Lothian
should be banned
Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth.
- Thread starter DOC
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bible evidence new testament
- Status
Crucifiction is mentioned in the Code of Hammurabi (c. 1700 BCE)
Also Crucifixion also happened before Moses came to Egypt, during the Amenophis IV (Akhenaten)
Don't you think it is odd that a crucifixion is not mentioned once in the OT. I thought stoning was the method of choice for the Jews. It's hard to pierce one's hands and feet with a stone.
Lothian
should be banned
I don't know where the forearm info came from but lesson 1 of the Mooring website says this
"When the Bible says that the risen Jesus had nail prints in His hands and side (John 20:25), the Greek word for "hands" takes in the wrists as well (16)".
http://www.themoorings.org/apologetics/crucifixion/cruc.html
And the bible says this:
“Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands, and put my finger in the mark of the nails and my hand in his side, I will not believe." (Gospel of John, 20:25)
It's good to see that you now acknowledge that the bible translators sometimes use the wrong English words for the original Greek.
ETA: Of course, 'forearm' is still not the same as 'wrist'. Or, alternatively, were you suggesting that Thomas was going to put his hand up to his forearm in Jesus's side?
Last edited:
Simon39759
Master Poster
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2009
- Messages
- 2,285
Here is the Psalm 22.
The whole psalm is a long list of suffering by a person and yet the person still trust his God.
The whole 'feet and hands' bit is just one line out of 31 verses totaling 79 lines.
Even then, we don't really know if it is accurate, many people argue that the common crucification imagery is not very accurate as the flesh of the palms would have been unable to keep the victim up. It has been argued that the nails were most likely driven ; through the victim's ankles or heels and the forearms, between the radius and the ulma. Exhumed skeletons would be consistent with this, but it is possible that the Romans had some level of variation in their methods and the Jesus was indeed crucified as commonly described.
It is not a validation of the psalm, of course, merely not an outright falsification of it.
Other details that would help identify the suffering as a crucification, let alone THE Crucifixion, having being condemned, being hanged (maybe on top of a hill surrounded by two other guys), being executed by gentiles... None of this is present.
As for the casting lots on the victims' garments, I have yet to see any reference of it being a Roman practice outside of the Bible. It actually doesn't strike me as credible, would you want to wear the dirty cheap clothes of a dead guy?
And, of course, how would have the gospel's writers know of the fate of Jesus' clothing?
Most likely, like Jesus riding on both a donkey AND a foal, like Jesus asking for a drink (by the own admission of the Gospel's writers) this was added to make it fill the prediction, a posteriori.
So, the psalm is not nearly as much of astounding match as Doc pretends it is.
There is one line, out of 79, that may describe a part of the crucification, maybe even with some level of accuracy.
And that's it. The rest is nothing but the description of the suffering of the servant and the promise of God's final justice.
The servant dwells on his suffering but does not offer any insight that might suggests him being more than human or having a religious message and there is nothing about his final resurrection of him coming back to judge mankind or being God in disguise.
So really, I just can't find this amazing coincidence really convincing at all.
Well, sorta, the buggers could be downright inventive.
But, yes, stoning would have been the sentence for Jesus' blasphemy, which is one of the reasons that make me doubt of the Bible version of Jesus being judged by the Sanhedrin and everything.
Of course, there is no reason to believe that the psalm 22 is about an execution in the first place...
The whole psalm is a long list of suffering by a person and yet the person still trust his God.
The whole 'feet and hands' bit is just one line out of 31 verses totaling 79 lines.
Even then, we don't really know if it is accurate, many people argue that the common crucification imagery is not very accurate as the flesh of the palms would have been unable to keep the victim up. It has been argued that the nails were most likely driven ; through the victim's ankles or heels and the forearms, between the radius and the ulma. Exhumed skeletons would be consistent with this, but it is possible that the Romans had some level of variation in their methods and the Jesus was indeed crucified as commonly described.
It is not a validation of the psalm, of course, merely not an outright falsification of it.
Other details that would help identify the suffering as a crucification, let alone THE Crucifixion, having being condemned, being hanged (maybe on top of a hill surrounded by two other guys), being executed by gentiles... None of this is present.
As for the casting lots on the victims' garments, I have yet to see any reference of it being a Roman practice outside of the Bible. It actually doesn't strike me as credible, would you want to wear the dirty cheap clothes of a dead guy?
And, of course, how would have the gospel's writers know of the fate of Jesus' clothing?
