The Bible contradiction thread

[Faun]

So you say, but the Bible doesn’t. There are also millions of people who believe Joachim is Mary’s father. Their guess is as good as yours.

But thank you for at least demonstrating the salient point here .... this is a contradiction in the New Testament which nobody knows the true answer. Which is evidence that it’s a farce and that Jesus was a false prophet, leading many people away from G-d.

Joachim is Eli, Heli.
Joachim when you study the language ,seems to be a variant form of Eliacim, which is abbreviated as Eli, a variant of Heli. Hence, though the two names may at first appear quite different, there is a great linguistic similarity between Heli and Joachim.

Jesus leads you to God, not away from him.

There is no proof that Joachim was Eli. That is what some folks invented in order to plug the holes in the New Testament.

So you say, but the Bible doesn’t. There are also millions of people who believe Joachim is Mary’s father. Their guess is as good as yours.

But thank you for at least demonstrating the salient point here .... this is a contradiction in the New Testament which nobody knows the true answer. Which is evidence that it’s a farce and that Jesus was a false prophet, leading many people away from G-d.

Joachim is Eli, Heli.
Joachim when you study the language ,seems to be a variant form of Eliacim, which is abbreviated as Eli, a variant of Heli. Hence, though the two names may at first appear quite different, there is a great linguistic similarity between Heli and Joachim.

Jesus leads you to God, not away from him.

There is no proof that Joachim was Eli. That is what some folks invented in order to plug the holes in the New Testament.

I gave it to you.
It's called studying their language.

LOL

You said it, you didn’t prove it. Your word is not proof. There is no such proof because there is nothing documented in any literature from back then claiming Joachim was also known as Eli.

So you say, but the Bible doesn’t. There are also millions of people who believe Joachim is Mary’s father. Their guess is as good as yours.

But thank you for at least demonstrating the salient point here .... this is a contradiction in the New Testament which nobody knows the true answer. Which is evidence that it’s a farce and that Jesus was a false prophet, leading many people away from G-d.

Joachim is Eli, Heli.
Joachim when you study the language ,seems to be a variant form of Eliacim, which is abbreviated as Eli, a variant of Heli. Hence, though the two names may at first appear quite different, there is a great linguistic similarity between Heli and Joachim.

Jesus leads you to God, not away from him.

There is no proof that Joachim was Eli. That is what some folks invented in order to plug the holes in the New Testament.

So you say, but the Bible doesn’t. There are also millions of people who believe Joachim is Mary’s father. Their guess is as good as yours.

But thank you for at least demonstrating the salient point here .... this is a contradiction in the New Testament which nobody knows the true answer. Which is evidence that it’s a farce and that Jesus was a false prophet, leading many people away from G-d.

Joachim is Eli, Heli.
Joachim when you study the language ,seems to be a variant form of Eliacim, which is abbreviated as Eli, a variant of Heli. Hence, though the two names may at first appear quite different, there is a great linguistic similarity between Heli and Joachim.

Jesus leads you to God, not away from him.

There is no proof that Joachim was Eli. That is what some folks invented in order to plug the holes in the New Testament.

I gave it to you.
It's called studying their language.

LOL

You said it, you didn’t prove it. Your word is not proof. There is no such proof because there is nothing documented in any literature from back then claiming Joachim was also known as Eli.

You definitely don't know the language.

I definitely know you can’t prove what you claim.

 

[peach174]

The Jews, in constructing their genealogical tables, reckoned wholly by males, and where the blood of the grandfather passed to the grandson through a daughter, the name of the daughter was omitted. In her place they put the name of that daughter's husband as the descendant of the maternal grandfather.
Mary's father was Eli or Heli ,Joseph was the son in law so the Bible say's Joseph was the son of Heli meaning he was the son in law.

In Matthew it say's Josephs father is Jacob.

So you say, but the Bible doesn’t. There are also millions of people who believe Joachim is Mary’s father. Their guess is as good as yours.

But thank you for at least demonstrating the salient point here .... this is a contradiction in the New Testament which nobody knows the true answer. Which is evidence that it’s a farce and that Jesus was a false prophet, leading many people away from G-d.

Joachim is Eli, Heli.
Joachim when you study the language ,seems to be a variant form of Eliacim, which is abbreviated as Eli, a variant of Heli. Hence, though the two names may at first appear quite different, there is a great linguistic similarity between Heli and Joachim.

