Part 5 of Post Your Tough Questions Regarding Christianity

Except the population of Israel in 1948 wasn't 2 million. So... no.

 

Women have been considered something of a problem in the Catholic Church from the onset...The lessening of female impact is virtually everywhere in the Catholic Church, from the priesthood to the Highest reaches. Part of this is a financial aspect (No Wife, Everything goes to the church), to the need to control reproduction, to the treatment of Nuns.
It is hard for me to understand how a woman could be Catholic, considering the Church seems to consider them second class people. As a woman cannot enter even the lowest levels of leadership she cannot vote for the Pope...Hell, she has no voice except in the choir.

 

I can interpret the Lord of the Rings, the Great Gatsby, and To Kill a Mockingbird without assuming they describe real things.

Since YHWH explicitly states women are worth less than men and St. Paul explicitly says women are to have no power over men, it's pretty apparent that women are viewed as second-class citizens at best or chattel at worst.

 

So eternal bliss will be non stop sex?

 

Why would you say such a thing? You think what constantine put together is the truth? That is nothing more than an opinion.

 

And yet God left 8 sinful people to repopulate the earth. Expecting no more sin?

 

Quote Posted by Gorn Captain:

You just contradicted the Bible by even saying there were "righteous people"...

"As it is written: "There is no one righteous, not even one;"----Romans 3:10

So....if you don't even know the Bible and even contradict it...how can we trust you on
anything else about Christianity or the Bible???
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have not contradicted the bible, it's just that you're another typical atheist who always seem to misinterpret what is being said....what else is new?...lol

I can't count the multitude of times I have used that line...what else is new...but I know it has been numerous of times when dealing with my atheist friends...lol

The word "righteous" is used in different ways.

In the verse you mentioned, "There is no one righteous, not even one" it is factually stating that we are all sinners.

In which I agree with as verified by what I specifically said on pg. 38 of Part 2 post #379 which was posted by you, I said,

"Anyone can distinquish the difference between evil people and righteous people but once again the thing that we all have in common, is that regardless if you are basically an evil person or basically a righteous person, we are all sinners." (key words: we are all sinners)

Now here is a passage in Scripture that is proclaiming Noah as being a righteous man, "Noah was a righteous man, the only blameless person living on earth at the time, and he walked in close fellowship with God." Gen. 6:9 NLT

Now in this context just because it is describing Noah as being a righteous man it is implying that Noah was without sin. It is just saying that he was basically a righteous person.

Here is another verse in Scripture, Jesus said, "Anyone who receives you receives me, and anyone who receives me receives the Father who sent me. If you receive a prophet as one who speaks for God, you will be given the same reward as a prophet. And if you receive rigtheous people because of their righteousness, you will be given a reward like theirs. And if you give even a cup of cold water to one of the least of my followers, you will surely be rewarded." Matthew 10:40-42 NLT

There are other passages in Scripture that refer to people as being righteous but you should get the message by now with the two examples I have given.

Therefore a person can be described as being righteous, however it doesn't mean that person is without sin because the fact remains we are all sinners, thus I have not contradicted the bible, it's just that you are doing what an atheist does best...misinterpret what they read.

 

He isn't trying hard enough? As there are more non christians than chritians.

One can't sit in judgement if one doesn't believe in it. How can one participate in something that isn't real for them.

 

and of course your interpretation is the one we should take!! lol

 

How do you know another human being as never sinned? What if a baby dies 1 second after birth?

 

Thank you for your biased opinion.

 

Quote Posted by GraspingforPeace:

Yes, there was a great flood in Uruk and Ur, hence the Epic of Gilgamesh, which Jewish authors altered and then added it to Genesis. But it wasn't a global flood, it was localized. It may have been all of the KNOWN world to these people at the time, but it certainly wasn't global in reality.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is no conclusive proof that Noah's flood story was ripped (copied) from the Epic of Gilgamesh.

From the early days of the comparative study of these two flood accounts there is an obvious relationship.

It was thought that the Gilgamesh account was older than the assumed dating of Genesis. However, the probability exists that the Biblical account had been preserved either as an oral tradition, or in written form handed down from Noah, through the patriarchs and eventually to Moses, thereby making it actually older than the Sumerian accounts which were restatements (with alterations) to the original.

The most accepted theory among evangelicals is that both have one common source, predating all the Sumerian forms. The divine inspiration of the Bible would demand that the Genesis account is the correct version.

The Hebrews were known for handing down their records and tradition. The Book of Genesis is viewed for the most part as an historical work, even by many liberal scholars, while the Epic of Gilgamesh is viewed as mythological.

The Genesis account was kept pure and accurate throughout the centuries by the benevolent guidance of God until it was finally written down by Moses.

The Epic of Gilgamesh, therefore, contains the corrupted account preserved by people who did not follow the God of the Hebrews.

 

prod (prd)
tr.v. prod·ded, prod·ding, prods
1. To jab or poke, as with a pointed object.
2. To goad to action; incite.

Nothing about anger in the definition. Just to incite and action.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/prodding

 

He does research, just doesn't use real facts in his research.

 

A reasonable logical thinking person. Would be my guess.

 

Quote Posted by dairyair:

If the scientists are correct then God will break his covenant to man. Or the scientists are wrong.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

God does not and will not break covenants He makes with man, thus there will never again be a Great Flood like the one that occurred during the days of Noah.

