Total Posts:131|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Zech 14 and the Second Temple Destruction

annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2014 2:51:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Those who seek to deny that Matthew, Mark, and Luke accurately record the words of Jesus - and who seek to place the writing of those respective books in a period at or after AD 70 - must explain the fact that Jesus merely built upon the prophesies of Zechariah.

Verse 1: "A day of the Lord is coming, Jerusalem, when your possessions will be plundered and divided up within your very walls."

Such language was nothing new. Regarding the destruction of the first temple at the hands of the Babylonians, Isaiah had used similar wording: "Wail, for the day of the Lord is near, as destruction from the Almighty. It will come ... " (Isa 13: 6) "A day of the Lord" simply means a time of judgment.

Verse 2: "I will gather all the nations to Jerusalem to fight against it; the city will be captured, the houses ransacked, and the women raped."

"All nations" were represented in the siege and destruction of Jerusalem. The Roman siege army contained legions from all over the empire. It goes without saying that ultimately the city was captured by the Romans. Women were raped. Houses were ransacked.

Luke 21 words it this way, "But when ye see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that her desolation is at hand."

The difference in Zech 14: 2 and Luke 21: 20 is the difference between tweddle-dee and tweddle-dum.

Verse 3: "Half of the city will go into exile, but the rest of the people will not be taken from the city."

It is a fact that many, many, MANY were "exiled" from the city - either by running from it before or during the siege, or by being sold into slavery after the capture. The remainder died within its walls.

Verse 3 of Zech is similar to the passage in Matt 24, "Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left."

Verse 5: "And ye shall flee by the valley of my mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azel; yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah"

Note the similarity to Matt 24: "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place ... then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day."

Jesus merely echoed and embellished the same warning.

Verse 6: "And it shall come to pass in that day, that there shall not be light."

See Matt 24: "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken ..."

Darkness, as it has in earlier prophesies (Jeremiah 4 regarding the destruction of the first temple), represented impending calamity for the Jewish state and Jewish people - the downfall of the Jewish luminaries and rulers.

Thus it is patently ridiculous to claim that "the writer of Matthew plagiarized from Mark", or "the writer of Luke plagiarized from Matthew", without advancing the same claim that the writer of Mark (I'm placing that book first by the arrangement of the skeptics) plagiarized from Zechariah! If not, then why not?

But with atheists and skeptics, the legs of the lame are not equal. I've never seen a one who was willing to claim that the writer of Mark plagiarized from Zechariah. Not a one. Why not? Answer: because no one in his right mind thinks that the book of Zechariah was written anywhere close to AD 70. With the gospel accounts, the skeptic finds it easy to slideeeeeeeeeee them over - for no good reason other than to offset the effect of the prophesies. With Zechariah, however, such gymnastics are not possible.

Wonder what the evasion will be? It'll be a toughie for I've read the A-list of the skeptics' resource library - and not a one ever deals with the subject.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/16/2014 3:18:47 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
How many times, Anna?

What's so hard about realizing that the stories in the New Testament are just that - stories? Anyone can write a story which builds on an older story. And when the final result tests upon a group of men picking with a bias, from a large collection of writings, to assemble the story they preferred from the various claims and manuscripts, it completely eliminates any mystery which you're suggesting to be evidence of God.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/16/2014 9:37:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/16/2014 3:18:47 AM, Beastt wrote:
How many times, Anna?

What's so hard about realizing that the stories in the New Testament are just that - stories? Anyone can write a story which builds on an older story. And when the final result tests upon a group of men picking with a bias, from a large collection of writings, to assemble the story they preferred from the various claims and manuscripts, it completely eliminates any mystery which you're suggesting to be evidence of God.

Is that the best you can do? Nobody "picked" the book of Zechariah to "assemble a story".
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bulproof
Posts: 25,255
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/16/2014 9:43:34 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Most of what old Zechi said didn't happen. Great prophecy.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/16/2014 9:49:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/16/2014 9:43:34 AM, bulproof wrote:
Most of what old Zechi said didn't happen. Great prophecy.

Yeah, it did. And the same language was employed, or similar, relating the the first destruction of the temple by the Babylonians. So your appeals to hyperliteralism aren't going to work so well.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bulproof
Posts: 25,255
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/16/2014 10:14:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/16/2014 9:49:35 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/16/2014 9:43:34 AM, bulproof wrote:
Most of what old Zechi said didn't happen. Great prophecy.

Yeah, it did. And the same language was employed, or similar, relating the the first destruction of the temple by the Babylonians. So your appeals to hyperliteralism aren't going to work so well.

What precisely is hyperliteralism?

Is that reading the words as the words actually mean?
Damn that language thing.

Like madman you want "no stone on another" to mean "well almost no stone" on another. It means the same in your world.

Too bad it doesn't in reality.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/16/2014 10:45:21 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/16/2014 10:14:27 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/16/2014 9:49:35 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/16/2014 9:43:34 AM, bulproof wrote:
Most of what old Zechi said didn't happen. Great prophecy.

Yeah, it did. And the same language was employed, or similar, relating the the first destruction of the temple by the Babylonians. So your appeals to hyperliteralism aren't going to work so well.

What precisely is hyperliteralism?

Is that reading the words as the words actually mean?

It is seeing such phrases as, "It will rain cats and dogs" and concluding that cats and dogs will come falling out of the clouds. After all, that's what the words actually mean, isn't it? Tell us. What does "raining cats and dogs" mean, from an atheistic point of view?

Also, explain the following:

"The little girl cried a barrel-full of tears."

Here's a good one:

"The boys were out looking for camel toes."


Like madman you want "no stone on another" to mean "well almost no stone" on another. It means the same in your world.

Too bad it doesn't in reality.

We'll see. I have some figures of speech that I'd like for you to explain from you literalistic point of view.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bulproof
Posts: 25,255
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 2:40:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/16/2014 10:45:21 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/16/2014 10:14:27 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/16/2014 9:49:35 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/16/2014 9:43:34 AM, bulproof wrote:
Most of what old Zechi said didn't happen. Great prophecy.

Yeah, it did. And the same language was employed, or similar, relating the the first destruction of the temple by the Babylonians. So your appeals to hyperliteralism aren't going to work so well.

What precisely is hyperliteralism?

Is that reading the words as the words actually mean?

It is seeing such phrases as, "It will rain cats and dogs" and concluding that cats and dogs will come falling out of the clouds. After all, that's what the words actually mean, isn't it? Tell us. What does "raining cats and dogs" mean, from an atheistic point of view?

Also, explain the following:

"The little girl cried a barrel-full of tears."

Here's a good one:

"The boys were out looking for camel toes."


Like madman you want "no stone on another" to mean "well almost no stone" on another. It means the same in your world.

Too bad it doesn't in reality.

We'll see. I have some figures of speech that I'd like for you to explain from you literalistic point of view.

