How To Get To Heaven When You Die

[GrouchyUSMC]

I understand it perfectly. Whoever wrote about their made up god Yahweh didn't want their people worshipping the other made up gods. It has zero to do with idols and everything to do with henotheism. This statement of yours proves you just don't get it "I literally said there was other gods at the time, they were man made gods." They're all man made gods Grouchy, including yours. Whoever wrote Genesis, and there were several people involved in that, is acknowledging that there are other gods (man made just like theirs), they just don't want their readers or believers to worship those other man made gods. They only want people to worship their man made god. You're so desperate to try and win an argument with me, any argument you don't care how stupid you make yourself look. You're saying Dickus, yes you're correct there were other gods and yes the Israelites followed them but Dickus you're wrong when you point that out because those other gods were just idols. My god is real, look at this pretty statue of Jesus, see my god is real, he's not an idol. Do you even have a clue how stupid you sound?

So if the people who wrote Genesis didn't want other people to worship gods, why (in your mind) would they mention other gods in Genesis during the creation of man? Isn't that defeating the purpose of showing there is only one God by mentioning other gods? Do you see why your theory (which you still have not shown any credible scholar supports) doesn't make sense? Most credible scholars agree it's to show His majesty and power, yet you can't seem to comprehend that simple fact.

Grouchy what do I have to say to get you to understand that I mean the verse has nothing to do with a miscarriage or premature birth. It has to do with whether or not the wife dies as a result of the fight. The wife could be holding a baby goat for all that matters and not be pregnant. If a fight were to break out and the wife were injured and dies that's what the verse is about.

Again, your opinion but the facts don't match it. The same word for "come forth" here is in Genesis when Esau is born. It says "if any harm" - the death of a child counts as harm. The law is very similar to the Code of Hammurabi which discusses that if a rich man's daughter dies due to birth complications from getting hit, the man who assaulted her has his daughter die in turn. But, in the same law, the death of a common woman or slave woman is just a fine. Was the common woman or slave woman not a human being? No, just a lower legal status. This actually applies the same law across the spectrum of all people - rich, common, or slave.

This is literally in what I have posted before, but you refuse to look at anything you don't agree with. Likely because you're scared you won't understand it. But the more you argue, the less you show you actually know because you can only keep arguing on what has already been proven wrong.

As I said, I've read parts of the quran and have no desire to go read it.

So was this a lie? Because quite clearly those two claims aren't matching up.

What do you mean about changing his option on some things? Please don't tell me you still are droning on about Ehrman at some point saying he didn't think that whoever wrote the gospels didn't think that Jesus thought he was god/divine. I never read Ehrman's works prior to him thinking that or not thinking that.

No wonder why you don't understand, that's completely incorrect from anything I said. Ehrman said the Gospels show the authors though Jesus was divine. He originally just thought it was John, but now he agrees it's all four. And this was AFTER Ehrman's most popular books. It's no wonder why you can't understand anything if you can't even get a simple argument right.

What that leaves us with are people like you. Incapable of effectively arguing your point and having to misrepresent facts.

I support everything I said with facts and the supporting links. You just keep saying the same thing even though the facts and links show you you're off base. If you're too stupid and/or lazy to review them, that's on you.

[GrouchyUSMC]

[thedickus]

So if the people who wrote Genesis didn't want other people to worship gods, why (in your mind) would they mention other gods in Genesis during the creation of man? Isn't that defeating the purpose of showing there is only one God by mentioning other gods? Do you see why your theory (which you still have not shown any credible scholar supports) doesn't make sense? Most credible scholars agree it's to show His majesty and power, yet you can't seem to comprehend that simple fact.

The people who wrote the creation story in Genesis were acknowledging the existence of other gods. The people who wrote the original sin narrative were also acknowledging other gods. I have mentioned at least three scholars who agree that early Israelites were henotheist and believed there were other gods that existed but they had the most powerful one. The people who wrote the ten commandments also acknowledged that there were other gods in existence, not idols, but gods. They only wanted their people to worship their god. Again, I've mentioned scholars. But by all means, continue to believe that the bible is the inerrant word of god and cite people, who stupidly like you, believe that snakes and donkeys can talk.

Again, your opinion but the facts don't match it. The same word for "come forth" here is in Genesis when Esau is born. It says "if any harm" - the death of a child counts as harm. The law is very similar to the Code of Hammurabi which discusses that if a rich man's daughter dies due to birth complications from getting hit, the man who assaulted her has his daughter die in turn. But, in the same law, the death of a common woman or slave woman is just a fine. Was the common woman or slave woman not a human being? No, just a lower legal status. This actually applies the same law across the spectrum of all people - rich, common, or slave.

This is literally in what I have posted before, but you refuse to look at anything you don't agree with. Likely because you're scared you won't understand it. But the more you argue, the less you show you actually know because you can only keep arguing on what has already been proven wrong.

Not my opinion, but the actual facts. You just can't stop saying that the verse in Exodus I mention has to do with either abortion or a miscarriage. It has to do with the death of the mother, not the unborn fetus. It has to do with whoever made up your god only placing a monetary value on an unborn fetus, just like a goat or lamb, and placing a life for life value on the actual wife. You yet again make my point when you're trying to argue against it Grouchy. Do you even understand what you're actually saying? The example you give says if the rich man's daughter dies due to birth complications from getting hit the man who assaulted her has his daughter die in turn. It says NOTHING about the fetus. The people who invented your god and made up your god's rules didn't care about the fetus, only the birth mother. They didn't place the same value on the unborn fetus as they do on the birth mother. You can continue your whataboutisms and try to read into what the words say, but it's not what the words say. The words, and you are supporting me. I mean can you be any more dense than you are? Again you so desperately want to win ANY argument against me you'll try to change the answer to support a totally different scenario. It's just pathetic.

