Split Thread Signs of the End Times

[halleyscomet]

It is more the explaining Scripture from Scripture.

Is English your native language? You seem really stumped and confused by the definition of the word "interpret." I'd suggest you look it up in a dictionary but I already posted the relevant text and you still didn't understand it.

Regardless, since you appear to be too ashamed of how you treat your parents to speak of it, I'll move onto the next law.

"35Ex. 20:14 — Not to kidnap — Yemenite->Ex. 20:13"

Have you ever kidnapped anyone?

 

[Border Reiver]

What evidence do you have that your holy book is any more accurate than any other collection of myths?

You seem to keep missing this question. May we have an answer?

 

[Paul Bethke]

Come now. Are you not even trying to put any thought into this? The first time a customer pays for her, she's a virgin. Other people got it fast enough.

So all prostitutes were at one time virgins!

The fact that she is a prostitute in my example is really not all that relevant. I just used the example of a prostitute to make clear that Jesus' teachings didn't line up with yours. Let's use my own life as an example. When I first had sex, it wasn't with a virgin. I had a couple of other partners who also weren't virgins. Then, my next partner was a virgin when we met. One more non-virgin after that. Then, one final non-virgin, who I met and married.

So you are committing adultery, and the virgin you abandoned, if she is married is also committing adultery, and the man who married the virgin you abandoned is committing adultery., so you have really left quite a trail behind you, so I understand why you are trying so hard to bring a different meaning into marriage.

So, am I really married? And if so, to whom? We could try to sort it all out by killing off people, but we might run out of stones first. More importantly, Jesus says no. You can't kill all of us whores and whoremongers. Should we all go live as monks and nuns? What, then, should we do with our children. There's no way you could justify any suggestion you make that is rooted in the sex-marriage identity. Jesus didn't teach it.

But Jesus did refer us back to what the Creator ordained in the beginning—so you are incorrect in your assessment.

Ok. I can buy that. Marriage ought to be a meeting of virgins who mate for life. No problem. It's not that I agree with that, but there would be some benefits, and my own opinion isn't all that important anyway. If you want to say that the Bible describes what an ideal marriage ought to be like, then I can accept that. If, on the other hand, you say that any sex means you are automatically married and part of an unbreakable bond, such reasoning defies both the Bible and common sense.

Well that is what I have been saying—the world must go back to what God ordained as marriage in the beginning.
So the new generation that has not been defiled can now embark on a life that conforms to what the Creator ordained. The rest will have to bear the guilt of their errors.

Here is an example that a virgin who has had sex is married, and as the law states there can be no divorce. Deut 22:19 They shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give them to the girl's father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives.

I gave examples that when a man lies with a woman they become husband and wife—so Jesus upheld this concept.

Mat 19:6 So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

So this definitely refers to sex being the joining force. The Hebrews consider it as bonding the two—so divorce is ripping them apart, to which God refers to as violence.

 

[Paul Bethke]

Given your documented failure, why would anyone believe a word of that nonsense?

But you can be a false prophet when you fail to wither the grass and blind people. Thus you are a failed prophet.

The epitomy of circular reasoning. The bible is true because the bible says it is true.

Does it never occur to you that using the bible to assess the bible is an utterly bovine exercise?

Postponement not failures—the events were set aside so that there can be a greater demonstration of power confirming the Creators creation abilities.
As I said the withering of grass will be replaced with a far greater withering—besides there will be a more inclusive explanation.

The Bible from my perspective is a reliable source of the revelation the Creator has given of his will—granted there are many enigmas, but they can be explained, and those that cannot do not deter from the actual revelation..

Circular reason only applies if the Scriptures cannot be validated.

 

[Paul Bethke]

You've made it clear your commission is to reform the church. You even admitted you've spoken to a few pastors about it and been rebuffed. You're only here because you've failed before and are terrified of trying again.

You can dismiss us as "just atheists and agnostics" but actual pastors are harder for you to ignore. You are here because of the same fear that drove Jonah to the sea.

The more you protest, the more clear the parallels between you and Jonah become.

Once more you show how ignorant you are concerning my commission—you are just guessing.

 

[Paul Bethke]

Things and events. You will not tell us what they are. You just continually use these vague references so that if something does happen, you can say... "See, see. That is exactly what I told you was going to happen".
Oldest trick in the false prophets playbook.

Not so Fuzzy you will see without a doubt what I will do is genuine.

 

[Paul Bethke]

Paul Bethke, you say in this post that you, right now, personally, have no evidence that anything in the Bible is true. Yet you have, in your own words, come on this forum to convince atheists that the Bible is true.
This raises so many questions I hardly know where to start, but I will confine myself to just two:

1. If you have no evidence the Bible is true, why do you believe it?

2. What evidence do you have, beyond your fervent wish, that evidence will be provided that the Bible is more than just a myth?