Do you have a definitive list of idioms that god uses regularly?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
seeu46
Posts: 578
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 9:19:41 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/15/2014 2:51:30 PM, annanicole wrote:
Those who seek to deny that Matthew, Mark, and Luke accurately record the words of Jesus - and who seek to place the writing of those respective books in a period at or after AD 70 - must explain the fact that Jesus merely built upon the prophesies of Zechariah.

Verse 1: "A day of the Lord is coming, Jerusalem, when your possessions will be plundered and divided up within your very walls."

Such language was nothing new. Regarding the destruction of the first temple at the hands of the Babylonians, Isaiah had used similar wording: "Wail, for the day of the Lord is near, as destruction from the Almighty. It will come ... " (Isa 13: 6) "A day of the Lord" simply means a time of judgment.

Verse 2: "I will gather all the nations to Jerusalem to fight against it; the city will be captured, the houses ransacked, and the women raped."

"All nations" were represented in the siege and destruction of Jerusalem. The Roman siege army contained legions from all over the empire. It goes without saying that ultimately the city was captured by the Romans. Women were raped. Houses were ransacked.

Luke 21 words it this way, "But when ye see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that her desolation is at hand."

The difference in Zech 14: 2 and Luke 21: 20 is the difference between tweddle-dee and tweddle-dum.


Verse 3: "Half of the city will go into exile, but the rest of the people will not be taken from the city."

It is a fact that many, many, MANY were "exiled" from the city - either by running from it before or during the siege, or by being sold into slavery after the capture. The remainder died within its walls.

Verse 3 of Zech is similar to the passage in Matt 24, "Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left."


Verse 5: "And ye shall flee by the valley of my mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azel; yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah"

Note the similarity to Matt 24: "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place ... then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day."

Jesus merely echoed and embellished the same warning.

Verse 6: "And it shall come to pass in that day, that there shall not be light."

See Matt 24: "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken ..."

Darkness, as it has in earlier prophesies (Jeremiah 4 regarding the destruction of the first temple), represented impending calamity for the Jewish state and Jewish people - the downfall of the Jewish luminaries and rulers.


Thus it is patently ridiculous to claim that "the writer of Matthew plagiarized from Mark", or "the writer of Luke plagiarized from Matthew", without advancing the same claim that the writer of Mark (I'm placing that book first by the arrangement of the skeptics) plagiarized from Zechariah! If not, then why not?

But with atheists and skeptics, the legs of the lame are not equal. I've never seen a one who was willing to claim that the writer of Mark plagiarized from Zechariah. Not a one. Why not? Answer: because no one in his right mind thinks that the book of Zechariah was written anywhere close to AD 70. With the gospel accounts, the skeptic finds it easy to slideeeeeeeeeee them over - for no good reason other than to offset the effect of the prophesies. With Zechariah, however, such gymnastics are not possible.

Wonder what the evasion will be? It'll be a toughie for I've read the A-list of the skeptics' resource library - and not a one ever deals with the subject.

Good post anna.
bulproof
Posts: 25,255
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 9:35:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 9:19:41 AM, seeu46 wrote:

Good post anna.

So maybe you can answer this.?

Do you have a definitive list of idioms that god uses regularly?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
DPMartin
Posts: 1,096
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 10:46:02 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 9:35:48 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:19:41 AM, seeu46 wrote:

Good post anna.

So maybe you can answer this.?

Do you have a definitive list of idioms that god uses regularly?

Yes what the humble heart understands, but to be more specific, what ever the hearer understands.
You can start there.
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 10:51:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 9:35:48 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:19:41 AM, seeu46 wrote:

Good post anna.

So maybe you can answer this.?

Do you have a definitive list of idioms that god uses regularly?

Why don't you answer the OP instead of asking for a ridiculous list.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bulproof
Posts: 25,255
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 10:53:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 10:46:02 AM, DPMartin wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:35:48 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:19:41 AM, seeu46 wrote:

Good post anna.

So maybe you can answer this.?

Do you have a definitive list of idioms that god uses regularly?

Yes what the humble heart understands, but to be more specific, what ever the hearer understands.
You can start there.
I was after a list.

The bible is the word of god. If god uses idioms, which ones and why does he use them rather than expressing himself clearly. Is god really stupid?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 11:02:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 10:53:32 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:46:02 AM, DPMartin wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:35:48 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:19:41 AM, seeu46 wrote:

Good post anna.

So maybe you can answer this.?

Do you have a definitive list of idioms that god uses regularly?

Yes what the humble heart understands, but to be more specific, what ever the hearer understands.
You can start there.
I was after a list.

The bible is the word of god. If god uses idioms, which ones and why does he use them rather than expressing himself clearly. Is god really stupid?

There are books on the subject. Get yourself one. Certainly idioms, hundreds of them, are employed in Biblical literature.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bulproof
Posts: 25,255
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 11:46:03 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 11:02:38 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:53:32 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:46:02 AM, DPMartin wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:35:48 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:19:41 AM, seeu46 wrote:

Good post anna.

So maybe you can answer this.?

Do you have a definitive list of idioms that god uses regularly?

Yes what the humble heart understands, but to be more specific, what ever the hearer understands.
You can start there.
I was after a list.

The bible is the word of god. If god uses idioms, which ones and why does he use them rather than expressing himself clearly. Is god really stupid?

There are books on the subject. Get yourself one. Certainly idioms, hundreds of them, are employed in Biblical literature.

There are books on the idioms that your god uses? Please refer some to me.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 11:54:00 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 11:46:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:02:38 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:53:32 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:46:02 AM, DPMartin wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:35:48 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:19:41 AM, seeu46 wrote:

Good post anna.

So maybe you can answer this.?

Do you have a definitive list of idioms that god uses regularly?

Yes what the humble heart understands, but to be more specific, what ever the hearer understands.
You can start there.
I was after a list.

The bible is the word of god. If god uses idioms, which ones and why does he use them rather than expressing himself clearly. Is god really stupid?

There are books on the subject. Get yourself one. Certainly idioms, hundreds of them, are employed in Biblical literature.

There are books on the idioms that your god uses? Please refer some to me.

Google "Types and Metaphors of the Bible". Keach's is about a thousand pages.

Look, I can't help it if you want to say that "raining cats and dogs" means that felids and canids are tumbling out of the sky just as I can help it if you believe that the moon falling from the sky is literal - or a mountain breaking into, or the sun ceasing to give light.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bulproof
Posts: 25,255
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 10:18:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 11:54:00 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:46:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:02:38 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:53:32 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:46:02 AM, DPMartin wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:35:48 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:19:41 AM, seeu46 wrote:

Good post anna.

So maybe you can answer this.?

Do you have a definitive list of idioms that god uses regularly?

Yes what the humble heart understands, but to be more specific, what ever the hearer understands.
You can start there.
I was after a list.

The bible is the word of god. If god uses idioms, which ones and why does he use them rather than expressing himself clearly. Is god really stupid?

There are books on the subject. Get yourself one. Certainly idioms, hundreds of them, are employed in Biblical literature.

There are books on the idioms that your god uses? Please refer some to me.

Google "Types and Metaphors of the Bible". Keach's is about a thousand pages.

