Total posts: 8,861
Posted in:
Worth MORE THAN three hundred denarii ”You have no clue how much it was worth.
You really need to do some homework. Come back when you have at least researched what it is you are denying.
"I am not sure if Mary realized the significance of her action or understood that Jesus was going to die. She did what she did out of love and appreciation for Jesus who recently had raised her brother Lazarus from the dead. She broke the vial of perfume and poured its entire contents over Jesus’ head. She lavished the precious perfume valued at 300 denarii on Jesus. A denarius represents the daily wage for a laborer. In today’s value, that anointing costs approximately $30,000! Mary was extravagant in her adoration because in her eyes, Jesus was worthy … far more valuable than 300 denarii".
Give or take
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I have the benefit of both the apostolic church and The Holy Spirit.
Yes very well, could you ask the holy spirit to explain for you and me where in this biblical verse below anyone is referencing what you call "the financial poor"?
"Why wasn’t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor"? John 12:5
Financial poverty isn't even really a good way of putting it.
That was your choice of words, not mine , Mopac.
People who lack food, shelter, clothing, orphans, widows, the like.
Yes those are examples of people being poor - except maybe the widow, who could have inherited a fortune for all anyone knows, a fishing business maybe, with a fleet of boats. But where in the scripture does Jesus reference these types of "poor"? Does Jesus for instance, say give to "the poor" orphanage?
Christians are supposed to help alleviate the sufferings of these people.First and foremost through the gospel, but not without neglecting their physical needs.
And very commendable that is. But that is not what I am asking about? You simply do not know to whom Jesus is referring to when he uses the words "the poor" do you?
Would you deny that the scriptures- that is to say Jesus, used code or coded words that were only for "those who have ears"?
Created:
Posted in:
Sad story of Job
Of all the examples of the unnecessary, wanton, willful and wastefully killing committed by god, the story of the murder of the children of Job has to be the worst singular example. , Satan Allowed to Test Job. Job 1:6-12
The particular murders of these TEN! children stands out simply because there is absolutely no reason given for these wanton, and willfully deliberate killings other than god wanting to prove a point. Satan Takes Job's Property and Children. Job 1:13-19
All murder of innocent people is abhorrent, even to some Christians I should imagine. But these particular killings are for no other reason than that god wanted to prove that he has a most loyal servant in Job, to someone, that he presumably had condemn and sentenced to spend "the rest of his life" on his belly eating "dust"!!! Genesis 3:14
I mean,why of all people or all things would GOD even feel the need to have to prove anything to anyone never mind a creature such as a belly-crawling dust eating lowlife?
Other examples of gods willful murder of innocents usually are accompanied with some trumped up charge or excuse of sinning and disobedience of one kind or another but not in this case.
Why Is life so cheap to god?
The story of job and the willful murder of all of Job's children can be read here.
Job 1:1-19 EnglishStandard Version (ESV)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
True debate is about finding the truth, not making oneself out to be right.
And is all Brother Tom is doing is giving his version of that truth and not being received too well for his efforts,
"What is truth" ? asked Pilate
"The myth of Christ has served us well" . said Pope Leo X
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I gave you one example. It was not intended to be exhaustive.What are you trying to say?
I am trying to get you to find me examples of Jesus making direct references to what you have described as "the financial poor". You see Mopac, it was you who suggested that there were different types of "poor", by asking for "context" wasn't it.
I gave you a verse and you inserted words into that verse to make it distinct; you did this, not me.
This is what I posted to you above:
" Looking at his disciples, he said: "Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God" .Luke 6:20
This was your response to that verse:
The poor in spirit in the context of this verse are those who recognize everything they have received is from God, and without God they are nothing.
But it don't even say the words "in spirit" does it? YOU inserted the words " in spirit" that are not even mentioned in that verse. I know why you did this, but I let it go and gave you another verse, with the word "the poor" in it, You then said that in this case it was "the financial poor":
and as can be seen above you avoided this question > And how exactly do you know from this verse that Jesus is specifically talking about "the financial poor"
. My point is Mopac, that nowhere in the scriptures does Jesus ever make reference to " the financial poor" . he simply says "the poor". I will give you that he says in the sermon on the mount:
“Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
but lacking spirit doesn't mean one is a member of "the financial poor".
And the truth is , you do not actually know what or who Jesus means when he says "the poor". That is why I asked you;
" And how exactly do you know from this verse that Jesus is specifically talking about "the financial poor". I would still like you to explain how you know.
