The Bible contradiction thread

[Faun]

Circumcision of the heart is a metaphor, not a command.

It is both just like the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate is a metaphor and a command.

The issue that you can't seem to grasp is that it is impossible to conform to the literal meaning of those commands without violating the deeper implications of the exact same commands whether its circumcision or kashrut or the bizarre practice of wearing phylacteries.

If you would like a clear and irrefutable explanation of what I mean I would be happy to provide one.

Dumbass, it was not a commandment. I showed you all 623 commandments and your idiocy cannot be found among them.

 

[hobelim]

Circumcision of the heart is a metaphor, not a command.

It is both just like the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate is a metaphor and a command.

The issue that you can't seem to grasp is that it is impossible to conform to the literal meaning of those commands without violating the deeper implications of the exact same commands whether its circumcision or kashrut or the bizarre practice of wearing phylacteries.

If you would like a clear and irrefutable explanation of what I mean I would be happy to provide one.

Dumbass, it was not a commandment. I showed you all 623 commandments and your idiocy cannot be found among them.

lol... Thats a strange way of asking for help.

Anyway, here it is.

If you conform to the literal meaning of the words used in the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate you violate the deeper implications of the exact same words of that command because the teaching that a person can become holy as God is holy by eating or abstaining from certain foods is the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The words of the law are figurative, the subjects hidden.

This is my flesh.

Unless you eat my flesh and apply your mind to understand and conform to the deeper implications of the law you cannot have the life promised for complying with the law in you.

 

[Faun]

Circumcision of the heart is a metaphor, not a command.

It is both just like the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate is a metaphor and a command.

The issue that you can't seem to grasp is that it is impossible to conform to the literal meaning of those commands without violating the deeper implications of the exact same commands whether its circumcision or kashrut or the bizarre practice of wearing phylacteries.

If you would like a clear and irrefutable explanation of what I mean I would be happy to provide one.

Dumbass, it was not a commandment. I showed you all 623 commandments and your idiocy cannot be found among them.

lol... Thats a strange way of asking for help.

Anyway, here it is.

If you conform to the literal meaning of the words used in the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate you violate the deeper implications of the exact same words of that command because the teaching that a person can become holy as God is holy by eating or abstaining from certain foods is the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The words of the law are figurative, the subjects hidden.

This is my flesh.

Unless you eat my flesh and apply your mind to understand and conform to the deeper implications of the law you cannot have the life promised for complying with the law in you.

LOLOL

Babbling nonsense doesn’t help you. I showed you the actual commandments. And compared to what you delude yourself with, the actual commandments prove you’re insane.

 

[hobelim]

Circumcision of the heart is a metaphor, not a command.

It is both just like the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate is a metaphor and a command.

The issue that you can't seem to grasp is that it is impossible to conform to the literal meaning of those commands without violating the deeper implications of the exact same commands whether its circumcision or kashrut or the bizarre practice of wearing phylacteries.

If you would like a clear and irrefutable explanation of what I mean I would be happy to provide one.

Dumbass, it was not a commandment. I showed you all 623 commandments and your idiocy cannot be found among them.

lol... Thats a strange way of asking for help.

Anyway, here it is.

If you conform to the literal meaning of the words used in the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate you violate the deeper implications of the exact same words of that command because the teaching that a person can become holy as God is holy by eating or abstaining from certain foods is the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The words of the law are figurative, the subjects hidden.

This is my flesh.

Unless you eat my flesh and apply your mind to understand and conform to the deeper implications of the law you cannot have the life promised for complying with the law in you.

LOLOL

Babbling nonsense doesn’t help you. I showed you the actual commandments. And compared to what you delude yourself with, the actual commandments prove you’re insane.

Pssst.. I'm not the guy mutilating infant penises, strapping a box on my head, or thinking that a person can become holy as God is Holy by avoiding pork chops..

You observe a literal interpretation and application of the law and now knowingly and deliberately set aside and violate its deeper implications. I see that you have your reward already.

congratulations!

 

[Faun]

Circumcision of the heart is a metaphor, not a command.

It is both just like the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate is a metaphor and a command.

The issue that you can't seem to grasp is that it is impossible to conform to the literal meaning of those commands without violating the deeper implications of the exact same commands whether its circumcision or kashrut or the bizarre practice of wearing phylacteries.