Look, I can't help it if you want to say that "raining cats and dogs" means that felids and canids are tumbling out of the sky just as I can help it if you believe that the moon falling from the sky is literal - or a mountain breaking into, or the sun ceasing to give light.

The idioms that GOD uses Annie, what men use is irrelevant when discussing the word of god.
So front up with your book of god's common idioms.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 10:20:23 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 10:18:02 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:54:00 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:46:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:02:38 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:53:32 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:46:02 AM, DPMartin wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:35:48 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:19:41 AM, seeu46 wrote:

Good post anna.

So maybe you can answer this.?

Do you have a definitive list of idioms that god uses regularly?

Yes what the humble heart understands, but to be more specific, what ever the hearer understands.
You can start there.
I was after a list.

The bible is the word of god. If god uses idioms, which ones and why does he use them rather than expressing himself clearly. Is god really stupid?

There are books on the subject. Get yourself one. Certainly idioms, hundreds of them, are employed in Biblical literature.

There are books on the idioms that your god uses? Please refer some to me.

Google "Types and Metaphors of the Bible". Keach's is about a thousand pages.

Look, I can't help it if you want to say that "raining cats and dogs" means that felids and canids are tumbling out of the sky just as I can help it if you believe that the moon falling from the sky is literal - or a mountain breaking into, or the sun ceasing to give light.

The idioms that GOD uses Annie, what men use is irrelevant when discussing the word of god.
So front up with your book of god's common idioms.

I told you to Google it.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bulproof
Posts: 25,255
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 10:26:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 10:20:23 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:18:02 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:54:00 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:46:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:02:38 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:53:32 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:46:02 AM, DPMartin wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:35:48 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:19:41 AM, seeu46 wrote:

Good post anna.

So maybe you can answer this.?

Do you have a definitive list of idioms that god uses regularly?

Yes what the humble heart understands, but to be more specific, what ever the hearer understands.
You can start there.
I was after a list.

The bible is the word of god. If god uses idioms, which ones and why does he use them rather than expressing himself clearly. Is god really stupid?

There are books on the subject. Get yourself one. Certainly idioms, hundreds of them, are employed in Biblical literature.

There are books on the idioms that your god uses? Please refer some to me.

Google "Types and Metaphors of the Bible". Keach's is about a thousand pages.

Look, I can't help it if you want to say that "raining cats and dogs" means that felids and canids are tumbling out of the sky just as I can help it if you believe that the moon falling from the sky is literal - or a mountain breaking into, or the sun ceasing to give light.

The idioms that GOD uses Annie, what men use is irrelevant when discussing the word of god.
So front up with your book of god's common idioms.

I told you to Google it.

Why don't you just admit that you don't even know if your god employs idioms, in fact you don't know that your god has ever said anything at all.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 10:40:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/15/2014 2:51:30 PM, annanicole wrote:
Those who seek to deny that Matthew, Mark, and Luke accurately record the words of Jesus - and who seek to place the writing of those respective books in a period at or after AD 70 - must explain the fact that Jesus merely built upon the prophesies of Zechariah.


Verse 6: "And it shall come to pass in that day, that there shall not be light."

See Matt 24: "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken ..."

Darkness, as it has in earlier prophesies (Jeremiah 4 regarding the destruction of the first temple), represented impending calamity for the Jewish state and Jewish people - the downfall of the Jewish luminaries and rulers.


Thus it is patently ridiculous to claim that "the writer of Matthew plagiarized from Mark", or "the writer of Luke plagiarized from Matthew", without advancing the same claim that the writer of Mark (I'm placing that book first by the arrangement of the skeptics) plagiarized from Zechariah! If not, then why not?

But with atheists and skeptics, the legs of the lame are not equal. I've never seen a one who was willing to claim that the writer of Mark plagiarized from Zechariah. Not a one. Why not? Answer: because no one in his right mind thinks that the book of Zechariah was written anywhere close to AD 70. With the gospel accounts, the skeptic finds it easy to slideeeeeeeeeee them over - for no good reason other than to offset the effect of the prophesies. With Zechariah, however, such gymnastics are not possible.

Wonder what the evasion will be? It'll be a toughie for I've read the A-list of the skeptics' resource library - and not a one ever deals with the subject.

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written by antichrists and false prophets who had no idea who our invisible Creator was. If all the writings of the saints existed in their original state, not one person would understand them. This is why they weren't used by antichrists to produce their new testament. They used a few ideas of the saints gospel but they mixed them with their religious ideas from Jewish, Roman, Greek, Persian and Babylonian traditions which has confused every single reader of the new testament since it was produced and approved by the Roman religious group called the Vatican.

The prophecies can be trusted by us saints to read because they're written in heavy symbolic form that was impossible for antichrists to change. Besides, our invisible Creator interprets them for us as we read them. All the prophecies you are using to refer to your 70 a.d. belief that the end of the age was at that time have nothing to do with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 a.d. They're about the day of the Lord that hasn't happened yet.

When the day of the Lord comes, there will be a total destruction by God's fire ( hot molten lava ) that will make the earth a "lake of fire". The event that happened on 70 a.d. when the Romans destroyed the city of Jerusalem didn't leave the entire earth barren of man and beast.

Zephaniah 1
18: Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them on the day of the wrath of the LORD. In the fire of his jealous wrath, all the earth shall be consumed; for a full, yea, sudden end he will make of all the inhabitants of the earth.

Jeremiah 4
22: "For my people are foolish, they know me not; they are stupid children, they have no understanding. They are skilled in doing evil, but how to do good they know not."
23: I looked on the earth, and lo, it was waste and void; and to the heaven, and they had no light.
24: I looked on the mountains, and lo, they were quaking, and all the hills moved to and fro.
25: I looked, and lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the air had fled.
26: I looked, and lo, the fruitful land was a desert, and all its cities were laid in ruins before the LORD, before his fierce anger.
27: For thus says the LORD, "The whole land shall be a desolation; yet I will not make a full end.
28: For this the earth shall mourn, and the heavens above be black; for I have spoken, I have purposed; I have not relented nor will I turn back."

Ezekiel 15
6: Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Like the wood of the vine among the trees of the forest, which I have given to the fire for fuel, so will I give up the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
7: And I will set my face against them; though they escape from the fire, the fire shall yet consume them; and you will know that I am the LORD, when I set my face against them.
8: And I will make the land desolate, because they have acted faithlessly, says the Lord GOD."


Only the spirit of God remains after He destroys the flesh of this world. All God's people and beasts are within His spirit that goes on forever.

Ezekiel 22
19: Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Because you have all become dross, therefore, behold, I will gather you into the midst of Jerusalem.
20: As men gather silver and bronze and iron and lead and tin into a furnace, to blow the fire upon it in order to melt it; so I will gather you in my anger and in my wrath, and I will put you in and melt you.
21: I will gather you and blow upon you with the fire of my wrath, and you shall be melted in the midst of it.
22: As silver is melted in a furnace, so you shall be melted in the midst of it; and you shall know that I the LORD have poured out my wrath upon you."
23: And the word of the LORD came to me:

Jerusalem in this prophecy means the entire earth, not just the city of Jerusalem. All the prophecies are written in symbolic form, not literal.
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 10:41:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 10:26:44 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:20:23 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:18:02 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:54:00 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:46:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:02:38 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:53:32 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:46:02 AM, DPMartin wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:35:48 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:19:41 AM, seeu46 wrote:

Good post anna.

