Total posts: 10,852
Posted in:
-->
@croweupc
I DID rebuttal your points, you DID NOT respond to them but make more fake claims. Really. I proved it was out of context and that it was AFTER Judas' hanging
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@croweupc
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
I will fight by your side til death
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@croweupc
Acts 1:18 describes what occurred after Judas hanged himself in Matthew 27:5. His body began to decay as it hung from the rope. Eventually, his corpse fell, and “burst asunder” when it hit the ground—he literally burst apart.
Created:
-->
@triangle.128k
no, making homosexuality ilegal is not discrimination, but pushing them off buildings and shooting a their bars because they are gay is discrimination,Islam is not a religion of peace
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
NOOOOOOOO, Colin Kapernick is horrendous
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
And Omar's argument isn't cherry picking
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
2 Kings 24:8: EIGHTEEN years of age2 Chron. 36:9: EIGHT years of age
The KJV follows the Masoretic reading. Most modern translators speculate that the Masoretic text is in error, seeing that 2 Kings 24:8 says Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign. However, there is no error in the Masoretic text. Jehoiachin became co-regent with his father Jehoiakim over Judah at age eight (2 Chronicles 36:9) and became the ruler “in Jerusalem” at age eighteen (2 Kings 24:8). The young age at which Jehoiachim became co-regent is not surprising, since his father’s interest would have been to secure an heir in the face of imminent Babylonian invasion. Jehoiachin’s co-regency of ten years corresponds perfectly with his father Jehoiakim’s reign of eleven years (2 Chronicles 36:5). Moreover, as soon as the Babylonian invasion looms into the picture, Chronicles begins to use the phrase, “king over Judah and Jerusalem” (2 Chronicles 36:4, 10). The phrase is never used in Kings or in Chronicles prior to the Babylonian invasion. Prior to the Babylonian invasion, there was no need to differentiate the king of Jerusalem from the king of Judah. However, as the Babylonians came and instituted their rule, the king of Jerusalem was no longer the default king of the rest of Judah. Thus, Chronicles begins to use the phrase “king over Judah and Jerusalem” to indicate a ruler who reigned over both Jerusalem and Judah. This point is significant in regards to ascertaining the total length of Jehoiachin’s time in office. Although 2 Kings 24:8 and 2 Chronicles 36:9 say that he reigned “in Jerusalem” for three months, that does not exclude the possibility of him co-reigning over Judah for the past ten years. Since his father was the sole regent over Jerusalem under Nebuchadnezzar’s regime (2 Kings 24:1), Jehoiachin did not have authority over Jerusalem despite having co-regency over Judah. The seeming contradiction between 2 Kings 24:8 and 2 Chronicles 36:9 is a testament of the confusing political scene of the time rather than an error in the Masoretic text.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
1 Kings 7:26: TWO THOUSAND baths.2 Chron. 4:5: THREE THOUSAND baths
The two verses do not contradict. What we have here are two descriptions that are not mutually exclusive. If the container held 3000 baths at a certain point in time, then surely there was a point during its filling when it held 2000 baths. Neither 1 Kings 7:26 nor 2 Chronicles 4:5 purport to provide the upper limit of the capacity. When the historian of 1 Kings 7:26 observed the container, it held 2000 baths. When the historian of 2 Chronicles 4:5 observed the container, it held 3000 baths.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
Typo, KJV fixed itI Kings 4:26: FORTY THOUSAND2 Chron. 9:25: FOUR THOUSAND
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
1 Chron. 18:4: David took SEVEN THOUSAND horsemen2 Samuel 8:4: David took ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED horsemen
We can take two steps to solve this mystery. The first step is to understand that horsemen and footmen were not exclusive categories, but that horsemen were a subset of footmen. Soldiers who were trained to ride horses were usually trained first as ground infantry just as armored vehicle operators of the USA Marines are all initially trained as ground infantry. There is a clear example of this double role elsewhere in scripture. 2 Samuel 10:18 describes a battle where David slew “forty thousand horsemen” of the Syrians (KJV, NASB, ESV). 1 Chronicles 19:18, describing the same event, says that David slew “forty thousand footmen” of the Syrians (KJV, NASB, ESV). 