Neither can you find another verse that you believe Jesus is talking about "the financial poor". Because there isn't a single one.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
So one item makes them rich?
yes!!!! ONE SINGLE ITEM!!!! Worth MORE THAN three hundred denarii ”
That's; around almost 30 grand!!!!!! in today's money, princess. And this wasn't the first time either. They were throwing it over Jesus like there was no tomorrow. But what did "our lord Jesus" have to say when someone complained?
Yes, he more or less said ' bollocks to the poor they will always be there, and if you are that concerned about "the poor" give them something of your own anytime you like ' .
Yes here we are: Mark 14:7
Lay off Mary. Stop with your moaning and whining and whinging; "you always have the poor with you, and whenever you want, you can do good for them".
Oh yes the heartfelt consideration he had shown "the poor " here is fkn staggering.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
why don't the Christians here try and debate one another .........
Because they would bore each other silly, maybe ?
And
Just recently I had two different and conflicting answers from Christians on a thread of mine. But when one realized the other was also a Christian, their answers and opinions quickly merged into a - ' well yes, it could mean that too ' . type of conversation; neither wanted to be shown to be wrong while not actaully conceding anything or as little ground as possible. So this meant after two clear and distinct answers, I ended up with two different answers from both these Christians who only a few posts before were in direct opposition with strong extremely opposing views.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I don't think BrotherDThomas being extreme has anything to do with it.
Would you consider the Brother to be a "lost sheep", Mopac?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
why aren't you more vociferously pursuing the low hanging fruit, the ones who already believe largely what you do (Jesus), in order to save them from your loving lord roasting them in a lava bath for all eternity?
I can feel a parable coming on, can you? ludofl3x
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Since yall don't like him for being extreme,Is that why we don't like him,
"WE"!!!? I suggest that you speak for yourself and not the whole forum. I have nothing against the Brother, whereas you have an axe to grind with anyone who doesn't agree with you or who refuses to sycophantically pander to you with an outstretched tongue .
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Depends entirely on the context.OK, So try this context > “Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God".The poor in spirit in the context of this verse are those who recognize everything they have received is from God, and without God they are nothing.And who are "the poor" in this verse? Why wasn’t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor?The financially poor.And where in the scriptures of the New Testament does Jesus ever mention "the financial poor".Jesus said to him, “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”
OK. And how exactly do you know from this verse that Jesus is specifically talking about "the financial poor". And is that the only single verse that you can find where, you believe Jesus means "the financial poor"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Which one of you is the true Christian, though?ErrnlVW doesn't identify as a Christian. He seems pretty new age to me personally.
That is not entirely true . He has as recently as two days ago confirmed that he is a Christian and in no uncertain terms. post 14
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Depends entirely on the context.OK, So try this context > “Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God".The poor in spirit in the context of this verse are those who recognize everything they have received is from God, and without God they are nothing.And who are "the poor" in this verse? Why wasn’t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor?The financially poor.
And where in the scriptures of the New Testament does Jesus ever mention "the financial poor".
Created:
-->
@SirAnonymous
That's not the issue and it is irrelevant. I want to know is all.That's fine, but asking a question with a little all caps and plenty of bold gives a rather different impression.
For emphasis,SirAnonymous. As some here continually actually forget the question at hand and would rather give their interpretation of everything without actaully addressing what is being asked. It is not ever meant as an offence. You for instance took the direct approach to my question whereas others have gone off on their own tangents leaving my question in the dust. I am sure you understand my meaning.
I am aware of what it states in Revelation but I am not sure if that is the answer. You seem to think it is.Yes, it is the best explanation.
And I agree. But we could both be wrong.
Two people now appear to agree that the identity of the Eden serpent is Satan.. One states it is merely "symbolic" .There are some Christians like EtrnVw who think large portions of the Bible are metaphorical or symbolic.
Yes, I have to agree with you, SirAnonymous. I have found Christians do this when they find themselves to be completely cornered for an logical and factual answer to theological problem. You could call it a ' cure all ' for all sticky theological situations or simply a "get out".
I think they don't take it as literally as they should, but that's not the issue in the this thread.
And that is their entitlement. But I find it doesn't help them at all in a theological debate or argument.
God could only have been talking to the same snake as Eve had been talking to other wise, why curse another snake. What do you think?I think He was talking to the same snake.
Me too.
And this is something else I think. I think that the one addressed as serpent was another god , the creator god, I think that this god was a physician /doctor. I think the argument here was everything to do with reproduction. It think one god (maybe a higher ranking god) had forbidden humans to reproduce.. I think that the god with the title serpent over- rid this taboo and endowed humans the knowledge of reproduction.
