Part 25 of Post Your Tough Questions Regarding Christianity

Part 25 is a continuation of Post your tough questions pertaining to God/Jesus/Holy Bible and I will do my best to clarify and make sense of it to those who are unaware...I still have questions and comments I haven't responded to in Part 7 thru 24.
Also I might answer questions that are on other members threads and so this will keep me real busy with the many questions that I will answer from my point of view/perspective keeping in line with Scripture.

I don't want my intentions to come across as converting you or whatever lol... but rather clear up things etc... so ask away.

 

Well Mitt .. tis # 25 now and I have yet to see you clear much up. Well, perhaps I speak to quick.

We were enlightened as to how to how God really did not kill any babies during the great flood because everyone was eating their babies.

Then of course we were informed that when God killed or ordered the killing of babies it was ok because those babies were evil on account of their parents sins.

You never did explain the contradiction between Gods law that children not be punished for the deeds of their parents and the aforementioned baby killing for the deeds of the parents ?

Still waiting for an explanation of that one but while we wait perhaps there is something easier that you might clear up for us.

Paul in Romans 13 tells us:

So God puts folks like Stalin and Hitler into power and if people would be punished by God for rebelling against this authority that God established ?

Wow .. so Stalin and Hitler were God's servants acting for the common good ?

Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Duarte, and every other genocidal maniac who comes into power is doing Gods work and we should submit to thee authorities as a matter of conscience ?

Is Paul crazy or is there something I am missing ?

 

Was Paul an Egyptian and was Jesus a Samaritan? The locals said that they were.

 

Jesus said not to resist the evil man. If the evil man is the ruler then God appointed him so why would anyone resist God's will if he believes in God? After all, shouldn't God's will be done on Earth as it is in heaven?

 

As above so below. I think that is how it goes.

 

Paul wasn't an Egyptian. He could never get the hang of Pyramid selling.

 

Psalm 22 is the voice of David. It is Historical, not Messianic. It is his pain, sorrow and yearning when he was on the run from his enemies. Times when he believed that God had not heeded him in his pleas for help.
He pleaded for help for god to come to his aid when pursued by Saul who tried to kill him, and when Absalom, his son, tried to take the crown. He uses animals to describe his enemies - as he does in other Psalms. This is easier understood if one actually studies the life of David.

Lets take a verse or two.

V1.
King James 'My god, my god, why hast thou forsaken me? (Why art thou so) far from helping me, (and from) the words of my roaring?
Hebrew 'My god, my god, why have you forsaken me?(You are) so far from my salvation, from the words of my loud moaning?'
Matthew 27 About the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying 'Eloi, Eloi, Lama Sabachthani? that is to say My god, my god, why hast thou forsaken me?'
Only it doesn't. There is no word Sabachthani in Hebrew. The Hebrew word translated would give us the text 'My god, My god why hast thou slaughtered/killed me.'

V16. KJV 'For dogs have compassed me; the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and feet.
Hebrew translation 'For dogs have surrounded me; a band of evildoers encompassed me: like a lion (they are at) my hands and my feet'.
KJV translates the Hebrew word 'Pierced', yet in every other use of the same word they use 'like a lion'
There are several other words used in the Bible for 'pierced', but this is not one of them.
This is confirmed by the Dead Sea Scrolls Book of Isaiah.

David finishes his reminiscenses with a song of praise for what god has brought him through,

I could go on but it's pointless I suppose. Most of us accept the mistranslations and errors in the Bible.

As I've said, if you do a real study of David's life as described in the Tanakh, it all fits in.

And all this from an Agnostic, non-Jew. How could I!!!!!!!!!!

 

It is true that most scientists accept an old age earth in the billions of years and this is taught in the majority of our academic institutions.
They derive this from radiometric dating and geologic timescale. Scientists who advocate for a much younger earth insist that radiometric dating is flawed because it is founded upon a series of faulty assumptions, while the geologic timescale is flawed because it employs circular reasoning.

They also point to the debunking of old-earth myths, like the popular misconception that it takes long periods of time for stratification, fossilization and the formation of diamonds, coal, oil, stalactites, stalagmites, etc, to occur. Young-earth scientists insist that over time more scientists will begin to accept a young earth paradigm as they closely reexamine the evidence.

But the fact remains the age of the earth cannot be proven. Whether the earth is young or old, both viewpoints and everything in between rest on faith and assumptions.

As a practicing Christian there is always good reason to trust in the Word of God over the words of atheistic scientists with an evolutionary agenda.

Don't get me wrong I like science, I mean I need it for my PC to turn on and work, I need it to get to my destination when flying in an airplane. I need it so after receiving a flu shot I won't get sick with the flu. I need it for many other reasons besides the ones I mentioned.

But when scientists tell me using their flawed assumptions that the earth is billions of years old that's when I become skeptical of science.