Most likely, like Jesus riding on both a donkey AND a foal, like Jesus asking for a drink (by the own admission of the Gospel's writers) this was added to make it fill the prediction, a posteriori.
So, the psalm is not nearly as much of astounding match as Doc pretends it is.
There is one line, out of 79, that may describe a part of the crucification, maybe even with some level of accuracy.
And that's it. The rest is nothing but the description of the suffering of the servant and the promise of God's final justice.
The servant dwells on his suffering but does not offer any insight that might suggests him being more than human or having a religious message and there is nothing about his final resurrection of him coming back to judge mankind or being God in disguise.
So really, I just can't find this amazing coincidence really convincing at all.
Well, sorta, the buggers could be downright inventive.
But, yes, stoning would have been the sentence for Jesus' blasphemy, which is one of the reasons that make me doubt of the Bible version of Jesus being judged by the Sanhedrin and everything.
Of course, there is no reason to believe that the psalm 22 is about an execution in the first place...
Last edited:
joobz
Tergiversator
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 17,998
Yes. Psalm 22 is quite interesting in regards to the story.
Obviously, first and for most, Mathew 27:46, where jesus says:
"My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me!" is a reference to the first line of psalm 22. This has been the source for the claim that this psalm is a prophecy of Jesus.
Interestingly, it has the following implications (not mutually exclusive)
1.) Psalm 22 clearly is written in the first person by a follower of god. Nowhere in the text of Psalm 22 does it suggest that the speaker is, in fact, god. But is merely one who is singled out and beaten upon by the wicked people surrounding him. The Psalm speaks of glory to come, regardless of the strife being observed today. That one day, the Lord's kingdom will be everywhere. that the "The meek shall eat and be satisfied: they shall praise the LORD that seek him: your heart shall live for ever." (inherit the earth, anyone?)
2.) it was a clearly intentional allusion in matthew. Whether or not this allusion was intentional by the author of matthew or by (in fact) jesus, is unkown. NO extrabiblical account exists of Jesus' words, so we can't know it is a fabrication. What we do know is that who ever made the allusion made it expressly with the idea that the speaker of the words (Why hast thou forsaken me) considered himself a man and not god.
So, if we do accept the idea that the psalm is prophecy, and prophecy fulfilled, christians must accept that this prophecy states Jesus was a man and not god.
But I do not believe that. It seems to me another example of the Jesus narrative being of redemption and the eminent coming of god. Remember that Christianity emerged from Jewish apocalyptic cults. Cults that would be familiar with passages like Psalm 22, which is incredibly apocalyptic in it's statements. The author of Matthew most likely made the allusion to emphasize the idea that god will win in the end and his followers will be the big winners, which is sort of the point of Psalm 22.
ETA:
Interestingly, a Jewish translation of the Jewish Psalm 22 states:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Bible/Psalms22.html
Psalm 22:17 " For dogs have encompassed me; a company of evil-doers have inclosed me; like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet."
Interesting how the bible translation has lacks the "like a lion" part.
The original Hebrew text states:
יז כִּי סְבָבוּנִי, כְּלָבִים: עֲדַת מְרֵעִים, הִקִּיפוּנִי; כָּאֲרִי, יָדַי וְרַגְלָי.
Notice the word:
כָּאֲרִי,
which translates as aryan, or like a lion
go one step further from:
http://www.behindthename.com/nmc/jew.php
ARI (1) אֲרִי m Hebrew
Means "lion" in Hebrew.
From another site we are given a bit more clarity of what this states:
"In Hebrew, the verse reads karah ari yad regal. Literally, mauled lion hands feet. Or, the lion mauled my hands and feet. The KJV, and virtually all Christian translations, completely ignores the word ari. It’s easy to see why they do that – because it significantly alters the context of the verse. If we’re talking about lions mauling the Psalmist rather than the Psalmist being pierced by some unknown entity, then it’s clear it doesn’t refer to Jesus. Fabricating messianic prophecy via incorrect translation is a modus operandi of Christians today and has been throughout history."
http://shemaantimissionary.tripod.com/id18.html
Do you not think it odd that the KJV translation of the bible completely omits this "like a lion" part?
Obviously, first and for most, Mathew 27:46, where jesus says:
"My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me!" is a reference to the first line of psalm 22. This has been the source for the claim that this psalm is a prophecy of Jesus.