So maybe you can answer this.?

Do you have a definitive list of idioms that god uses regularly?

Yes what the humble heart understands, but to be more specific, what ever the hearer understands.
You can start there.
I was after a list.

The bible is the word of god. If god uses idioms, which ones and why does he use them rather than expressing himself clearly. Is god really stupid?

There are books on the subject. Get yourself one. Certainly idioms, hundreds of them, are employed in Biblical literature.

There are books on the idioms that your god uses? Please refer some to me.

Google "Types and Metaphors of the Bible". Keach's is about a thousand pages.

Look, I can't help it if you want to say that "raining cats and dogs" means that felids and canids are tumbling out of the sky just as I can help it if you believe that the moon falling from the sky is literal - or a mountain breaking into, or the sun ceasing to give light.

The idioms that GOD uses Annie, what men use is irrelevant when discussing the word of god.
So front up with your book of god's common idioms.

I told you to Google it.

Why don't you just admit that you don't even know if your god employs idioms, in fact you don't know that your god has ever said anything at all.

I know that someone very accurately prophesied the siege and fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. That's the reason for the thread: "Zech 14 and the Second Temple Destruction".

It should have read, "Zech 14, Matt 24, Mark 13 and the Second Temple Destruction"
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 10:42:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 10:40:35 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/15/2014 2:51:30 PM, annanicole wrote:
Those who seek to deny that Matthew, Mark, and Luke accurately record the words of Jesus - and who seek to place the writing of those respective books in a period at or after AD 70 - must explain the fact that Jesus merely built upon the prophesies of Zechariah.


Verse 6: "And it shall come to pass in that day, that there shall not be light."

See Matt 24: "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken ..."

Darkness, as it has in earlier prophesies (Jeremiah 4 regarding the destruction of the first temple), represented impending calamity for the Jewish state and Jewish people - the downfall of the Jewish luminaries and rulers.


Thus it is patently ridiculous to claim that "the writer of Matthew plagiarized from Mark", or "the writer of Luke plagiarized from Matthew", without advancing the same claim that the writer of Mark (I'm placing that book first by the arrangement of the skeptics) plagiarized from Zechariah! If not, then why not?

But with atheists and skeptics, the legs of the lame are not equal. I've never seen a one who was willing to claim that the writer of Mark plagiarized from Zechariah. Not a one. Why not? Answer: because no one in his right mind thinks that the book of Zechariah was written anywhere close to AD 70. With the gospel accounts, the skeptic finds it easy to slideeeeeeeeeee them over - for no good reason other than to offset the effect of the prophesies. With Zechariah, however, such gymnastics are not possible.

Wonder what the evasion will be? It'll be a toughie for I've read the A-list of the skeptics' resource library - and not a one ever deals with the subject.

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written by antichrists and false prophets who had no idea who our invisible Creator was. If all the writings of the saints existed in their original state, not one person would understand them. This is why they weren't used by antichrists to produce their new testament. They used a few ideas of the saints gospel but they mixed them with their religious ideas from Jewish, Roman, Greek, Persian and Babylonian traditions which has confused every single reader of the new testament since it was produced and approved by the Roman religious group called the Vatican.

The prophecies can be trusted by us saints to read because they're written in heavy symbolic form that was impossible for antichrists to change. Besides, our invisible Creator interprets them for us as we read them. All the prophecies you are using to refer to your 70 a.d. belief that the end of the age was at that time have nothing to do with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 a.d. They're about the day of the Lord that hasn't happened yet.

When the day of the Lord comes, there will be a total destruction by God's fire ( hot molten lava ) that will make the earth a "lake of fire". The event that happened on 70 a.d. when the Romans destroyed the city of Jerusalem didn't leave the entire earth barren of man and beast.

Zephaniah 1
18: Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them on the day of the wrath of the LORD. In the fire of his jealous wrath, all the earth shall be consumed; for a full, yea, sudden end he will make of all the inhabitants of the earth.

Jeremiah 4
22: "For my people are foolish, they know me not; they are stupid children, they have no understanding. They are skilled in doing evil, but how to do good they know not."
23: I looked on the earth, and lo, it was waste and void; and to the heaven, and they had no light.
24: I looked on the mountains, and lo, they were quaking, and all the hills moved to and fro.
25: I looked, and lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the air had fled.
26: I looked, and lo, the fruitful land was a desert, and all its cities were laid in ruins before the LORD, before his fierce anger.
27: For thus says the LORD, "The whole land shall be a desolation; yet I will not make a full end.
28: For this the earth shall mourn, and the heavens above be black; for I have spoken, I have purposed; I have not relented nor will I turn back."

Ezekiel 15
6: Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Like the wood of the vine among the trees of the forest, which I have given to the fire for fuel, so will I give up the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
7: And I will set my face against them; though they escape from the fire, the fire shall yet consume them; and you will know that I am the LORD, when I set my face against them.
8: And I will make the land desolate, because they have acted faithlessly, says the Lord GOD."


Only the spirit of God remains after He destroys the flesh of this world. All God's people and beasts are within His spirit that goes on forever.

Ezekiel 22
19: Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Because you have all become dross, therefore, behold, I will gather you into the midst of Jerusalem.
20: As men gather silver and bronze and iron and lead and tin into a furnace, to blow the fire upon it in order to melt it; so I will gather you in my anger and in my wrath, and I will put you in and melt you.
21: I will gather you and blow upon you with the fire of my wrath, and you shall be melted in the midst of it.
22: As silver is melted in a furnace, so you shall be melted in the midst of it; and you shall know that I the LORD have poured out my wrath upon you."
23: And the word of the LORD came to me:

Jerusalem in this prophecy means the entire earth, not just the city of Jerusalem. All the prophecies are written in symbolic form, not literal.

I was asking for responses from sane people.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 10:45:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 10:42:08 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:40:35 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/15/2014 2:51:30 PM, annanicole wrote:
Those who seek to deny that Matthew, Mark, and Luke accurately record the words of Jesus - and who seek to place the writing of those respective books in a period at or after AD 70 - must explain the fact that Jesus merely built upon the prophesies of Zechariah.


Verse 6: "And it shall come to pass in that day, that there shall not be light."

See Matt 24: "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken ..."

Darkness, as it has in earlier prophesies (Jeremiah 4 regarding the destruction of the first temple), represented impending calamity for the Jewish state and Jewish people - the downfall of the Jewish luminaries and rulers.


Thus it is patently ridiculous to claim that "the writer of Matthew plagiarized from Mark", or "the writer of Luke plagiarized from Matthew", without advancing the same claim that the writer of Mark (I'm placing that book first by the arrangement of the skeptics) plagiarized from Zechariah! If not, then why not?