2 Samuel 10:18 and 1 Chronicles 19:18 read together suggest that the horsemen and the footmen were the same men just described differently. There were not 80,000 men in total but rather 40,000 men who took on double roles as horsemen and footmen. Hence in the case of the Syrians the subset (40,000 horsemen) occupied the entire set (40,000 footmen). Going back to the battle against Hadarezer, when 2 Samuel 8:4 says that there were “seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen,” there were not 20,700 men in total, but rather 20,000 men of which 700 were considered horsemen by the author of 2 Samuel. Likewise, when 1 Chronicles 18:4 says that there were “seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen,” there were not 27,000 men in total, but rather 20,000 men of which 7000 were considered horsemen by the author of 1 Chronicles. Listed categories that are connected by the conjunction "and" do not have to be exclusive categories. For example, the Bible often uses the phrase "Judah and Jerusalem" even though Jerusalem is part of Judah. Listed categories that are connected by "and" can overlap in what they refer to. Thus "x horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen" means that there were x number of entities that qualified as horsemen and twenty thousand entities that qualified as horsemen, not that there were two exclusive categories of horsemen and footmen.
The second step to solving the mystery is to see that the difference between 700 and 7000 horsemen is due to “horsemen” being a floating label. The designation, “horsemen” is a floating label because it attaches when a man is on a horse, and could detach when a man is no longer on a horse. Chariots can always be called “chariots” (thus 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles both agree that there were a thousand chariots). Footmen can also always be called “footmen” since all chariot riders are trained with the basics of ground infantry (thus 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles both agree that there were 20,000 footmen). However, horsemen are not always horsemen. If at the start of battle there were 7000 men on horses, one historian can say that David captured 7000 horsemen in battle. However, if at the end of the battle 6300 horses go out of commission and only 700 men remain on horses, then another historian can say that David captured 700 horsemen in battle. The discrepancy in numbers is due to the different perspectives of the historians. The author of 1 Chronicles still referred to the men who lost their horses as "horsemen" whereas the author of 2 Samuel only referred to the men still on horses as "horsemen." This discrepancy could have arisen if the historian of 1 Chronicles got his number from a headcount of horsemen prior to battle (as the two sides squared off against each other) and the historian of 2 Samuel got his number from a post-battle headcount. Both accounts are correct according to their own perspectives. There is evidence that different historical sources were used in the two books. For example, as mentioned earlier, the superficial difference between 2 Samuel 10:18 (“forty thousand horsemen”) and 1 Chronicles 19:18 (“forty thousand footmen”) demonstrates that one account is not a mere duplicate of the other.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
2 Samuel 24:13: SEVEN years of famine.1 Chron.: 21:12: THREE years of famine.
Regarding 2 Samuel 24:13, many English translations follow the Septuagint by using “three” in place of “seven.” If this were the original reading, then we would have an example of a copyist error. It is possible for copyist errors to have crept into some documents, and since the doctrine of inerrancy only applies to the original manuscripts, such errors would have no impact on this crucial doctrine.
Not surprisingly, some critics of biblical authority present this apparent incongruity as evidence confirming their pre-committed disbelief in the inerrancy and divine inspiration of Scripture. Others cite this to justify their claim that modern copies of the biblical texts insufficiently represent the original manuscripts.
In reality, these accusations of corruption are unwarranted, and there are at least a couple of plausible solutions that do not appeal to a copyist error.
The key lies in understanding the greater context of the account. Let us first consider a verse that precedes the account in 2 Samuel:
So according to the text, numbering the people was nearly a year-long process, and there is no clear indication that God had suspended the initial three-year famine prior to the events in chapter 24. Now if God had combined three additional years of famine (1 Chronicles 21:12) with the three years of initialfamine, and a possible intervening year while the census was conducted, the resulting overall famine would have totaled about seven years (2 Samuel 24:13).
