Split Thread Signs of the End Times

[Paul Bethke]

But a man can be forgiven and a woman cannot. According to you. Have you so swiftly forgotten what you posted in this very thread? Were you lying about that?

You confirm the fact that you do not read correctly what is posted.
A man who has sex with a promiscuous woman can be forgiven—but the woman can only be forgiven if she abstains from sex. That should be clear to you now!!

What a crock.

Men can be forgiven, women cannot. That is your claim. To you, women are nothing but chattel.

Oedipus rex.

Who does she live with now?


I have two daughters. Atheist daughters.

WTF? The economy of the what now?

Creepy. Women must stalk prospective husbands. Creepy.

And in your borked world, the men are forgiven but the women are not.

Because she has nice boobies, perhaps?

Nope. I agreed not to reveal the effect of those smooth tongues. I am morally bound. Pretty sweet though.

Oddly, this does not happen in the real world. Why is that?

Like hell they will.

At last we get to it. Women are goods to you.
And my ex brought me plenty of harm. Quit your lying.

You post a lot of nonsense.—read what is written, and do not assume to know my personal details.

 

[Paul Bethke]

Yet again you're missing the forest for the trees. The textual evidence suggests that Paul was married and that he was expressing frustration at being married while being persecuted.

http://theapologeticchristian.blogspot.com/2011/09/apostle-paul-was-not-single.html

Some suspect

he was divorced and bitter but that's always struck me as unnecessarily trying to explain misogyny that was typical for the time and place where he lived.

That is your problem you present false evidence, you suspect something and think it is fact—you represent how some atheist think—no evidence just speculation.

 

[Paul Bethke]

Mods nothing. You're refusing to answer a question about having kidnapped anyone. The police might be a better party to involve.

For the record, being called "corrupted" by a proven false prophet isn't a bad thing. Quite the opposite. It tells me I'm on the right track

I am not false—I present the truth so how can I be false?

So what are you trying to prove by suggesting my refusal to answer the question? What has kidnapping got to do with me?

 

[halleyscomet]

You post a lot of nonsense.—read what is written, and do not assume to know my personal details.

Quick tip from a man who has kids and is successfully teaching them. Saying "read what is written" without any kind of direction is not teaching, it's contradiction without evidence or support. What you're doing is, from an educational standpoint, futile and impotent. This is another example of why you're a complete and total failure at spreading your interpretation of scripture. You're incapable of giving people a REASON to care a withered fig branch what you have to say beyond your own pride and ego.

Even Jesus explained the parables to the apostles. Refusing to clarify doesn't make you look like a wise man of God. It makes you look like a dictatorial idiot who can't support anything he says. You might as well be sputtering in impotent rage as gripping a cracked monocle while you speak. You're behaving as a caricature, not an educator.

 

[Paul Bethke]

Quick tip from a man who has kids and is successfully teaching them. Saying "read what is written" without any kind of direction is not teaching, it's contradiction without evidence or support. What you're doing is, from an educational standpoint, futile and impotent. This is another example of why you're a complete and total failure at spreading your interpretation of scripture. You're incapable of giving people a REASON to care a withered fig branch what you have to say beyond your own pride and ego.

Even Jesus explained the parables to the apostles. Refusing to clarify doesn't make you look like a wise man of God. It makes you look like a dictatorial idiot who can't support anything he says. You might as well be sputtering in impotent rage as gripping a cracked monocle while you speak. You're behaving as a caricature, not an educator.

Looks like you have failed in what you want to achieve.

 

[Border Reiver]

It appears that neither Jesus or Paul were married---1Cor 7:7 I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.

First Corinthians makes NO statement as to whether Jesus was married or not. 1Cor 7:7 is a reference by Paul to himself, he does not say "I wish that all men were as I am and Jesus was." He says "I wish all men were as I am."

This is an odd chapter for the Bible, directly contradicting Yahweh's command to "be fruitful and multiply"(Gen 1:28), as the incredibly mysoginistic Paul is directing the members of the Church in Corinth that it is good if you don't have sexual relations with a woman (1Cor 7:1), but concedes that if you don't have the will of a Paul, that men should have a wife so that they can have sex whenever the man wants ("For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does.")

 

[halleyscomet]

I am not false—I present the truth so how can I be false?



So what are you trying to prove by suggesting my refusal to answer the question? What has kidnapping got to do with me?

We've already been through the proof of you being a false prophet. Don't lie and pretend you don't know what I'm talking about.

And don't lie and pretend you don't know why I'm asking you if you've ever kidnapped anyone. We're going high the 613 Mitzvot and the one about kidnapping is from Exodus 21:16. (The Wikipedia verse listings are either borked or from a translation that uses very different chapter and verse breakdowns than the major translations I'm familiar with. I need to look into that.)

"Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper's possession.

The Bible tells us not to kidnap anyone so I'm asking you if you've ever kidnapped anyone.

And you're STILL dodging the question.

 

[abaddon]

You confirm the fact that you do not read correctly what is posted.
A man who has sex with a promiscuous woman can be forgiven—but the woman can only be forgiven if she abstains from sex. That should be clear to you now!!

You are admitting to being an outright mysogynist?

You post a lot of nonsense.—read what is written, and do not assume to know my personal details.

Dodge. Stop doing that. We already know you are a false prophet. You claimed you would wither the grass at the 2010 world cup, you would blind Randi and an entire shopping list of posters right on this site. All of it failed. Every single bit of it.

By any definition, you are a false prophet.

Your latest claim is that you must first reform the church. Given that you never will, and cannot, this is also false prophecy.

Given that you are unable to resolve the bible lies without adding lies of your own invention (extrabiblical fiction) you cannot do that either. Further proving your false prophecy.

What does your bible say about that? Must I quote? Are you, as usual, ignorant of what the bible actually says about such snake oil?

It would appear so.

 

[halleyscomet]

Looks like you have failed in what you want to achieve.

What do you think I was trying to achieve?

Why do you think I failed?

Are you suggesting that I'm a failure as a father because I explain things to my sons instead of just telling them they're wrong?

 

[abaddon]

You confirm the fact that you do not read correctly what is posted.
A man who has sex with a promiscuous woman can be forgiven—but the woman can only be forgiven if she abstains from sex. That should be clear to you now!!

Yup. Because **** women. They don't count. Men can bonk anything that moves. Women, not so much. How in the name of the spaghetti monster are you going to justify such mysogny? Even the bible thinks you are being a dick.

You post a lot of nonsense.—read what is written, and do not assume to know my personal details.

I only care about those insofar as they impinge upon your insane claims. Otherwise, I don't care what madness you claim.

 

[Paul Bethke]

You are admitting to being an outright mysogynist?

False—you are lying.

Dodge. Stop doing that. We already know you are a false prophet. You claimed you would wither the grass at the 2010 world cup, you would blind Randi and an entire shopping list of posters right on this site. All of it failed. Every single bit of it.

Changed my approach—nothing wrong with that!!

By any definition, you are a false prophet.

Your latest claim is that you must first reform the church. Given that you never will, and cannot, this is also false prophecy.
Given that you are unable to resolve the bible lies without adding lies of your own invention (extrabiblical fiction) you cannot do that either. Further proving your false prophecy.
What does your bible say about that? Must I quote? Are you, as usual, ignorant of what the bible actually says about such snake oil?

It would appear so.

Again you are posting a lot of nonsense—but that is expected from you because you do not read what I have posted. You can go on ranting as much as you like it is of no consequence to me.
I am not false I represent the truth—it is you who sees truth as being false.

 

[Jodie]

A man who has sex with a promiscuous woman can be forgiven—but the woman can only be forgiven if she abstains from sex. That should be clear to you now!!

I don't agree with your interpretation of scripture. Thou shalt not commit adultery applies to both men and women. That said, these laws were written before birth control and genetic testing was invented. The Jewish identity is passed down through the mother so this is why it is written this particular way.

There is a lot of contradiction in the scriptures so you should read them from the context of the age when they were written. You need to also take into consideration that things were changed and added to the bible over time, another reason for the contradictions you'll find in the scriptures.

 

[Border Reiver]

I am not false—I present the truth so how can I be false?

So what are you trying to prove by suggesting my refusal to answer the question? What has kidnapping got to do with me?

You are not presenting the truth - you are quoting the Bible, which as been demonstrated over and over again, is not truth. It is a religious document with many historical, scientific and moral errors overlaid on the oral histories of a minor tribal grouping from the Middle East.

You've claimed to be living a life that is spiritually pure in accordance with the commands of Yahweh and halleyscomet has been going through the laws of Yahweh as they are written down in the Tanakh one by one to verify your claim. The Prohibition against kidnapping is one of those laws - while we're all fairly sure that you keep this one, halleyscomet is asking you out of a sense of thoroughness.

 

[Craig B]

Well then if you live with her, (whoever), do you copulate? Is copulation allowed in heaven?

Not if it is the same thing as marriage.

Matt 22:30 At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.​

So no bonking in heaven. I raised this issue with PB some time ago, but I have had no very detailed response.

 

[Paul Bethke]

What do you think I was trying to achieve?

Why do you think I failed?

Are you suggesting that I'm a failure as a father because I explain things to my sons instead of just telling them they're wrong?

I am not suggesting anything--you have failed that is why you are trying to discredit me for my success.
The lengths you going to are tantamount of a person who is trying to hide his own failures.
Do you explain to your sons the folly of committing adultery?
Could be that your marriage is a failure!