Did you finally give up trying to say that Ehrman and other scholars didn't think that the historical Jesus said or thought that he was god? It seems like you actually realize that you got your @$$ handed to you in that argument and you've doubled down on your other buII$hlt non-arguments. Tell us again how the snakes and donkeys can talk. Tell us again how the kangaroos hopped across from Australia to Africa. Better yet tell us how the kangaroos were actually some other rodent and evolved over just a couple of thousand years into kangaroos. That was equally a buII$hlt nonsensical argument. Again, you so desperately NEED to believe that your bible is true you'll concoct all kinds of fantasies to make it seem that way to you. Luckily for you there are enough other complete losers out there like yourself that also need to believe this same line of buII$hlt you feel this justifies it to yourself. Drink that koolaid Grouchy. Say hi to god for me, actually if you're right and your god is real if you meet him before me tell him Dickus said to go fukk himself. He's an @$$h0Ie and a murderer.

[BlackJack619]

Okay, boomer. Whatever makes you feel warm and fuzzy at night. Clearly your ego won’t let you accept anything else because you have nothing else. If this is really that important to you to be right even when everything points to being wrong, then until you overcome this invincible ignorance fallacy there’s no point in proving anything to you because you will never bother to or be capable of understanding it. One of the obvious signs of a pseudo intellectual.

You are right because he has stated a few dozen times in this thread that he doesn’t want God to be real. Clearly admitting his argument is emotional and bias in nature.

[thedickus]

Good old Grouchy, he won't let the fact that he doesn't have a fukking clue what he's talking about stop him from talking about it.

The bible only says that a couple of the actual 12 disciples died. Non canonical books talk about what may have happened to some of them. They sound just as trustworthy as the bible. Take the Acts of Paul, it talks about how Paul (who wasn't a disciple) was martyred by beheading and instead of blood coming out, milk came out of his neck and that he appeared after he was beheaded. I'm sure anyone who believes that snakes and donkeys can talk believes this as well.

[thedickus]

You are right because he has stated a few dozen times in this thread that he doesn’t want God to be real. Clearly admitting his argument is emotional and bias in nature.

Again you lying sack of $hlt, I've stated numerous times that if there is a god, I hope it's not your god. That's because your god is an @$$h0Ie.

[BlackJack619]

I have no idols. You really can't be more wrong about pretty much everything. Atheists have no gods. That's the definition of an atheist. You and your nonstop lies doesn't change that.

So your idol is the definition of atheism.

We could turn the definition of atheism into a golden statue and you would worship that as your lord and savior.

You are everything your idol says you are, and nothing more.

[ScottLefler]

So your idol is the definition of atheism.

We could turn the definition of atheism into a golden statue and you would worship that as your lord and savior.

You are everything your idol says you are, and nothing more.

Notice how he actually does believe in God, but he doesn't like God because he doesn't understand Him or has had bad things happen to him and blames God for the actions of others. Evolution is a faith based religion of the Atheists, not backed by Scientific Evidence.

[GrouchyUSMC]

The people who wrote the creation story in Genesis were acknowledging the existence of other gods. The people who wrote the original sin narrative were also acknowledging other gods. I have mentioned at least three scholars who agree that early Israelites were henotheist and believed there were other gods that existed but they had the most powerful one. The people who wrote the ten commandments also acknowledged that there were other gods in existence, not idols, but gods. They only wanted their people to worship their god. Again, I've mentioned scholars. But by all means, continue to believe that the bible is the inerrant word of god and cite people, who stupidly like you, believe that snakes and donkeys can talk.

Pardon my French, but are you really this stupid or are you just trolling? Did you miss the whole “Israel” polytheism/henotheism/monotheism discussion before? Or do you just not have a clue what it means? You keep using other books in the Bible to claim God is talking to other gods when He creates man. You’re wrong. It’s a stupid theory. Literally no scholar believes that other gods were hanging out with Him when He made man. That was my whole argument from the beginning. You’re off on a completely different subject.

Not my opinion, but the actual facts. You just can't stop saying that the verse in Exodus I mention has to do with either abortion or a miscarriage. It has to do with the death of the mother, not the unborn fetus. It has to do with whoever made up your god only placing a monetary value on an unborn fetus, just like a goat or lamb, and placing a life for life value on the actual wife. You yet again make my point when you're trying to argue against it Grouchy. Do you even understand what you're actually saying? The example you give says if the rich man's daughter dies due to birth complications from getting hit the man who assaulted her has his daughter die in turn. It says NOTHING about the fetus. The people who invented your god and made up your god's rules didn't care about the fetus, only the birth mother. They didn't place the same value on the unborn fetus as they do on the birth mother. You can continue your whataboutisms and try to read into what the words say, but it's not what the words say. The words, and you are supporting me. I mean can you be any more dense than you are? Again you so desperately want to win ANY argument against me you'll try to change the answer to support a totally different scenario. It's just pathetic.

Did you even bother to read anything I wrote before you started replying? Because you’re not addressing anything I said. For a guy who claims he knows all the history and only cares about the history, you never knew the Code of Hammurabi closely mimicked many Biblical laws and was likely the basis for them? Maybe you really don’t know as much as you claim to.

Did you finally give up trying to say that Ehrman and other scholars didn't think that the historical Jesus said or thought that he was god? It seems like you actually realize that you got your @$$ handed to you in that argument and you've doubled down on your other buII$hlt non-arguments.

I love that you think this, it’s cute. What I said from the beginning is Ehrman changed his opinion from stating just John presented Jesus as divine to now claiming all four Gospels do. That’s it. My opinion hasn’t changed on it because that’s the fact. You’re an old man yelling at clouds because you aren’t bright enough to understand what I’m saying.

Tell us again how the kangaroos hopped across from Australia to Africa. Better yet tell us how the kangaroos were actually some other rodent and evolved over just a couple of thousand years into kangaroos. That was equally a buII$hlt nonsensical argument. Again, you so desperately NEED to believe that your bible is true you'll concoct all kinds of fantasies to make it seem that way to you.

