Bible criticism

[Dajjal]

 

[BreezeWood]

.

When Were Joseph and Mary Married?

Yet, when Joseph found out Mary was “with child,” he determined he would “send her away privately” (vs. 19). The Greek verb translated in the RSVCE to send away is apolusai, which means divorce. Why would Joseph have to divorce Mary if they were only engaged?

honey, I'm pregnant - we are married but I know it isn't yours because I was a virgin when it happened ....

.

 

[irosie91]

.

When Were Joseph and Mary Married?

Yet, when Joseph found out Mary was “with child,” he determined he would “send her away privately” (vs. 19). The Greek verb translated in the RSVCE to send away is apolusai, which means divorce. Why would Joseph have to divorce Mary if they were only engaged?

honey, I'm pregnant - we are married but I know it isn't yours because I was a virgin when it happened ....

.

thanks----I needed that ---I have been groggy all morning


'
as to the "divorce"----who knows----maybe Joseph had already sent out the wedding invitations and engaged the musicians?? There would have to have been some sort of
ANNOUNCEMENT. What do you expect from Luke---he never met Jesus and did not know Aramaic. He was
VERY GREEK

 

[Dajjal]

 

[irosie91]

View attachment 87217

silly question-----BECAUSE IT IS. IT is what happened.
The mummy of king tut is also extant

 

[Indeependent]

View attachment 87217

Apparently the Romans considered the Ark and it's contents to be of consequence.
Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.
Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

 

[irosie91]

View attachment 87217

Apparently the Romans considered the Ark and it's contents to be of consequence.
Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.
Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

the legend -----HAMMIE himself promulgated is a "god"
gave him the code. The issue of no remaining TABLETS of
mosaic law is one of the most idiotic I have ever encountered
-----people are STILL desperate to get their hands on that which the romans stole. -------they certainly recorded and
memorialized the events. (I am not suggesting that the original tablets were part of the booty-------if they were ever in Jerusalem---they would have been GONE long ago in wars with Babylon, Assyria and Egypt) Jesus----MOST CERTAINLY knew how to read and write-----yet for all the HUGE FOLLOWING he had and determination even during his lifetime that he is
"GOD"------and HE LIVED in an established city-----but somehow no one has so much as his autograph. Moses
traipsed around in the desert for 40 years-----whole different
thing-----every time I moved from one apartment to the other
I LOST all kinds of stuff. The dead sea scrolls managed to survive---(sorta) but not a shred from a person who people considered "GOD"

 

[sealybobo]

I am tired of reading all the bible thumping threads telling us the bible is the word of God, and we will burn in hell if we do not believe it. So here is a thread to dismantle the bible and prove it cannot be from God, and it has not been preserved unchanged.
I will be posting many links and doing some cut and paste jobs, because I am no bible expert, but I know a lot of work has been done on this by others.

The first point I would like to raise is the age of Noah and other so called prophets. The bible says Noah lived to be 950 years old, but I read somewhere that this is now believed to be a mistake in the translation of the numbers from an early bible, by a scribe that did not understand the numbering system.
I will research this and post links.

To be going on with here are a couple of links to critical pages.

Bible Babble - The Holy Bible and it's Errors, Contradictions, and so on.

Biblical scientific errors - RationalWiki

They can explain away anything so don't waste your time. They are perfectly OK with using both arguments. Either people lived that long or that this might have been mia translated.

What a bunch of shit. Same way they say 7 days to God might not be 7 to us. In other words they couldn't fathom billions at the time

 

[BreezeWood]

View attachment 87217

Apparently the Romans considered the Ark and it's contents to be of consequence.
Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.
Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

.

Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.

The Code of Hammurabi is a well-preserved Babylonian law code of ancient Mesopotamia, dating back to about 1754 BC (Middle Chronology). It is one of the oldest deciphered writings of significant length in the world.

Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

written law is etched in stone, there must be a reason, they meant what they said ...

if the bibles were similar in importance it only stands to reason SOMEONE would etch them in stone and yet not a sole bothered to take the time ... time away from their more important duties than future posterity ... and reasoning.

.

 

[Indeependent]

View attachment 87217

Apparently the Romans considered the Ark and it's contents to be of consequence.
Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.
Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

.

Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.

The Code of Hammurabi is a well-preserved Babylonian law code of ancient Mesopotamia, dating back to about 1754 BC (Middle Chronology). It is one of the oldest deciphered writings of significant length in the world.

Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

written law is etched in stone, there must be a reason, they meant what they said ...

if the bibles were similar in importance it only stands to reason SOMEONE would etch them in stone and yet not a sole bothered to take the time ... time away from their more important duties than future posterity ... and reasoning.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

 

[irosie91]

I am tired of reading all the bible thumping threads telling us the bible is the word of God, and we will burn in hell if we do not believe it. So here is a thread to dismantle the bible and prove it cannot be from God, and it has not been preserved unchanged.
I will be posting many links and doing some cut and paste jobs, because I am no bible expert, but I know a lot of work has been done on this by others.

The first point I would like to raise is the age of Noah and other so called prophets. The bible says Noah lived to be 950 years old, but I read somewhere that this is now believed to be a mistake in the translation of the numbers from an early bible, by a scribe that did not understand the numbering system.
I will research this and post links.

To be going on with here are a couple of links to critical pages.

Bible Babble - The Holy Bible and it's Errors, Contradictions, and so on.

Biblical scientific errors - RationalWiki

They can explain away anything so don't waste your time. They are perfectly OK with using both arguments. Either people lived that long or that this might have been mia translated.

What a bunch of shit. Same way they say 7 days to God might not be 7 to us. In other words they couldn't fathom billions at the time

you guys have no POETIC SPIRIT-----the bible is from "god"----and the ODYSSEY is from-----some sort of "gods". ----
The Kama Sudtra is INSPIRED. -------Sophocles---was a martian

 

[BreezeWood]

View attachment 87217

Apparently the Romans considered the Ark and it's contents to be of consequence.
Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.
Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

.

Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.

The Code of Hammurabi is a well-preserved Babylonian law code of ancient Mesopotamia, dating back to about 1754 BC (Middle Chronology). It is one of the oldest deciphered writings of significant length in the world.

Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

written law is etched in stone, there must be a reason, they meant what they said ...

if the bibles were similar in importance it only stands to reason SOMEONE would etch them in stone and yet not a sole bothered to take the time ... time away from their more important duties than future posterity ... and reasoning.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

and papyrus wore out VERY quickly ...


I get it, that's why it would not have been a good idea to etch their religion in stone for verification and by the way it didn't work even when the Almighty tried it so why bother - thanks again for your hero Moses.

.

 

[irosie91]

I am tired of reading all the bible thumping threads telling us the bible is the word of God, and we will burn in hell if we do not believe it. So here is a thread to dismantle the bible and prove it cannot be from God, and it has not been preserved unchanged.
I will be posting many links and doing some cut and paste jobs, because I am no bible expert, but I know a lot of work has been done on this by others.

The first point I would like to raise is the age of Noah and other so called prophets. The bible says Noah lived to be 950 years old, but I read somewhere that this is now believed to be a mistake in the translation of the numbers from an early bible, by a scribe that did not understand the numbering system.
I will research this and post links.

To be going on with here are a couple of links to critical pages.

Bible Babble - The Holy Bible and it's Errors, Contradictions, and so on.

Biblical scientific errors - RationalWiki

They can explain away anything so don't waste your time. They are perfectly OK with using both arguments. Either people lived that long or that this might have been mia translated.

What a bunch of shit. Same way they say 7 days to God might not be 7 to us. In other words they couldn't fathom billions at the time

you guys have no POETIC SPIRIT-----the bible is from "god"----and the ODYSSEY is from-----some sort of "gods". ----
The Kama Sudtra is INSPIRED. -------Sophocles---was a martian

PS----there is no 'hell' Dante was prone to nite-mares---he
was in love with a child Beatrice------and she landed in the
CELESTIAL ROSE or something like that

 

[Indeependent]

View attachment 87217

Apparently the Romans considered the Ark and it's contents to be of consequence.
Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.
Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

.

Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.

The Code of Hammurabi is a well-preserved Babylonian law code of ancient Mesopotamia, dating back to about 1754 BC (Middle Chronology). It is one of the oldest deciphered writings of significant length in the world.

Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

written law is etched in stone, there must be a reason, they meant what they said ...

if the bibles were similar in importance it only stands to reason SOMEONE would etch them in stone and yet not a sole bothered to take the time ... time away from their more important duties than future posterity ... and reasoning.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

and papyrus wore out VERY quickly ...


I get it, that's why it would not have been a good idea to etch their religion in stone for verification and by the way it didn't work even when the Almighty tried it so why bother - thanks again for your hero Moses.

.

I have no clue as to the context of your remarks.

 

[irosie91]

View attachment 87217

Apparently the Romans considered the Ark and it's contents to be of consequence.
Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.
Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

.

Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.

The Code of Hammurabi is a well-preserved Babylonian law code of ancient Mesopotamia, dating back to about 1754 BC (Middle Chronology). It is one of the oldest deciphered writings of significant length in the world.

Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

written law is etched in stone, there must be a reason, they meant what they said ...

if the bibles were similar in importance it only stands to reason SOMEONE would etch them in stone and yet not a sole bothered to take the time ... time away from their more important duties than future posterity ... and reasoning.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

and papyrus wore out VERY quickly ...


I get it, that's why it would not have been a good idea to etch their religion in stone for verification and by the way it didn't work even when the Almighty tried it so why bother - thanks again for your hero Moses.

.

your welcome-----come again

 

[irosie91]

View attachment 87217

Apparently the Romans considered the Ark and it's contents to be of consequence.
Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.
Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

.

Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.

The Code of Hammurabi is a well-preserved Babylonian law code of ancient Mesopotamia, dating back to about 1754 BC (Middle Chronology). It is one of the oldest deciphered writings of significant length in the world.

Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

written law is etched in stone, there must be a reason, they meant what they said ...

if the bibles were similar in importance it only stands to reason SOMEONE would etch them in stone and yet not a sole bothered to take the time ... time away from their more important duties than future posterity ... and reasoning.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

and papyrus wore out VERY quickly ...


I get it, that's why it would not have been a good idea to etch their religion in stone for verification and by the way it didn't work even when the Almighty tried it so why bother - thanks again for your hero Moses.

.

I have no clue as to the context of your remarks.

just small talk

 

[BreezeWood]

View attachment 87217

Apparently the Romans considered the Ark and it's contents to be of consequence.
Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.
Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

.

Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.

The Code of Hammurabi is a well-preserved Babylonian law code of ancient Mesopotamia, dating back to about 1754 BC (Middle Chronology). It is one of the oldest deciphered writings of significant length in the world.

Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

written law is etched in stone, there must be a reason, they meant what they said ...

if the bibles were similar in importance it only stands to reason SOMEONE would etch them in stone and yet not a sole bothered to take the time ... time away from their more important duties than future posterity ... and reasoning.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

and papyrus wore out VERY quickly ...


I get it, that's why it would not have been a good idea to etch their religion in stone for verification and by the way it didn't work even when the Almighty tried it so why bother - thanks again for your hero Moses.

.

I have no clue as to the context of your remarks.

.

I have no clue as to the context of your remarks.

a course to pass the GRD (high school diploma) is readily available for everyone - give it a shot, it might help.

.

 

[irosie91]

Apparently the Romans considered the Ark and it's contents to be of consequence.
Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.
Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

.

Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.

The Code of Hammurabi is a well-preserved Babylonian law code of ancient Mesopotamia, dating back to about 1754 BC (Middle Chronology). It is one of the oldest deciphered writings of significant length in the world.

Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

written law is etched in stone, there must be a reason, they meant what they said ...

if the bibles were similar in importance it only stands to reason SOMEONE would etch them in stone and yet not a sole bothered to take the time ... time away from their more important duties than future posterity ... and reasoning.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

and papyrus wore out VERY quickly ...


I get it, that's why it would not have been a good idea to etch their religion in stone for verification and by the way it didn't work even when the Almighty tried it so why bother - thanks again for your hero Moses.

.

I have no clue as to the context of your remarks.

.

I have no clue as to the context of your remarks.

a course to pass the GRD (high school diploma) is readily available for everyone - give it a shot, it might help.

.

I spent all day looking for my sissors

 

[Indeependent]

Apparently the Romans considered the Ark and it's contents to be of consequence.
Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.
Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

.

Apparently the Romans did not consider the Code of Hammurabi to be of consequence.

The Code of Hammurabi is a well-preserved Babylonian law code of ancient Mesopotamia, dating back to about 1754 BC (Middle Chronology). It is one of the oldest deciphered writings of significant length in the world.

Plus, NOBODY considers the Code of Hammurabi to be of a Holy origin.

written law is etched in stone, there must be a reason, they meant what they said ...

if the bibles were similar in importance it only stands to reason SOMEONE would etch them in stone and yet not a sole bothered to take the time ... time away from their more important duties than future posterity ... and reasoning.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

and papyrus wore out VERY quickly ...


I get it, that's why it would not have been a good idea to etch their religion in stone for verification and by the way it didn't work even when the Almighty tried it so why bother - thanks again for your hero Moses.

.

I have no clue as to the context of your remarks.

.

I have no clue as to the context of your remarks.

a course to pass the GRD (high school diploma) is readily available for everyone - give it a shot, it might help.

.

An objective perusal of tonight's back and forth will clearly display your lack of ability to communicate a coherent idea.
Now please attempt to relay an idea clearly.
I am more than willing to have a conversation with someone who isn't inebriated.

 

[BreezeWood]

.

The Code of Hammurabi is a well-preserved Babylonian law code of ancient Mesopotamia, dating back to about 1754 BC (Middle Chronology). It is one of the oldest deciphered writings of significant length in the world.



written law is etched in stone, there must be a reason, they meant what they said ...

if the bibles were similar in importance it only stands to reason SOMEONE would etch them in stone and yet not a sole bothered to take the time ... time away from their more important duties than future posterity ... and reasoning.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

.

Because illiteracy was the rule of the day and papyrus wore out VERY quickly.

and papyrus wore out VERY quickly ...


I get it, that's why it would not have been a good idea to etch their religion in stone for verification and by the way it didn't work even when the Almighty tried it so why bother - thanks again for your hero Moses.

.

I have no clue as to the context of your remarks.

.

I have no clue as to the context of your remarks.

a course to pass the GRD (high school diploma) is readily available for everyone - give it a shot, it might help.

.

I spent all day looking for my sissors

.

I spent all day looking for my sissors

scissors


almost a sentence - I enjoy reading your posts almost would like to figure them out ...

.