But with atheists and skeptics, the legs of the lame are not equal. I've never seen a one who was willing to claim that the writer of Mark plagiarized from Zechariah. Not a one. Why not? Answer: because no one in his right mind thinks that the book of Zechariah was written anywhere close to AD 70. With the gospel accounts, the skeptic finds it easy to slideeeeeeeeeee them over - for no good reason other than to offset the effect of the prophesies. With Zechariah, however, such gymnastics are not possible.

Wonder what the evasion will be? It'll be a toughie for I've read the A-list of the skeptics' resource library - and not a one ever deals with the subject.

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written by antichrists and false prophets who had no idea who our invisible Creator was. If all the writings of the saints existed in their original state, not one person would understand them. This is why they weren't used by antichrists to produce their new testament. They used a few ideas of the saints gospel but they mixed them with their religious ideas from Jewish, Roman, Greek, Persian and Babylonian traditions which has confused every single reader of the new testament since it was produced and approved by the Roman religious group called the Vatican.

The prophecies can be trusted by us saints to read because they're written in heavy symbolic form that was impossible for antichrists to change. Besides, our invisible Creator interprets them for us as we read them. All the prophecies you are using to refer to your 70 a.d. belief that the end of the age was at that time have nothing to do with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 a.d. They're about the day of the Lord that hasn't happened yet.

When the day of the Lord comes, there will be a total destruction by God's fire ( hot molten lava ) that will make the earth a "lake of fire". The event that happened on 70 a.d. when the Romans destroyed the city of Jerusalem didn't leave the entire earth barren of man and beast.

Zephaniah 1
18: Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them on the day of the wrath of the LORD. In the fire of his jealous wrath, all the earth shall be consumed; for a full, yea, sudden end he will make of all the inhabitants of the earth.

Jeremiah 4
22: "For my people are foolish, they know me not; they are stupid children, they have no understanding. They are skilled in doing evil, but how to do good they know not."
23: I looked on the earth, and lo, it was waste and void; and to the heaven, and they had no light.
24: I looked on the mountains, and lo, they were quaking, and all the hills moved to and fro.
25: I looked, and lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the air had fled.
26: I looked, and lo, the fruitful land was a desert, and all its cities were laid in ruins before the LORD, before his fierce anger.
27: For thus says the LORD, "The whole land shall be a desolation; yet I will not make a full end.
28: For this the earth shall mourn, and the heavens above be black; for I have spoken, I have purposed; I have not relented nor will I turn back."

Ezekiel 15
6: Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Like the wood of the vine among the trees of the forest, which I have given to the fire for fuel, so will I give up the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
7: And I will set my face against them; though they escape from the fire, the fire shall yet consume them; and you will know that I am the LORD, when I set my face against them.
8: And I will make the land desolate, because they have acted faithlessly, says the Lord GOD."


Only the spirit of God remains after He destroys the flesh of this world. All God's people and beasts are within His spirit that goes on forever.

Ezekiel 22
19: Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Because you have all become dross, therefore, behold, I will gather you into the midst of Jerusalem.
20: As men gather silver and bronze and iron and lead and tin into a furnace, to blow the fire upon it in order to melt it; so I will gather you in my anger and in my wrath, and I will put you in and melt you.
21: I will gather you and blow upon you with the fire of my wrath, and you shall be melted in the midst of it.
22: As silver is melted in a furnace, so you shall be melted in the midst of it; and you shall know that I the LORD have poured out my wrath upon you."
23: And the word of the LORD came to me:

Jerusalem in this prophecy means the entire earth, not just the city of Jerusalem. All the prophecies are written in symbolic form, not literal.

I was asking for responses from sane people.

The religious Jews didn't hear the Truth that the other saints were preaching, either. Most Christians can't hear the Truth spoken today as I preach the gospel to God's believers here in Campbell. However, there are many believers coming to me this past year who called themselves Christians. Now they know the Truth.
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 10:52:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 10:45:21 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:42:08 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:40:35 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/15/2014 2:51:30 PM, annanicole wrote:
Those who seek to deny that Matthew, Mark, and Luke accurately record the words of Jesus - and who seek to place the writing of those respective books in a period at or after AD 70 - must explain the fact that Jesus merely built upon the prophesies of Zechariah.


Verse 6: "And it shall come to pass in that day, that there shall not be light."

See Matt 24: "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken ..."

Darkness, as it has in earlier prophesies (Jeremiah 4 regarding the destruction of the first temple), represented impending calamity for the Jewish state and Jewish people - the downfall of the Jewish luminaries and rulers.


Thus it is patently ridiculous to claim that "the writer of Matthew plagiarized from Mark", or "the writer of Luke plagiarized from Matthew", without advancing the same claim that the writer of Mark (I'm placing that book first by the arrangement of the skeptics) plagiarized from Zechariah! If not, then why not?

But with atheists and skeptics, the legs of the lame are not equal. I've never seen a one who was willing to claim that the writer of Mark plagiarized from Zechariah. Not a one. Why not? Answer: because no one in his right mind thinks that the book of Zechariah was written anywhere close to AD 70. With the gospel accounts, the skeptic finds it easy to slideeeeeeeeeee them over - for no good reason other than to offset the effect of the prophesies. With Zechariah, however, such gymnastics are not possible.

Wonder what the evasion will be? It'll be a toughie for I've read the A-list of the skeptics' resource library - and not a one ever deals with the subject.

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written by antichrists and false prophets who had no idea who our invisible Creator was. If all the writings of the saints existed in their original state, not one person would understand them. This is why they weren't used by antichrists to produce their new testament. They used a few ideas of the saints gospel but they mixed them with their religious ideas from Jewish, Roman, Greek, Persian and Babylonian traditions which has confused every single reader of the new testament since it was produced and approved by the Roman religious group called the Vatican.

The prophecies can be trusted by us saints to read because they're written in heavy symbolic form that was impossible for antichrists to change. Besides, our invisible Creator interprets them for us as we read them. All the prophecies you are using to refer to your 70 a.d. belief that the end of the age was at that time have nothing to do with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 a.d. They're about the day of the Lord that hasn't happened yet.

When the day of the Lord comes, there will be a total destruction by God's fire ( hot molten lava ) that will make the earth a "lake of fire". The event that happened on 70 a.d. when the Romans destroyed the city of Jerusalem didn't leave the entire earth barren of man and beast.

Zephaniah 1
18: Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them on the day of the wrath of the LORD. In the fire of his jealous wrath, all the earth shall be consumed; for a full, yea, sudden end he will make of all the inhabitants of the earth.

Jeremiah 4
22: "For my people are foolish, they know me not; they are stupid children, they have no understanding. They are skilled in doing evil, but how to do good they know not."
23: I looked on the earth, and lo, it was waste and void; and to the heaven, and they had no light.
24: I looked on the mountains, and lo, they were quaking, and all the hills moved to and fro.
25: I looked, and lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the air had fled.
26: I looked, and lo, the fruitful land was a desert, and all its cities were laid in ruins before the LORD, before his fierce anger.
27: For thus says the LORD, "The whole land shall be a desolation; yet I will not make a full end.
28: For this the earth shall mourn, and the heavens above be black; for I have spoken, I have purposed; I have not relented nor will I turn back."