This is why I think that there are three accounts of humans being created. The first set of male and female humans could not know each other but the second couple got down to a lot of knowing. Genesis 1:27.KJV. Genesis 2:7. KJV. & Genesis 2:22
Today, particular in the western world many if not all hospital lobby's and all ambulances in particular, have the sign of a serpent/s - a snake/s - to be precise -coiled around a tree or a branch or simply a wooden pole. This is the sign of medicine. There are instances in the scriptures where this sign is mentioned or shown along side the act of curing. The Greeks adopted this medical sign as I believe did the Romans.
But that is only what I think
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Sorry Stephen, there is One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Don't be. i don't care.
To say otherwise is subversive to the faith itself.
I don't believe I have. But I am sure there are some CHRISTIANS that will give you an argument..... just not in front of me.
You know, taking the teachings of heretics as being just as valid as the apostles and the apostolic church.
not sure what you mean by that, but I don't care anyway, mopac.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Depends entirely on the context.OK, So try this context > “Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God".The poor in spirit in the context of this verse are those who recognize everything they have received is from God, and without God they are nothing.
And who are "the poor" in this verse?
“Why wasn’t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
You claimed that the disciples were rich.
That right I do, and they were. You don't agree and i don't fkn care. now what.
Those perfume and anointing oils were worth over a years fkn wages but here they were just throwing it all over Jesus when they could have given that money to the "poor". so much so that even Judas got upset at the fkn wasted expense.
Like I said. you don't agree and I don't fkn care . So off you pop princess. nothing for you here.
Created:
-->
@EtrnlVw
the Bible alternates between literal and figurative throughout the entire Book.
And how very convenient. I suppose this alternation only happens at a time of your choosing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Brother D is always touting himself as the true Christian
And Mopac believes his Christian church is the only "true church" and he also believe no one outside of "his church" can ever understand or interpret what the bible says.
Are you going to start a thread dedicated solely to Mopac? Or even start a thread that disagrees that "only his church" can ever understand or interpret what the bible says.
Created:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Why do you always repeat the same question I previously answered?[..........................]The specific question you are asking doesn't pertain to me, because I'm not a Biblical literalist
Then you have wasted both our times haven't you. I repeated the question because you didn't get around to naming the identity of the Eden serpent as if you had missed the question completely. Instead you told me a long tale about how it was all only ""symbolic". and is " only representative of the forms of temptation mankind faces". <<<<<< you see. no identification there is there?
You could have simply said, AT THE START that " The specific question you are asking doesn't pertain to me" but that you believe it was only symbolic anyway. But instead I had a 150 word essay on your biblical interpretation of what was meant by "serpent".
And who are the Devil and SatanAccording to traditional Christian thinking it would be a being who has chosen to oppose God. I don't know if they are the same being, but generally they are accepted as so, and according to that verse there would be no reason to believe otherwise.
Ok. Nice. We are getting little closer to some kind of an answer. You say it is a "being" and others have put a name to this being, haven't they.
OK. nice.
Created:
-->
@SirAnonymous
It does to me. I want to know the identity of the Eden serpent.Why?
That's not the issue and it is irrelevant. I want to know is all.
Revelation suggests it to be the "Devil and Satan". Revelation 12:9 and Revelation 20:2So if you're aware of this answer and have provided the biblical support for it yourself, why are you asking?
I am aware of what it states in Revelation but I am not sure if that is the answer. You seem to think it is.
Ok, then simply say that you do not understand and your business here will be done.Well, you've provided the biblical support for the serpent being Satan yourself, so it wouldn't be accurate to say I don't understand who the serpent was.
Ok, Then according to you, Revelation is saying that the garden of Eden serpent "snake" is Satan and Devil and you agree that it is. That is fine. It is just that there seems to be a disagreement and I want to satisfy myself. Two people now appear to agree that the identity of the Eden serpent is Satan.. One states it is merely "symbolic" .
.
Ok. I hope I don't get too confusing here but , let me point out, that the story starts already with a "serpent" (you call it a snake) Genesis 3.Serpent and snake are synonyms. There's no need to put that much emphasis on such a minor distinction.
OK we'll stick to snake as being our serpent.
It appears to me at least that we are talking two different snakes/ serpents. You see the one that tempted Even is already a "snake". But when we get to Gen 3:14 we read of something or some one only now being cursed & condemned to crawl on it belly like a snake for the rest of its daysThis is why I asked you " if or not the serpent/Satan Devil at Genesis 3:1 is the same serpent Satan Devil as the one cursed Genesis 3:14Let me get this straight. You're wondering why the curse says that the serpent will be condemned to crawl on its belly if it is already a serpent. Is that what you're trying to ask?