I’m not going to tell you about evolution and Pangea because you’re going to go off the rails and never understand anyways. I recommend Google.

You’ll be too busy begging for forgiveness to tell him any insults, and unfortunately for those who turn their backs on Him His judgment is fair but eternal. You will be wishing you actually read the Bible in its entirety on that day.

[GrouchyUSMC]

The bible only says that a couple of the actual 12 disciples died.

Brilliant insight. You are clearly Mensa material.

I would think all of them would have probably died by now. Unless you think they are still living.

[GrouchyUSMC]

[thedickus]

Pardon my French, but are you really this stupid or are you just trolling? Did you miss the whole “Israel” polytheism/henotheism/monotheism discussion before? Or do you just not have a clue what it means? You keep using other books in the Bible to claim God is talking to other gods when He creates man. You’re wrong. It’s a stupid theory. Literally no scholar believes that other gods were hanging out with Him when He made man. That was my whole argument from the beginning. You’re off on a completely different subject.

Absolutely false. Scholars say that Yahweh is talking to members of the divine council. Dr Jon Levenson a professor of jewish studies at Harvard University agrees. As well as other biblical scholars, notably Marc Brettler, Michael Coogan and John Day all agree that in Genesis 1 where god says that we will make man in our image that god is talking to the divine council.

As Harvard’s Jon Levenson states: “It is true—and quite significant–that the God of Israel has no myth of origin. Not a trace of theogony can be found in the Hebrew bible. God has no nativity. But there do seem to be other divine beings in Genesis 1, to whom God proposes the creation of humanity, male and female together: “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (v. 26). When were these other divine beings created? They too seem to have been primordial."

Read a book Grouchy, FFS read something.

Did you even bother to read anything I wrote before you started replying? Because you’re not addressing anything I said. For a guy who claims he knows all the history and only cares about the history, you never knew the Code of Hammurabi closely mimicked many Biblical laws and was likely the basis for them?

WTF Grouchy? I repeat back what your wrote and you claim I'm not reading what you write? Yes, I read it and what you cited agreed with me. That even in the Code of Hammurabi that no mention was made of the fetus if the pregnant woman was killed. Again you agree with me, not the fetus, only the woman's death involves a life for life punishment. I'm aware of the Code of Hammurabi, I've read some of Dr Josh Bowen's work. You got that backwards Grouchy, the Code of Hammurabi predates the bible, the biblical laws mimicked the Code of Hammurabi. But don't let the facts get in the way of your argument, you haven't so far. Why start now?

I love that you think this, it’s cute. What I said from the beginning is Ehrman changed his opinion from stating just John presented Jesus as divine to now claiming all four Gospels do. That’s it. My opinion hasn’t changed on it because that’s the fact. You’re an old man yelling at clouds because you aren’t bright enough to understand what I’m saying.

That's your problem. I'm bright enough to see through your buII$hlt tactics. You tried to refute that I said even Ehrman thought that the historical Jesus never said he was god/divine with what Ehrman thought about what the writers of the gospels thought Jesus said about his divinity. I keep making your look like a complete fool when you try to use this deceitful tactic and yet you just keep doubling down on it. Do you actually understand that scholars believe there's a huge difference between what the writers of the gospels thought of Jesus and what the historical Jesus was like? I honestly don't think you do. When I mentioned this before I seem to recall you asking something stupid like well where did they get that information? It's not in the bible. Again if you want to know about the historical Jesus ask a historian.
Repeat after me Grouchy, Dickus never once said that Ehrman thought that the writers of the gospels thought that Jesus never thought that he was god/divine. Dickus said that Ehrman thinks that the historical Jesus never thought or said that he was god/divine. HUGE difference.

I’m not going to tell you about evolution and Pangea because you’re going to go off the rails and never understand anyways. I recommend Google.

I'm aware of Pangea. The breakup of Pangea was thought to be close to 200 million years ago. The great flood story and Noah's ark was around 4000 years ago. Tell us all again how a kangaroo hopped from Australia to Africa to get on the boat.

You’ll be too busy begging for forgiveness to tell him any insults, and unfortunately for those who turn their backs on Him His judgment is fair but eternal. You will be wishing you actually read the Bible in its entirety on that day.

OOH, I'm soo scared. Talk about a Mensa member, hat's not even what Jesus taught. He didn't teach anything about eternal punishment or torment. Just that god's enemies would be destroyed, not tormented for eternity. Jews thought that "hell" wasn't a place, just that it meant not to have god. I say bring it on! No one has seen or heard from that megalomaniacal murderous fukker like...in ever. We've proven we don't need him.

[thedickus]

Brilliant insight. You are clearly Mensa material.

I would think all of them would have probably died by now. Unless you think they are still living.

If any of them were real then yes they would all be dead right now. You posted a meme about the 12 disciples lying about the resurrection of Jesus so they could be martyred. This is a common misconception among apologists. That the 12 disciples all being martyred proves that Jesus had to have risen from the grave. His disciples wouldn't have allowed themselves to have have been martyred for him unless the resurrection actually happened. The bible only mentions one of them having been martyred, James was killed with a sword. Most likely beheaded. But again, don't let facts get in the way of your argument, no need starting now.

[GrouchyUSMC]

Absolutely false. Scholars say that Yahweh is talking to members of the divine council. Dr Jon Levenson a professor of jewish studies at Harvard University agrees. As well as other biblical scholars, notably Marc Brettler, Michael Coogan and John Day all agree that in Genesis 1 where god says that we will make man in our image that god is talking to the divine council.

As Harvard’s Jon Levenson states: “It is true—and quite significant–that the God of Israel has no myth of origin. Not a trace of theogony can be found in the Hebrew bible. God has no nativity. But there do seem to be other divine beings in Genesis 1, to whom God proposes the creation of humanity, male and female together: “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (v. 26). When were these other divine beings created? They too seem to have been primordial."