If you would like a clear and irrefutable explanation of what I mean I would be happy to provide one.

Dumbass, it was not a commandment. I showed you all 623 commandments and your idiocy cannot be found among them.

lol... Thats a strange way of asking for help.

Anyway, here it is.

If you conform to the literal meaning of the words used in the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate you violate the deeper implications of the exact same words of that command because the teaching that a person can become holy as God is holy by eating or abstaining from certain foods is the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The words of the law are figurative, the subjects hidden.

This is my flesh.

Unless you eat my flesh and apply your mind to understand and conform to the deeper implications of the law you cannot have the life promised for complying with the law in you.

LOLOL

Babbling nonsense doesn’t help you. I showed you the actual commandments. And compared to what you delude yourself with, the actual commandments prove you’re insane.

Pssst.. I'm not the guy mutilating infant penises, strapping a box on my head, or thinking that a person can become holy as God is Holy by avoiding pork chops..

You observe a literal interpretation and application of the law. I see that you have your reward already.

congratulations!

Aww, you poor thing. You want so badly to be one of the chosen. You invent alternatives.

As if there are any.

 

[hobelim]

It is both just like the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate is a metaphor and a command.

The issue that you can't seem to grasp is that it is impossible to conform to the literal meaning of those commands without violating the deeper implications of the exact same commands whether its circumcision or kashrut or the bizarre practice of wearing phylacteries.

If you would like a clear and irrefutable explanation of what I mean I would be happy to provide one.

Dumbass, it was not a commandment. I showed you all 623 commandments and your idiocy cannot be found among them.

lol... Thats a strange way of asking for help.

Anyway, here it is.

If you conform to the literal meaning of the words used in the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate you violate the deeper implications of the exact same words of that command because the teaching that a person can become holy as God is holy by eating or abstaining from certain foods is the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The words of the law are figurative, the subjects hidden.

This is my flesh.

Unless you eat my flesh and apply your mind to understand and conform to the deeper implications of the law you cannot have the life promised for complying with the law in you.

LOLOL

Babbling nonsense doesn’t help you. I showed you the actual commandments. And compared to what you delude yourself with, the actual commandments prove you’re insane.

Pssst.. I'm not the guy mutilating infant penises, strapping a box on my head, or thinking that a person can become holy as God is Holy by avoiding pork chops..

You observe a literal interpretation and application of the law. I see that you have your reward already.

congratulations!

Aww, you poor thing. You want so badly to be one of the chosen. You invent alternatives.

As if there are any.

lol... now thats truly delusional. When I get an urge to obsess over what to eat and what to wear and when to strap a box on my head I'll let you know...

 

[G.T.]

Circumcision of the heart is a metaphor, not a command.

It is both just like the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate is a metaphor and a command.

The issue that you can't seem to grasp is that it is impossible to conform to the literal meaning of those commands without violating the deeper implications of the exact same commands whether its circumcision or kashrut or the bizarre practice of wearing phylacteries.

If you would like a clear and irrefutable explanation of what I mean I would be happy to provide one.

Dumbass, it was not a commandment. I showed you all 623 commandments and your idiocy cannot be found among them.

lol... Thats a strange way of asking for help.

Anyway, here it is.

If you conform to the literal meaning of the words used in the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate you violate the deeper implications of the exact same words of that command because the teaching that a person can become holy as God is holy by eating or abstaining from certain foods is the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The words of the law are figurative, the subjects hidden.

This is my flesh.

Unless you eat my flesh and apply your mind to understand and conform to the deeper implications of the law you cannot have the life promised for complying with the law in you.

LOLOL

Babbling nonsense doesn’t help you. I showed you the actual commandments. And compared to what you delude yourself with, the actual commandments prove you’re insane.

Pssst.. I'm not the guy mutilating infant penises, strapping a box on my head, or thinking that a person can become holy as God is Holy by avoiding pork chops..

You observe a literal interpretation and application of the law and now knowingly and deliberately set aside and violate its deeper implications. I see that you have your reward already.

congratulations!

You mock different interpretations of the bible because they're ridiculous yet you still believe in the magical sky fairy, so - - your soap box isn't very tall

 

[G.T.]

It is both just like the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate is a metaphor and a command.