I may be asking the impossible here, but I would appreciate detailed answers rather than vague generalisations and hints of greater, hidden knowledge to which only you are privy.
As a further caveat, quotes from the Bible will not suffice as an adequate answer. You say you have read the Bible, so the evidence that it is true cannot be contained within it, as you would already have seen it. The fact that you say you have no evidence the Bible is true must mean the evidence is not within the Bible.

What I am saying is that there is no current proof to validate the Scriptures—but when the time comes, then by repeating many of the recorded miracles it can be seen that the Bible is a true record of the events recorded—so at the present time there is no evidence.

I have my own proof that the Creator does exist, and the study of the Scriptures reveals his wisdom, so from the understanding of scriptures I conclude that what is written can and will take place as a demonstration of the Creators’ abilities.

One thing is pertinent that God cannot act until his perfect will is understood. So in the past, there have been fragments of truth, but not the complete understanding. This is now understood, so in the near future things can begin to unfold.

 

[Agatha]

<polite snip>

Here is an example that a virgin who has had sex is married, and as the law states there can be no divorce. Deut 22:19 They shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give them to the girl's father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives.

I gave examples that when a man lies with a woman they become husband and wife—so Jesus upheld this concept.

Mat 19:6 So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

So this definitely refers to sex being the joining force. The Hebrews consider it as bonding the two—so divorce is ripping them apart, to which God refers to as violence.

You have not yet responded to the following points that people are making.

1. Not all virgins bleed on first penetration, so a woman who is a virgin may be unjustly condemned as unchaste if her husband decides he doesn't like her. Do you support the Biblical punishment of the stoning of virgins who cannot prove their virginity?

2. According to you, if a virgin is raped, she must marry the rapist (if he's caught). Would you agree that this is a terrible injustice for the woman?

 

[Paul Bethke]

Ironically, the Bible itself tells us we have no reason to fear you. The very book you tell us to heed makes it clear we are not to listen to you because of your failed prophesies.

If we are to take the Bible as truth then our first act, according to the Bible, should be to close out ears to what YOU have to say.

But the time will come for all to fear---Luke_12:5 But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him.

 

[Paul Bethke]

As far as I'm aware James Randi can still see. Jesus totally left you hanging.

But as I said postponed for a far greater demonstration—as I have stated the purged Church will be the vehicle through which the power of Yahweh will be displayed. So when you hear of this taking place, you will know that the time is near for the Day of the LORD.

 

[Meadmaker]

So you are committing adultery, and the virgin you abandoned, if she is married is also committing adultery, and the man who married the virgin you abandoned is committing adultery., so you have really left quite a trail behind you, so I understand why you are trying so hard to bring a different meaning into marriage.

So, I abandoned the virgin. (Well, she wasn't a virgin at the time I abandoned her, but I think you get that.) And in the eyes of God we were married, it would seem.

But wait. If I go back to my first sex partner, she had sex with, and abandoned, a virgin (i.e. me). So, weren't we married? So when I had sex with a virgin, I was already married, so I couldn't be married to Laura (the virgin) because I was already married to Jane. But wait. Jane wasn't a virgin when we had sex, so Jane and I couldn't be married, because she must have already been married.

Or is this one of those cases where we have some male/female asymmetry going on? Is it that the first time a male has sex with a female virgin, they are married? Oh, wait. What if a virgin man has sex with a virgin woman? Married. Clearly. Then he, no longer a virgin, has sex with another virgin woman. Now what? Who is married to whom?

As I said before, we're asking you to put a little thought into this. The Bible describes what the authors thought was an ideal way of living, and there's an awful lot to be said for mating for life, and not abandoning sex partners along the way. We may not all agree with the advice of the Bible, but it's consistent and not ridiculous. However, you've twisted that good advice on the best way to live into some sort of spellcasting magic that occurs when penises enter vaginas.

And even if the world reverts to the sort of ideal world that enforces God's law among men, it won't change the fact that people will still commit adultery, and virgins will still sell themselves as sex partners to married men. Maybe they will be stoned to death when they are caught, which ought to keep that sort of thing to a minimum, but it will still happen, just like it does in Iran, or Saudi Arabia, or ISIS-held lands where they do that sort of thing even today. So, beheadings and stonings don't really solve the problem. The Bible says that men and women should be married in order to have sex, but this magic part is your own invention.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Well if it your satisfies curiosity--I am married to the same woman who was a virgin when we got married.