Ezekiel 15
6: Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Like the wood of the vine among the trees of the forest, which I have given to the fire for fuel, so will I give up the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
7: And I will set my face against them; though they escape from the fire, the fire shall yet consume them; and you will know that I am the LORD, when I set my face against them.
8: And I will make the land desolate, because they have acted faithlessly, says the Lord GOD."


Only the spirit of God remains after He destroys the flesh of this world. All God's people and beasts are within His spirit that goes on forever.

Ezekiel 22
19: Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Because you have all become dross, therefore, behold, I will gather you into the midst of Jerusalem.
20: As men gather silver and bronze and iron and lead and tin into a furnace, to blow the fire upon it in order to melt it; so I will gather you in my anger and in my wrath, and I will put you in and melt you.
21: I will gather you and blow upon you with the fire of my wrath, and you shall be melted in the midst of it.
22: As silver is melted in a furnace, so you shall be melted in the midst of it; and you shall know that I the LORD have poured out my wrath upon you."
23: And the word of the LORD came to me:

Jerusalem in this prophecy means the entire earth, not just the city of Jerusalem. All the prophecies are written in symbolic form, not literal.

I was asking for responses from sane people.

The religious Jews didn't hear the Truth that the other saints were preaching, either. Most Christians can't hear the Truth spoken today as I preach the gospel to God's believers here in Campbell. However, there are many believers coming to me this past year who called themselves Christians. Now they know the Truth.

Sure they do, Brad. Run along.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bulproof
Posts: 25,255
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 11:06:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 10:41:08 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:26:44 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:20:23 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:18:02 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:54:00 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:46:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:02:38 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:53:32 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:46:02 AM, DPMartin wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:35:48 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:19:41 AM, seeu46 wrote:

Good post anna.

So maybe you can answer this.?

Do you have a definitive list of idioms that god uses regularly?

Yes what the humble heart understands, but to be more specific, what ever the hearer understands.
You can start there.
I was after a list.

The bible is the word of god. If god uses idioms, which ones and why does he use them rather than expressing himself clearly. Is god really stupid?

There are books on the subject. Get yourself one. Certainly idioms, hundreds of them, are employed in Biblical literature.

There are books on the idioms that your god uses? Please refer some to me.

Google "Types and Metaphors of the Bible". Keach's is about a thousand pages.

Look, I can't help it if you want to say that "raining cats and dogs" means that felids and canids are tumbling out of the sky just as I can help it if you believe that the moon falling from the sky is literal - or a mountain breaking into, or the sun ceasing to give light.

The idioms that GOD uses Annie, what men use is irrelevant when discussing the word of god.
So front up with your book of god's common idioms.

I told you to Google it.

Why don't you just admit that you don't even know if your god employs idioms, in fact you don't know that your god has ever said anything at all.

I know that someone very accurately prophesied the siege and fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. That's the reason for the thread: "Zech 14 and the Second Temple Destruction".

It should have read, "Zech 14, Matt 24, Mark 13 and the Second Temple Destruction"

WOW that's some reverse gear you've got on that bike. LMAO
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2014 11:43:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 11:06:25 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:41:08 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:26:44 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:20:23 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:18:02 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:54:00 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:46:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 11:02:38 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:53:32 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:46:02 AM, DPMartin wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:35:48 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/17/2014 9:19:41 AM, seeu46 wrote:

Good post anna.

So maybe you can answer this.?

Do you have a definitive list of idioms that god uses regularly?

Yes what the humble heart understands, but to be more specific, what ever the hearer understands.
You can start there.
I was after a list.

The bible is the word of god. If god uses idioms, which ones and why does he use them rather than expressing himself clearly. Is god really stupid?

There are books on the subject. Get yourself one. Certainly idioms, hundreds of them, are employed in Biblical literature.

There are books on the idioms that your god uses? Please refer some to me.

Google "Types and Metaphors of the Bible". Keach's is about a thousand pages.

Look, I can't help it if you want to say that "raining cats and dogs" means that felids and canids are tumbling out of the sky just as I can help it if you believe that the moon falling from the sky is literal - or a mountain breaking into, or the sun ceasing to give light.

The idioms that GOD uses Annie, what men use is irrelevant when discussing the word of god.
So front up with your book of god's common idioms.

I told you to Google it.

Why don't you just admit that you don't even know if your god employs idioms, in fact you don't know that your god has ever said anything at all.

I know that someone very accurately prophesied the siege and fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. That's the reason for the thread: "Zech 14 and the Second Temple Destruction".

It should have read, "Zech 14, Matt 24, Mark 13 and the Second Temple Destruction"

WOW that's some reverse gear you've got on that bike. LMAO

Everytime I get a msg that reads, "bulproof replied to your forum post ... ", I know before clicking on it that it's not worth the energy to flex my index finger.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2014 7:50:01 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 10:52:54 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:45:21 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:42:08 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:40:35 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/15/2014 2:51:30 PM, annanicole wrote:
Those who seek to deny that Matthew, Mark, and Luke accurately record the words of Jesus - and who seek to place the writing of those respective books in a period at or after AD 70 - must explain the fact that Jesus merely built upon the prophesies of Zechariah.


Verse 6: "And it shall come to pass in that day, that there shall not be light."

See Matt 24: "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken ..."

Darkness, as it has in earlier prophesies (Jeremiah 4 regarding the destruction of the first temple), represented impending calamity for the Jewish state and Jewish people - the downfall of the Jewish luminaries and rulers.


Thus it is patently ridiculous to claim that "the writer of Matthew plagiarized from Mark", or "the writer of Luke plagiarized from Matthew", without advancing the same claim that the writer of Mark (I'm placing that book first by the arrangement of the skeptics) plagiarized from Zechariah! If not, then why not?

But with atheists and skeptics, the legs of the lame are not equal. I've never seen a one who was willing to claim that the writer of Mark plagiarized from Zechariah. Not a one. Why not? Answer: because no one in his right mind thinks that the book of Zechariah was written anywhere close to AD 70. With the gospel accounts, the skeptic finds it easy to slideeeeeeeeeee them over - for no good reason other than to offset the effect of the prophesies. With Zechariah, however, such gymnastics are not possible.

Wonder what the evasion will be? It'll be a toughie for I've read the A-list of the skeptics' resource library - and not a one ever deals with the subject.

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written by antichrists and false prophets who had no idea who our invisible Creator was. If all the writings of the saints existed in their original state, not one person would understand them. This is why they weren't used by antichrists to produce their new testament. They used a few ideas of the saints gospel but they mixed them with their religious ideas from Jewish, Roman, Greek, Persian and Babylonian traditions which has confused every single reader of the new testament since it was produced and approved by the Roman religious group called the Vatican.