The issue that you can't seem to grasp is that it is impossible to conform to the literal meaning of those commands without violating the deeper implications of the exact same commands whether its circumcision or kashrut or the bizarre practice of wearing phylacteries.

If you would like a clear and irrefutable explanation of what I mean I would be happy to provide one.

Dumbass, it was not a commandment. I showed you all 623 commandments and your idiocy cannot be found among them.

lol... Thats a strange way of asking for help.

Anyway, here it is.

If you conform to the literal meaning of the words used in the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate you violate the deeper implications of the exact same words of that command because the teaching that a person can become holy as God is holy by eating or abstaining from certain foods is the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The words of the law are figurative, the subjects hidden.

This is my flesh.

Unless you eat my flesh and apply your mind to understand and conform to the deeper implications of the law you cannot have the life promised for complying with the law in you.

LOLOL

Babbling nonsense doesn’t help you. I showed you the actual commandments. And compared to what you delude yourself with, the actual commandments prove you’re insane.

Pssst.. I'm not the guy mutilating infant penises, strapping a box on my head, or thinking that a person can become holy as God is Holy by avoiding pork chops..

You observe a literal interpretation and application of the law. I see that you have your reward already.

congratulations!

Aww, you poor thing. You want so badly to be one of the chosen. You invent alternatives.

As if there are any.

It's just another attempt at defending the indefensible...his schtick is that the claims are not magical! They're a road map to the wisdom of yeshua! Because magicalness would be ridiculous! Well, except the whole magicalness of believing there's a yeshua, thingy.

 

[hobelim]

It is both just like the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate is a metaphor and a command.

The issue that you can't seem to grasp is that it is impossible to conform to the literal meaning of those commands without violating the deeper implications of the exact same commands whether its circumcision or kashrut or the bizarre practice of wearing phylacteries.

If you would like a clear and irrefutable explanation of what I mean I would be happy to provide one.

Dumbass, it was not a commandment. I showed you all 623 commandments and your idiocy cannot be found among them.

lol... Thats a strange way of asking for help.

Anyway, here it is.

If you conform to the literal meaning of the words used in the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate you violate the deeper implications of the exact same words of that command because the teaching that a person can become holy as God is holy by eating or abstaining from certain foods is the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The words of the law are figurative, the subjects hidden.

This is my flesh.

Unless you eat my flesh and apply your mind to understand and conform to the deeper implications of the law you cannot have the life promised for complying with the law in you.

LOLOL

Babbling nonsense doesn’t help you. I showed you the actual commandments. And compared to what you delude yourself with, the actual commandments prove you’re insane.

Pssst.. I'm not the guy mutilating infant penises, strapping a box on my head, or thinking that a person can become holy as God is Holy by avoiding pork chops..

You observe a literal interpretation and application of the law and now knowingly and deliberately set aside and violate its deeper implications. I see that you have your reward already.

congratulations!

You mock different interpretations of the bible because they're ridiculous yet you still believe in the magical sky fairy, so - - your soap box isn't very tall

Whatever I believe or don't believe and whether God exists or not he is an actual character in a book that anyone can read.

That character instructs people through law to avoid the teaching of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The subject of the refrain is either food or teaching, diet or learning.

It can't be both. The literal instruction violates the deeper implications of that same instruction.

 

[G.T.]

Dumbass, it was not a commandment. I showed you all 623 commandments and your idiocy cannot be found among them.

lol... Thats a strange way of asking for help.

Anyway, here it is.

If you conform to the literal meaning of the words used in the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate you violate the deeper implications of the exact same words of that command because the teaching that a person can become holy as God is holy by eating or abstaining from certain foods is the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The words of the law are figurative, the subjects hidden.

This is my flesh.

Unless you eat my flesh and apply your mind to understand and conform to the deeper implications of the law you cannot have the life promised for complying with the law in you.

LOLOL

Babbling nonsense doesn’t help you. I showed you the actual commandments. And compared to what you delude yourself with, the actual commandments prove you’re insane.

Pssst.. I'm not the guy mutilating infant penises, strapping a box on my head, or thinking that a person can become holy as God is Holy by avoiding pork chops..

You observe a literal interpretation and application of the law and now knowingly and deliberately set aside and violate its deeper implications. I see that you have your reward already.

congratulations!

