Posts by pomegranate

39

Is the Flood Story True?

by JosephAlward in

those who have not yet relinquished their right to think for themselves should be virtually certain that the story of noah and the ark is a fable.

those who believe the bible's stories are literally true find it almost impossible to address with a straight face the problems presented below.. then the flood came which destroyed every living thing which was not in the ark: "and every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

" (genesis 7:23).

pomegranate

Joseph, I stand corrected. Thank you. The "unclean" number should be three. God corrects me in some of the most interesting ways and with the most unexpected people.

>>>Gen 7:1-4
2 Take with you seven of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate,<<<

Seven pairs here.

>>and two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate<<

TWO pairs here, as Joseph has shown.

So, the corrected numbers should be

8 pairs of birds (1 pair first, 7 pairs second)

3 pairs unclean animals (1 pair first, 2 more pairs second)

8 pairs clean animals (1 pair first, 7 pairs second)

>>Before we go further, please explain why you think seven pairs of clean came second, but only one pair of unclean.<<

Where do we go now?

45

Is the Path to Salvation Clear?

by JosephAlward in

inerrantists believe that every word in the bible is literally true; to believe otherwise, they say, is to remove the foundation upon which one may have a certain understanding of how one may achieve salvation and reach the kingdom of heaven.

that makes perfect sense, on one level.

if one could indeed know that everything in the bible is true, then one would just have to turn to the part where the method of salvation is described, do what the bible says, and live forever.

pomegranate

>>For the third time, now, Pom has refused to explain how "love" can be something that might await the corpse in the grave,<<

Jeez Joseph, here, let me say this:

Love or hate DOESN'T await a corpse after death, that's the whole point, since we know the truth of Christ now. You're the one teaching it does, which the context(again) of the Bible passage isn't in harmony with.

The FULL context is the destiny of death, for the righteous and unrighteous, and the condition of BOTH while dead.

Destiny of death.

Read the CONTEXT Joseph. Not just one piece of a sentence. Afterlife is NOT the topic of context. IT IS DEATH's CONDITION ALONE.

Eccl 9:1
but no man knows whether love or hate awaits him.

But GOD DOES and He answers it PLAINLY:

Eccl 9:6
6 Their love, their hate
and their jealousy have long since vanished;
never again will they have a part
in anything that happens under the sun.

The context is death Joseph. There is no love or hate for a corpse, whether a righteous one or unrighteous one. Either going out, or coming in.

This text isn't teaching salvation as you continue to hammer without contextual backing. It is teaching the condition of the dead.

39

Is the Flood Story True?

by JosephAlward in

those who have not yet relinquished their right to think for themselves should be virtually certain that the story of noah and the ark is a fable.

those who believe the bible's stories are literally true find it almost impossible to address with a straight face the problems presented below.. then the flood came which destroyed every living thing which was not in the ark: "and every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

" (genesis 7:23).

pomegranate

I know where you're making your mistake, you're not taking into consideration the division between the clean and unclean animals.

You are adding the unclean animals into the clean animals.

"You gotta keep 'em seperated"

God always divides clean from unclean. We should too.

39

Is the Flood Story True?

by JosephAlward in

those who have not yet relinquished their right to think for themselves should be virtually certain that the story of noah and the ark is a fable.

those who believe the bible's stories are literally true find it almost impossible to address with a straight face the problems presented below.. then the flood came which destroyed every living thing which was not in the ark: "and every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

" (genesis 7:23).

pomegranate

>>I pointed out to Pom that if he's going to treat the birds in Genesis 7 separate from those in Genesis 6, he should do the same thing with the animals. Thus, by his logic, Noah put one pair of animals on the ark in Genesis 6, then he put seven pairs of clean animals on in Genesis 7, plus another pair of unclean animals. That makes 1+7+1=9 pairs of animals.<<

I see your point. Your intial argument was BIRDS. You want the math with animals too. Regarding birds AND animals, the math is the same:

Gen 6:18-20
19 You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. 20 Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive.

So what the intial counts are:

(1) pair, (Male and Female) All Birds

(1) pair, (Male and Female) All Animals

Gen 7:1-4
2 Take with you seven of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, 3 and also seven of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth.

BIRDS:
(1) pair, (Male and Female) All Birds (taken first)
(7) MORE pairs, (Male and Female) All birds (taken second)
Total: 8 pairs of each bird.

ANIMALS:
(1) pair, (Male and Female) All Animals (taken first)

Some of the animals are considered clean/unclean, as shown in chapter 7 (The number of cleaness or Holyness) . What was taken on next would be added to the above, depending on how the animals were catagorized according to cleaness, which the Bible does not divulge here.

(1) MORE pair, those animals considered "unclean." (second)
Total: That would make 2 pairs of all animals considered unclean.