I am asking are the serpent at Gen 3 and the serpent at Gen 3:14 the same or different serpents. And for the reason I have pointed out above. I think they are one and the same but I value your opinion.
Here is why I think they are one and the same. Because at Gen it says ; - "The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”
14 So the Lord God said to the serpent, Because you have done this,
“Cursed are you above all livestock
and all wild animals!
You will crawl on your belly
and you will eat dust
all the days of your life.
God could only have been talking to the same snake as Eve had been talking to other wise, why curse another snake. What do you think?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I asked you:
Do you know who Jesus means when he speaks of "the poor" in the New Testament, Mopac?
your response was to say :
Depends entirely on the context.
OK, So try this context > “Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
And Judas' came from one of the richest families on the Mediterranean.Yet he betrayed Jesus for 30 pieces of silver?That's correct!!!He was a thief too and an absolute greedy bastard , Yet Jesus still had this little rich boy as a follower.That is silly. You still have no biblical support for your claims.
..John 12:6
He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.
Not that he cared for the poor—he was a thief, and since he was in charge of the disciples’ money, he often stole some for himself.
He said this, not because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief, and having charge of the moneybag he used to help himself to what was put into it.
Judas did not say this because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief. As keeper of the money bag, he used to take from what was put into it.
But he said this, not because he was caring for the poor, but because he was a thief; and having the money bag, he used to pilfer that being put into it.
Now he said this, not because he was concerned about the poor, but because he was a thief, and as he had the money box, he used to pilfer what was put into it.
This he said, not that he cared for the poor, but because he was a thief, and had the money box; and he used to take what was put in it.
This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.
Now do yourself a fkn favour and go and try to rile antagonize some one else . I have told you many times now sunshine. You are fkn spent and void and redundant. someone new to pester may not realise how spent and redundant you actually are, for your first 1 or 2 posts.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
It is not a sin to be rich.
I know. I am not arguing the toss. Its camels and how easier it is to get into the kingdom of god.
Do you know who Jesus means when he speaks of "the poor" in the New Testament, Mopac?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
And Judas' came from one of the richest families on the Mediterranean.Yet he betrayed Jesus for 30 pieces of silver?
That's correct!!!. He was a thief too and an absolute greedy bastard , Yet Jesus still had this little rich boy as a follower.
...in these ambiguous biblical half stories.If the stories are ambiguous, how do you know they were poor?
I am saying they were rich and influential. Keep up.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dynasty
Is BrotherDThomas really a Christian?
The definition of - Christian - has been and still is argued ..... among Christians themselves.
Who cares? This is a religion forum. He writes about religion. He quotes religious scripture. He disagrees with many - concerning religious matters. He appears to be able to support his claims concerning .. religious matters.
I don't agree with some of what he says and he me. But this doesn't mean I have to create thread especially dedicated to him.
I don't care what he is. It is not a requirement of the forum that one MUST BE a Christian to come here and question the Christian scriptures.
Created:
-->
@EtrnlVw
The soul? What is the soul?It's your conscious being that exists independent of the physical body. This is the part of you God created and sent into creation where your parents where a part of forming your physical layer. You are an expression of the Creator, you are from God's very own heart and soul.
Could you start a thread on this and explain a bit more?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
We are simply going to have to disagree then.
Yes . that will do me fine.
But you simply cannot accept the double standards by these authors, can you?. They are obviously pro their own god. They would never claim that Pharaoh even had gods but we know for a fact that he did, don't we? But even you won't admit that the Egyptians had their own gods will you.
And this is exactly the dilemma that the double standards in this story have left you with.
This story is simply Yahweh propaganda.
Created:
-->
@SirAnonymous
I couldn't be sure I was right though. This is why I say, it has never for me, been Satisfactorily answered.So? Suppose the snake isn't Satan. It makes no difference.
It does to me. I want to know the identity of the Eden serpent. Revelation suggests it to be the "Devil and Satan". Revelation 12:9 and Revelation 20:2
All that would mean is that there's a part of the Bible we don't understand.
Ok, then simply say that you do not understand and your business here will be done.
And a perfect example of what I mean is given above at post #2 by the great biblical wordsmith himself EtrnlVw.He tells us the serpent is only "symbolic". and is " only representative of the forms of temptation mankind faces". Is he not correct?And he hasn't related or equate Satan Or the Devil at all to this serpent in the Garden. So, should he; as you seem to have done.? And has Revelation appears to also do?That proves...absolutely nothing.
I agree, but he is more than entitled to his opinion and give his interpretation.
He's not a Christian, though. He thinks that all religions have some truth, but none are completely right. To him, anything can be metaphorical.