The prophecies can be trusted by us saints to read because they're written in heavy symbolic form that was impossible for antichrists to change. Besides, our invisible Creator interprets them for us as we read them. All the prophecies you are using to refer to your 70 a.d. belief that the end of the age was at that time have nothing to do with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 a.d. They're about the day of the Lord that hasn't happened yet.

When the day of the Lord comes, there will be a total destruction by God's fire ( hot molten lava ) that will make the earth a "lake of fire". The event that happened on 70 a.d. when the Romans destroyed the city of Jerusalem didn't leave the entire earth barren of man and beast.

Zephaniah 1
18: Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them on the day of the wrath of the LORD. In the fire of his jealous wrath, all the earth shall be consumed; for a full, yea, sudden end he will make of all the inhabitants of the earth.

Jeremiah 4
22: "For my people are foolish, they know me not; they are stupid children, they have no understanding. They are skilled in doing evil, but how to do good they know not."
23: I looked on the earth, and lo, it was waste and void; and to the heaven, and they had no light.
24: I looked on the mountains, and lo, they were quaking, and all the hills moved to and fro.
25: I looked, and lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the air had fled.
26: I looked, and lo, the fruitful land was a desert, and all its cities were laid in ruins before the LORD, before his fierce anger.
27: For thus says the LORD, "The whole land shall be a desolation; yet I will not make a full end.
28: For this the earth shall mourn, and the heavens above be black; for I have spoken, I have purposed; I have not relented nor will I turn back."

Ezekiel 15
6: Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Like the wood of the vine among the trees of the forest, which I have given to the fire for fuel, so will I give up the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
7: And I will set my face against them; though they escape from the fire, the fire shall yet consume them; and you will know that I am the LORD, when I set my face against them.
8: And I will make the land desolate, because they have acted faithlessly, says the Lord GOD."


Only the spirit of God remains after He destroys the flesh of this world. All God's people and beasts are within His spirit that goes on forever.

Ezekiel 22
19: Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Because you have all become dross, therefore, behold, I will gather you into the midst of Jerusalem.
20: As men gather silver and bronze and iron and lead and tin into a furnace, to blow the fire upon it in order to melt it; so I will gather you in my anger and in my wrath, and I will put you in and melt you.
21: I will gather you and blow upon you with the fire of my wrath, and you shall be melted in the midst of it.
22: As silver is melted in a furnace, so you shall be melted in the midst of it; and you shall know that I the LORD have poured out my wrath upon you."
23: And the word of the LORD came to me:

Jerusalem in this prophecy means the entire earth, not just the city of Jerusalem. All the prophecies are written in symbolic form, not literal.

I was asking for responses from sane people.

The religious Jews didn't hear the Truth that the other saints were preaching, either. Most Christians can't hear the Truth spoken today as I preach the gospel to God's believers here in Campbell. However, there are many believers coming to me this past year who called themselves Christians. Now they know the Truth.

Sure they do, Brad. Run along.

I can show you all the prophecies pertaining to the day of the Lord that hasn't happened yet but you will deny them all.
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2014 12:05:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
We need to figure out exactly how Zechariah and the gospel writers so accurately prophesied the fall of the city.

Beastt has enlightened us by saying, "What's so hard about realizing that the stories in the New Testament are just that - stories?"

That is, of course, nothing short of pure brilliance. Zechariah, of course, wrote after the destruction of the first temple, along with Haggai - and never pretended to be speaking of the Babylonians and Jerusalem.

He has also placed the dates of composition for all of the gospels after AD 70 - and done so, by his own admission, for the sole purpose of undermining any supernatural explanations of the prophesies. I can just as easily toss 'em to pre-AD 70 for no reason. But one will not that what has been said by atheists about the OT prophesies concerning the destruction of Herod's temple in AD 70 amounts to three naughts, two ciphers, and a zero.

I will concede, up front, that it's a topic not covered in the typical atheist/skeptic materials. Ehrman doesn't cover it, and I've never heard him mention it. But surely it can't be that difficult.

Here's a laugh: verse 2 says, "For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished."

Do you know the complaint made by the skeptics? LMAO! Why, they whine that "your god assisted in the raping of Jewish women at the hands of the pagan Romans!" How's that for a concession?
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
matt.mcguire88
Posts: 1,137
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2014 12:38:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/17/2014 10:42:08 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:40:35 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/15/2014 2:51:30 PM, annanicole wrote:
Those who seek to deny that Matthew, Mark, and Luke accurately record the words of Jesus - and who seek to place the writing of those respective books in a period at or after AD 70 - must explain the fact that Jesus merely built upon the prophesies of Zechariah.


Verse 6: "And it shall come to pass in that day, that there shall not be light."

See Matt 24: "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken ..."

Darkness, as it has in earlier prophesies (Jeremiah 4 regarding the destruction of the first temple), represented impending calamity for the Jewish state and Jewish people - the downfall of the Jewish luminaries and rulers.


Thus it is patently ridiculous to claim that "the writer of Matthew plagiarized from Mark", or "the writer of Luke plagiarized from Matthew", without advancing the same claim that the writer of Mark (I'm placing that book first by the arrangement of the skeptics) plagiarized from Zechariah! If not, then why not?

But with atheists and skeptics, the legs of the lame are not equal. I've never seen a one who was willing to claim that the writer of Mark plagiarized from Zechariah. Not a one. Why not? Answer: because no one in his right mind thinks that the book of Zechariah was written anywhere close to AD 70. With the gospel accounts, the skeptic finds it easy to slideeeeeeeeeee them over - for no good reason other than to offset the effect of the prophesies. With Zechariah, however, such gymnastics are not possible.

Wonder what the evasion will be? It'll be a toughie for I've read the A-list of the skeptics' resource library - and not a one ever deals with the subject.

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written by antichrists and false prophets who had no idea who our invisible Creator was. If all the writings of the saints existed in their original state, not one person would understand them. This is why they weren't used by antichrists to produce their new testament. They used a few ideas of the saints gospel but they mixed them with their religious ideas from Jewish, Roman, Greek, Persian and Babylonian traditions which has confused every single reader of the new testament since it was produced and approved by the Roman religious group called the Vatican.

The prophecies can be trusted by us saints to read because they're written in heavy symbolic form that was impossible for antichrists to change. Besides, our invisible Creator interprets them for us as we read them. All the prophecies you are using to refer to your 70 a.d. belief that the end of the age was at that time have nothing to do with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 a.d. They're about the day of the Lord that hasn't happened yet.

When the day of the Lord comes, there will be a total destruction by God's fire ( hot molten lava ) that will make the earth a "lake of fire". The event that happened on 70 a.d. when the Romans destroyed the city of Jerusalem didn't leave the entire earth barren of man and beast.

Zephaniah 1
18: Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them on the day of the wrath of the LORD. In the fire of his jealous wrath, all the earth shall be consumed; for a full, yea, sudden end he will make of all the inhabitants of the earth.