Read a book Grouchy, FFS read something.

Which book are you reading? You literally just posted a copy and paste from this website. Quoting what is a Mormon belief on a Mormon blog.

For those following along, this is what the blog says. Literally exactly what he wrote and typed.

As biblical scholars such as Marc Brettler, Michael Coogan, and John Day have persuasively argued, this is yet another reference to the divine council in the Hebrew Bible. As Harvard’s Jon Levenson states:

“It is true—and quite significant–that the God of Israel has no myth of origin. Not a trace of theogony can be found in the Hebrew bible. God has no nativity. But there do seem to be other divine beings in Genesis 1, to whom God proposes the creation of humanity, male and female together: “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (v. 26). When were these other divine beings created? They too seem to have been primordial. ..

That's absolutely hilarious. You just proved you haven't read a book, just copied and pasted info from a blog, then told me to "read a book." You don't even know which of Levenson's books that came from. Because if you actually did read his book, you would realize he's not advocating the existence of other gods. Both Brettler and Day refer to them as "sons of God" and as heavenly advisors, not gods. Coogan is talking about the existence of Satan. You literally went for the first thing you could find on Google that supported your opinion but you're not smart enough to actually research it to make sure it matches the subject. The only people that believe this divine council is made up of gods is the Mormons, because they believe they can become gods and goddesses themselves.

You make it too easy. I wonder how many other posts of yours are just straight up copy and pastes of other peoples' works without giving them any credit to make it sound like you know what you're talking about. You must have "read" that book like you "read" the Qu'ran and Bible.

WTF Grouchy? I repeat back what your wrote and you claim I'm not reading what you write? Yes, I read it and what you cited agreed with me. That even in the Code of Hammurabi that no mention was made of the fetus if the pregnant woman was killed.

The punishment for the death of a pregnant noble woman was death. There is only a fine incurred if a pregnant woman who is common or a slave dies. So there is literally a life that dies and only a fine is incurred. So it seems neither of our theories may be correct.

I'm aware of the Code of Hammurabi, I've read some of Dr Josh Bowen's work. You got that backwards Grouchy, the Code of Hammurabi predates the bible, the biblical laws mimicked the Code of Hammurabi. But don't let the facts get in the way of your argument, you haven't so far. Why start now?

Reading comprehension isn't your strong point, is it? ..you never knew the Code of Hammurabi closely mimicked many Biblical laws and was likely the basis for them? You may want to brush up on what is a subject noun. Especially as after I explain what I'm talking about.

That's your problem. I'm bright enough to see through your buII$hlt tactics. You tried to refute that I said even Ehrman thought that the historical Jesus never said he was god/divine with what Ehrman thought about what the writers of the gospels thought Jesus said about his divinity. I keep making your look like a complete fool when you try to use this deceitful tactic and yet you just keep doubling down on it. Do you actually understand that scholars believe there's a huge difference between what the writers of the gospels thought of Jesus and what the historical Jesus was like? I honestly don't think you do. When I mentioned this before I seem to recall you asking something stupid like well where did they get that information? It's not in the bible. Again if you want to know about the historical Jesus ask a historian.
Repeat after me Grouchy, Dickus never once said that Ehrman thought that the writers of the gospels thought that Jesus never thought that he was god/divine. Dickus said that Ehrman thinks that the historical Jesus never thought or said that he was god/divine. HUGE difference.

You claimed only the author of John thought Jesus was divine, not the other three Gospels HERE. My whole argument was showing Ehrman originally thought that but changed his views, which is likely what you were going off of.

So again, you're lying. You literally did say this. Posting it here in case you try to go back and edit it. thedickus - "I've read the book of John is known as the asynoptic (big word, that means it ain't like the others) gospel. It was the last written gospel, most likely some 90 - 100 years after the death of Jesus. It's the only one that paints Jesus as "divine"."

I showed you you were wrong (again) by using your own source. You likely didn't know because you never read the books, you just apparently copy and paste from other websites. That was literally the extent of my argument but your two IQ points somehow thinks that makes me claim Ehrman called Jesus divine.

[ScottLefler]

OOH, I'm soo scared. Talk about a Mensa member, hat's not even what Jesus taught. He didn't teach anything about eternal punishment or torment. Just that god's enemies would be destroyed, not tormented for eternity. Jews thought that "hell" wasn't a place, just that it meant not to have god. I say bring it on! No one has seen or heard from that megalomaniacal murderous fukker like...in ever. We've proven we don't need him.

There are some religions out there who teach that there is no such thing as Hell. Some teach that hell is the only the grave. Some teach that hell is a place where souls are burned up in an instant. But that is not what the bible teaches. Today, I am going to demonstrate though the word of God that hell is a literal place of torment.

Where is hell?

Isa 14:15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

2Pe 2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;

Hell is down. Most bible scholars believe that it is in the center of the earth.

Mt 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Jesus's body remained on the earth, but His Spirit went to the heart of the earth, or center. Where is the heart of something located? In the center.
What is Hell?

1Pe 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

Hell is a prison.
It is a prison for those who have not accepted Jesus Christ as their Savior. Hell is no laughing matter. There is no party in hell.

Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. {strange: Gr. other}

Lu 16:20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

First of all notice that this man was not happy. It says that he was tormented in this FLAME. Hell is fire. It is an eternal flame that never goes out.

Mr 9:3 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: {offend...: or, cause thee to offend} Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: {offend...: or, cause thee to offend} Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: {offend...: or, cause thee to offend} Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

It says where their worm dieth not and the FIRE is NOT quenched. Hell is eternal torment by fire.
Hell is outer darkness. There is no light there. It is pitch black, forever.

Mt 8:11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Mt 22:13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Lu 13:27 But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity.
28 There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.