And entitled to his opinion all the same. Do you not agree. if you believe his opinion to be totally wrong, then simply start a thread of your own laying out why he is wrong and with evidence to prove him to be wrong. As far as I am concerned he is trying to give his interpretation, without evidence.
It would be nice to hear that it is "strong evidence" from someone who believes they know more or better , SirAnonymous.I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. Could you rephrase that?
Well you said at post #4 above that I supplied "strong evidence " that answered my own question. I have simply asked that someone who believes him/herself to be in a position to know or not if that is actual "strong evidence" that I supplied.
Are you a devout Christian, SirAnonymous ?Yes.
then you are just the man I am looking for. And then you agree that the "ancient serpent" of Revelation is the same serpent written about in the Eden story of the serpent also called Satan & Devil?
and are you telling me that the serpent of the Garden is the Satan also known as the Devil?Probably, or just a random snake that the devil was speaking through.
So you are not sure now then?
Again, though, what's the point of this question?
That's non of your concern. I have asked a question as to the identity of the tempting serpent, and up to this point I have been told it is " only symbolism" , "that it is Satan" that " it is the Devil", and that "I have answered my own question".
And could you just clear up for me if or not the serpent/Satan Devil at Genesis 3:1 is the same serpent Satan Devil as the one cursed Genesis 3:14Most of it was to Satan, but the part about crawling on the belly was probably for all snakes.
Ok. I hope I don't get too confusing here but , let me point out, that the story starts already with a "serpent" (you call it a snake) Genesis 3. The women and the serpent have a conversation 3:2 - 4. This serpent goes on to tempt Eve and she takes the forbidden fruit .3:6 .https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+3&version=NIV;
So at this point it is, as you say, already "a snake". ....
....then we get to Genesis 3:14 New International Version (NIV) where we read...
14 So the Lord God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this,
“Cursed are you above all livestock
and all wild animals!
You will crawl on your belly
and you will eat dust
all the days of your life.
and you will eat dust
all the days of your life.
It appears to me at least that we are talking two different snakes/ serpents. You see the one that tempted Even is already a "snake". But when we get to Gen 3:14 we read of something or some one only now being cursed & condemned to crawl on it belly like a snake for the rest of its days
This is why I asked you " if or not the serpent/Satan Devil at Genesis 3:1 is the same serpent Satan Devil as the one cursed Genesis 3:14
Created:
-->
@EtrnlVw
I couldn't be sure I was right though. This is why I say, it has never for me, been Satisfactorily answered. And a perfect example of what I mean is given above at post #2 by the great biblical wordsmith himself EtrnlVw.He tells us the serpent is only "symbolic". and is " only representative of the forms of temptation mankind faces". Is he not correct?There's no logical reason to reject anything I've said,
Have I done that?
everything within the text remains intact.
I haven't said different. But then who is the "ancient serpent" of Revelation referring to- Revelation 12:9, 20:2. It clearly states there that it is the same " Devil, and Satan". And who are the Devil and Satan
Even if people assumed all this figurative language is literal they can change their mind right now.
So are you changing your mind. Are these Devil Satan not symbolic but actual living characters mentioned so often throughout the scripture?
it's just being used to form an illustration so the serpent wasn't really a "who" even though the devil and or Satan are often times used to reference the negative forces.
I see. So are the Devil and Satan one and the same entity or being; and are they simply being referenced or referred to as a serpent? And could you be clear on that.
And he hasn't related or equate Satan Or the Devil at all to this serpent in the Garden.Lets say Satan or the Devil does in fact exist,
Well, do they or do they not exist? I am interested in what it is that you say. You have said that the serpent of the garden is only symbolic. I have said Revelation appears to say different in identifying who the serpent in the garden actually is. "That ancient serpent" Revelation 12:9, 20:2
they can certainly be a part of tempting people,
So they exist then?
but my assessment still stands.
Well I wouldn't ever expect you to back-peddle, now would I? Although the evidence seem to be showing your interpretation to be , well, wrong. So are you now saying then that - the identity of the Garden serpent that tempted Eve to be Satan called Devil as revelation appears to be doing so.Revelation 12:9, 20:2
We know snakes can't talk like humans or talk at all,
That depends doesn't it, if I am to take on board what it is you are saying. First we need to establish if or not that - the garden serpent,- the ancient serpent.- the Devil and Satan are all one and the same, don't we.
. But I will readily admit that spirits can manipulate human souls, no question about it,
Nothing to do with the question can we stick to the question
I'm sure my assessment is correct in what I wrote.
Well you would.
There's a ton of symbolism in the Adam and Eve story.
Ok. That is your opinion, but somehow you have manged to completely left original question behind.