(7) MORE pairs, those animals considered "clean." (second)
Total: That would make 8 pairs of all animals considered clean.

Summary:

8 pairs of birds (1 pair first, 7 pairs second)
2 pairs unclean animals (1 pair first, 1 more pair second)
8 pairs clean animals (1 pair first, 7 pairs second)

That's what I understand Noah was commanded to do.

Where do you get nine?

45

Is the Path to Salvation Clear?

by JosephAlward in

inerrantists believe that every word in the bible is literally true; to believe otherwise, they say, is to remove the foundation upon which one may have a certain understanding of how one may achieve salvation and reach the kingdom of heaven.

that makes perfect sense, on one level.

if one could indeed know that everything in the bible is true, then one would just have to turn to the part where the method of salvation is described, do what the bible says, and live forever.

pomegranate

>>Pom still has not explained how "love" can be something that might await the corpse in the grave,<<

That was never your question. Your original problem was RR knowing he was saved and you used Eccl. against him. You have just introduced a red herring that has nothing to do with the topic you raised. Folks do that when they're cornered.

>>how it can be something found in death.<<

Well according to your very own words, it has to do with salvation remember?

>>Pom has sidestepped this question in order to provide other evidence that one can, indeed, know if one is saved.<<

I have side stepped nothing. I answered regarding the context, showing that YOUR taught meaning of salvation isn't there IN CONTEXT. Then, I gave you the beneifit of the doubt and let the context mean what YOU are teaching, and showed that because of the ignorance of the Israelite people regarding Christ and salvation as proven by Paul, they would not have understood the mechanics of salvation by way of Christ. Either way, your question has been addressed.

>>I completely agree that the Bible says in some places that one can be saved, and that this teaching could be used by Christians, such as RR, to "know" they've been saved. However, my point is that the Bible presents contradictory information on this matter;<<

No it does not. Again, even letting you read YOUR one sentence out of context, salvation would NOT have been known by the ancient Israelites, so even then your sentence CANNOT mean salvation as YOU teach. All the other points I posted previously would come into play, like the false worship around the Israelites that taught afterlife.

>>this is the principal theme underlying almost all of my posts. The Bible says one thing in one place, but an entirely different thing in another place.<<

That's what you say, but your evidence in light of how I understand the Bible is not convincing to me.

>>The reason there are so many different Christian sects with conflicting beliefs about salvations is that the Bible is not clear on this matter.<<

Naw. I believe it is becasue of another supernatural dude called Satan blinding the minds of the unbelievers.

>>On this basis, the Bible cannot be the word of a god; if it were, it wouldn't be so confusion to so many.<<

Again, it is man that is confused not the book.

>>An all powerful god would know how to show his Bible writers how to write a coherent Bible; since the Bible seems to be contradictory, it couldn't have been written under the guidance of a god.<<

I have seen no contradiction by your evidence thus far. If you call things going beyond the laws of nature a contradiction, well, like I have said before, that is possible for God.

Outside of the defiance of physics, I have seen no contradiction regarding anything you have presented. Just a lack of understanding.

Again, you have your faith Joseph. But it is not in God. You prefer to put your trust in men.

That's OK by me.

39

Is the Flood Story True?

by JosephAlward in

those who have not yet relinquished their right to think for themselves should be virtually certain that the story of noah and the ark is a fable.

those who believe the bible's stories are literally true find it almost impossible to address with a straight face the problems presented below.. then the flood came which destroyed every living thing which was not in the ark: "and every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

" (genesis 7:23).

pomegranate

>>I have contempt for those who accept on faith the beliefs and opinions of others on important matters;<<

You fit that same definition. You put your faith in men, I put mine in God. But I have "contempt" for no man regardless of what they choose to believe. That's where we really differ. What bothers me, is you use the word "contempt" on people. Who the heck are you? You're not a very nice man are you?

con·tempt (noun)

1. The feeling or attitude of regarding someone or something as inferior, base, or worthless; scorn.

2. The state of being despised or dishonored; disgrace.

>>I don't know if I've ever read anything by, or about Friedman, so I would be shaming myself merely to have adopted without thinking anything Friedman may have said. Even if I have read Friedman's work, I certainly wouldn't accept anything he says on his say-so; I would check the facts for myself, and reach my own conclusions based on my own reasoning.<<

You most certainly have read his stuff. You are word for wording it.

By the way, you wanna show everyone here your 1+7+1=9 logic from the Bible verses? I see one pair, then seven pair. Where's the other pair come in? Or is it a phantom pair like your two story theory?