Some Christians have proposed another solution. They claim that these two passages describe the prophet Gad confronting David on two different occasions. According to this view, the “seven year” proposal was initially given four years prior to the “three year” proposal. Thus, the prophet would have confronted David and given him a few years to mull over his decision. During that time, David had repented of his actions so God reduced the time of punishment—something God definitely has the authority to do. A problem with this view is that if God reduced the seven years to three years because of David’s repentance, then why didn’t He reduce the length of the other options as well? So while this solution may seem less likely, it still provides another reasonable explanation.
Not surprisingly, some critics of biblical authority present this apparent incongruity as evidence confirming their pre-committed disbelief in the inerrancy and divine inspiration of Scripture. Others cite this to justify their claim that modern copies of the biblical texts insufficiently represent the original manuscripts.
In reality, these accusations of corruption are unwarranted, and there are at least a couple of plausible solutions that do not appeal to a copyist error.
The key lies in understanding the greater context of the account. Let us first consider a verse that precedes the account in 2 Samuel:
Now there was a famine in the days of David for three years, year after year; and David inquired of the Lord. And the Lord answered, “It is because of Saul and his bloodthirsty house, because he killed the Gibeonites.” (2 Samuel 21:1)Clearly, Israel had already experienced three years of famine before David numbered the people of Israel and Judah—for reasons unrelated to the situation in question. 2 Samuel 24:1–7 record the initiation of the census, but we find in verse 8 that “when they had gone through all the land, they came to Jerusalem at the end of nine months and twenty days.”
So according to the text, numbering the people was nearly a year-long process, and there is no clear indication that God had suspended the initial three-year famine prior to the events in chapter 24. Now if God had combined three additional years of famine (1 Chronicles 21:12) with the three years of initialfamine, and a possible intervening year while the census was conducted, the resulting overall famine would have totaled about seven years (2 Samuel 24:13).
Some Christians have proposed another solution. They claim that these two passages describe the prophet Gad confronting David on two different occasions. According to this view, the “seven year” proposal was initially given four years prior to the “three year” proposal. Thus, the prophet would have confronted David and given him a few years to mull over his decision. During that time, David had repented of his actions so God reduced the time of punishment—something God definitely has the authority to do. A problem with this view is that if God reduced the seven years to three years because of David’s repentance, then why didn’t He reduce the length of the other options as well? So while this solution may seem less likely, it still provides another reasonable explanation.
Created:
-->
@Stronn
Rounded to 3.146The approximate value is 3.14159
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
Samual and Chronicles are different look at point above
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@croweupc
These numbers you are putting together are not connected.
So how do they contradict?
Created:
This is crazy, Genesis 1:1 combine the letters and multiply the product of the letters,then divide it by the number of words and multiply the product of words, it equals Pie!!, 3.146, wow!
Do the same with John 1:1 and you get 2.7183, the number of Euler's Number. Holy crap!
This is honestly life-changing
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@croweupc
did not include the standing army of 288,000 described in 1 Chronicles 27:1–15, or the 12,000 specifically attached to Jerusalem
The figure of 470,000 in 1 Chronicles 21 did not include the 30,000 men of the standing army of Judah mentioned in 2 Samuel 6:1.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
because easy wins are not fun and tarnish your record
Sorry, that';s the ONLY way you can make it on the leaderboards
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
Yeah, pretty much sums up the voting on this website, when you make a debate, make sure you only make Ragnar, Ramshustu, and Blamonkey as judges. And at ALL costs, don't let imabench vote
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@croweupc
In the report in 2 Samuel, the number of men of valor who drew the sword was 800,000, but did not include the standing army of 288,000 described in 1 Chronicles 27:1–15, or the 12,000 specifically attached to Jerusalem described in 2 Chronicles 1:14. Including these figures gives the grand total of 1,100,000 men of valor who composed the entire army of the men of Israel. The figure of 470,000 in 1 Chronicles 21 did not include the 30,000 men of the standing army of Judah mentioned in 2 Samuel 6:1. This is evident from the fact that the Chronicler points out that Joab did not complete the counting of the men of Judah (1 Chron. 21:6). Both calculations are correct according to the groups which were included and excluded from each report. Please understand the context next time
In the Bible:3=1 (Trinity)1=1000 (Days)
Evidence and what's your point
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
Who cares? the leaderboards suck anyway, all the top guys won't debate each other and chicken out and they make excuses when they are on all day!-https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/1925.
