!

Also had I wanted to plagiarize I would have posted this and passed it off as my own. Not easily googled and verified works that as was pointed out, not even showing the slightest attempt to hide the cut and pastes. Not exactly rocket science to have done so had I wanted.

So just so no one tries sidestepping the material by focusing on authorship, this is not mine either but still begs a response;

[AN ABSURDLY LONG AND BORING WALL OF TEXT PASSED AROUND THE INTERNET ONLY ABOUT A BILLION TIMES AND DEBUNKED EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THOSE TIMES REMOVED BY MODERATOR]

[Jonathan Thomas]

Re: STOP being Left-handed!!!

Mary, you can keep your infractions!

Does not bode well that you are so threatened as to resort to those things instead of using your words. Is your faith so weak? Remember that light can't exist without darkness just as faith can't exist without doubt and God made them all. Everything and everyone serves a purpose--including debate

[Mary Etheldreda]

Re: STOP being Left-handed!!!

instead of using your words.

Oh the irony. Say, why don't you use your own words and share what Jesus has done for you lately.

[Jonathan Thomas]

Re: STOP being Left-handed!!!

mary, same can be said of you. why not use your own words instead of using passages from a book that can and is more often than not considered superstitious mumbo jumbo stolen from religions far older than yours. pretty sure they believed it was true as well before they died. just like every christian for the last 200 years have said the end is near only to find themselves on their deathbed realizing they were wrong.

1. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 1:3- And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verses1:14-And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 1:15-And let them be for lights inthe firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 1:16-And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
Comment:Its common knowledge that the sun provides light, so the bible is incorrect because the light could only have been provided by the sun.In addition, the moon is not a light but merely reflects the sun’s light. Stars, although not visible with the naked eye, shine during the day and not only at night as stated in the bible. The bible is therefore wholly incorrect with respect to the sun, moon and stars. The bible only covers the creation of the sun, earth, moon and stars whilst nothing is mentioned about the other planets, galaxies or the universe. In addition, the bible states that god created the sun, moon and stars (i.e. past tense) when science has proven that the universe is currently growing therefore more planetary bodies are being created.
2. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 1:26-And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 1:27- So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 1:28-And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 5:2-Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their nameAdam, in the day when they were created.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 2:7- And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, andbreathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 2:21- And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
Old Testament, Book of genesis,Verse 2:22-And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
Comment:The bible is contradictory on whether adam and eve was created together or separately otherwise the creation of adam and eve occurs multiple times in book: once in Verse 2:7 where adam is created and Verse 2:21-2:22 where eve is created and Verses 1:26 where both are created simultaneously and Verse 5:2 where they are created again. In verse 5:2 the author forgets that the female is called eve and states that both i.e. male and female are called adam.
3. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 2:16- And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 2:17-But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 5:5-And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.
Comment:Despite eating from the tree of knowledge adam lived till the ripe age of nine hundred and thirty years. The threat of immediate to adam and eve death was therefore without substance. Since god is all knowing, he should have known that adam and eve would consume from the forbidden fruit.
4. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 3:9- And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?
Old Testament, Proverbs, Verse 15:3- The eyes of the LORD are in every place, beholding the evil and the good.
Comment:The flaw lies in god’s request that adam and eve reveal themselves when he is supposed to be an all-knowing god, from whom nothing is hidden.
5. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 3:16- Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
Comment:The purpose of this verse is to explain why women endure pain during childbirth. Medical advancement has eased the burden women ordinarily would have had to bear during childbirth. For all intents and purposes this biblical threat has been made redundant. Oh, and how convenient is it that the ends with the following phrase: “and he shall rule over thee” because that is exactly how society has been structured.
6. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 3:17- And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 3:18- Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 3:19-In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.
Comment:The purpose of the verse to explain what happens to the body once we die i.e. the decomposition of the body. The fatal flaw is that the bible is scientifically incorrect as the body does not turn to dust but rather decomposes.
The second fatal flaw is that fossilised bones have been found proving that the entire body does not decompose. The third fatal flaw is that god only punished adam i.e. the male species to decompose when the reality is that women decompose as well.
7. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 1:24- And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 2:19- And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
Comment:Having just created animals and fowls to fill the earth which does not include the garden of eden, god then creates animals and fowl again in eden. Does this mean that the animals and fowls created in eden is of the same kind as the animals and fowls created in eden or are they different species?
8. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 1:24- And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
Comment:The existence of dinosaurs, which were proven to exist way before homo-sapiens evolved, is not mentioned in the bible
9. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 1:31- And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 6:6- And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 6:7- 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.
Comment:God is supposedly an all-powerful and all-knowing entity who then creates man and beast and is then displeased with his creation. Surely what he creates should be perfect and without fault. Therefore since man and beast is not perfect, they could not have been made by the hands of god.
10. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 2:20- And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.
Comment:According to the bible adam was allowed to name the animals. The bible fails to provide the names of the animals. Also, adam only names the beasts and fowl that god created in the garden of eden.
11. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 2:17- But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 3:5- For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
New Testament, Hebrews, Verse 5:14- But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, [even] those who by reason of use have their senses
exercised to discern both good and evil.
Comment:In the old testament it was not good to want to have discern between good and evil and the new testament it is immature to not want to discern between good and evil. This is evidence that biblical rules changes as cultures change and advance. This is a religious flaw since god is omniscient and any rules originally made by him should have been able to stand the test of time and not be changeable.
12. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 4:16- And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 4:17- And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 4:18- And unto Enoch was born Irad: and Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methusael: and Methusael begat Lamech.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 4:19- And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.
Comment:There is no mention in the bible that god made other people yet Cain, Enoch and Lamech were able to find wives. The bible is arrogantly quiet on this topic i.e. you are expected to accept this omission and the story of creation and not question its validity.
13. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 4:9- And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 4:10-And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.
Old Testament, Proverbs,Verse 15:3- The eyes of the LORD are in every place, beholding the evil and the good.
Comment:God asks cain what he has done to his brother as if he requires confirmation from cain that he killed his brother. Again, god is claimed to be able to see everything, so why does he not know where abel is and asks cain to tell him