It is quite simple. I want to know the identity of the serpent that is said to have tempted Eve in the garden of Eden. Is it in your opinion as revelation suggests or not? Just say Yes or No.
Revelation 20:2 New International Version (NIV)
2 He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan,
Revelation 12:9 New International Version (NIV)
9 The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan,
Created:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Ask the people that actually wrote the damn story and they will tell you that it is a metaphor as Etrnl said above.
Only the biblical wordsmith himself Etrnl didn't actually write "the damn story". No, what he has done is given us how he believes the whole Eden story should be interpreted. Which isn't a problem as he is more than entitled to do so, but is it correct.
Ask many Christians today and they will claim that it is Satan in disguise, as you mentioned.
No. I believe that it was someone else that said that at post #4 >> "Christian everywhere thinks it was Satan". I still do not know what to believe. Do all or the majority of Christians believe that the identity of the garden serpent is "Satan and the Devil"? Revelation 12:9, 20:2. I have had just within four post two different opinions. So I am still undecided.
And maybe you could clear up for me if or not the serpent/Satan Devil at Genesis 3:1 is the same serpent Satan Devil as the one cursed Genesis 3:14
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
In one case a staff actually turns into a snake.
No, in BOTH cases the staffs turn into snakes:
10 So Moses (god) and Aaron (priest & prophet) went to Pharaoh and did just as the Lord commanded. Aaron threw his staff down in front of Pharaoh and his officials, and it became a snake.11 Pharaoh then summoned wise men and sorcerers, and the Egyptian magicians also did the same things by their secret arts:12 Each one threw down his staff and it became a snake. But Aaron’s staff swallowed up their staffs. 13 Yet Pharaoh’s heart became hard and he would not listen to them, just as the Lord had said.
The magicians simply imitate this through trickery.
They are good then, aren't they? To be able to pull this off without the assistance of any god!! Aaron and Moses needed gods divine assistance to pull off the same "sign".
It's a different thing.
Only in your mind. If the trick happened at all it proved Pharaoh's boys didn't need a god to do exactly the same trick.
If you don't accept that, I don't know what to tell you.
I don't accept it all all. And it was the double standards that I am highlighting.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
As such, your questions will be considered garbage
I see. Another fail
I have told you I will answer your questions on your own thread. You keep declining and I don't fkn care .
Created:
Posted in:
No it isn't.but you're talking about others,
I'm clearly talking JESUS' disciples. Rich and well off disciples that are men of influence and rich men in high places. s are some of his women disciples Are you saying that those examples are not disciples of Jesus? . Are you stating the bible is incorrect.
They had fishing businesses.Indeed their businesses was fishing.
That's absolutely correct, What was it, do you think, that they were doing with all those fish they were catching by the boat load every day.? Were they just throwing them back into the sea of Galilee or simply giving them away... to the poor maybe? Don't make me laugh. They were rich businessmen in the fishery business. And Judas' came from one of the richest families on the Mediterranean. learn your scripture, princess.
Non of Jesus disciples were rich.
I have proved you wrong AGAIN at post 1 and at post 28 as do the gospels themselves.
No one bought spices by the kolo genius.
Semantics. Pounds, kilos' it matters not. And Wrong again read you fkn scripture
"Mary therefore took a pound of expensive ointment made from pure nard, and anointed the feet of Jesus and wiped his feet with her hair. The house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume."
Then they did it again with more expensive oils and perfumes POUNDS OF THE STUFF. Nicodemus a rich disciple took pounds of the stuff as did the rich Mary Magdalene take more POUNDS OF THE STUFF!!! You really are a joker, scrapping the empty barrel, aren't you. I have told you sunshine , all your arguments are spent and you are devoid of anything at all substantial to argue against anything that I highlight in these ambiguous biblical half stories.
What have I lied about.In this thread? That the disciples were rich. That Jesus "surrounded" Himself with the rich, that the women in his life were are well to do "women of substance"
That's right. show me where I am wrong if you have a dispute. What do you think is meant by the phrase "women of substance" Einstein?
All lies so that you can make the ludicrous charge about a rich man entering the kingdom.
What charge? I have ask questions , here, but of course you missed them.
What was wrong with pious rich men entering the kingdom of god?
Why would it be less easier for a rich man than it would for a less well off man to enter the kingdom of god?
And what is actually meant by "the kingdom of God"?
"The myth of Christ has served us well" . said Pope Leo X
Created:
-->
@ethang5
I can tell you why He NEEDS no defense. Lol.
WHY?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Thats just it. The magicians practice the art of illusion and deception.
You are missing my point. And no it is not just it.