You mock different interpretations of the bible because they're ridiculous yet you still believe in the magical sky fairy, so - - your soap box isn't very tall

Whatever I believe or don't believe and whether God exists or not he is an actual character in a book that anyone can read.

That character instructs people through law to avoid the teaching of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The subject of the refrain is either food or teaching, diet or learning.

It can't be both. The literal instruction violates the deeper implications of that same instruction.

Decoder ring fallacy.

You appeal to magic just like the christ cracker eaters, yet you mock them. You'll burn in fake-hell as a hypocrite, same as the rest that pretend they have the knowledge of origins.

 

[hobelim]

lol... Thats a strange way of asking for help.

Anyway, here it is.

If you conform to the literal meaning of the words used in the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate you violate the deeper implications of the exact same words of that command because the teaching that a person can become holy as God is holy by eating or abstaining from certain foods is the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The words of the law are figurative, the subjects hidden.

This is my flesh.

Unless you eat my flesh and apply your mind to understand and conform to the deeper implications of the law you cannot have the life promised for complying with the law in you.

LOLOL

Babbling nonsense doesn’t help you. I showed you the actual commandments. And compared to what you delude yourself with, the actual commandments prove you’re insane.

Pssst.. I'm not the guy mutilating infant penises, strapping a box on my head, or thinking that a person can become holy as God is Holy by avoiding pork chops..

You observe a literal interpretation and application of the law and now knowingly and deliberately set aside and violate its deeper implications. I see that you have your reward already.

congratulations!

You mock different interpretations of the bible because they're ridiculous yet you still believe in the magical sky fairy, so - - your soap box isn't very tall

Whatever I believe or don't believe and whether God exists or not he is an actual character in a book that anyone can read.

That character instructs people through law to avoid the teaching of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The subject of the refrain is either food or teaching, diet or learning.

It can't be both. The literal instruction violates the deeper implications of that same instruction.

Decoder ring fallacy.

You appeal to magic just like the christ cracker eaters, yet you mock them. You'll burn in fake-hell as a hypocrite, same as the rest that pretend they have the knowledge of origins.

Decoder ring fallacy? nonsense.

It doesn't take a decoder ring or even very much intelligence to realize that when Jesus said, "eat my flesh" to observant Jews he was teaching that kosher law was not literal, the subject, teaching, was hidden and not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used..

The entire bible from the very first book to the last speaks of hidden teaching.

If you don't look for it you will find nothing.

 

[G.T.]

LOLOL

Babbling nonsense doesn’t help you. I showed you the actual commandments. And compared to what you delude yourself with, the actual commandments prove you’re insane.

Pssst.. I'm not the guy mutilating infant penises, strapping a box on my head, or thinking that a person can become holy as God is Holy by avoiding pork chops..

You observe a literal interpretation and application of the law and now knowingly and deliberately set aside and violate its deeper implications. I see that you have your reward already.

congratulations!

You mock different interpretations of the bible because they're ridiculous yet you still believe in the magical sky fairy, so - - your soap box isn't very tall

Whatever I believe or don't believe and whether God exists or not he is an actual character in a book that anyone can read.

That character instructs people through law to avoid the teaching of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The subject of the refrain is either food or teaching, diet or learning.

It can't be both. The literal instruction violates the deeper implications of that same instruction.

Decoder ring fallacy.

You appeal to magic just like the christ cracker eaters, yet you mock them. You'll burn in fake-hell as a hypocrite, same as the rest that pretend they have the knowledge of origins.

Decoder ring fallacy? nonsense.

It doesn't take a decoder ring or even very much intelligence to realize that when Jesus said, "eat my flesh" to observant Jews he was teaching that kosher law was not literal, the subject, teaching, was hidden, and not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used..

The entire bible from the very first book to the last speaks of hidden teaching.

If you don't look for it you will find nothing.

It's not very profound to write a book full of contradictions with magical claims as to how the world was created, who to worship and how, how to treat your slaves and what to do with your daughter if she was raped...

and then add in a bunch of absurd contradictions and pretend they're a map to a "hidden teaching" of something that is an obvious bi-product of human to human interaction that most folks already know..

decoder ring fallacy


wash your hands, you're as completely ridiculous as any with your absurd belief in yeshua the invisible sky fairy, but actually a touch worse

 

[hobelim]

Pssst.. I'm not the guy mutilating infant penises, strapping a box on my head, or thinking that a person can become holy as God is Holy by avoiding pork chops..