God said, "Never again will floodwaters kill all living creatures; never again will a flood destroy the earth." Then God said, "I am giving you a sign of my covenant with you and will all living creatures; for all generations to come. I have placed my rainbow in the clouds. It is the sign of my covenant with you and with all the earth. When I send clouds over the earth, the rainbow will appear in the clouds, and I will remember my covenant with you and with all living creatures. Never again will the floodwaters destroy all life. When I see the rainbow in the clouds, I will remember the eternal covenant between God and every living creature on earth." Then God said to Noah, "Yes, this rainbow is the sign of the covenant I am confirming with all the creatures on earth." Genesis 9:11-17 NLT

 

Because Eve, woman, was the 1st to sin and eat the apple and then tricked adam, man, to do the same. She is now subservient to man because of this act.

 

Wikipedia is stating that scholars have so far found no evidence that Jews started during the Exodus and at the same time the scholars that the Wikipedia is referring to have only the Bible to trace the origin of the Jews. You cheery pick that specific phrase and make it appear that scholars have indeed with no doubt concluded that Jews did not originated from the Exodus.

If you don't think what scholars thinks then what's the point of referencing them? If we are to only use our own opinion then I will say yes the Exodus did occur and that the kingdom of Israel originated from the Exodus. If scholars as you claim have dismissed the Bible Exodus is made up then why would they kept on referencing the Bible Exodus as the beginning and history of Jews and Israel? Because they have no definite proof and what ever proof they have found seems led them back to Egypt that a certain group of people did settle with the Egyptians and left and that this people they theorise are the Hebrews that the Bible is referring to.

First of all where did you came up those numbers? Egypt is an empire if Egypt's total population is only 3.5 minus the Jews 2.0 that would mean Egypt has a population of only 1.5 million?
The Bible went straight to the point they refer what scholars believer were Hyksos as Hebrews.

 

It is impossible for the hyksos to be hebrews. It is not in the bible.

- - - Updated - - -

It is impossible for the hyksos to be hebrews. It is not in the bible.

 

Thanks that proves to me I am correct. Woman are thought inferior by Catholics because of a fairytale. Honestly how does a woman sit there and let herself be made inferior buy a bunch of angry child molesting guys in funny hats. (In Massachusetts alone there were 78 priests brought up on charges in the last 20 years. 78!..) In all aspects of nature male and female work together in harmony. In areas where this harmony is missing things are always a mess. Look at the middle east and what those religious whackos do to women.
Also if Eve was able to trick Adam then it proves Eve is smarter. It shows Adam was an idiot, so if that was true Jesus should have picked twelve women not twelve men. ANOTHER striking contradiction. To emphasize a point I made earlier. Having a penis doesnt give you wisdom. If you disagree I will post example after example of where this is not true.

 

No they are not Hebrew your right. No Hebrew was ever King or Pharoah of Egypt. The only non Egyptian to ever rule Egypt was Cleopatra and she was Greek.

http://history-world.org/hyksos.htm

 

I agree.
Women in Abrahamic religions are 2nd class people. One of the reasons they were to stay barefoot and pregnant while remaining in the kitchen.

 

As there are people that left the church many have join the church and they join against all odds.

There you go again, claiming I refuse to answer simple questions, as I said I have answer your questions with simplicity and you don't like them so you get angry and make all kinds of wild accusations from accusing me of lying to being a strawman. I tried to give you adult answers but you get upset. So, if you insist I will try again to meet your standard of expectations.

See, I haven't answer yet already you are being insulting, pre-judging and angry. I am assuming by women not allow to elect the Pope you are referring to the nuns, right? There are no other women inside the Catholic church except the nuns so this is what I will assume.

Catholic church do not allow nuns to elect or take part in the election of a Pope because they are not ordain as priest.
"Only a baptized man (In Latin, vir) validly receives sacred ordination."[152] Insofar as priestly and episcopal ordination are concerned, the Church teaches that this requirement is a matter of divine law, and thus doctrinal.[153] The requirement that only males can receive ordination to the diaconate has not been promulgated as doctrinal by the Church's magisterium, though it is clearly at least a requirement according to canon law.[154][155]

Now you will ask why not ordain women priest then? First of all the Catholic church have been in the fore front in fighting for women's rights, women have their role as well as men have theirs. Now go back to women priest one reason no women priest because Jesus Christ have all male Apostles even if this is so women have been well respected and recognize.

Just like a traditional family, the husband is responsible for providing food and shelter while the wife is responsible in up keeping the house a share responsibility.

Well if that is how you like to understand it, that can be ok to, I won't answer it that way. You are too pre-assuming.
I would answer; why it rains? Because of atmospheric cycle, water evaporate to the clouds and when the clouds gets to heavy with evaporated water the water drops that becomes rain.

 

Well thank you for answering. I had to look it up earlier today and I posted the answer. It is because as you also say Jesus chose all men as the Apostles and no women.
So the next question is
Why did Jesus choose all men? Did he think men are superior or is it that a woman place back then is in the home. Or both?

 

The quotes state, for example: "No evidence has been found that indicates Egypt ever suffered such a demographic and economic catastrophe or that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds."

and,

"A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness,[3] and most archaeologists have abandoned the archaeological investigation of Moses and the Exodus as "a fruitless pursuit".[4] A number of theories have been put forward to account for the origins of the Israelites, and despite differing details they agree on Israel's Canaanite origins."

There are two conclusions by Biblical scholars: 1) The Exodus didn't happen and 2) The Israelites were Canaanites. That throws two loops for the Bible that claims: 1) The Exodus happened as it says it happened and 2) The Israelites were not Canaanites.


That isn't cherry-picking, it is the CONSENSUS among scholars.

They don't.

"The consensus among biblical scholars today is that there was never any exodus of the proportions described in the Bible,[14] and that the story is best seen as theology, a story illustrating how the god of Israel acted to save and strengthen his chosen people, and not as history"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus#Historicity

"The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the "mixed multitude" of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people,[17] compared with an entire Egyptian population in 1250 BCE of around 3 to 3.5 million.[18]"