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Harikrish
I don't like you, what you do on DDO is sick.
The bible does not meet the math and science requirement of a 4th grader.
Evidence? I have proved that is not the case
Christians struggle to explain what is the lengeth of a day in Genesis. Is it a 24 hour day, is a 1000 years equal to a day or a billion years equal to a day?
Ok and, people can believe in different things and be accepted by God, hence why there are Catholics, Protestants, Baptists,etc
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
No it doesn't. It means people adjacent to the house you live in.
Not in the Bible
If you love your neighbors how can you be for the death of your neighbor? Death penalty, war and interment camps.
The Bible supports the Death Penalty and war and killing in what way, fighting the nazi's, war is justified, war is a broad topic
What if Trump declared war on Iran? Would you be for it?
Right now, No
I didn't need to imply it. I said it. Go read my arguments before going through what you are parroting off your idols.
Evidence? and hostility
No I don't. I said the Bible doesn't condemn slavery that is human property. I have clearly shown it doesn't and in some cases even mentions what to do to them.
Since when was slavery in the Bible owning property. I have debunked your slavery claims.
You dislike what Islam thinks therefore you agree with Trump on the Muslim ban. Your a bigot. It is that simple.
No, It's not on the basis of religion
Don't really care about your transgender comment because you didn't elaborate on what you mean.The thing is the democrats have changed. Republican haven't. They still have those biases against homosexuals but deny being homophobic but given from what they preach out of which is the Bible they are clearly anti-homosexuality. I don't need every Republican to be an Evangelical to be correct. I only need the majority or the representative as in Trump to support the Bible.
Why did you parrarlism? First, the argument is 30 years ago now it's today. Consveratives support Gay marriage and actually aligns with conservative ideology. People who disagree aren't bigots or homophobic, they just don't want to see it be legal.-Transgenderism is a mental disease>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_dysphoria
How are Antifa domestic terrorists?
Easy
The US government has designated them as such. Politico reports “the Department of Homeland Security formally classified [antifa’s] activities as ‘domestic terrorist violence’. . . . A senior state law enforcement official said, ‘A whole bunch of them’ have been deemed dangerous enough to be placed on US terrorism watch lists.”
What is more radical than communism?
Not a lot, maybe fascism, but other than that radicalness isn't a competition
Created:
-->
@Wylted
Same
Created:
-->
@Snoopy
I agree to an extent
Created:
-->
@Snoopy
Yeah I guess but it seems that you support foreign intervention in Syria
Created:
-->
@Snoopy
So you want more foreign intervention and death?,got it!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
How many neighbors do you have?
Neighbors refer to everyone you know.
Are you for the Iran war?
War with Iran?,No. If they threaten us again though, we should bomb them, as a warning shot
I meant internment camp did I not or do you not realize the difference? I specifically didn't say concentration because I know how triggered conservatives get over it.
You never implied internment camp, why don't you define it as it's your argument
No-one needs to say they are something for it to be true. A murderer can say he is not a murderer but still be one. Have you actually got an argument that the Bible condemns human property or am I going to get the same thing out of you?
Again, you have to prove that "slavery" in the Bible was harsh and it was like owning property, you have not.
Then give it.
I just did
How is that not bigotry?
It's not religion,its controlling the situation
You just called transgender people mentally ill when conservatives back lets say 30 years had gays being mentally ill?
Transgenders are mentally ill, have a problem with that, go ahead,report me, Consveratives 30 years ago, evidence? and yeah Democrats were also against homosexuality
So your a bigot?
What?, where do you get that from?
What is radical then?