You observe a literal interpretation and application of the law and now knowingly and deliberately set aside and violate its deeper implications. I see that you have your reward already.

congratulations!

You mock different interpretations of the bible because they're ridiculous yet you still believe in the magical sky fairy, so - - your soap box isn't very tall

Whatever I believe or don't believe and whether God exists or not he is an actual character in a book that anyone can read.

That character instructs people through law to avoid the teaching of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The subject of the refrain is either food or teaching, diet or learning.

It can't be both. The literal instruction violates the deeper implications of that same instruction.

Decoder ring fallacy.

You appeal to magic just like the christ cracker eaters, yet you mock them. You'll burn in fake-hell as a hypocrite, same as the rest that pretend they have the knowledge of origins.

Decoder ring fallacy? nonsense.

It doesn't take a decoder ring or even very much intelligence to realize that when Jesus said, "eat my flesh" to observant Jews he was teaching that kosher law was not literal, the subject, teaching, was hidden, and not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used..

The entire bible from the very first book to the last speaks of hidden teaching.

If you don't look for it you will find nothing.

It's not very profound to write a book full of contradictions with magical claims as to how the world was created, who to worship and how, how to treat your slaves and what to do with your daughter if she was raped...

and then add in a bunch of absurd contradictions and pretend they're a map to a "hidden teaching" of something that is an obvious bi-product of human to human interaction that most folks already know..

decoder ring fallacy


wash your hands, you're as completely ridiculous as any with your absurd belief in yeshua the invisible sky fairy, but actually a touch worse

Yeah, I am as bad as they come, a genuine psycho. But however brilliant you imagine yourself to be you might want to include in your speculations that during the times when scripture was written there was no such thing as freedom of expression and people were thrown in dungeons, enslaved, maimed or killed for trivial reasons on a daily basis.


"I will give you hidden treasures from dark vaults hoarded in secret places"

"Now I show you new things, hidden things, that you did not know before."

"The kingdom of heaven is like hidden treasure lying buried in a field. The man who found it, buried it again."

Time was when many were aghast at you, my people, and so now many nations recoil at sight of him. For they see what they had never been told and things unheard before fill their thoughts."

 

[G.T.]

You mock different interpretations of the bible because they're ridiculous yet you still believe in the magical sky fairy, so - - your soap box isn't very tall

Whatever I believe or don't believe and whether God exists or not he is an actual character in a book that anyone can read.

That character instructs people through law to avoid the teaching of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The subject of the refrain is either food or teaching, diet or learning.

It can't be both. The literal instruction violates the deeper implications of that same instruction.

Decoder ring fallacy.

You appeal to magic just like the christ cracker eaters, yet you mock them. You'll burn in fake-hell as a hypocrite, same as the rest that pretend they have the knowledge of origins.

Decoder ring fallacy? nonsense.

It doesn't take a decoder ring or even very much intelligence to realize that when Jesus said, "eat my flesh" to observant Jews he was teaching that kosher law was not literal, the subject, teaching, was hidden, and not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used..

The entire bible from the very first book to the last speaks of hidden teaching.

If you don't look for it you will find nothing.

It's not very profound to write a book full of contradictions with magical claims as to how the world was created, who to worship and how, how to treat your slaves and what to do with your daughter if she was raped...

and then add in a bunch of absurd contradictions and pretend they're a map to a "hidden teaching" of something that is an obvious bi-product of human to human interaction that most folks already know..

decoder ring fallacy


wash your hands, you're as completely ridiculous as any with your absurd belief in yeshua the invisible sky fairy, but actually a touch worse

Yeah, I am as bad as they come, a genuine psycho.


"I will give you hidden treasures from dark vaults hoarded in secret places"

"Now I show you new things, hidden things, that you did not know before."

"The kingdom of heaven is like treasure lying buried in a field. The man who found it, buried it again."

Time was when many were aghast at you, my people, and so now many nations recoil at sight of him. For they see what they had never been told and things unheard before fill their thoughts."

Yes. A genuine psycho. They used fancy language to dupe fools like you into believing your eureka moments actually mean something. They dont.