Interestingly, it has the following implications (not mutually exclusive)
1.) Psalm 22 clearly is written in the first person by a follower of god. Nowhere in the text of Psalm 22 does it suggest that the speaker is, in fact, god. But is merely one who is singled out and beaten upon by the wicked people surrounding him. The Psalm speaks of glory to come, regardless of the strife being observed today. That one day, the Lord's kingdom will be everywhere. that the "The meek shall eat and be satisfied: they shall praise the LORD that seek him: your heart shall live for ever." (inherit the earth, anyone?)
2.) it was a clearly intentional allusion in matthew. Whether or not this allusion was intentional by the author of matthew or by (in fact) jesus, is unkown. NO extrabiblical account exists of Jesus' words, so we can't know it is a fabrication. What we do know is that who ever made the allusion made it expressly with the idea that the speaker of the words (Why hast thou forsaken me) considered himself a man and not god.
So, if we do accept the idea that the psalm is prophecy, and prophecy fulfilled, christians must accept that this prophecy states Jesus was a man and not god.
But I do not believe that. It seems to me another example of the Jesus narrative being of redemption and the eminent coming of god. Remember that Christianity emerged from Jewish apocalyptic cults. Cults that would be familiar with passages like Psalm 22, which is incredibly apocalyptic in it's statements. The author of Matthew most likely made the allusion to emphasize the idea that god will win in the end and his followers will be the big winners, which is sort of the point of Psalm 22.
ETA:
Interestingly, a Jewish translation of the Jewish Psalm 22 states:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Bible/Psalms22.html
Psalm 22:17 " For dogs have encompassed me; a company of evil-doers have inclosed me; like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet."
Interesting how the bible translation has lacks the "like a lion" part.
The original Hebrew text states:
יז כִּי סְבָבוּנִי, כְּלָבִים: עֲדַת מְרֵעִים, הִקִּיפוּנִי; כָּאֲרִי, יָדַי וְרַגְלָי.
Notice the word:
כָּאֲרִי,
which translates as aryan, or like a lion
go one step further from:
http://www.behindthename.com/nmc/jew.php
ARI (1) אֲרִי m Hebrew
Means "lion" in Hebrew.
From another site we are given a bit more clarity of what this states:
"In Hebrew, the verse reads karah ari yad regal. Literally, mauled lion hands feet. Or, the lion mauled my hands and feet. The KJV, and virtually all Christian translations, completely ignores the word ari. It’s easy to see why they do that – because it significantly alters the context of the verse. If we’re talking about lions mauling the Psalmist rather than the Psalmist being pierced by some unknown entity, then it’s clear it doesn’t refer to Jesus. Fabricating messianic prophecy via incorrect translation is a modus operandi of Christians today and has been throughout history."
http://shemaantimissionary.tripod.com/id18.html
Do you not think it odd that the KJV translation of the bible completely omits this "like a lion" part?
Last edited:
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
Crucifiction is mentioned in the Code of Hammurabi (c. 1700 BCE)
Also Crucifixion also happened before Moses came to Egypt, during the Amenophis IV (Akhenaten)
Everything to do with judao/xtianity is a tawdry rip-off from the Amarna Period.
The reedcutters weren't noted for their literary and philosophical skills, and as a matter of fact they were more trouble than they were worth.
Had the whole lot of them chucked in the Red Sea once, but you wouldn't believe the fairytale they made out of that episode.
Last edited:
Simon39759
Master Poster
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2009
- Messages
- 2,285
Interesting, very interesting.
The 'like a lion' remind me of the comandment, 'thou shall not kill' which, apparently, uses the word for kill generally used for wild beast which would translate as 'thou shall not kill like a wild beast does (aka, with violence rather than due process)' often approximated as 'thou shall not murder'.
But, yes, reading psalm 22, there is nothing in there that even hint at would you'd expect a God man to say or think.
joobz
Tergiversator
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 17,998
Thanks
I reread my post, and I realized some aspects were in my brain, but didn't come off as well:
As a foot note:
1.) When I say "not mutually exclusive", I was referring to the allusion being made either by Jesus or by Matthew. In fact, it may be that the allusion was a tradition inspired by the actual Jesus and merely emphasized by the author.
2.) When I say "story of redemption", I was not referring to personal redemption (like the prodigal son) but of societal redemption. That we should endure because god is coming and he'll show we were right. That redemption story.
HERE IS PSALM 22 WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO PREDICT THE INCARNATION OF THE GOD AS JESUS AND HIS DEATH TO APPEASE HIS EVIL TWIN "THE LORD" (The evil triplet, the holy ghost, is silent throughout.) :
1 My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?
Why are you so far from saving me,
so far from the words of my groaning?"