Who goes to hell, and what is after hell?

Re 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

One day after everyone has been judged, hell and death will be cast into the lake of fire.

Re 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

The devil is going to be cast into the lake of fire. Notice that it is a place of torment and that torment never ends.

Re 14:11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

Those who reject Jesus Christ and accept the mark of the beast are going to the lake of fire.

Re 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
Those who reject Jesus Christ won't be found written in the book of life. They also will be cast into the lake of fire.

There is only one way out. That way is Jesus Christ.
Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
Who is God willing to save from hell and the lake of fire?

Ro 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

How do we do this?

Ro 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
Ro 10:11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

The bible says that whosoever believeth on Him shall NOT be ashamed. Are you willing to accept Jesus Christ today to be your Savior?

12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

God is willing to save ANYONE no matter what you have done, if you will simply call upon upon Jesus Christ to save you. Will you do that today?

If you want to accept Jesus free gift of salvation, or if you have any doubts about whether or not you are going to heaven, you could place your faith in Jesus Christ for salvation by praying a simple prayer:

”Dear Lord Jesus I believe that You are the Lord and believe in my heart that You died on the Cross and Rose from the dead for my sins. I repent of my sins and turn to You, placing my Faith in You as Lord of my life, Please save me and I thank You for it, in Jesus holy name, Amen.”

If you have placed your faith in Jesus Christ and meant it with all of your heart, you are now a child of God and will go to heaven. Now that you are on your way to heaven, you should attend a bible believing church and follow in baptism.

[GrouchyUSMC]

If any of them were real then yes they would all be dead right now. You posted a meme about the 12 disciples lying about the resurrection of Jesus so they could be martyred. This is a common misconception among apologists. That the 12 disciples all being martyred proves that Jesus had to have risen from the grave. His disciples wouldn't have allowed themselves to have have been martyred for him unless the resurrection actually happened. The bible only mentions one of them having been martyred, James was killed with a sword. Most likely beheaded. But again, don't let facts get in the way of your argument, no need starting now.

I just think it's hilarious you're so flustered you tried to claim only a couple actually died. Now apparently you did some research and learned only James is documented in the Bible as being a martyr. There are historical documents that point to several others, some unconfirmed, but it's going to be a waste on you. I can tell.

[mtpockets]

[GrouchyUSMC]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to mtpockets again.

That’s a good one!

[ScottLefler]

EXACTLY! No one would die for what they know to be a lie and if Jesus Christ hadn't risen from the dead, the Disciples would have KNOWN that it was a lie. They were willing to suffer imprisonment, torture, martyrdom BECAUSE they KNEW that it was TRUE! Jesus Christ is LORD and EVERY knee will BOW before HIM!

[ScottLefler]

I just think it's hilarious you're so flustered you tried to claim only a couple actually died. Now apparently you did some research and learned only James is documented in the Bible as being a martyr. There are historical documents that point to several others, some unconfirmed, but it's going to be a waste on you. I can tell.

11 out of 12 of the Disciples were Martyred for their faith, plus Paul, plus Jesus Christ Himself. The only reason that John wasn't Martyred is because when they put him in the pot of boiling oil, God performed a miracle and it didn't kill him. Several years later, he wrote the book of Revelation. Jesus had promised John that he would not be martyred and that he would live to his natural old age.

[ScottLefler]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to mtpockets again.

That’s a good one!

I am glad to have you here Mr GrouchyUSMC....LOL

[thedickus]

Which book are you reading? You literally just posted a copy and paste from this website. Quoting what is a Mormon belief on a Mormon blog.

Let me follow your argument here Grouchy. Anytime I mention that it's known in scholarship that in the creation story in Genesis that there other gods/divine beings already in existence you say this is wrong and the use of "we" and "our" is the use of the royal we and means only one person and ask me what scholars believe this. I give you an actual quote from an actual scholar (one that I never said I read) specifically from Jon D. Levenson in his book "Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine Omnipotence". Now you're bltching about the quote that is being referenced is coming from a mormon website. You wanted scholarly proof that the ancient Israelites were henotheistic and believed in other gods, but only were supposed to worship the one true god. I find you a citation of this coming from a scholar of the Hebrew bible. This scholar affirms that god was talking to the divine council when he said let us make man in our image. How exactly does a mormon website providing the exact example of scholarly proof you asked about not count in your world? Do you think you're somehow better than mormons? Do you honestly think that your completely baseless and made up religion is better than the baseless made up religion of the mormons? That's as stupid as two children arguing over who would win in a fight Superman or Batman. So what exactly is your argument against the scholarly acceptance of god saying "we" in the Genesis creation story was god speaking to the divine council? Apparently it's that "The only people that believe this divine council is made up of gods is the Mormons, because they believe they can become gods and goddesses themselves." You seem to forget or your faith is simply to fragile to allow for you to acknowledge that the ancient Israelites, the ones who actually made up the god you worship and the stories about him, were henotheistic. That henotheism morphed into monotheism in later centuries as more made up stories about your made up god surfaced those stories took on a monotheistic tone. Scholars know this.
Jon D. Levenson is a Hebrew bible scholar and a professor of jewish studies at the Harvard Divinity School. The quote you're referencing was from him. I'm not sure about Dr Levenson, but I don't think he's a mormon.

The punishment for the death of a pregnant noble woman was death. There is only a fine incurred if a pregnant woman who is common or a slave dies. So there is literally a life that dies and only a fine is incurred. So it seems neither of our theories may be correct.

Now you're saying only the life of a pregnant noble woman is worth actual value to your god? He's a bigger @$$h0Ie than I thought. The death of anything else to your god is just worth a monetary fine. Your god certainly doesn't value all life, so that is absolutely no way any christian who believes what you believe can justify being pro-life.

You've been beaten on your argument against Exodus and the penalty for losing the life of a pregnant woman so many times and so badly it's just not worth the time any longer. And again, yes I've known for a long time that biblical laws mimicked and were based on the Code of Hammurabi.

You claimed only the author of John thought Jesus was divine, not the other three Gospels HERE. My whole argument was showing Ehrman originally thought that but changed his views, which is likely what you were going off of.

Your whole argument was and is flawed and had nothing to do with what I was talking about. Ehrman may have changed his views about what the authors of the gospels, specifically Matthew, Mark, and Luke, thought about the divinity of Jesus. Ehrman never said he thought the historical Jesus said or thought he was divine/god. Regardless of what those authors wrote, Ehrman at one time may have thought that those authors didn't think that Jesus was divine. After all they never have Jesus saying he's god. Only John does. And for the umpteenth time, the messiah is not and never was thought to be god to jews, of which Jesus and his disciples were.
Your rebuttal to my argument, that the historical Jesus never thought or said that he was god/divine had nothing to do with the historical Jesus. You can't seem to get that through your thick head. What I said about the book of John was: "It's the only one that paints Jesus as "divine"."
That was in a rebuttal to your continuous misrepresentation of my initial argument. Again, you so desperately need to try to save face and think you've won an argument against me you can only misrepresent my actual argument. You haven't shown me to be wrong about a single thing Grouchy. Not one.

Going back to page 45 of this thread to find where I correctly state that only in the book of John does the author have Jesus saying that he is god is laden with your getting your @$$ handed to you about biblically endorsed slavery. Again something that actual scholars, not the ones that believe that snakes and donkeys can talk, agree with. I might see if I can find a reference to anything Dr Joshua Bowen has written about biblically endorsed slavery on a jevoha's witnesses website. That should cause you to completely lose your mind.

[thedickus]

I just think it's hilarious you're so flustered you tried to claim only a couple actually died. Now apparently you did some research and learned only James is documented in the Bible as being a martyr. There are historical documents that point to several others, some unconfirmed, but it's going to be a waste on you. I can tell.

Having biblical knowledge is being flustered? LOL, I must be flustered all to hell then. Only a couple of the 12 disciples actually did die and only one may have been martyred, James. Judas would've been the other of the 12 disciples to die. Here's what I actually said Grouchy: "The bible only says that a couple of the actual 12 disciples died." This is true. James as I mentioned was the only one the bible says was actually martyred. I said this when I said: "The bible only mentions one of them having been martyred, James was killed with a sword.". I'm very aware of the "historical" non biblical accounts of the other disciples. I don't consider Paul a disciple (although he certainly did). But I mentioned a non canonical "historical" account of Paul's martyrdom earlier when I said in the Acts of Paul he was beheaded and milk, instead of blood poured out of his neck. He also appeared after he was beheaded. But the truth is that we simply don't know historically what happened to the other 10 disciples, there's no actual record. You don't need to waste my time trying to tell me something that I already know. You should go back to trying to tell us all how the bible doesn't mean what it actually says. The mental gymnastics you put yourself through in that self justification is fun to watch.

So now are you going to try to misstate my argument as you've tried to to do with every other argument you've failed to win with me?

[GrouchyUSMC]

Let me follow your argument here Grouchy. Anytime I mention that it's known in scholarship that in the creation story in Genesis that there other gods/divine beings already in existence you say this is wrong and the use of "we" and "our" is the use of the royal we and means only one person and ask me what scholars believe this. I give you an actual quote from an actual scholar (one that I never said I read) specifically from Jon D. Levenson in his book "Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine Omnipotence". Now you're bltching about the quote that is being referenced is coming from a mormon website.

You literally copied and pasted from the site without reading into anything the man was saying. As Levenson says in the paragraph you plagiarized from, he is not calling them other gods but the same thing Brettler and Day refer to them as: From other biblical accounts of the divine assembly in session, it would appear that these “sons of God/gods” played an active roles and made fresh proposals to God, who nonetheless retained the final say.” No wonder you didn't share the whole thing, your own theory wasn't supported in the same thing you quoted.

You literally posted something claiming your theory was right, but none of the people you quoted claimed there were other gods present. The only people who do think god were present there was the Mormon author of that blog using them for their argument that Mormons will become gods and goddesses after death. So the only people who support your theory are Mormons, and none of the scholars you claimed prove your theory agree with that. You're wrong. Again.

Now you're saying only the life of a pregnant noble woman is worth actual value to your god? He's a bigger @$$h0Ie than I thought. The death of anything else to your god is just worth a monetary fine. Your god certainly doesn't value all life, so that is absolutely no way any christian who believes what you believe can justify being pro-life.

Serious question - You aren't mentally handicapped, are you? Developmental difficulties, anything like that? Because this is so far off base from what I said that I don't want to insult you because you may have a genuine issue affecting you and I would feel bad for that.

Let me try to explain this in simpler terms.

Code of Hammurabi:
Pregnant noble woman dies = death.
Pregnant common woman dies = fine.
Pregnant slave woman dies = fine.

By your own interpretation, the common woman and slave woman are not considered human beings then as only a fine is incurred.

Your whole argument was and is flawed and had nothing to do with what I was talking about.

...What I said about the book of John was: "It's the only one that paints Jesus as "divine".

Going back to page 45 of this thread to find where I correctly state that only in the book of John does the author have Jesus saying that he is god is laden with your getting your @$$ handed to you about biblically endorsed slavery. Again something that actual scholars, not the ones that believe that snakes and donkeys can talk, agree with. I might see if I can find a reference to anything Dr Joshua Bowen has written about biblically endorsed slavery on a jevoha's witnesses website. That should cause you to completely lose your mind.[/QUOTE]

Which Ehrman says is incorrect, as all four Gospels point to Jesus as being divine. You were wrong. Admit it. You were going off of old knowledge and blog posts instead of actual books, likely just copying and pasting information, and didn't realize things changed.

This is exactly what you said. I'm not taking anything out of context. This is what you said, and it was proven wrong.



This is where Ehrman says you're wrong:
https://ehrmanblog.org/jesus-as-divi...s-for-members/

And so people can see the information for free, here's the key quotes where he addresses it specifically from this blog:
https://jamesbishopblog.com/2018/01/...-divine-jesus/

“Until a year ago I would have said – and frequently did say, in the classroom, in public lectures, and in my writings – that Jesus is portrayed as God in the Gospel of John but not, definitely not, in the other Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. I would point out that only in John did Jesus say such things as “Before Abraham, I am” (8:58; taking upon himself the name of God, as given to Moses in Exodus 3); his Jewish opponents knew full well what he was saying: they take up stones to stone him. Later he says “I and the Father are one” (10:30). Again, the Jews break out the stones. Later he tells his disciples, “If you have seen me, you have seen the Father” (14:9). And in a later prayer to God he asks him to “glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world was created” (17:5). None of these sayings, or anything like them, can be found in the other canonical Gospels. Jesus is clearly portrayed as a divine being in John, but only in John (I would have argued).“

“In doing my research and thinking harder and harder about the issue, when I (a) came to realize that the Gospels not only attributed these things to him, but also understood him to be adopted as the Son of God at his baptism (Mark 1:9-11), or to have been made the son of God by virtue of the fact that God was literally his father, in that it was the Spirit of God that made the virgin Mary pregnant (Luke 1:35), and (b) realized what “adoption” meant to people in the Roman world (as indicated in a previous post), I finally yielded. These Gospels do indeed think of Jesus as divine. Being made the very Son of God who can heal, cast out demons, raise the dead, pronounce divine forgiveness, receive worship together suggests that even for these Gospels Jesus was a divine being, not merely a human… But in a different sense from John.”

“So yes, now I agree that Jesus is portrayed as a divine being, a God-man, in all the Gospels. But in very different ways, depending on which Gospel you read.”

[GrouchyUSMC]

Having biblical knowledge is being flustered? LOL, I must be flustered all to hell then. Only a couple of the 12 disciples actually did die

So where do you think they are at today if they're still alive today after all these centuries? I hear Madagascar is a nice place to visit. Maybe some of them are in Florida enjoying the weather.

The mental gymnastics you put yourself through in that self justification is fun to watch.

Re-read the bolded part again and see what you keep saying. This is hilarious.

[GrouchyUSMC]

There are some religions out there who teach that there is no such thing as Hell. Some teach that hell is the only the grave. Some teach that hell is a place where souls are burned up in an instant. But that is not what the bible teaches. Today, I am going to demonstrate though the word of God that hell is a literal place of torment.

Where is hell?

Isa 14:15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

2Pe 2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;

Hell is down. Most bible scholars believe that it is in the center of the earth.

Mt 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Jesus's body remained on the earth, but His Spirit went to the heart of the earth, or center. Where is the heart of something located? In the center.
What is Hell?

1Pe 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

Hell is a prison.
It is a prison for those who have not accepted Jesus Christ as their Savior. Hell is no laughing matter. There is no party in hell.

Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. {strange: Gr. other}

Lu 16:20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

First of all notice that this man was not happy. It says that he was tormented in this FLAME. Hell is fire. It is an eternal flame that never goes out.

Mr 9:3 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: {offend...: or, cause thee to offend} Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: {offend...: or, cause thee to offend} Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: {offend...: or, cause thee to offend} Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

It says where their worm dieth not and the FIRE is NOT quenched. Hell is eternal torment by fire.
Hell is outer darkness. There is no light there. It is pitch black, forever.

Mt 8:11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Mt 22:13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Lu 13:27 But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity.
28 There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.

Who goes to hell, and what is after hell?

Re 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

One day after everyone has been judged, hell and death will be cast into the lake of fire.

Re 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

The devil is going to be cast into the lake of fire. Notice that it is a place of torment and that torment never ends.

Re 14:11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

Those who reject Jesus Christ and accept the mark of the beast are going to the lake of fire.

Re 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
Those who reject Jesus Christ won't be found written in the book of life. They also will be cast into the lake of fire.

There is only one way out. That way is Jesus Christ.
Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
Who is God willing to save from hell and the lake of fire?

Ro 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

How do we do this?

Ro 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
Ro 10:11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

The bible says that whosoever believeth on Him shall NOT be ashamed. Are you willing to accept Jesus Christ today to be your Savior?

12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

God is willing to save ANYONE no matter what you have done, if you will simply call upon upon Jesus Christ to save you. Will you do that today?

If you want to accept Jesus free gift of salvation, or if you have any doubts about whether or not you are going to heaven, you could place your faith in Jesus Christ for salvation by praying a simple prayer:

”Dear Lord Jesus I believe that You are the Lord and believe in my heart that You died on the Cross and Rose from the dead for my sins. I repent of my sins and turn to You, placing my Faith in You as Lord of my life, Please save me and I thank You for it, in Jesus holy name, Amen.”

If you have placed your faith in Jesus Christ and meant it with all of your heart, you are now a child of God and will go to heaven. Now that you are on your way to heaven, you should attend a bible believing church and follow in baptism.

You should have just shared Matthew 25:31-46. It completely shoots down his argument Jesus never talked about eternal punishment. thedickus has never read the Bible, so he likely never saw it before.

31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

I mean, seems pretty clear to me what he's saying.

[thedickus]

You literally copied and pasted from the site without reading into anything the man was saying. As Levenson says in the paragraph you plagiarized from, he is not calling them other gods but the same thing Brettler and Day refer to them as: From other biblical accounts of the divine assembly in session, it would appear that these “sons of God/gods” played an active roles and made fresh proposals to God, who nonetheless retained the final say.” No wonder you didn't share the whole thing, your own theory wasn't supported in the same thing you quoted.

I have said that scholars agree that god was talking to other devine beings during the Genesis creation story. You said no, he couldn't have because the bible doesn't say that he created any other beings, divine or otherwise. I've shown you proof that scholars believe you are wrong. That the divine council was in existence and god was talking to them. If you're too stupid to understand you're wrong then no one can help you. Keep trying to make the same failed argument. Typical you can't refute the argument so you try to now pretend the argument is invalid because it came from a mormon based website. Again it's very easy to see through how you can't actually refute the argument. Do you think the author wrote his book about the Hebrew bible and how the divine council was in existence to appease a bunch of mormons? I know you're stupid, I'm just not too sure how stupid. Was there a watching paint dry career field when you served? You may have failed out of that apprenticeship program if there were. I literally posted a citation that shows scholars believe this theory was in alive and well in ancient Israel.

Serious question - You aren't mentally handicapped, are you? Developmental difficulties, anything like that? Because this is so far off base from what I said that I don't want to insult you because you may have a genuine issue affecting you and I would feel bad for that.

Let me try to explain this in simpler terms.

Code of Hammurabi:
Pregnant noble woman dies = death.
Pregnant common woman dies = fine.
Pregnant slave woman dies = fine.

By your own interpretation, the common woman and slave woman are not considered human beings then as only a fine is incurred.

I'm positive you're mentally handicapped at this point. You think snakes and donkeys can talk and you're incapable of staying on point. What's off base is the argument you're trying to make. I said the verse in Exodus is simply not proof that your god values all life or thinks of an unborn fetus as being a life. The verse proves it since if the pregnant woman dies then a life for life punishment will be imposed on the other man. If the fetus dies, then it's just a fine. You can't argue against this and simply haven't. You spent over a week trying to first argue that miscarriage and premature birth could be the same thing, I showed that had nothing to do with the argument. Now you're going off on some tangent about noble women vs slave women. It doesn't change the underlying fact that your god doesn't put the same value on a fetus as an actual person. I've tried to keep this in simple terms. You're incapable or unwilling to follow. I'm sure it's unwilling to follow. Most likely your apologist website says to bring up the argument you tried to make and have failed miserably.

Which Ehrman says is incorrect, as all four Gospels point to Jesus as being divine. You were wrong. Admit it. You were going off of old knowledge and blog posts instead of actual books, likely just copying and pasting information, and didn't realize things changed.

Again with this buII$hlt. You can't refute my actual argument, you have but one answer, so you keep trying to change the question to fit your answer. I have repeatedly said that Ehrman didn't think the historical Jesus said or thought he was god. I've said that even in the gospels the only author to actually say or "paint" him to actually be god was John. That's the only gospel where Jesus says he's god. I've said that it's pretty obvious that the writers of all four gospels thought Jesus was god. Again you can't win an argument against me so you try to attack my answer to something else that has no bearing on what I said.

[thedickus]

So where do you think they are at today if they're still alive today after all these centuries? I hear Madagascar is a nice place to visit. Maybe some of them are in Florida enjoying the weather.



Re-read the bolded part again and see what you keep saying. This is hilarious.

Seriously? This is the best that you can do? You alluded in your meme to all of the disciples being tortured, imprisoned, and/or martyred. I had to correct you, again, using your bible to show you that according to your own bible only two of the disciple's deaths were mentioned. If you want to extrapolate that out to there are now actually 11 2000 year old jewish dudes still running around, not just Jesus, then have at it. Statistically speaking, being jewish, they're 3 times more likely to be in New York than in Florida. Kind of funny you stopped trying to defend your biblically endorsed slavery. Any time you want to offer some actual proof that anything regarding god in your bible is actually true, feel free. You've stayed away from that and instead try to focus on the minutiae. You haven't fared to well at that.

[GrouchyUSMC]

I have said that scholars agree that god was talking to other devine beings during the Genesis creation story.

You didn’t say divine beings. You said gods.

If you had said “divine beings”, we wouldn’t have been having the same discussion. You have literally being arguing gods for the past four pages until you picked up “divine council” from a blog post. Now you’re trying to back track.

I love that you’re trying to change what you said now though. It only shows you know I’m right even though you won’t admit it.

I said the verse in Exodus is simply not proof that your god values all life or thinks of an unborn fetus as being a life. The verse proves it since if the pregnant woman dies then a life for life punishment will be imposed on the other man.

Quit avoiding the question. So because only a fine is imposed for the death of a common person or a slave, you don’t believe they are human?

You spent over a week trying to first argue that miscarriage and premature birth could be the same thing, I showed that had nothing to do with the argument.

No, you just kept repeating yourself and refusing to read anything I said so I tried something different with the hope that you would see, once again, your argument is wrong. Apparently you couldn’t find a proper place to steal someone else’s intellectual property and pass it off as your own, so all you could do was stick to your guns.

Again with this buII$hlt. You can't refute my actual argument, you have but one answer, so you keep trying to change the question to fit your answer. I have repeatedly said that Ehrman didn't think the historical Jesus said or thought he was god. I've said that even in the gospels the only author to actually say or "paint" him to actually be god was John. That's the only gospel where Jesus says he's god. I've said that it's pretty obvious that the writers of all four gospels thought Jesus was god. Again you can't win an argument against me so you try to attack my answer to something else that has no bearing on what I said.

You do know I shared the image of what you actually said so people can see you’re lying again, right? You didn’t say that at all in the beginning. What’s funny is you won’t admit it, but you know I’m right again.

Oh, and other folks who read but don’t post are seeing it. I’m getting a ton of green love lately. Some of the comments are rude so I won’t share them, but they don’t think too highly of your integrity or mental prowess.

[BlackJack619]

After his first copy and pasta response a few thousand post ago, I noticed non of his arguments are actually his.

Good for you grouchy for calling out his plagiarism.

He’s even admitted he’s the text book atheist.

I wonder if he knows Christian were the first ones to be called atheist?