 

[abaddon]

False—you are lying.

Nope. Shall I embarrass you by quoting what you posted right here in this thread? Those wewr your post, no? Shall I quote you or not?

Changed my approach—nothing wrong with that!!

Useless. Changing your approach is not changing your crank belief. The crank belief remains the same throughout.

Again you are posting a lot of nonsense—

Expected. Anything which disagrees with you must perforce be rejected.

but that is expected from you because you do not read what I have posted.

Spoken like a gullible believer. Any any all contrary opinions are rejected.

You can go on ranting as much as you like it is of no consequence to me.

Your rants are of no consequence to anyone here. Did you have an actual point, or were you seeking to score points with your imaginary deity of choice?

I am not false I represent the truth—it is you who sees truth as being false.

You are demonstrably false. You have lied about every prediction you have made. Every single one. It would be difficult to get more false than that.

 

[Paul Bethke]

I don't agree with your interpretation of scripture. Thou shalt not commit adultery applies to both men and women. That said, these laws were written before birth control and genetic testing was invented. The Jewish identity is passed down through the mother so this is why it is written this particular way.

There is a lot of contradiction in the scriptures so you should read them from the context of the age when they were written. You need to also take into consideration that things were changed and added to the bible over time, another reason for the contradictions you'll find in the scriptures.

Nothing has changed the Ten Commandments that Scripture is based on stays the same. A man may have sex with a prostitute and be forgiven—but the prostitute is not forgiven, until she repents and abstains from sex.---Jesus stated that with the woman taken in adultery---John 8:11 "No one, sir," she said. "Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin."
But now a man who has sex with a virgin and does not remain her husband is committing adultery—and if he seeks forgiveness then he must abstain from sex, and remain celibate.

You see it works both ways---the Day of the LORD is coming where all will needs give account of their marital status.

The Ten Commandments are the foundation of the Scriptures, upon which all people will be judged.

 

[Paul Bethke]

Nope. Shall I embarrass you by quoting what you posted right here in this thread? Those wewr your post, no? Shall I quote you or not?

Please do that—I have nothing to be embarrassed by>

Useless. Changing your approach is not changing your crank belief. The crank belief remains the same throughout.


Expected. Anything which disagrees with you must perforce be rejected.

Spoken like a gullible believer. Any any all contrary opinions are rejected.

Your rants are of no consequence to anyone here. Did you have an actual point, or were you seeking to score points with your imaginary deity of choice?
You are demonstrably false. You have lied about every prediction you have made. Every single one. It would be difficult to get more false than that.

No I have not lied—I explained that they are in limbo until the right times comes for me to demonstrate what is recorded.
So where is the lie—there is no lie only a clear explanation, which is perfectly feasible?

 

[Border Reiver]

Please do that—I have nothing to be embarrassed by>



No I have not lied—I explained that they are in limbo until the right times comes for me to demonstrate what is recorded.
So where is the lie—there is no lie only a clear explanation, which is perfectly feasible?

Mr. Bethke, you claimed you would wither the grass at the 2010 World Cup. This did not happen.

This is not something that is "in limbo until the right times comes" that is a specific prediction with a definite time. Since the 2010 World Cup can NEVER again happen, saying that it has been delayed is tantamount to admitting failure. Face it, if a practitioner of traditional religions told you that "Raven/Odin/Zeus/Shiva/etc would wither the grass on your front lawn this August" and it didn't happen - would you accept his statement that said deity had put the matter on hold until the time was right, or would you call the practitioner a liar? Be honest.

 

[Paul Bethke]

Mr. Bethke, you claimed you would wither the grass at the 2010 World Cup. This did not happen.

This is not something that is "in limbo until the right times comes" that is a specific prediction with a definite time. Since the 2010 World Cup can NEVER again happen, saying that it has been delayed is tantamount to admitting failure. Face it, if a practitioner of traditional religions told you that "Raven/Odin/Zeus/Shiva/etc would wither the grass on your front lawn this August" and it didn't happen - would you accept his statement that said deity had put the matter on hold until the time was right, or would you call the practitioner a liar? Be honest.

Yes I did predict that I would be instrumental in the withering grass saga—now that did not happen, the reason being that I predicted prematurely, not realising that there was another issue of greater importance that needed to be accomplished first.

So 2010 has come and gone with no withering having taken place, but the more important issue is still in progress.

So if at a later stage just for the sake of accomplishment the withering takes place at a later stage, surely the spectacular event can be seen as a postponement.

You see I made the withering grass a focus point and now it has been revealed that the purging of the Church is of greater importance at this stage. So until the purging of the Church takes place all other demonstrations are in limbo.