39

Is the Flood Story True?

by JosephAlward in

those who have not yet relinquished their right to think for themselves should be virtually certain that the story of noah and the ark is a fable.

those who believe the bible's stories are literally true find it almost impossible to address with a straight face the problems presented below.. then the flood came which destroyed every living thing which was not in the ark: "and every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

" (genesis 7:23).

pomegranate

>>1. According to the Bible, God did not use any supernatural means in building the Ark.<<

Well, it seems he would have if He communicated the very design of the thing to Noah. I have come to the simple conclusion that everything God does is supernatural. Even dealing with man is supernatural. OK? And yes I get it.

>>Therefore, it is not logical to assume He used any supernatural means to preserve Noah and the animals while on the Ark.<<

God is supernatural. The flood is supernatural.

>>2. The logistics of 8 people tending to thousands of animals is beyond reason.<<

It's called supernatural. Remember?

>>3. The logistics of putting thousands of animals, along with food and water on the Ark is beyond reason.<<

Supernatural. When things go beyond reason, like people being raised from the dead, going 40 days without food and water and everything else that defies nature, would certainly be classified as supernatural. That is God.

>>4. We could not do today, even with our technology, what Noah supposedly did 5,000 years ago.<<

So, you wanna be like God? Maybe you should try creating a heavens and earth first. After all, that was the first thing in the Bible that defies logic from God. How do you create something out of nothing???

>>5. Therefore, the whole account does not stand to logical reason.<<

With your logic, neither does God.

>>6. Therefore, the whole "Noah's Ark thing" is fable; myth; a crock of shit.<<

Yeah, get right down to the sewer words. You have great posting demeanor.

>>7. Therefore, the Bible as a whole cannot be trusted.<<

No, you cannot be trusted.

>>8. Therefore, the God of the Bible cannot be trusted.<<

See my answer above.

>>Any questions? (I hope not. This discussion with you is fruitless.)<<

Why should I ask you questions? You have no answers. Fruitless?? What were you trying to grow here, a new kind of pomegranate?

37

Can Man See God and Live?

by JosephAlward in

the author of the book of john evidently believed that no man has seen god, while the author of exodus tells us that moses had, indeed, seen god.

either john is wrong, or exodus is; either way, the bible is in error on this point.

here is the evidence:.

pomegranate

So what's YOUR real truth Joseph?

45

Is the Path to Salvation Clear?

by JosephAlward in

inerrantists believe that every word in the bible is literally true; to believe otherwise, they say, is to remove the foundation upon which one may have a certain understanding of how one may achieve salvation and reach the kingdom of heaven.

that makes perfect sense, on one level.

if one could indeed know that everything in the bible is true, then one would just have to turn to the part where the method of salvation is described, do what the bible says, and live forever.

pomegranate

>>I've argued that the author is implying that the state of death of a man is no different than that for a dog, but there is a hope for man that after death there may be some kind of "love," which I associate with heaven, or salvation, but there also may be "hate," from a disapproving God, which we may crudely associate with no salvation, or perhaps a type of hell.<<

There is nothing like that in the context at all.

But let's do this Joseph. OK? Let's say this is exactly the case even with the CONTEXT (which it blatantly is not.) But let's say it is. Let's say the context IS talking about the indefinite knowledge of love/hate after death meaning salvation/no salvation (as YOU are teaching....or whatever the heck you're doing.)

Be mindful of this FACT:

Prior to Jesus death and resurrection, unknown salvation would be the case, because the outworking of Christ regarding salvation of mankind would NOT have been known or understood by the Israelites reading Ecclesiastes at that time. They had no understanding how the sacred secret of Christ would work.

Rom 16:25-27
25 Now to him who is able to establish you by my gospel and the proclamation of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past, 26 but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal God, so that all nations might believe and obey him- 27 to the only wise God be glory forever through Jesus Christ! Amen.

1 Cor 2:7,8
7 No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

Eph 3:8-9
the unsearchable riches of Christ, 9 and to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things.

Post Jesus death and resurrection, the proof of ones personal salvation is given to all that God chooses as a token of that hope.

1 John 3:24
And this is how we know that he lives in us: We know it by the Spirit he gave us.

1 John 3:18-20
19 This then is how we know that we belong to the truth, and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence 20 whenever our hearts condemn us. For God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything.

RR knows if he has been chosen.

You're not jealous are you???? [8>]

39

Is the Flood Story True?

by JosephAlward in

those who have not yet relinquished their right to think for themselves should be virtually certain that the story of noah and the ark is a fable.

those who believe the bible's stories are literally true find it almost impossible to address with a straight face the problems presented below.. then the flood came which destroyed every living thing which was not in the ark: "and every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

" (genesis 7:23).

pomegranate

>>The answer is that there are (at least) two different stories of the flood woven into one seemingly continuous story by an editor who alternated passages from two different authors.<<

That's Richard Elliot Friedman's hypothesis. A man made opinion that YOU Sir Joseph have put your faith in.

It is an opinion that you have accepted, not the provable truth because you nor he were there to confirm anything.

You have as much faith as I do!!