Jeremiah 4
22: "For my people are foolish, they know me not; they are stupid children, they have no understanding. They are skilled in doing evil, but how to do good they know not."
23: I looked on the earth, and lo, it was waste and void; and to the heaven, and they had no light.
24: I looked on the mountains, and lo, they were quaking, and all the hills moved to and fro.
25: I looked, and lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the air had fled.
26: I looked, and lo, the fruitful land was a desert, and all its cities were laid in ruins before the LORD, before his fierce anger.
27: For thus says the LORD, "The whole land shall be a desolation; yet I will not make a full end.
28: For this the earth shall mourn, and the heavens above be black; for I have spoken, I have purposed; I have not relented nor will I turn back."

Ezekiel 15
6: Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Like the wood of the vine among the trees of the forest, which I have given to the fire for fuel, so will I give up the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
7: And I will set my face against them; though they escape from the fire, the fire shall yet consume them; and you will know that I am the LORD, when I set my face against them.
8: And I will make the land desolate, because they have acted faithlessly, says the Lord GOD."


Only the spirit of God remains after He destroys the flesh of this world. All God's people and beasts are within His spirit that goes on forever.

Ezekiel 22
19: Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Because you have all become dross, therefore, behold, I will gather you into the midst of Jerusalem.
20: As men gather silver and bronze and iron and lead and tin into a furnace, to blow the fire upon it in order to melt it; so I will gather you in my anger and in my wrath, and I will put you in and melt you.
21: I will gather you and blow upon you with the fire of my wrath, and you shall be melted in the midst of it.
22: As silver is melted in a furnace, so you shall be melted in the midst of it; and you shall know that I the LORD have poured out my wrath upon you."
23: And the word of the LORD came to me:

Jerusalem in this prophecy means the entire earth, not just the city of Jerusalem. All the prophecies are written in symbolic form, not literal.

I was asking for responses from sane people.

LOL, who woulda thought a religion forum could be so comedic.
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2014 12:52:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/18/2014 12:38:44 PM, matt.mcguire88 wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:42:08 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/17/2014 10:40:35 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/15/2014 2:51:30 PM, annanicole wrote:
Those who seek to deny that Matthew, Mark, and Luke accurately record the words of Jesus - and who seek to place the writing of those respective books in a period at or after AD 70 - must explain the fact that Jesus merely built upon the prophesies of Zechariah.


Verse 6: "And it shall come to pass in that day, that there shall not be light."

See Matt 24: "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken ..."

Darkness, as it has in earlier prophesies (Jeremiah 4 regarding the destruction of the first temple), represented impending calamity for the Jewish state and Jewish people - the downfall of the Jewish luminaries and rulers.


Thus it is patently ridiculous to claim that "the writer of Matthew plagiarized from Mark", or "the writer of Luke plagiarized from Matthew", without advancing the same claim that the writer of Mark (I'm placing that book first by the arrangement of the skeptics) plagiarized from Zechariah! If not, then why not?

But with atheists and skeptics, the legs of the lame are not equal. I've never seen a one who was willing to claim that the writer of Mark plagiarized from Zechariah. Not a one. Why not? Answer: because no one in his right mind thinks that the book of Zechariah was written anywhere close to AD 70. With the gospel accounts, the skeptic finds it easy to slideeeeeeeeeee them over - for no good reason other than to offset the effect of the prophesies. With Zechariah, however, such gymnastics are not possible.

Wonder what the evasion will be? It'll be a toughie for I've read the A-list of the skeptics' resource library - and not a one ever deals with the subject.

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written by antichrists and false prophets who had no idea who our invisible Creator was. If all the writings of the saints existed in their original state, not one person would understand them. This is why they weren't used by antichrists to produce their new testament. They used a few ideas of the saints gospel but they mixed them with their religious ideas from Jewish, Roman, Greek, Persian and Babylonian traditions which has confused every single reader of the new testament since it was produced and approved by the Roman religious group called the Vatican.

The prophecies can be trusted by us saints to read because they're written in heavy symbolic form that was impossible for antichrists to change. Besides, our invisible Creator interprets them for us as we read them. All the prophecies you are using to refer to your 70 a.d. belief that the end of the age was at that time have nothing to do with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 a.d. They're about the day of the Lord that hasn't happened yet.

When the day of the Lord comes, there will be a total destruction by God's fire ( hot molten lava ) that will make the earth a "lake of fire". The event that happened on 70 a.d. when the Romans destroyed the city of Jerusalem didn't leave the entire earth barren of man and beast.

Zephaniah 1
18: Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them on the day of the wrath of the LORD. In the fire of his jealous wrath, all the earth shall be consumed; for a full, yea, sudden end he will make of all the inhabitants of the earth.

Jeremiah 4
22: "For my people are foolish, they know me not; they are stupid children, they have no understanding. They are skilled in doing evil, but how to do good they know not."
23: I looked on the earth, and lo, it was waste and void; and to the heaven, and they had no light.
24: I looked on the mountains, and lo, they were quaking, and all the hills moved to and fro.
25: I looked, and lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the air had fled.
26: I looked, and lo, the fruitful land was a desert, and all its cities were laid in ruins before the LORD, before his fierce anger.
27: For thus says the LORD, "The whole land shall be a desolation; yet I will not make a full end.
28: For this the earth shall mourn, and the heavens above be black; for I have spoken, I have purposed; I have not relented nor will I turn back."

Ezekiel 15
6: Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Like the wood of the vine among the trees of the forest, which I have given to the fire for fuel, so will I give up the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
7: And I will set my face against them; though they escape from the fire, the fire shall yet consume them; and you will know that I am the LORD, when I set my face against them.
8: And I will make the land desolate, because they have acted faithlessly, says the Lord GOD."


Only the spirit of God remains after He destroys the flesh of this world. All God's people and beasts are within His spirit that goes on forever.

Ezekiel 22
19: Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Because you have all become dross, therefore, behold, I will gather you into the midst of Jerusalem.
20: As men gather silver and bronze and iron and lead and tin into a furnace, to blow the fire upon it in order to melt it; so I will gather you in my anger and in my wrath, and I will put you in and melt you.
21: I will gather you and blow upon you with the fire of my wrath, and you shall be melted in the midst of it.
22: As silver is melted in a furnace, so you shall be melted in the midst of it; and you shall know that I the LORD have poured out my wrath upon you."
23: And the word of the LORD came to me:

Jerusalem in this prophecy means the entire earth, not just the city of Jerusalem. All the prophecies are written in symbolic form, not literal.

I was asking for responses from sane people.

LOL, who woulda thought a religion forum could be so comedic.

It attracts the fruitcakes from all corners. Borno gets all his revelations directly; thus, he can't be wrong. BioMystic reads the zodiac for his religion. SkyAngel sees the word "the" in a sentence and claims it's symbolic of something. MadCornish redefines common words at the drop of a hat, based upon the latest WatchTower propaganda. Beastt makes his assertions, then when the details get a little tedious, he claims victory and moves on. One fruitcake told me that in order to fund the extra billions in health care/death/other benefits for proposed "gay spouses", the government just needs to print more money. Yep, that would solve it!
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."