Radical is ideas that are considered relating to or affecting the fundamental nature of something; far-reaching or thorough.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Guess Christianity doesn't even advocate for love. Thank you for telling me that.
Thats not what I meant
Finally you have shown a quote that does show Christianity support love but not for all. Now I know why Evangelicals who are mostly Republican support foreign wars. Why should I love my neighbor?
What? how
Not important. The analogy was an analogy. You haven't said how the analogy is wrong simply stated you disagree with terms I used. Tell me what is a camp?
Bad analogy and what is a camp?, well a concentration camp I assume -is a a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution. The term is most strongly associated with the several hundred camps established by the Nazis in Germany and occupied Europe in 1933–45, among the most infamous being Dachau, Belsen, and Auschwitz.
Having humans as property. Bondservants is human property therefore Christianity supports slaves even when you try to change the words.
Who said it was owning property back then?
If I said The Bible is hate and immoral we would be going no where. Do you actually have an argument?
Yes I have an argument?
Trump's muslim ban is to control the situation, it was temporary too.
Transgenders is a mental illness, so unfit to join the military,Gay people are allowed now.
Antifa is domestic terrorism
Socialists are fine, they disagree with me
Communists are semi-radical.
Democrats are people who I disagree with on the political scale. Don't know why you would ask this,but ok
Created:
-->
@bsh1
@Wylted
Just PM us all this shit
Are PM's monitored?
Created:
The civil war has been going on for 8 years.
60% of these rebels are actually extremists-https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/12/20/460463173/60-percent-of-syrian-rebels-share-islamic-state-ideology-think-tank-finds
They believe in Sharia Law, which discriminates against Christians,Women and Gays. Syria doesn't and supports Women's rights
If Assad was so evil, why would he let people return to rebel held areas,like when He liberated Aleppo, why would he let return to Idlib if he was so evil
Created:
-->
@Nd24007
You should be ashamed of yourself.
Created:
-->
@Snoopy
So how am I taking it out of context?
Created:
-->
@Snoopy
Well, then I said
WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. has no evidence to confirm reports from aid groups and others that the Syrian government has used the deadly chemical sarin on its citizens, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said Friday.“We have other reports from the battlefield from people who claim it’s been used,” Mattis told reporters at the Pentagon. “We do not have evidence of it.”He said he was not rebutting the reports.“We’re looking for evidence of it, since clearly we are dealing with the Assad regime that has used denial and deceit to hide their outlaw actions,” Mattis said.
Created:
-->
@Snoopy
I was referring to this quote
Assad regime was terrorizing civilians with chemical WMD's.
That never happened
WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. has no evidence to confirm reports from aid groups and others that the Syrian government has used the deadly chemical sarin on its citizens, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said Friday.
“We have other reports from the battlefield from people who claim it’s been used,” Mattis told reporters at the Pentagon. “We do not have evidence of it.”
He said he was not rebutting the reports.
“We’re looking for evidence of it, since clearly we are dealing with the Assad regime that has used denial and deceit to hide their outlaw actions,” Mattis said.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGEc-CMsrQs-Why you should support SAA in the civil war
Created:
-->
@Snoopy
Assad regime was terrorizing civilians with chemical WMD's.
And wrong, 2013 chemical attack was confirmed by rebels
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Your supposed to love each-other in general,not literarily
For example
-"Mark 12:31 (ASV) The second is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these."
It doesn't mean love like sexual attractiveness,but being nice,etc.
Was Jewish internment camps as bad as immigration camps in the US?
No. Sorry AOC is wrong 100%, and those "camps",where AOC provided no evidence, the laws for these was put under Clinton and Obama
Any evidence Biblical slavery was worse than the harsh slavery which referred to 17-19th century America's slavery.
Again, were these "slaves" treated poorly, how do you define slavery.
What were we talking about? Bondservants or slavery?
In a way,both but most likely bondservants
The Bible is love,not immoral, so your argument is wrong and like what Supa said: Banning someone on religion is bigotry
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
So did you report it? now hearing bsh1
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
The point was that the Bible and mathematics support a very holy and brilliant book
Created: