Noah's Ark with two of EVERY animal

If they all worshiped the same god then there would be no differences between the 3 religions and the gods they worship would not have done different things.
Islam does not consider Yitzchak to be a patriarch; they consider Yishmael to be a patriarch.
 
That has nothing to do with it.
If i worshiped my own intellect as you claim and you call that a "false god" then I must think my intellects is perfect because all religions think the god they worship is perfect.

The fact that I know my intellect isn;'t perfect therefore means I cannot worship it as a person worships a god

Try again
 
If they all worshiped the same god then there would be no differences between the 3 religions and the gods they worship would not have done different things.
That's not true. The Bible had hundreds of authors over hundreds of years. It was amended, redacted and updated many times.
 
try to keep up.

Jews and Christians do not worship the same god.
Muslims and Christian's do not worship the same god
Jews and Muslims do not worship the same god.
You are incorrect.
The Koran considers God to be ineffable, kind and to have given Commands that must be adhered to.
Christians consider God to be a mean bastard.
 
That's not true. The Bible had hundreds of authors over hundreds of years. It was amended, redacted and updated many times.

Judaism and Christianity have a schism at Jesus. Form that point on the 2 religions worship different gods.

Islam's claim to have the same origins as Judaism is nothing but an attempt for them to legitimize their religion since it was the last on the scene




“The New Testament leaves no margin for misunderstanding. To deny the Son is to deny the Father.”
 
Who is Yitzhak?
OMG!
You goyim call him Isaac, Avraham’s son from Sarah.
I am correcting this post as I originally posted he was the son of Hagar.
Never post before getting out of bed.
 
Last edited:
The translation into Yiddish is also not correct. Because the OT came from Sumerian/Babylonian/Akkadian texts that predated the bible by 2000 years. And they got a lot of things wrong! And they were probably wrong too previously!

Yet here we are arguing about it in 2022... And people are dying about it.
  • The flood occurred long before the written word. It was not written down at the time it occurred.
  • The story of the flood was spoken long before it was written.
  • Down through the ages, the flood became the setting for many stories.
  • Ages later, we come across the Hebrew people who are still relating a story where the great flood was the setting.
  • Read any story about the Civil War. Just by reading it, we can usually figure out when it was written simply by the words used and cultural insights and customs in play at the time it was written.
  • We can identify the points that mean most to the author. The author has his point to bring across to the audience.
No question there are a lot of stories--some older--whose setting is the great flood. The stories themselves are no more alike than Civil War stories such as Gone with the Wind and Rifles for Watie even though both of these have the same setting, too.

What is the point of the Hebrew story? Hint: it is not about polar bears and kangaroos. It is not about the number of continents, the amount of land covered, or whether there was an aquarium for fish on board.

Just as today we can enjoy different stories with the same setting, I am betting so did ancients. Yet this particular acount made it into the Bible. Why?
 
Christians consider God to be a mean bastard.
More precisely, Christians see the portrayal of God in the Old Testament as being mean. Jesus presents a vastly different picture of God. The reason I began delving into the Old Testament was to discover why Jews thought God was so mean. Surprise! I learned Jews did not view God as mean--and nor do the Old Testament stories portray God as such when they are viewed properly from the perspective of the Hebrew language.
 
Few stories have such a detailed timeline as does the flood story. The narrative is written as literal history, not myth.
 
OMG!
You goyim call him Isaac, Avraham’s son from Hagar.

LOL

Yet again, you show the forum how brain-dead you are. :cuckoo:

Isaac was the son of Sarah. Ishmael was the son of Hagar.

face-palm-gif.278959
 
You are incorrect.
The Koran considers God to be ineffable, kind and to have given Commands that must be adhered to.
Christians consider God to be a mean bastard.
Heads up: He is an atheist/agonostic who sees things one way and is utterly confused that those who believe have a different perspective. He has no belief in God, but insists there are three for Jews, Muslim, and Christians, when all maintain God is One. Kind of like someone who doesn't quite understand basketball, but tells those who do play that points cannot be scored unless the ball is kicked through the uprights.
 
LOL

Yet again, you show the forum how brain-dead you are. :cuckoo:

Isaac was the son of Sarah. Ishmael was the son of Hagar.

face-palm-gif.278959
You are correct; I just got out of bed.
But please call him Yitzchak from now on.
 
More precisely, Christians see the portrayal of God in the Old Testament as being mean. Jesus presents a vastly different picture of God. The reason I began delving into the Old Testament was to discover why Jews thought God was so mean. Surprise! I learned Jews did not view God as mean--and nor do the Old Testament stories portray God as such when they are viewed properly from the perspective of the Hebrew language.

G-d had many sons.
 

Forum List

Back
Top