Your propaganda writers have led you by the nose, borrowed some ethics learned from secular society at the time, wove in some colorful alliterations and fooled you and others into believing in a deity, a heaven, a hell and other retarded magical shit because you, like them, are a ripe and gullible lemming so easy to manipulate by words.

 

[hobelim]

Whatever I believe or don't believe and whether God exists or not he is an actual character in a book that anyone can read.

That character instructs people through law to avoid the teaching of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

The subject of the refrain is either food or teaching, diet or learning.

It can't be both. The literal instruction violates the deeper implications of that same instruction.

Decoder ring fallacy.

You appeal to magic just like the christ cracker eaters, yet you mock them. You'll burn in fake-hell as a hypocrite, same as the rest that pretend they have the knowledge of origins.

Decoder ring fallacy? nonsense.

It doesn't take a decoder ring or even very much intelligence to realize that when Jesus said, "eat my flesh" to observant Jews he was teaching that kosher law was not literal, the subject, teaching, was hidden, and not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used..

The entire bible from the very first book to the last speaks of hidden teaching.

If you don't look for it you will find nothing.

It's not very profound to write a book full of contradictions with magical claims as to how the world was created, who to worship and how, how to treat your slaves and what to do with your daughter if she was raped...

and then add in a bunch of absurd contradictions and pretend they're a map to a "hidden teaching" of something that is an obvious bi-product of human to human interaction that most folks already know..

decoder ring fallacy


wash your hands, you're as completely ridiculous as any with your absurd belief in yeshua the invisible sky fairy, but actually a touch worse

Yeah, I am as bad as they come, a genuine psycho.


"I will give you hidden treasures from dark vaults hoarded in secret places"

"Now I show you new things, hidden things, that you did not know before."

"The kingdom of heaven is like treasure lying buried in a field. The man who found it, buried it again."

Time was when many were aghast at you, my people, and so now many nations recoil at sight of him. For they see what they had never been told and things unheard before fill their thoughts."

Yes. A genuine psycho. They used fancy language to dupe fools like you into believing your eureka moments actually mean something. They dont.

Your propaganda writers have led you by the nose, borrowed some ethics learned from secular society at the time, wove in some colorful alliterations and fooled you and others into believing in a deity, a heaven, a hell and other retarded magical shit because you, like them, are a ripe and gullible lemming so easy to manipulate by words.

Oh really? What religion or church teaches anything at all like what I have just shown you?

I was not manipulated or led by the nose to believe in anything by anybody.

It has always been obvious to me that a talking serpent was a metaphor for a human archetype, rising from the dead or opening the eyes of the blind was not about magic, and eat my flesh was a revelation about kosher law.

And it will never cease to amaze me that anyone would dispute that.

 

[G.T.]

Decoder ring fallacy.

You appeal to magic just like the christ cracker eaters, yet you mock them. You'll burn in fake-hell as a hypocrite, same as the rest that pretend they have the knowledge of origins.

Decoder ring fallacy? nonsense.

It doesn't take a decoder ring or even very much intelligence to realize that when Jesus said, "eat my flesh" to observant Jews he was teaching that kosher law was not literal, the subject, teaching, was hidden, and not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used..

The entire bible from the very first book to the last speaks of hidden teaching.

If you don't look for it you will find nothing.

It's not very profound to write a book full of contradictions with magical claims as to how the world was created, who to worship and how, how to treat your slaves and what to do with your daughter if she was raped...

and then add in a bunch of absurd contradictions and pretend they're a map to a "hidden teaching" of something that is an obvious bi-product of human to human interaction that most folks already know..

decoder ring fallacy


wash your hands, you're as completely ridiculous as any with your absurd belief in yeshua the invisible sky fairy, but actually a touch worse

Yeah, I am as bad as they come, a genuine psycho.


"I will give you hidden treasures from dark vaults hoarded in secret places"

"Now I show you new things, hidden things, that you did not know before."

"The kingdom of heaven is like treasure lying buried in a field. The man who found it, buried it again."

Time was when many were aghast at you, my people, and so now many nations recoil at sight of him. For they see what they had never been told and things unheard before fill their thoughts."

Yes. A genuine psycho. They used fancy language to dupe fools like you into believing your eureka moments actually mean something. They dont.