Jesus leads you to God, not away from him.

There is no proof that Joachim was Eli. That is what some folks invented in order to plug the holes in the New Testament.

The Jews, in constructing their genealogical tables, reckoned wholly by males, and where the blood of the grandfather passed to the grandson through a daughter, the name of the daughter was omitted. In her place they put the name of that daughter's husband as the descendant of the maternal grandfather.
Mary's father was Eli or Heli ,Joseph was the son in law so the Bible say's Joseph was the son of Heli meaning he was the son in law.

In Matthew it say's Josephs father is Jacob.

So you say, but the Bible doesn’t. There are also millions of people who believe Joachim is Mary’s father. Their guess is as good as yours.

But thank you for at least demonstrating the salient point here .... this is a contradiction in the New Testament which nobody knows the true answer. Which is evidence that it’s a farce and that Jesus was a false prophet, leading many people away from G-d.

Joachim is Eli, Heli.
Joachim when you study the language ,seems to be a variant form of Eliacim, which is abbreviated as Eli, a variant of Heli. Hence, though the two names may at first appear quite different, there is a great linguistic similarity between Heli and Joachim.

Jesus leads you to God, not away from him.

There is no proof that Joachim was Eli. That is what some folks invented in order to plug the holes in the New Testament.

I gave it to you.
It's called studying their language.

LOL

You said it, you didn’t prove it. Your word is not proof. There is no such proof because there is nothing documented in any literature from back then claiming Joachim was also known as Eli.

Look it up,there is plenty of proof.

 

[Faun]

So you say, but the Bible doesn’t. There are also millions of people who believe Joachim is Mary’s father. Their guess is as good as yours.

But thank you for at least demonstrating the salient point here .... this is a contradiction in the New Testament which nobody knows the true answer. Which is evidence that it’s a farce and that Jesus was a false prophet, leading many people away from G-d.

Joachim is Eli, Heli.
Joachim when you study the language ,seems to be a variant form of Eliacim, which is abbreviated as Eli, a variant of Heli. Hence, though the two names may at first appear quite different, there is a great linguistic similarity between Heli and Joachim.

Jesus leads you to God, not away from him.

There is no proof that Joachim was Eli. That is what some folks invented in order to plug the holes in the New Testament.

So you say, but the Bible doesn’t. There are also millions of people who believe Joachim is Mary’s father. Their guess is as good as yours.

But thank you for at least demonstrating the salient point here .... this is a contradiction in the New Testament which nobody knows the true answer. Which is evidence that it’s a farce and that Jesus was a false prophet, leading many people away from G-d.

Joachim is Eli, Heli.
Joachim when you study the language ,seems to be a variant form of Eliacim, which is abbreviated as Eli, a variant of Heli. Hence, though the two names may at first appear quite different, there is a great linguistic similarity between Heli and Joachim.

Jesus leads you to God, not away from him.

There is no proof that Joachim was Eli. That is what some folks invented in order to plug the holes in the New Testament.

I gave it to you.
It's called studying their language.

LOL

You said it, you didn’t prove it. Your word is not proof. There is no such proof because there is nothing documented in any literature from back then claiming Joachim was also known as Eli.

Look it up,there is plenty of proof.

There’s nothing to look up. Had there been, you would have posted it. As I said, there is no history indicating Joachim was Eli. None. That claim began some 800 years after Jesus died by cultists like you who realized there are holes needing plugs in the New Testament.

 

[peach174]

Jewish traditions back then was when a daughter got married, the son in law becomes the son to the father in law. This ensured their daughters blood line of the families.

Prove it.... quote either the Old Testament or the Talmud....

Jewish traditions back then was when a daughter got married, the son in law becomes the son to the father in law. This ensured their daughters blood line of the families.

Prove it.... quote either the Old Testament or the Talmud....

Jewish traditions back then was when a daughter got married, the son in law becomes the son to the father in law. This ensured their daughters blood line of the families.

Prove it.... quote either the Old Testament or the Talmud....

Jewish traditions back then was when a daughter got married, the son in law becomes the son to the father in law. This ensured their daughters blood line of the families.

Prove it.... quote either the Old Testament or the Talmud....

Jewish traditions back then was when a daughter got married, the son in law becomes the son to the father in law. This ensured their daughters blood line of the families.

Prove it.... quote either the Old Testament or the Talmud....

Jewish traditions back then was when a daughter got married, the son in law becomes the son to the father in law. This ensured their daughters blood line of the families.

Prove it.... quote either the Old Testament or the Talmud....

Jewish traditions back then was when a daughter got married, the son in law becomes the son to the father in law. This ensured their daughters blood line of the families.

Prove it.... quote either the Old Testament or the Talmud....

Bible Gateway passage: Numbers 27:1-11 - King James Version
Bible Gateway passage: Numbers 36:1-12 - King James Version

 

[hobelim]

The second death (Lake of Fire) comes after judgrment.

How can you have a second death if it appointed for man to die once?????

there is the death consequent to violating the law of God and then there is the death of the physical body.


Those who take part in the first resurrection cannot be harmed by the second death.


Only physical death is natural. People praying to statues for instance and then dying and descending into the netherworld for decades or for life by losing their sanity is not Gods will.

IOW, you admit it is NOT appointed for man to die once. Some men will die twice, and as you have already pointed out some men will not die at all.

no. Only physical death is "appointed." those who die as a consequence of violating the law of God do not die a natural death and even those who will live forever must first face the appointed physical death.

 

[hobelim]

I get my information that God requires circumcising something more important than the foreskin of your dick from the Torah.

Now you know.


Would you like to see?

Sure, post awsy.

Deuteronomy 10:16


Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked. (ancient Hebrew humor)


It is known that ancient people believed that consciousness was seated in the organ of the heart. We now know that consciousness is seated in the organ of the brain. It follows then that whenever scripture is speaking about the human heart the subject is the human mind.


If you had circumcised the foreskin of your mind you would rather die a horrible death than to advocate mutilating the penis of a Jewish man child.

If it is true that the uncircumcised are not Gods people as you said, then until you conform to Deuteronomy 10:16 you are not Gods people, so in the future try to keep in mind that however wrong Christians may be about everything, you ain't right either.

So what is more important now? Convincing Christians that they are confused or circumcising the foreskin of your own mind? If you were children of Abraham you would do as Abraham did.

and Abraham did not turn to a moil.

You are thoroughly confused. Circumcision is for Jews to accept G-d’s everlasting covenant. That never changes.

Yes, you must circumcise the foreskin of your mind, the evil inclination. This will never change.

The mark of Gods everlasting covenant is in the flesh, the teaching, not the penis. You are thoroughly confused.


The teaching and practice of circumcising the flesh of the foreskin of infant penises is the flesh and blood of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

If you eat the vile and degrading flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate it will defile and contaminate your mind and you will die and degenerate into an unclean creature that cannot ruminate.

ITS THE LAW.

If you drink their blood you will say and do stupid things like mutilating the penises of infants as if that was the will of God and the subject of what separates the people of God from the heathen instead of the teaching in the law.

Its about as insane as the Christian belief that a three in one God became an edible human being or the Muslim belief that Mohammed was the last and greatest prophet of a holy God.

If your sin is not as obvious as a white boulder in the middle of a plowed field to you, you might want to consider the possibility that your soul has been cut off for failing to stand guard over the sanctity of your own mind.

Take your time........

Of course it's the foreskin of the penis. G-d was about to take a life at one point because Moses' son was not circumcised but he was saved when when Zipporah circumcised their son by cutting off his foreskin with a sharp stone and throwing it down at his feet.

Moses was who was raised as an Egyptian and received the law from God which gave the command refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate and the command to circumcise your heart, your mind, did not have a circumcised penis.

God wasn't upset that his son wasn't circumcised, the numbskuls that he was trying to elevate above irrational superstitions were upset with Moses his God and the law which painted many people who thought they were favored by God because of their circumcised dicks as unclean unthinking wild beasts according to the divine menu.

 

[MedfordMan]

No at all, it just doesn't say what you claim it says.

You've asked your question and your question has been answered.

It says what I quoted, ”And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.” Meaning uncircumcised men are cut out of his covenant.

Not quite.

The verse doesn't say that an uncircumcised man's soul is cut off from God.

That man's disobedience breaks the covenant with God, causing spiritual separation, but it doesn't condemn him to Hell unless he chooses not to seek forgiveness.

God did not cut the uncircumcised man out of his covenant. The uncircumcised man chose not to continue to be part of the covenant with God.

The point is not that God is capricious or vain, but that God is righteous so our sin separates us from him.

It means what it says ... the soul of the uncircumcised will not be G-d's people. That is G-d’s covenant.

Exactly what do Jews believe is required to be circumcised in order to become Gods people?

Penises? A circumcised penis is the mark of the covenant between God and man?

Is that really your answer?


Contradictions in the gospels should be the least of your concerns.

I’m telling you what the Torah says. I have no idea from where you get your information.

Is Judaism a biblical faith (based on the bible) or a rabbinic faith (based upon what rabbis says the Bible says)?

 

[MedfordMan]

The second death (Lake of Fire) comes after judgrment.

How can you have a second death if it appointed for man to die once?????

there is the death consequent to violating the law of God and then there is the death of the physical body.


Those who take part in the first resurrection cannot be harmed by the second death.


Only physical death is natural. People praying to statues for instance and then dying and descending into the netherworld for decades or for life by losing their sanity is not Gods will.

IOW, you admit it is NOT appointed for man to die once. Some men will die twice, and as you have already pointed out some men will not die at all.

Actually, the two guys who never died, Enoch and Elijah will face physical death in the future (see Revelation 11:7)

i believe they are the two witnesses spoken of in the book of Revelation.

 

[edthecynic]

The second death (Lake of Fire) comes after judgrment.

How can you have a second death if it appointed for man to die once?????

there is the death consequent to violating the law of God and then there is the death of the physical body.


Those who take part in the first resurrection cannot be harmed by the second death.


Only physical death is natural. People praying to statues for instance and then dying and descending into the netherworld for decades or for life by losing their sanity is not Gods will.

IOW, you admit it is NOT appointed for man to die once. Some men will die twice, and as you have already pointed out some men will not die at all.

no. Only physical death is "appointed." those who die as a consequence of violating the law of God do not die a natural death and even those who will live forever must first face the appointed physical death.

Now that is just doublespeak.

 

[hobelim]

The second death (Lake of Fire) comes after judgrment.

How can you have a second death if it appointed for man to die once?????

there is the death consequent to violating the law of God and then there is the death of the physical body.


Those who take part in the first resurrection cannot be harmed by the second death.


Only physical death is natural. People praying to statues for instance and then dying and descending into the netherworld for decades or for life by losing their sanity is not Gods will.

IOW, you admit it is NOT appointed for man to die once. Some men will die twice, and as you have already pointed out some men will not die at all.

no. Only physical death is "appointed." those who die as a consequence of violating the law of God do not die a natural death and even those who will live forever must first face the appointed physical death.

Now that is just doublespeak.

No its not doublespeak.

Everyone must die a physical death. No one is exempt. Elijah being "taken up" in a whirlwind is just a euphemism for him being lynched by a mob.

"The death" consequent to setting aside divine instruction is a metaphor for the loss of sanity. This is not Gods will. People drive each other insane.

Those who do not die in this way and all those who rise from this death and embrace immortality and become, "like one of us", still must first die a physical death.

 

[ding]

Sure, post awsy.

Deuteronomy 10:16


Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked. (ancient Hebrew humor)


It is known that ancient people believed that consciousness was seated in the organ of the heart. We now know that consciousness is seated in the organ of the brain. It follows then that whenever scripture is speaking about the human heart the subject is the human mind.


If you had circumcised the foreskin of your mind you would rather die a horrible death than to advocate mutilating the penis of a Jewish man child.

If it is true that the uncircumcised are not Gods people as you said, then until you conform to Deuteronomy 10:16 you are not Gods people, so in the future try to keep in mind that however wrong Christians may be about everything, you ain't right either.

So what is more important now? Convincing Christians that they are confused or circumcising the foreskin of your own mind? If you were children of Abraham you would do as Abraham did.

and Abraham did not turn to a moil.

You are thoroughly confused. Circumcision is for Jews to accept G-d’s everlasting covenant. That never changes.

Yes, you must circumcise the foreskin of your mind, the evil inclination. This will never change.

The mark of Gods everlasting covenant is in the flesh, the teaching, not the penis. You are thoroughly confused.


The teaching and practice of circumcising the flesh of the foreskin of infant penises is the flesh and blood of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

If you eat the vile and degrading flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate it will defile and contaminate your mind and you will die and degenerate into an unclean creature that cannot ruminate.

ITS THE LAW.

If you drink their blood you will say and do stupid things like mutilating the penises of infants as if that was the will of God and the subject of what separates the people of God from the heathen instead of the teaching in the law.

Its about as insane as the Christian belief that a three in one God became an edible human being or the Muslim belief that Mohammed was the last and greatest prophet of a holy God.

If your sin is not as obvious as a white boulder in the middle of a plowed field to you, you might want to consider the possibility that your soul has been cut off for failing to stand guard over the sanctity of your own mind.

Take your time........

Of course it's the foreskin of the penis. G-d was about to take a life at one point because Moses' son was not circumcised but he was saved when when Zipporah circumcised their son by cutting off his foreskin with a sharp stone and throwing it down at his feet.

Moses was who was raised as an Egyptian and received the law from God which gave the command refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate and the command to circumcise your heart, your mind, did not have a circumcised penis.

God wasn't upset that his son wasn't circumcised, the numbskuls that he was trying to elevate above irrational superstitions were upset with Moses his God and the law which painted many people who thought they were favored by God because of their circumcised dicks as unclean unthinking wild beasts according to the divine menu.

Did you receive a revelation from God?

Please tell us about it.

 

[ding]

The second death (Lake of Fire) comes after judgrment.

How can you have a second death if it appointed for man to die once?????

there is the death consequent to violating the law of God and then there is the death of the physical body.


Those who take part in the first resurrection cannot be harmed by the second death.


Only physical death is natural. People praying to statues for instance and then dying and descending into the netherworld for decades or for life by losing their sanity is not Gods will.

IOW, you admit it is NOT appointed for man to die once. Some men will die twice, and as you have already pointed out some men will not die at all.

no. Only physical death is "appointed." those who die as a consequence of violating the law of God do not die a natural death and even those who will live forever must first face the appointed physical death.

How do you define natural death?

Some people probably do die a spiritual death before they experience a physical death but they will be given an opportunity to change their heart before they experience a physical death.

 

[ding]

Sure, post awsy.

Deuteronomy 10:16


Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked. (ancient Hebrew humor)


It is known that ancient people believed that consciousness was seated in the organ of the heart. We now know that consciousness is seated in the organ of the brain. It follows then that whenever scripture is speaking about the human heart the subject is the human mind.


If you had circumcised the foreskin of your mind you would rather die a horrible death than to advocate mutilating the penis of a Jewish man child.

If it is true that the uncircumcised are not Gods people as you said, then until you conform to Deuteronomy 10:16 you are not Gods people, so in the future try to keep in mind that however wrong Christians may be about everything, you ain't right either.

So what is more important now? Convincing Christians that they are confused or circumcising the foreskin of your own mind? If you were children of Abraham you would do as Abraham did.

and Abraham did not turn to a moil.

You are thoroughly confused. Circumcision is for Jews to accept G-d’s everlasting covenant. That never changes.

Yes, you must circumcise the foreskin of your mind, the evil inclination. This will never change.

The mark of Gods everlasting covenant is in the flesh, the teaching, not the penis. You are thoroughly confused.


The teaching and practice of circumcising the flesh of the foreskin of infant penises is the flesh and blood of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

If you eat the vile and degrading flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate it will defile and contaminate your mind and you will die and degenerate into an unclean creature that cannot ruminate.

ITS THE LAW.

If you drink their blood you will say and do stupid things like mutilating the penises of infants as if that was the will of God and the subject of what separates the people of God from the heathen instead of the teaching in the law.

Its about as insane as the Christian belief that a three in one God became an edible human being or the Muslim belief that Mohammed was the last and greatest prophet of a holy God.

If your sin is not as obvious as a white boulder in the middle of a plowed field to you, you might want to consider the possibility that your soul has been cut off for failing to stand guard over the sanctity of your own mind.

Take your time........

Of course it's the foreskin of the penis. G-d was about to take a life at one point because Moses' son was not circumcised but he was saved when when Zipporah circumcised their son by cutting off his foreskin with a sharp stone and throwing it down at his feet.

Moses was who was raised as an Egyptian and received the law from God which gave the command refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate and the command to circumcise your heart, your mind, did not have a circumcised penis.

God wasn't upset that his son wasn't circumcised, the numbskuls that he was trying to elevate above irrational superstitions were upset with Moses his God and the law which painted many people who thought they were favored by God because of their circumcised dicks as unclean unthinking wild beasts according to the divine menu.

Do you even Abraham?

Try reading Genesis 17.

 

[ding]

How can you have a second death if it appointed for man to die once?????

there is the death consequent to violating the law of God and then there is the death of the physical body.


Those who take part in the first resurrection cannot be harmed by the second death.


Only physical death is natural. People praying to statues for instance and then dying and descending into the netherworld for decades or for life by losing their sanity is not Gods will.

IOW, you admit it is NOT appointed for man to die once. Some men will die twice, and as you have already pointed out some men will not die at all.

no. Only physical death is "appointed." those who die as a consequence of violating the law of God do not die a natural death and even those who will live forever must first face the appointed physical death.

Now that is just doublespeak.

No its not doublespeak.

Everyone must die a physical death. No one is exempt. Elijah being "taken up" in a whirlwind is just a euphemism for him being lynched by a mob.

"The death" consequent to setting aside divine instruction is a metaphor for the loss of sanity. This is not Gods will. People drive each other insane.

Those who do not die in this way and all those who rise from this death and embrace immortality and become, "like one of us", still must first die a physical death.

All you have is doublespeak.

 

[edthecynic]

How can you have a second death if it appointed for man to die once?????

there is the death consequent to violating the law of God and then there is the death of the physical body.


Those who take part in the first resurrection cannot be harmed by the second death.


Only physical death is natural. People praying to statues for instance and then dying and descending into the netherworld for decades or for life by losing their sanity is not Gods will.

IOW, you admit it is NOT appointed for man to die once. Some men will die twice, and as you have already pointed out some men will not die at all.

no. Only physical death is "appointed." those who die as a consequence of violating the law of God do not die a natural death and even those who will live forever must first face the appointed physical death.

Now that is just doublespeak.

No its not doublespeak.

Everyone must die a physical death. No one is exempt. Elijah being "taken up" in a whirlwind is just a euphemism for him being lynched by a mob.

"The death" consequent to setting aside divine instruction is a metaphor for the loss of sanity. This is not Gods will. People drive each other insane.

Those who do not die in this way and all those who rise from this death and embrace immortality and become, "like one of us", still must first die a physical death.

more doublespeak.

 

[Faun]

Sure, post awsy.

Deuteronomy 10:16


Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked. (ancient Hebrew humor)


It is known that ancient people believed that consciousness was seated in the organ of the heart. We now know that consciousness is seated in the organ of the brain. It follows then that whenever scripture is speaking about the human heart the subject is the human mind.


If you had circumcised the foreskin of your mind you would rather die a horrible death than to advocate mutilating the penis of a Jewish man child.

If it is true that the uncircumcised are not Gods people as you said, then until you conform to Deuteronomy 10:16 you are not Gods people, so in the future try to keep in mind that however wrong Christians may be about everything, you ain't right either.

So what is more important now? Convincing Christians that they are confused or circumcising the foreskin of your own mind? If you were children of Abraham you would do as Abraham did.

and Abraham did not turn to a moil.

You are thoroughly confused. Circumcision is for Jews to accept G-d’s everlasting covenant. That never changes.

Yes, you must circumcise the foreskin of your mind, the evil inclination. This will never change.

The mark of Gods everlasting covenant is in the flesh, the teaching, not the penis. You are thoroughly confused.


The teaching and practice of circumcising the flesh of the foreskin of infant penises is the flesh and blood of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

If you eat the vile and degrading flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate it will defile and contaminate your mind and you will die and degenerate into an unclean creature that cannot ruminate.

ITS THE LAW.

If you drink their blood you will say and do stupid things like mutilating the penises of infants as if that was the will of God and the subject of what separates the people of God from the heathen instead of the teaching in the law.

Its about as insane as the Christian belief that a three in one God became an edible human being or the Muslim belief that Mohammed was the last and greatest prophet of a holy God.

If your sin is not as obvious as a white boulder in the middle of a plowed field to you, you might want to consider the possibility that your soul has been cut off for failing to stand guard over the sanctity of your own mind.

Take your time........

Of course it's the foreskin of the penis. G-d was about to take a life at one point because Moses' son was not circumcised but he was saved when when Zipporah circumcised their son by cutting off his foreskin with a sharp stone and throwing it down at his feet.

Moses was who was raised as an Egyptian and received the law from God which gave the command refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate and the command to circumcise your heart, your mind, did not have a circumcised penis.

God wasn't upset that his son wasn't circumcised, the numbskuls that he was trying to elevate above irrational superstitions were upset with Moses his God and the law which painted many people who thought they were favored by God because of their circumcised dicks as unclean unthinking wild beasts according to the divine menu.

You really have no fucking clue about that of which you ramble.

Circumcision of the heart is a metaphor, not a command. There were 613 commandments plus the Ten Commandments etched in stone on Mount Sinai...

Judaism 101: A List of the 613 Mitzvot (Commandments)
Judaism 101: Aseret ha-Dibrot: The "Ten Commandments"

... and not one was about circumcision of the heart.

You also don't speak for G-d. The Bible says Moses' wife saved a life for circumcising their son. I'll take the Bible over you, 1000 times out of 1000.

 

[Faun]

It says what I quoted, ”And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.” Meaning uncircumcised men are cut out of his covenant.

Not quite.

The verse doesn't say that an uncircumcised man's soul is cut off from God.

That man's disobedience breaks the covenant with God, causing spiritual separation, but it doesn't condemn him to Hell unless he chooses not to seek forgiveness.

God did not cut the uncircumcised man out of his covenant. The uncircumcised man chose not to continue to be part of the covenant with God.

The point is not that God is capricious or vain, but that God is righteous so our sin separates us from him.

It means what it says ... the soul of the uncircumcised will not be G-d's people. That is G-d’s covenant.

Exactly what do Jews believe is required to be circumcised in order to become Gods people?

Penises? A circumcised penis is the mark of the covenant between God and man?

Is that really your answer?


Contradictions in the gospels should be the least of your concerns.

I’m telling you what the Torah says. I have no idea from where you get your information.

Is Judaism a biblical faith (based on the bible) or a rabbinic faith (based upon what rabbis says the Bible says)?

It's both.

 

[hobelim]

Deuteronomy 10:16


Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked. (ancient Hebrew humor)


It is known that ancient people believed that consciousness was seated in the organ of the heart. We now know that consciousness is seated in the organ of the brain. It follows then that whenever scripture is speaking about the human heart the subject is the human mind.


If you had circumcised the foreskin of your mind you would rather die a horrible death than to advocate mutilating the penis of a Jewish man child.

If it is true that the uncircumcised are not Gods people as you said, then until you conform to Deuteronomy 10:16 you are not Gods people, so in the future try to keep in mind that however wrong Christians may be about everything, you ain't right either.

So what is more important now? Convincing Christians that they are confused or circumcising the foreskin of your own mind? If you were children of Abraham you would do as Abraham did.

and Abraham did not turn to a moil.

You are thoroughly confused. Circumcision is for Jews to accept G-d’s everlasting covenant. That never changes.

Yes, you must circumcise the foreskin of your mind, the evil inclination. This will never change.

The mark of Gods everlasting covenant is in the flesh, the teaching, not the penis. You are thoroughly confused.


The teaching and practice of circumcising the flesh of the foreskin of infant penises is the flesh and blood of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

If you eat the vile and degrading flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate it will defile and contaminate your mind and you will die and degenerate into an unclean creature that cannot ruminate.

ITS THE LAW.

If you drink their blood you will say and do stupid things like mutilating the penises of infants as if that was the will of God and the subject of what separates the people of God from the heathen instead of the teaching in the law.

Its about as insane as the Christian belief that a three in one God became an edible human being or the Muslim belief that Mohammed was the last and greatest prophet of a holy God.

If your sin is not as obvious as a white boulder in the middle of a plowed field to you, you might want to consider the possibility that your soul has been cut off for failing to stand guard over the sanctity of your own mind.

Take your time........

Of course it's the foreskin of the penis. G-d was about to take a life at one point because Moses' son was not circumcised but he was saved when when Zipporah circumcised their son by cutting off his foreskin with a sharp stone and throwing it down at his feet.

Moses was who was raised as an Egyptian and received the law from God which gave the command refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate and the command to circumcise your heart, your mind, did not have a circumcised penis.