 

Maybe, but maybe as long ago as 7,000 yrs, the point is we don't know definitely when it occurred. Scholars have differing opinions, kinda like scientists, they have differing opinions on a lot of stuff, like the age of the universe, when did the dinosaurs go extinct, etc.

Exactly! We wouldn't know how high Mt. Everest was. Why do you know how high Mt. Everest was 5-6 thousand years ago? If you do would you like to share your knowledge with us of what it was? Give us your best guess...lol

 

First off, do you want there to be a God? If not, then is there anything anyone can say to you? What good would giving you just one evidence be? You're only going to reject it.

I'm going to assume you don't want there to be a God, I mean who searches for God but just asks for one evidence of His existence?

Obviously you're not sincerely interested in the existence of Almighty God the Creator of the universe and all living beings.

 

Yes I do know, just that there is no conclusive evidence that dinosaurs existed millions of years before humans.

Is there or isn't there dinosaurs in the Bible? That's an ongoing debate within the Christian community. There are those who believe in an older age for the earth and so they tend to agree that the Bible does not mention dinosaurs because according to their paradigm, dinosaurs went extinct millions of years before man ever came on the scene.

And there are those who believe in a younger age for the earth and so they tend to agree that the Bible does mention dinosaurs, though the Bible never actually uses the word "dinosaur."

Instead the Hebrew word tanniyn is used, which is translated a few different ways in our English Bibles. Sometimes it's "serpent" and sometimes it's "sea monster" but it is most commonly translated "dragon."

The tanniyn appear to have been a giant reptile and these creatures are mentioned nearly thirty times in the Old Testament. They were found both on land and in the water.

Scholars believe the writers may have been describing dinosaurs. So depending on how you interpret the available evidences and how you view the world around you, there are dinosaurs in the Bible or there are no dinosaurs in the Bible.

There is no doubt that people drew and carved dinosaur images in ancient times. But does this mean that the ancients actually saw dinosaurs? How do we know that they did not just see the bones in the ground and draw them from the fossils like artists do today?

First, unlike dinosaur drawings made today, the dinosaur carvings, paintings, and figurines of ancient times are found in a setting of men living with dinosaur-like, reptilian creatures often called dragons. History records how people all over the world told stories of living with “dragons” (or dinosaurs). They did not tell stories of digging up dinosaur bones and reassembling them as scientists do today.

Second, we know according to the Bible that only a few thousand years ago, man lived with one animal that had bones “like beams of bronze,” “ribs like bars of iron” (Job 40:18 ), and that moved its tail “like a cedar” (40:17). Another real dinosaur/dragon-like animal on Earth in Job’s day could even breathe fire and smoke (41:18-21). Also, if God made “the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them” during the six days of Creation, then man obviously lived with dinosaurs, as well as every other animal that has since become extinct. So, ancient dinosaur artwork based upon living dinosaurs agrees with both history and the Bible.

Third, locating, excavating, assembling, and illustrating dinosaur fossils is an extremely complex, time-consuming process. We know of no evidence of the ancient people around the world excavating dinosaur fossils, reconstructing their skeletons, and then drawing them accurately, as scientists carefully attempt to do in modern times.

Finally, unlike scientists and illustrators today, who often recreate the skeletons of dinosaurs based on the fossil record, the ancients depicted the actual bodies of these creatures. If the ancients’ knowledge of dinosaurs simply came from the fossil record, we would expect that they, at least sometimes, would have drawn dinosaur skeletons. Instead, we find example after example of dinosaurs as they would be seen in real life—surrounded by humans and real, living animals such as monkeys, parrots, water buffalo, elephants, and goats. Isn’t this exactly what we should expect to find if the ancients really lived with dinosaurs?

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apPubPage.aspx?pub=2&issue=1100&article=2064

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth

You are sceptical of everything with which you don't agree.

The book of Job is merely a theological argument. This is one argument that has gone on for millenia and will go on until man realises that all men suffer. Some more than others. It is the way of nature.

 

radiocarbon dating. *sigh* please stop quoting me.

 

All the accusation against Jesus were from the Pharisees not from the Romans.

That gospel proof that it was the Pharisees and their followers that are accusing Jesus for all sorts of stuff not the Romans.
This is twisting; http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=376597&p=1064383973#post1064383973
Post # 711

Again you are twisting the facts it wasn't the Romans who are accusing Jesus of anything it was the Pharisees and I don't understand why you keep on ignoring this very clear fact?

 

Behemoth and Leviathan were the Nile Hippo and the Nile Crocodile..

 

Giftdone isn't twisting anything. It's simply the case that you don't understand English sufficiently to know what Giftdone is saying. Giftdone isn't saying the the Romans were the accusers. The Pharisees were. But it involved Roman law as well as Jewish religious laws. That's it, simply.
I think any explanation by anyone, even Giftdone, would go over your head.

 

Put down the keyboard. Back away slowly and try not to hurt yourself. Blatant denial on your part.

 

Are you OK? You didn't hurt yourself?
Everest hasn't changed height by more than maybe a few meters in the last 7000 yrs.
Or maybe you can explain how the mountains grew by perhaps miles? No. Didn't think so.
Oh, there are civilizations all over the glove dating back longer than 7000 yrs ago and even some as old as 12-16,000 yrs. Civilizations, not just a body or 2.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Creator_gods
You're right. If one is to look for a creator god, there are hundreds to choose from.

 

How did the dinosaurs become extinct, but man and many others not? Oh, they were to big to get on the ark?

 

Whether I want it to exist has no bearing on whether it does.

 

Look WR. This is just so absurd it is getting painful.

The Romans put Jesus on trial on the basis of the Pharisees accusations. When you accuse someone of Murder, the prosecution then asks questions of the defendant in relation to that accusation.

The questions Jesus was asked by the Romans were then in relation to the charges being brought against him by the Pharisees.

One of those Charges was Jesus's claim that he was the "Messiah".

 

Mitt !! The idea that the Earth is only 6000 years old is patently false. I will not get into "millions of years" because you would not understand anyway but I can explain to you "Conclusively" why the Earth is much older than 6000 years.

1) Tree rings - dendrochronology. We can date things thousands of years back through tree ring analysis.

In many areas of the earth we can date things back man thousands of years. The oldest is 11,000 years. Sure you have some ring overlap so there is some error but this error is small (for arguments sake say a few hundred years). So when we say 11,000 years it may be 10,800 or 11,200.

What it is not is 5000 years old. We can date various events such as volcano eruptions through trees. The same eruption can be correlated through other trees.

We then look at a layer in the earth. We can tell which layer was from the volcano from its chemical fingerprint. We then know "hey .. this layer is from the year 2000"

Ice layers are the same idea as tree rings. We have ice cores that go back hundreds of thousands of years.

When we pull one of these cores out we find layers with the same fingerprint of known volcano eruptions. We then know "hey this layer is from 2000 years ago"

What is interesting is that we have historical accounts of the volcano eruption "2000 years ago" The tree rings also stated "Same date" !!! Gas analysis in the ice core "Same date" "Radioactive dating" Same date. Great ... good stuff.

Then we count the layers of the ice core. Guess at the number of layers ? 2000 Go figure.

We then look at the length of the ice core (1 kilometer deep) wow ! We look at the depth of our sample that gave the 2000 years ago dating and find that it is 10 meters deep.

First thing the analyst thinks ... doing some quick math 1000 meters in a kilometer .. depth at 10 meters. 100 times 2000 is 200,000 years.

This is a rough estimate of course because the rings have not yet been counted but you get the point.

Perhaps when they count the rings it is going to be 198,000 or 210,000 but it is not going to be 6000 or anywhere close to that age.

The evidence is "Conclusive".

We can take certain events like a volcano eruption that happened approximately 150,000 years ago.

We then look at the coral reefs. These reefs are layered in the same way as ice cores. What is really cool is they can tell what the temperature of the ocean was 100,000 years ago from analysis of these layers.

What they also can tell you is when that Volcano erupted 150,000 years ago. When you compare the coral dating to the ice core dating it is the same.

So there is conclusive evidence (and by no means have I presented it all) that the earth is at least hundreds of thousands of years old. Conclusive beyond any shadow of a doubt.

What there I no evidence for is the silly idea that the earth is only 6000 years old. Zero, Zilch, Nada.

 

I am surprise that or maybe not? That you would claim that Giftedone is not twisting the Bible even though it is clearly posted I guess that is your meaning of good English?
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=376597&p=1064383973#post1064383973
Jesus was not found guilty because he said "No" when asked such question.
Pilate - "Are you the Messiah" Jesus "No" Pilate: "Are you the Son of God" Jesus "No"

So far his posting is not in agreeable with what you say it is.
I think it is over your head As the saying goes "you can't handle the truth"

 

I agree with you and I have been saying it from the very beginning that the Pharisees were the ones who brought all the charges against Jesus from being the Son of God, to being King, to steering up the crowd etc. etc. But what we differ is that you insist that Jesus answered Pilate everything positive in direct contradiction to facts of Biblical history. And the irony is that trevorw who I believe has extensive materials regarding the history of this agrees with your inaccurate or twisting of history.

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=376597&p=1064383973#post1064383973
by Giftedone from post 711:
Jesus was not found guilty because he said "No" when asked such question.
Pilate - "Are you the Messiah" Jesus "No" Pilate: "Are you the Son of God" Jesus "No"
This is the only way Jesus would have been found not guilty.