Your propaganda writers have led you by the nose, borrowed some ethics learned from secular society at the time, wove in some colorful alliterations and fooled you and others into believing in a deity, a heaven, a hell and other retarded magical shit because you, like them, are a ripe and gullible lemming so easy to manipulate by words.

Oh really? What religion or church teaches anything at all like what I have just shown you?

Non sequitur.

Your decoder ring fallacy is just one of the abundant interpretations that even biblical scholars cant decide on, and the problem with it is that its no better than the rest. Speculation, hearsay, interpretive, not empirically justified and worst of all - borrowed...not to mention "talking serpent" is obvious metaphor, but codified instruction as to what to do with a raped woman is not - no matter how hard you like them writers bending you over and fucking you in the ass.

As it all is.

There was nothing proprietary to TEACH regarding human behavior and how it works.

You can cross your fingers, squint your eyes as hard as you can and pretend yeshua is real and that your "hidden" (lol) ethics were profound and not easily observed by any rational being in nature...but at the end of the day, your left with just a pile of shitty, and unjustified claims like any other deist.

 

[hobelim]

Decoder ring fallacy? nonsense.

It doesn't take a decoder ring or even very much intelligence to realize that when Jesus said, "eat my flesh" to observant Jews he was teaching that kosher law was not literal, the subject, teaching, was hidden, and not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used..

The entire bible from the very first book to the last speaks of hidden teaching.

If you don't look for it you will find nothing.

It's not very profound to write a book full of contradictions with magical claims as to how the world was created, who to worship and how, how to treat your slaves and what to do with your daughter if she was raped...

and then add in a bunch of absurd contradictions and pretend they're a map to a "hidden teaching" of something that is an obvious bi-product of human to human interaction that most folks already know..

decoder ring fallacy


wash your hands, you're as completely ridiculous as any with your absurd belief in yeshua the invisible sky fairy, but actually a touch worse

Yeah, I am as bad as they come, a genuine psycho.


"I will give you hidden treasures from dark vaults hoarded in secret places"

"Now I show you new things, hidden things, that you did not know before."

"The kingdom of heaven is like treasure lying buried in a field. The man who found it, buried it again."

Time was when many were aghast at you, my people, and so now many nations recoil at sight of him. For they see what they had never been told and things unheard before fill their thoughts."

Yes. A genuine psycho. They used fancy language to dupe fools like you into believing your eureka moments actually mean something. They dont.

Your propaganda writers have led you by the nose, borrowed some ethics learned from secular society at the time, wove in some colorful alliterations and fooled you and others into believing in a deity, a heaven, a hell and other retarded magical shit because you, like them, are a ripe and gullible lemming so easy to manipulate by words.

Oh really? What religion or church teaches anything at all like what I have just shown you?

Non sequitur.

Your decoder ring fallacy is just one of the abundant interpretations that even biblical scholars cant decide on, and the problem with it is that its no better than the rest. Speculation, hearsay, interpretive, not empirically justified and worst of all - borrowed.

As it all is.

There was nothing proprietary to TEACH regarding human behavior and how it works.

You can cross your fingers, squint your eyes as hard as you can and pretend yeshua is real and that your "hidden" (lol) ethics were profound and not easily observed by any rational being in nature...but at the end of the day, your left with just a pile of shitty, and unjustified claims like any other deist.

Now you are just full of shit.

I never made any claim of anything being profound. In fact its the exact opposite. Easy enough for anyone with a second grade education to understand.

 

[G.T.]

It's not very profound to write a book full of contradictions with magical claims as to how the world was created, who to worship and how, how to treat your slaves and what to do with your daughter if she was raped...

and then add in a bunch of absurd contradictions and pretend they're a map to a "hidden teaching" of something that is an obvious bi-product of human to human interaction that most folks already know..

decoder ring fallacy


wash your hands, you're as completely ridiculous as any with your absurd belief in yeshua the invisible sky fairy, but actually a touch worse

Yeah, I am as bad as they come, a genuine psycho.


"I will give you hidden treasures from dark vaults hoarded in secret places"

"Now I show you new things, hidden things, that you did not know before."

"The kingdom of heaven is like treasure lying buried in a field. The man who found it, buried it again."

Time was when many were aghast at you, my people, and so now many nations recoil at sight of him. For they see what they had never been told and things unheard before fill their thoughts."

Yes. A genuine psycho. They used fancy language to dupe fools like you into believing your eureka moments actually mean something. They dont.

Your propaganda writers have led you by the nose, borrowed some ethics learned from secular society at the time, wove in some colorful alliterations and fooled you and others into believing in a deity, a heaven, a hell and other retarded magical shit because you, like them, are a ripe and gullible lemming so easy to manipulate by words.

Oh really? What religion or church teaches anything at all like what I have just shown you?

Non sequitur.

Your decoder ring fallacy is just one of the abundant interpretations that even biblical scholars cant decide on, and the problem with it is that its no better than the rest. Speculation, hearsay, interpretive, not empirically justified and worst of all - borrowed.

As it all is.

There was nothing proprietary to TEACH regarding human behavior and how it works.

You can cross your fingers, squint your eyes as hard as you can and pretend yeshua is real and that your "hidden" (lol) ethics were profound and not easily observed by any rational being in nature...but at the end of the day, your left with just a pile of shitty, and unjustified claims like any other deist.

Now you are just full of shit.

I never made any claim of anything being profound. In fact its the exact opposite. Easy enough for anyone with a second grade education to understand.

You make claims, you merely fail to justify them.

Talking serpent is easy to pin-point as a metaphor.

A directly codified way to treat a raped daughter is not.

And the writers really fucked you in the ass by claiming wisdom that they don't have and shuffling it in with wisdom that mostly everyone had - - you're just a sucker of a different kind because you believe that instead of claiming to provide the actual details of origins...the book is in fact just a "hidden teachings" how-to book for dummies which teaches ethical bullshit that everyone already knew...and worse, it teaches ethics that are barbaric by today's standards so it lacks clear wisdom in that regard.

 

[alang1216]

In another thread a poster wrote, "but there are way too many contradictions to take it (the Bible) literally and even the figurative passages are too wide ranging (I read inconsistent) as to preclude a coherent philosophy."

Needless to say I disagree with what was said above, so I've started this thread to clear up confusion about the Bible and address this widespread, but unfounded claim.

This is not my idea. In the prior thread I had said my piece and had left the thread, but the Holy Spirit has been after me to respond, so I am doing so.

The disclaimer:

I am one guy, who has a very busy full time job and a family. I will try to answer any honest question, but I will focus on large issues that make a border point in the interpretation of many similar verses.

If you have a personal question, which you don't feel comfortable asking on the forum, I have set up a personal e-mail of [email protected] for this purpose. If you think I'm an idiot or don't want to participate in the discussion, feel free to leave the thread. I don't need your angry e-mails on the personal e-mail, but I will pray for you personally before I delete them.

The ground rules:

If you have a scripture that you feel represents a contradiction, post the whole chapter (all the verses in that chapter) so we can see the context of the verse.

Please also do the same with the verse you claim it contradicts.

I'll post the contextual verses in my response.

I'll be cutting and pasting the Bible verses from the Blue Letter Bible and you can do so too for free.

I prefer the King James version, post your verses from that translation.

I will only comment on verses found in the (non Catholic) Bible. I will not comment or address scripture from the Apocrypha, the Gnostic bible, the Talmud or Mishna, the book of Morman and other texts or Gospels some are claiming should be part of or which some claim were part of some version of the Bible, at one time.

I'm not interested in a cut and paste of articles or other posts on this subject. If your not willing to do the work yourself, this thread isn't for you.

The purpose:

The purpose of this thread is not to prove that there aren't any contradictions in the Bible (spoiler alert - there are)

OR

that there aren't figurative passages or concepts that are difficult to understand.

The purpose is to show that the Bible is consistent when read in the proper context and that you don't have to have a PHD in religion to read and understand it.

My apologies if this subject was already discussed (TLDR)...

I always thought a major contradiction was between the two birth narratives. It seems impossible to reconcile them and in general they make no sense. They only make sense if one assumes they were separate inventions added later to show how Jesus fulfilled different Jewish prophesies.

 

[G.T.]

The problem Hebelim is going to have in dismissing the codified way to treat your conquered peoples, women, etc. where rape is an A-OK! norm, is that despite the claim that it's so barbaric that it must be metaphor? Is that little thorn in his side called reality where.....sorry, bud - these were wars that were ACTUALLY taking place.