What it is , is that these "sorcerers" were able to perform exactly the same sign as Aaron did. You are trying to tell us that Aaron's trick was a miraculous sign and that the sorcerers " sign" was an illusion. If it was only a performed illusion, how come Aaron's snake ate these other snakes? Did they devour snakes that wasn't really there in reality? Did it devour illusionary reptiles?
That is what magic is.
This is my point. If god does it, it is a miracle but when these sorcerers perform the exact sign , then you and the bible call it magic.
The point, as I said, was that Pharaoh was trying to dismiss Moses as a magician, not a prophet of God.
Well Aaron was said to be the prophet not Moses. And again my point cannot be more clear. On the hand we have a so called miraculous sign performed by a servant of god and on the other we have to accept it was only magic when exactly the same sign is performed by someone who doesn't recognize this god. <<<< double standards.
Created:
-->
@SirAnonymous
You have just answered your own question. But seriously, what do you mean "No One Can EVER Answer This Question Satisfactorily"? Pretty much every Christian everywhere thinks it was Satan, and you just provided strong evidence that they're right.
I couldn't be sure I was right though. This is why I say, it has never for me, been Satisfactorily answered. And a perfect example of what I mean is given above at post #2 by the great biblical wordsmith himself EtrnlVw.
He tells us the serpent is only "symbolic". and is " only representative of the forms of temptation mankind faces". Is he not correct?
And he hasn't related or equate Satan Or the Devil at all to this serpent in the Garden. So, should he; as you seem to have done.? And has Revelation appears to also do?
Pretty much every Christian everywhere thinks it was Satan, and you just provided strong evidence that they're right.
It would be nice to hear that it is "strong evidence" from someone who believes they know more or better , SirAnonymous.
You have just answered your own question.
I have only said that I have read ...what maybe.... a reference to the serpents identity. I wouldn't want to say it definitely is one and the same.
. Are you a devout Christian, SirAnonymous ? and are you telling me that the serpent of the Garden is the Satan also known as the Devil? (Revelation 12:9, 20:2)
And could you just clear up for me if or not the serpent/Satan Devil at Genesis 3:1 is the same serpent Satan Devil as the one cursed Genesis 3:14
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Why was JESUS such a PERVERT?!
Not sure Brother , But If I recollect correctly, there is a verse or two that tells of naked youth (I am assuming male), was seen running from Jesus' grasp or house I=in middle of the night. Only god knows what they were up to or caught doing. I am far too lazy at the moment to find it. So either ignore and disregard it or some else can look for the verses themselves.
Created:
-->
@EtrnlVw
There was never a talking snake....surprise, surprise!
It is generally considered to be a talking snake , I know, it is rather silly but so is grabbing dragon by the tail in revelation. But I do ask WHO and not WHAT. And it does mention a serpent all the same. So of the many species there are of reptiles and serpents you can choose which ever you think Genesis is referring to. I am not fussed in the slightest. Its the identity of the "serpent" I am asking about.
>>>>>>>>>>The question is What is the identity of the serpent in the garden of Eden.,
The serpent is representative of the forms of temptation mankind faces in this life,
I see. Satan or Devil or both or one and the same?
this has nothing to do with any snake,
I didn't really believe it was that is why I asked WHO and not WHAT , but your missing my question.
it's just being used to form an illustration so the serpent wasn't really a "who" even though the devil and or Satan are often times used to reference the negative forces.
I see. So are the Devil and Satan one and the same entity or being; and are they simply being referenced or referred to as a serpent? And could you be clear on that.
And lo and behold Adam and Eve are representative of mankind as a whole.
I see. But this is way way past having anything to do with my actual question. here>> Who was the serpent that had tempted Eve in the Garden of Eden? Notice I ask who and not what.
Most of what is being portrayed in Genesis is symbolic,
Well, well, well, I'd never have guessed. So can you answer my question now.
much of it has layered meanings. And yes, that includes the tree of life, the curses and everything else.
Ok. But what about my question.
Note that temptations are subtle, they begin with thought....they are weighed out in the individuals mind...they take on an emotional grasp, the individual wrestles with that temptation....then, after indulgence they reek havoc on the individuals life.
Well spotted. Now about my original question.
You can say that temptations are the root of all the bad things man does,
Yes you can. Now about my question?
and because of this temptations are considered a curse above all things.
Ok
Once they are fulfilled, it's like eating "dust" in that carnal desires are never satisfied. They promise satisfaction to the individual, but they can never fulfill that promise.
It must have been my writing. It must have been way way too small for you to read. try this>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>WHO WAS THE SERPENT THAT TEMPTED EVE IN THE GARDEN OF EDEN<<<<<<<<<<<<<<????