BUT JESUS WAS GOD, ACCORDING TO TRINITARIAN CHRISTIANS.
THAT HE WOULD FORSAKE HIMSELF, THE ONE GOD, IS ABSURD.
2 O my God, I cry out by day, but you do not answer,
by night, and am not silent.
THE CRUCIFIXION TOOK ONLY A FEW HOURS.
3 Yet you are enthroned as the Holy One;
you are the praise of Israel. [a]
4 In you our fathers put their trust;
they trusted and you delivered them.
5 They cried to you and were saved;
in you they trusted and were not disappointed.
WHY DOES JESUS SAY 'OUR FATHERS' WHEN REFERRING TO THE JEWS? I THOUGHT THAT (THE LORD OR THE HOLY GHOST OR JESUS HIMSELF OR ALL THREE) WAS JESUS' FATHER. AT LEAST THAT'S WHAT CHRISTIANS CLAIM: THAT JESUS WAS THE SON OF THE GOD HE WAS PRAYING TO. SO WHY IS HE TALKING ABOUT 'OUR FATHERS' ?
6 But I am a worm and not a man,
scorned by men and despised by the people.
BUT IF JESUS WAS GOD HE LIED WHEN HE SAID HE WAS A WORM. A GOD IS NOT A WORM.
7 All who see me mock me;
they hurl insults, shaking their heads:
8 "He trusts in the LORD;
let the LORD rescue him.
Let him deliver him,
since he delights in him."
"ALL WHO SEE ME MOCK ME"? WHERE WAS LUKE? IF HE WAS NOT AN EYEWITNESS AT THE CRUCIFIXION THEN HIS REPORT IS HEARSAY FROM THOSE WHO HATED JESUS.
9 Yet you brought me out of the womb;
you made me trust in you
even at my mother's breast.
10 From birth I was cast upon you;
from my mother's womb you have been my God.
THIS SUGGESTS JESUS WAS NOT PART OF THE TRINITY BEFORE HIS BIRTH AS A HUMAN. SO HOW COULD HE HAVE OFFERED TO DIE FOR MANKIND'S SINS BEFORE HE EXISTED?
BESIDES, IF HE DID VOLUNTEER BEFORE HIS BIRTH AS A HUMAN, HE KNEW THIS WOULD HAPPEN WHEN HE SIGNED UP. WHY COMPLAIN NOW, WHEN HE'S DOING WHAT HE CAME TO EARTH TO DO?
11 Do not be far from me,
for trouble is near
and there is no one to help.
12 Many bulls surround me;
strong bulls of Bashan encircle me.
13 Roaring lions tearing their prey
open their mouths wide against me.
THERE IS NOTHING IN THE NT ABOUT BULLS AND LIONS AT THE CRUCIFIXION.
14 I am poured out like water,
and all my bones are out of joint.
My heart has turned to wax;
it has melted away within me.
15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth;
you lay me in the dust of death.
WHY BERATE THE LORD? JESUS IS GOD. HE KNOWS HE WILL BE RESURRECTED!
DOESN'T HE?
16 Dogs have surrounded me;
a band of evil men has encircled me,
they have pierced [c] my hands and my feet.
17 I can count all my bones;
people stare and gloat over me.
18 They divide my garments among them
and cast lots for my clothing.
19 But you, O LORD, be not far off;
O my Strength, come quickly to help me.
20 Deliver my life from the sword,
my precious life from the power of the dogs.
HIS PRAYER WAS UNANSWERED. THE SOLDIER PIERCED HIS SIDE WITH A SWORD.
MAYBE THE SECOND PRAYER WAS ANSWERED. NOTHING IN THE N.T. ABOUT DOGS EATING HIM.
21 Rescue me from the mouth of the lions;
save [d] me from the horns of the wild oxen.
NO MENTION IN THE N.T. ABOUT WILD OXEN PRESENT AT THE CRUCIFIXION,
EITHER.
22 I will declare your name to my brothers;
in the congregation I will praise you.
NOTHING IN THE N.T. ABOUT JESUS GOING TO THE SYNAGOGUES AFTER HIS RESURRECTION.
23 You who fear the LORD, praise him!
All you descendants of Jacob, honor him!
Revere him, all you descendants of Israel!
24 For he has not despised or disdained
the suffering of the afflicted one;
he has not hidden his face from him
but has listened to his cry for help.
HERE JESUS SEEMS TO BE MAKING A DEAL WITH THE LORD: IF YOU'LL SAVE ME FROM THE CROSS I WILL GIVE YOU CREDIT BEFORE THE JEWS.
AGAIN: HAS HE FORGOTTEN THAT HE OFFERED TO DIE TO SATISFY THE BLOOD LUST OF HIS FATHER "THE LORD"?
DOES HE NOT KNOW HE WILL DIE?
IF HE DOES NOT KNOW, IS HE GOD?
IF HE DOES KNOW, WHY THIS POINTLESS BEGGING AND WHINING?
25 From you comes the theme of my praise in the great assembly;
before those who fear you [e] will I fulfill my vows.
BUT JESUS JUST SAID HE WAS BEING CRUCIFIED
26 The poor will eat and be satisfied;
they who seek the LORD will praise him—
may your hearts live forever!
WELL, I GUESS NO POOR CHRISTIANS HAVE EVER STARVED TO DEATH, THEN. OR ELSE THIS IS JUST GIBBERISH.
27 All the ends of the earth
will remember and turn to the LORD,
and all the families of the nations
will bow down before him,
28 for dominion belongs to the LORD
and he rules over the nations.
29 All the rich of the earth will feast and worship;
all who go down to the dust will kneel before him—
those who cannot keep themselves alive.
30 Posterity will serve him;
future generations will be told about the Lord.
31 They will proclaim his righteousness
to a people yet unborn—
for he has done it.
NOT YET, ANYWAY. THE MAJORITY OF HUMANS ARE NOT TRINITARIAN CHRISTIANS.
------------------
HOW CAN GROWN-UP PEOPLE BELIEVE NONSENSE LIKE THIS?
1 My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?
Why are you so far from saving me,
so far from the words of my groaning?"
BUT JESUS WAS GOD, ACCORDING TO TRINITARIAN CHRISTIANS.
THAT HE WOULD FORSAKE HIMSELF, THE ONE GOD, IS ABSURD.
2 O my God, I cry out by day, but you do not answer,
by night, and am not silent.
THE CRUCIFIXION TOOK ONLY A FEW HOURS.
3 Yet you are enthroned as the Holy One;
you are the praise of Israel. [a]
4 In you our fathers put their trust;
they trusted and you delivered them.
5 They cried to you and were saved;
in you they trusted and were not disappointed.
WHY DOES JESUS SAY 'OUR FATHERS' WHEN REFERRING TO THE JEWS? I THOUGHT THAT (THE LORD OR THE HOLY GHOST OR JESUS HIMSELF OR ALL THREE) WAS JESUS' FATHER. AT LEAST THAT'S WHAT CHRISTIANS CLAIM: THAT JESUS WAS THE SON OF THE GOD HE WAS PRAYING TO. SO WHY IS HE TALKING ABOUT 'OUR FATHERS' ?
6 But I am a worm and not a man,
scorned by men and despised by the people.
BUT IF JESUS WAS GOD HE LIED WHEN HE SAID HE WAS A WORM. A GOD IS NOT A WORM.
7 All who see me mock me;
they hurl insults, shaking their heads:
8 "He trusts in the LORD;
let the LORD rescue him.
Let him deliver him,
since he delights in him."
"ALL WHO SEE ME MOCK ME"? WHERE WAS LUKE? IF HE WAS NOT AN EYEWITNESS AT THE CRUCIFIXION THEN HIS REPORT IS HEARSAY FROM THOSE WHO HATED JESUS.
9 Yet you brought me out of the womb;
you made me trust in you
even at my mother's breast.
10 From birth I was cast upon you;
from my mother's womb you have been my God.
THIS SUGGESTS JESUS WAS NOT PART OF THE TRINITY BEFORE HIS BIRTH AS A HUMAN. SO HOW COULD HE HAVE OFFERED TO DIE FOR MANKIND'S SINS BEFORE HE EXISTED?
BESIDES, IF HE DID VOLUNTEER BEFORE HIS BIRTH AS A HUMAN, HE KNEW THIS WOULD HAPPEN WHEN HE SIGNED UP. WHY COMPLAIN NOW, WHEN HE'S DOING WHAT HE CAME TO EARTH TO DO?
11 Do not be far from me,
for trouble is near
and there is no one to help.
12 Many bulls surround me;
strong bulls of Bashan encircle me.
13 Roaring lions tearing their prey
open their mouths wide against me.
THERE IS NOTHING IN THE NT ABOUT BULLS AND LIONS AT THE CRUCIFIXION.
14 I am poured out like water,
and all my bones are out of joint.
My heart has turned to wax;
it has melted away within me.
15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth;
you lay me in the dust of death.
WHY BERATE THE LORD? JESUS IS GOD. HE KNOWS HE WILL BE RESURRECTED!
DOESN'T HE?
16 Dogs have surrounded me;
a band of evil men has encircled me,
they have pierced [c] my hands and my feet.
17 I can count all my bones;
people stare and gloat over me.
18 They divide my garments among them
and cast lots for my clothing.
19 But you, O LORD, be not far off;
O my Strength, come quickly to help me.
20 Deliver my life from the sword,
my precious life from the power of the dogs.
HIS PRAYER WAS UNANSWERED. THE SOLDIER PIERCED HIS SIDE WITH A SWORD.
MAYBE THE SECOND PRAYER WAS ANSWERED. NOTHING IN THE N.T. ABOUT DOGS EATING HIM.
21 Rescue me from the mouth of the lions;
save [d] me from the horns of the wild oxen.
NO MENTION IN THE N.T. ABOUT WILD OXEN PRESENT AT THE CRUCIFIXION,
EITHER.
22 I will declare your name to my brothers;
in the congregation I will praise you.
NOTHING IN THE N.T. ABOUT JESUS GOING TO THE SYNAGOGUES AFTER HIS RESURRECTION.
23 You who fear the LORD, praise him!
All you descendants of Jacob, honor him!
Revere him, all you descendants of Israel!
24 For he has not despised or disdained
the suffering of the afflicted one;
he has not hidden his face from him
but has listened to his cry for help.
HERE JESUS SEEMS TO BE MAKING A DEAL WITH THE LORD: IF YOU'LL SAVE ME FROM THE CROSS I WILL GIVE YOU CREDIT BEFORE THE JEWS.
AGAIN: HAS HE FORGOTTEN THAT HE OFFERED TO DIE TO SATISFY THE BLOOD LUST OF HIS FATHER "THE LORD"?
DOES HE NOT KNOW HE WILL DIE?
IF HE DOES NOT KNOW, IS HE GOD?
IF HE DOES KNOW, WHY THIS POINTLESS BEGGING AND WHINING?
25 From you comes the theme of my praise in the great assembly;
before those who fear you [e] will I fulfill my vows.
BUT JESUS JUST SAID HE WAS BEING CRUCIFIED
26 The poor will eat and be satisfied;
they who seek the LORD will praise him—
may your hearts live forever!
WELL, I GUESS NO POOR CHRISTIANS HAVE EVER STARVED TO DEATH, THEN. OR ELSE THIS IS JUST GIBBERISH.
27 All the ends of the earth
will remember and turn to the LORD,
and all the families of the nations
will bow down before him,
28 for dominion belongs to the LORD
and he rules over the nations.
29 All the rich of the earth will feast and worship;
all who go down to the dust will kneel before him—
those who cannot keep themselves alive.
30 Posterity will serve him;
future generations will be told about the Lord.
31 They will proclaim his righteousness
to a people yet unborn—
for he has done it.
NOT YET, ANYWAY. THE MAJORITY OF HUMANS ARE NOT TRINITARIAN CHRISTIANS.
------------------
HOW CAN GROWN-UP PEOPLE BELIEVE NONSENSE LIKE THIS?
Last edited:
dafydd
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 35,398
Beats me.Perhaps KK can enlighten us.
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
Appeal to authority is still a logical fallacy. Did they teach you about logical fallacies in your logic course?
Cactus Wren
Muse
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2006
- Messages
- 895
[hijack]I have to call you on this one, Simon. Try retting, scutching, and hackling enough flax to hand-spin (with a drop spindle) enough linen thread to hand-weave a yard of fabric. Or reread Stave Four of A Christmas Carol, in which someone literally takes Scrooge's shirt off his corpse to sell it -- in the apparent certainty that someone would "want to wear the dirty cheap clothes of a dead guy". Before spinning and weaving were mechanized, all clothing was worn and reused and handed on and mended until it couldn't support another stitch: who had worn it before didn't matter much, so long as he or she hadn't died of smallpox or something equally noxious.
Indeed; as for the casting of lots, the explanation I've heard, though I don't know if there is any supporting evidence for it, is that as the garment was a seamless robe, there was no way of dividing it up without damaging the cloth.
- Status