I second Craig4's follow-up question. Are the two of you still living together?

 

[abaddon]

Postponement not failures—the events were set aside so that there can be a greater demonstration of power confirming the Creators creation abilities.
As I said the withering of grass will be replaced with a far greater withering—besides there will be a more inclusive explanation.

Are you still going to wither the grass at the 2010 World Cup?

The Bible from my perspective is a reliable source of the revelation the Creator has given of his will—granted there are many enigmas, but they can be explained, and those that cannot do not deter from the actual revelation..

No you simply try to paint your interpretation onto the bible.

Circular reason only applies if the Scriptures cannot be validated.

They can't. There is no evidence that any of is true.

 

[Paul Bethke]

You have not yet responded to the following points that people are making.

1. Not all virgins bleed on first penetration, so a woman who is a virgin may be unjustly condemned as unchaste if her husband decides he doesn't like her. Do you support the Biblical punishment of the stoning of virgins who cannot prove their virginity?

2. According to you, if a virgin is raped, she must marry the rapist (if he's caught). Would you agree that this is a terrible injustice for the woman?

All virgins have a hymen, so it is possible that certain activities can rend the hymen.
In this case a mother will have to intervene to record this event.
Besides there is honesty when the two plan to marry, this can be presented.

But today I understand that there is hymen restoration—but that will constitute dishonesty.

A virgin who is raped will be exonerated by having the rapist put to death. I never said she must marry the rapist—she is forced into a situation, so the laws of the land must protect her.

But because I say that sex is marriage, there is no consent on the virgins’ part that is why it is called rape.

Here is a situation where a brother honoured his sister---2Sam_13:32 But Jonadab son of Shimeah, David's brother, said, "My lord should not think that they killed all the princes; only Amnon is dead. This has been Absalom's expressed intention ever since the day Amnon raped his sister Tamar.

Prior to this is another occation--Gen_34:26 They put Hamor and his son Shechem to the sword and took Dinah from Shechem's house and left.

The brothers took revenge for the rape of their sister.

Deut_22:25 But if out in the country a man happens to meet a girl pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die.
Now the problem arises because men have changed the law of God that protects a virgin.
Rapist must be put to death to exonerate the victim.

 

[Paul Bethke]

I second Craig4's follow-up question. Are the two of you still living together?

We are still in holy matrimony.

 

[Paul Bethke]

Are you still going to wither the grass at the 2010 World Cup?

No you simply try to paint your interpretation onto the bible.

They can't. There is no evidence that any of is true.

But that is what I am about to prove the Scriptures as authentic--so watch this space as they say!!

 

[abaddon]

But that is what I am about to prove the Scriptures as authentic--so watch this space as they say!!

Stop dodging. Are you going to wither the grass at the 2010 World Cup as you claimed?

 

[Paul Bethke]

Until

OK I am going off the Forum now--see you all tomorrow or the next day--until then enjoy yourselves.

 

[abaddon]

We are still in holy matrimony.

Another dodge. That was not what was asked. According to you, that would apply to me and my ex-wife also, despite the fact that she is some 6 years removed from my life. And before you ask the obvious, I have had relations since with other women and very nice they were too. As for my ex-wife, maybe she has or maybe she hasn't. I neither know nor care. It is not my business.

 

[Border Reiver]

We start with this:

The Bible from my perspective is a reliable source of the revelation the Creator has given of his will—granted there are many enigmas, but they can be explained, and those that cannot do not deter from the actual revelation..

Circular reason only applies if the Scriptures cannot be validated.

Move to this:

What I am saying is that there is no current proof to validate the Scriptures—but when the time comes, then by repeating many of the recorded miracles it can be seen that the Bible is a true record of the events recorded—so at the present time there is no evidence.

Obviously then, the Scriptures are invalid.

I have my own proof that the Creator does exist, and the study of the Scriptures reveals his wisdom, so from the understanding of scriptures I conclude that what is written can and will take place as a demonstration of the Creators’ abilities.

Other than the invalid scriptures, what proof do you have?

One thing is pertinent that God cannot act until his perfect will is understood. So in the past, there have been fragments of truth, but not the complete understanding. This is now understood, so in the near future things can begin to unfold.

Why can Yahweh not act until his will is understood now?

If we accept that the stories in the Bible are true (for the purposes of discussion only), then Yahweh was able to do so in the past (creation, the expulsion from Eden, Flood, the Tower of Babel, the Exodus, etc.). What has changed?

As for his doing so in the "near" future, I doubt it. After all, the End Times were supposed to start "soon" after they were written, so that the generation that witnessed him would not pass away. I am unaware of any 2,000 year old persons living at this time.