God wasn't upset that his son wasn't circumcised, the numbskuls that he was trying to elevate above irrational superstitions were upset with Moses his God and the law which painted many people who thought they were favored by God because of their circumcised dicks as unclean unthinking wild beasts according to the divine menu.

You really have no fucking clue about that of which you ramble.

Circumcision of the heart is a metaphor, not a command. There were 613 commandments plus the Ten Commandments etched in stone on Mount Sinai...

Judaism 101: A List of the 613 Mitzvot (Commandments)
Judaism 101: Aseret ha-Dibrot: The "Ten Commandments"

... and not one was about circumcision of the heart.

You also don't speak for G-d. The Bible says Moses' wife saved a life for circumcising their son. I'll take the Bible over you, 1000 times out of 1000.

Moses, who gave the law and spoke with God face to face, was not circumcised. Why didn't Moses circumcise his own son if it was so important to God? Why didn't he do it to himself?

I can understand why you are upset with me.

You have a critical problem, and you have been made painfully aware of it.

You have been mutilating infant penises for thousands of years for no rational reason and nothing to show for it but traumatized children.

 

[hobelim]

Circumcision of the heart is a metaphor, not a command.

It is both just like the command to refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate is a metaphor and a command.

The issue that you can't seem to grasp is that it is impossible to conform to the literal meaning of those commands without violating the deeper implications of the exact same commands whether its circumcision or kashrut or the bizarre practice of wearing phylacteries.

If you would like a clear and irrefutable explanation of what I mean I would be happy to provide one.

 

[Faun]

You are thoroughly confused. Circumcision is for Jews to accept G-d’s everlasting covenant. That never changes.

Yes, you must circumcise the foreskin of your mind, the evil inclination. This will never change.

The mark of Gods everlasting covenant is in the flesh, the teaching, not the penis. You are thoroughly confused.


The teaching and practice of circumcising the flesh of the foreskin of infant penises is the flesh and blood of unclean creatures that do not ruminate.

If you eat the vile and degrading flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate it will defile and contaminate your mind and you will die and degenerate into an unclean creature that cannot ruminate.

ITS THE LAW.

If you drink their blood you will say and do stupid things like mutilating the penises of infants as if that was the will of God and the subject of what separates the people of God from the heathen instead of the teaching in the law.

Its about as insane as the Christian belief that a three in one God became an edible human being or the Muslim belief that Mohammed was the last and greatest prophet of a holy God.

If your sin is not as obvious as a white boulder in the middle of a plowed field to you, you might want to consider the possibility that your soul has been cut off for failing to stand guard over the sanctity of your own mind.

Take your time........

Of course it's the foreskin of the penis. G-d was about to take a life at one point because Moses' son was not circumcised but he was saved when when Zipporah circumcised their son by cutting off his foreskin with a sharp stone and throwing it down at his feet.

Moses was who was raised as an Egyptian and received the law from God which gave the command refrain from the flesh of unclean creatures that do not ruminate and the command to circumcise your heart, your mind, did not have a circumcised penis.

God wasn't upset that his son wasn't circumcised, the numbskuls that he was trying to elevate above irrational superstitions were upset with Moses his God and the law which painted many people who thought they were favored by God because of their circumcised dicks as unclean unthinking wild beasts according to the divine menu.

You really have no fucking clue about that of which you ramble.

Circumcision of the heart is a metaphor, not a command. There were 613 commandments plus the Ten Commandments etched in stone on Mount Sinai...

Judaism 101: A List of the 613 Mitzvot (Commandments)
Judaism 101: Aseret ha-Dibrot: The "Ten Commandments"

... and not one was about circumcision of the heart.

You also don't speak for G-d. The Bible says Moses' wife saved a life for circumcising their son. I'll take the Bible over you, 1000 times out of 1000.

Moses, who gave the law and spoke with God face to face, was not circumcised. Why didn't Moses circumcise his own son if it was so important to God? Why didn't he do it to himself?

I can understand why you are upset with me.

You have a critical problem, and you have been made painfully aware of it.

You have been mutilating infant penises for thousands of years for no rational reason and nothing to show for it but traumatized children.

Of course Moses was circumcised. You once again demonstrate you have no fucking clue what you're talking about.