[Jonathan Thomas]

Re: STOP being Left-handed!!!

because i do not like censorship!

14. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 6:4- 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.
Old Testament, Book of genesis,Verse 7:21- And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:
Old Testament, Numbers, Verse 13:33- And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.
Comment: According to genesis giants inhabited the earth but were killed in the flood. In the book of numbers reference is again made to giants so the inconsistency is that the giants should have been wiped out with the flood, yet are mentioned in the book of numbers which follows genesis.
15. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 6:7- 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.
Comment:god, who is supposed to be omniscient, displays grief and repentance which are human emotions. Surely such emotion is not what is expected from an enlightened supernatural being. God is portrayed more as a human than a divine entity.
16. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 6:9- These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 12:7- And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto the LORD, who appeared unto him.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 17:1- And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 18:1- And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 33:20- And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.
New Testament, John, Verse 1:18- No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared (him).
New Testament, 1 John, Verse 4:12- No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.
Comment:The verses are contradictory as to whether man can see god or not.
In the old testament god appears before noah and abram, yet in the new testament, 1 John, Verse 4:12 it states that No man hath seen God at any time.The lack of consistency is further evidence that the bible was written by humans who vastly differ on their understanding of god and the way he is to be portrayed.
17. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 7:2- Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 7:15- And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.
Comment:The inconsistency lies in the fact that in verse 7:2, for clean beasts 7 must be brought aboard and the unclean beasts in 2s yet in verse 7:15 it states that all living things entered the ark in 2s and no distinction is made between clean and uncleans beasts.
18. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 7:7- And Noah went in, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons’ wives with him, into the ark, because of the waters of the flood.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 7:13- In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah’s wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark;
Comment:Noah and family enters the ark in verse 7:7 and again in 7:13
19. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 6:19- 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.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 6:21 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.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 7:24-And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.
Comment:There is no way that noah was able to bring along food requirements for his family and the animals to last them for 5 months (roughly 150 days). In any event if he did, there is no way the food could have remained safe to consume for the duration of 150 days. In addition, what kind of food was taken on board to cater for the carnivores?
20. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 8:4- And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.
Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 8:5- And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen.
Comment: Further to the 5 months (150 days) as indicated in verse 7:24, the ark rested on the mountain for another 3 months (7th month to the 10th month).That makes the total period that the occupants remained in the ark 8 months. So the point is again relevant, where and how was the food stored to feed the occupants for 8 months? In addition, how was the food stored to prevent spoilage and remain fit for consumption?
21. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse 7:12- And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.
Old Testament Book of genesis, Verse 7:13, In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah’s wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark;
Old Testament Book of genesis,Verse 7:14- They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort.
Old Testament Book of genesis, Verse 7:15- And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.
Old Testament Book of genesis, Verse 7:16- And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God had commanded him: and the LORD shut him in.
Old Testament Book of genesis, Verse 7:17- And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth.
Comment: The sequence of the verses is totally out. In verse 7:12 it is stated that it rains for forty days and forty nights. Yet the occupants of the ark enters the ark in verse 7:13 and god shuts the ark door in verse 7:16. In verse 7:17 it is stated that it rains for 40 days. So, did it rain before they entered the ark or whilst they were aboard the ark?
22. Old Testament, Book of genesis, Verse7:17- And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth.
Old Testament Book of genesis, Verse 7:24- And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.
Old Testament Book of genesis, Verse 8:3- And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated.
Old Testament Book of genesis, Verse 8:6- And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made:
Comment: The inconsistency lies in what is being stated the different verses: Verse 7:17 it rains for 40 days, Verse 8:6 noah opens the window at the end of forty days yet in verses 7:24 and 8:3, both which precedes verse 8:6, it is stated that the water prevailed for 150 days.