.
Created:
-->
@EtrnlVw
That is of course if you make the assumption that the soul does not survive a physical death.
The soul? What is the soul?
Created:
Posted in:
It would be better to use the word "sign" than miracle, Stephen,
As you wish, it was a "sign" then of gods miraculous power.
The fact that Moses' snake ate the snakes of the magicians was a sign as well.
Yes I have indicated as much above. See post 13 " Indeed GOD'S snake was obviously the best snake... etc etc.."
Later in the story, it becomes increasingly clear that the magicians are so outclassed that they themselves confess that God is at work.
Ok but this is not the issue . We know already that "god was at work" don't we. I am not going to bother going into who is the top god. And the Hebrew authors wouldn't have written it any other way , now would they.
NO, This issue is the double standard of the authors and the question of where did the ability to do exactly the same "sign" performed by Pharaoh's "sorcerers", come from?
Created:
-->
@ethang5
Why doesn't Jesus need "no defense"?<br>Jesus needs no defense.Why doesn't Jesus need "no defense"?I don't know. But I can tell you why He NEEDS no defense. Lol.
OK. That'll do. WHY?
Created:
.......Who was the serpent that had tempted Eve in the Garden of Eden.
I have read what maybe a reference to the serpents identity but god forbid!!!! that I should bare false witness and identify the wrong person, if indeed it was even a person.
In the book of Revelation, Satan is called “the ancient serpent” (Revelation 12:9, 20:2), is this referring to the snake in Genesis?
Created:
Posted in:
It is very clear from the rest of the story that what God ends up doing is so far beyond what the magicians are able to do.
Indeed GOD'S snake was obviously the best snake because it was a snake created by the all powerful GOD; it was gods special snake.
But where did the ability to do the same trick performed by Pharaoh's "sourcerers", come from?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
There is no legitimate debate, Stephen.
You mean you want to totally ignore the double standards shown here by the biblical authors. That is quite understandably seeing that pharaohs "sorcerers" could pull of the same stunt as Arron did but his stunt was supposed to be by a miracle and power of god. Wasn't it?
--> @Deb-8-a-bull had absolutely no problem whatsoever spotting these double standards. While you, did not. Even though it was glaring.
And to say there is "no debate here" is simply tell others here , that age old " nothing to see here, move on and everyone back on the bus" . GOD!! you really are stuck for explanations aren't you.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
Jesus needs no defense.
Why doesn't Jesus need "no defense"?
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
It's cool to think that you've devoted more thread initializations to Harikrish and your petty squabble with him than you have to your case for Jesus.
Yes he does this intentionally to disrupt a thread he cannot defend his god on. He does it to distract from the crux of the topic and also to bury his embarrassing contradictory statements and lies.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
It's not where I come to vent and lash out at others of opposing beliefs like you do.
Lets us see evidence my " & venting" lashing out sunshine.
And I know " It's not where I come to vent and lash out" . Your deceitful approach and tactic is to just play the victim instead and you do this because at least you do understand that "venting and lashing out " cannot and will not, win you an argument.
Now then. I have noticed there are far too many questions for you to cope with above, so why don't we try just 3 or 4 at a time and hope you can stay alert long enough to read them.
When was John baptised?
Why would John “need” to be baptised twice?
Who baptised John in the first place?
Why didn’t Jesus baptise John the Baptist after John had said “I need to be baptized by you”? Matthew 3:14
Take your time, and remember , it may help to remove or cover anything shiny or reflective in your bedroom that will distract you.
Created:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Stevie, I certainly don't want you to get banned.
Bullshit!!! You have made it so obviously clear that after your jubilation and excitement of seeing another member banned, your sole intention from that point on was to see the same happen to me.
--> @ethang5 wrote : Post 25 - Hey, EtrnlVw, Disgusting has been perma-banned. No more stalking and harassment anymore. Nice huh?EtrnlVw, responded : Post 34 - Really?? I may have to continue posting here, I was getting pretty disgusted by all the crazy unintelligent responses...we may have to work on Stevie though, looks like he's starting to pop. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/2254/true-christians-have-to-accept-that-jesus-was-an-abortionist?page=2
I ain't your buddy and would never want be.Still butthurt from carrying on like a buffoon.
Nope, I was never "butt hurt" and could never ever be by anyone with a childish mentality such as you posses. . I am extremely happy, in tip top form, alert,aware and still sharp a razor. Which is more than can be said about you sunshine.
Now how about you address the op just for once and stop carrying on your unnecessary and uncalled for vendetta you have with me on someone else's thread. There's a good boy.
Created: