betsy

FACT: "THE BIBLE SPEAKS RATHER EXPLICITLY ABOUT BASIC PRINCIPLES IN EVERY AREA OF SCIENCE" Excerpt from, THE BIBLE IS A TEXTBOOK OF SCIENCE http://www.icr.org/home/resources/resources_tracts_tbiatos/

And? Haven't you heard of the word, sharing? Anyway, kidding aside....why do you think God gave the Jews a very strict Mosaic Law? What do you think God's been prepping them for? What do you think was their "mission?" I bet you don't know.

Stolen from the Jews by Christians??? What an ignorant thing to say! You're my evidence #B. Proving what I've said before, that, most so-called "critics" of the Bible don't know diddly squat about the Bible. Either they're just winging it. Or repeating the same mush that they read from those who are winging it. And you belong to the latter group. Under classification D. "The parrots who can't get it right, even when they're only repeating it."

Still lost? You've been talking spam for ages now. Go here... http://www.spam.com/ This is Mapleleafweb.

You're off-kilter again. And obviously you don't understand what's being said in the article.... ....therefore, support your rebuttal with something credible. Talk is cheap. And talks that don't make sense or jive with the arguments are a dime-a-dozen on this forum. They're just spit in the wind.

Let me add something to this, MDancer. Yesss! It has something to do with the Bible! http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=18914&st=915 You can reject all you want. You can deny all you want. You can run, but you can't get away from the...Bible.

FACT: MODERN WESTERN SCIENCE WAS FOUNDED UPON JUDEO-CHRISTIAN PRESUPPOSITIONAL FOUNDATIONS FROM THE BIBLE. Excerpt from: Science Facts Confirm the Bible by R. Totten, M.Div - © 2000 http://worldview3.50webs.com/scientmethod.html

And that's what exactly happened to Solomon. Solomon had multiple wives and concubines....and ended up as God warned against. Solomon's heart turned away from God due to the influence of his wives. No bolts of lightning or immediate punishments. But there were grave consequences Along the same vein of grave consequences, I speculate this: Abraham and Sarah got impatient waiting for the promised child that they took matters into their own hands - the result was Ishmael. The existence of Ishmael created a repercussion that we - unto this very day - still feel. Genesis 16 Hagar and Ishmael 1 Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. But she had an Egyptian slave named Hagar; 2 so she said to Abram, “The LORD has kept me from having children. Go, sleep with my slave; perhaps I can build a family through her.” Abram agreed to what Sarai said. 3 So after Abram had been living in Canaan ten years, Sarai his wife took her Egyptian slave Hagar and gave her to her husband to be his wife. 4 He slept with Hagar, and she conceived. When she knew she was pregnant, she began to despise her mistress. 5 Then Sarai said to Abram, “You are responsible for the wrong I am suffering. I put my slave in your arms, and now that she knows she is pregnant, she despises me. May the LORD judge between you and me.” 6 “Your slave is in your hands,” Abram said. “Do with her whatever you think best.” Then Sarai mistreated Hagar; so she fled from her. 7 The angel of the LORD found Hagar near a spring in the desert; it was the spring that is beside the road to Shur. 8 And he said, “Hagar, slave of Sarai, where have you come from, and where are you going?” “I’m running away from my mistress Sarai,” she answered. 9 Then the angel of the LORD told her, “Go back to your mistress and submit to her.” 10 The angel added, “I will increase your descendants so much that they will be too numerous to count.” 11 The angel of the LORD also said to her: “You are now pregnant and you will give birth to a son. You shall name him Ishmael,[a] for the LORD has heard of your misery. 12 He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers.” http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/1161-ishmael-or-isaac-the-koran-or-the-bible

Corrections. Consider it to be the alleged "word of God," as dictated by an angel who claim to be "Gabriel." I say "claim to be..." because really, how many angels are there? Are we sure it's not one of the fallen "angels?" Who do Muslims think Allah is? The same God worshipped by Abraham and the Jews. The same God worshipped by Christians.

The story of Abraham happened before the Mosaic Law was given. Did Abraham commit adultery by begetting a son from the maid....I don't know. How is it a crime if it's not a law? But in Deuteronomy it was written: And that's what exactly happened to Solomon. Solomon had multiple wives and concubines....and ended up as God warned against. Solomon's heart turned away from God due to the influence of his wives. No bolts of lightning or immediate punishments. But there were grave consequences.

Either you've not been following the whole discussion at all....or you're in denial! I'm not. You are. Exactly. That's what my articles - and the evidences, or rather non-evidences - have been saying about the deadwood, evolution. Who's talking about the existence of God? You're off-track. You don't get it. Hello? You're living in the past. Get to the current times. That statement you've spouted about faith and atheism is pure baloney. You cannot hide behind it....nor can you use it as an excuse! You are as fundamentalist as any religion. New Atheism is a a faith....a belief of no god. If it talks like a duck....and waddles like duck....and looks like a duck.....it is a duck! Brush up from the other topics, Church of the Non-Believers, Video Debates and Interviews etc.., You're just gurgling what's already been spat. yeah. Sounds much better than calling it a scam, don't you think? And? Response??? Ho-ho-ho Puhleez....spell it out bluntly. Don't be coy or cutesy with words. Response my foot. Correction. You mean, evidence. Scientists haven't found a scientific evidence (yet?) And they won't! Your best argument had just been nuked, to boot. For you, it will have to be the logical thinking of...reading what's actually being discussed, along with all the arguments and rebuttals....so you wouldn't be rehashing and sounding so repetitively stale. And throwing rational thinking to the wind by refusing to understand exactly what Intelligent Designers are actually saying! Preferring a dead wood to a logical alternative. A hippo dressed in a tutu and ballerina shoes is still a hippo. Get back to me when you've got some new things to say!

Why do you have to presume it's Jehovah. You can presume any creator you want. Does Intelligent Design says it has to be a god? ID scientists say they'll follow where the evidence leads them. And that could mean....anywhere. See that? E V I D E N C E. They want evidence. Not some wishful thinking or any convoluted fairy-tale about un ugly frog who's been kissed by time and had magically transformed to become you. Actually it is the Neo-darwinists' atheistic faith that's getting the better of you. Aside from the religious faith behind some ID scientists, why does the Christian God fit the role of the Intelligent Designer? You ask, why not other gods? Perhaps it has something to do with the BIBLE? http://www.cbn.com/spirituallife/churchandministry/evangelism/burns_godswords.aspx Look who's talking! I've watched a docu called History of Earth, and I've seen where the "hocus-pocus" happened. One minute the narrator shifted from the ocean where there's one single lifeform in it, and documented the happenings on land. The volcanoes were acting up and shifting everything. Then the narrator said, "Now let's go back to the ocean and see what's happening." And you see under the ocean teeming with various forms of life....including what looked like an eel. The narrator said, "Now we see that from that one single life form evolved different life forms." EHHH??? How do you know they all evolved from that one single life form? No one was there to observe it! Talk about pulling a fast one. Of course, those who'd swallowed hook, line, and sinker of this propaganda didn't even notice the fast sleight of hand. Where is the disguise in the fact that our origin still baffles science to this day, as we speak? You mean you don't like the word, "Designed," because it implies, "created"....which you automatically associate with Creation and GENESIS! Just like Bambino and the doo-wap choir....you're bogged down by religion! It is you who can't get past religion! Something seems to happen to your reason as soon as you get a whiff of that word, creation. What creation is to you is like garlic to Dracula. Along with fairy tale believers like the Frog Prince? Golly, I wonder if there is any subliminal suggestion secretly imbedded behind the word "creation" that makes you guys throw rational thinking to the wind.

Adultery? Not relevant? ho-ho-ho You wish! Because you can't get around it, huh? Of course it's relevant. Very much so. And if you take all the rest of the passages and explanations that I quoted, they show how consistent Jesus is with the Old Testament...and that the Old Testament is not pro-polygamy. Just because there was no bolt of lightning striking everyone who took multiple wives does not mean God approved polygamy. A man, by having two wives, already did commit adultery! Ehhh? You sound so confused here....and now you're confusing me too. State the exact verse that you're referring to. Btw, do you have two wives? Planning on a third one? For an atheist, you seem so desperate for any form of Godly validation.

Hey MDancer, let's do a recap. http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/hinduism/beliefs/intro_1.shtmlDon't know about them really, but since they're your gods, obviously you do! I told you. All this time you believe in creation! And no wonder you're into all that "cycle"... http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_date1.htm Btw, what's holding this whole show together - this cyclic treadmill? Four elephants? One on each corner of the universe? So, which one do you lovingly refer to as "Physics?" Vishnu or Shiva? Now, it'll be interesting to see how you'd fit Cronus into this.

Hello MDancer? We're not talking about me. I know where I stand. I AM FAITH-BASED! We're talking about you guys who claim to be the "rational" ones....but proving to be actually, the terribly confused ones! Like you, going on about the god Basmati and his side-kicks Vishnu and whatchamacallit...and we just found out why! Looking back on your cycles....all this time you're actually a creationist! And you didn't even know it! And now you're invoking Cronus? Golly, you're going through all them?

Here is your quoted article; And? What does that prove? Don't tell me you're rattling in the same pea pod as Bambino, Dre and the doo-wap choir? They're so bogged down in religion - because to them, it's actually religion of no-god vs religion of god! They can't see reason. That's how radical fundamentalists are! I'm not even going to try to respond to each and every one of them. You respond to one and that response fits all! So Shakey, better take a deep breath, read my posts again and get a grip on what I'm saying. Never mind about my religious leanings. It's what I'm actually saying here is what you need to respond to....otherwise, you're barking at the wrong tree. Here for your convenience, the gist of it.... PAGE 37 Creation I'm saying, you should abandon the theory of evolution and replace it with the theory of ID. That is, if you want to be scientific about it, and not faith-based. Did you read that explanation from an Intelligent Designer? ID is actually up your alley. There's only one kicker..... ID is saying it will go where the evidence leads them. It's not strictly bound to common ancestry. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/11/douglas_theobald_tests_univers041021.html Neo-Darwinists got themselves in a dead-end situation, all boxed in....and yet close-mindedly refusing to shift. Science is all about empirical evidence! That's the strict rule, isn't it? Whereas ID is willing to let the evidence lead to the conclusion. In contrast neo-darwinists came up with a conclusion and are trying desperately to get the evidence to fit to their conclusion!http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=17897&st=555 Therefore, unless you're a religious fanatic like me....ID should be your preferred choice!

Can't add anything to expand on that? Of course, no! Something tells me Bambino is already sold on creation... ....but he's so hang-up on the word, Biblical. For some reason....he just can't simply get beyond that word, Biblical!

He did speak against it. ADULTERY. http://www.letusreason.org/Biblexp75.htm

That it was being practiced does not necessarily mean that it was condoned by Jesus. What....don't you even know why Jesus was lambasting the clergy of the day??? One of the reasons Jesus had a lot of enemies was due to Him speaking against some of the traditions and practices of the people - which were being condoned and perpetuated by the Pharisees! What do you think your example about resurrection was all about? The Saducees questioning His authority! And why do you think they were questioning His authority? Because He's telling them they're doing things wrong! That's the problem when you guys just pick and choose any verse you want to use in the Bible. You don't use it in its proper context. That's why....here I go again: It's important to read and try to understand the Bible. And you make a perfect example as to why.

This must be what you're referring to. Take note of the subject title of this portion. This is about the resurrection of the dead. Not about marriage, or polygamy. Just like you, the Saducees rejected belief in the supernatural, especially angels and resurrection of the dead. With "Moses said...," the Saducees were referring to the practice of "levirate marriage" which called for an unmarried brother to take his brother's widow for his own wife. My Bible footnotes explains: The absurd hypothetical case given by the Saducees attempts to discredit the legitimacy of the resurrection. This extreme example must've been thought by them to be the ultimate proof of the foolishness of the doctrine of resurrection. And it is indeed an absurd hypothetical example. Take note of Jesus' reply. “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. He then explained that in the resurrection, men do not marry. They are asexual like the angels. Therefore MDancer, that did not support your case at all since it has nothing to do about your polygamy case at all.

To which I quipped that nothing stops MDancer from having multiple wives! If he seeks validation - then go for religion that condones polygamy! I wonder if Hindus practice polygamy? I should ask MDancer.... And I did. If you both don't agree with my answer, that's not my problem anymore. What can I say....one can lead the horse to the water, but you can't force the horse to drink it.

Since you're rejecting my supported claim, then cite that passage in the Bible to back up your assertion. You seem to know more than the Apostles do what Christ meant.

Pardon me? Either you have trouble reading, or you have a problem understanding. Here, let me show what you quoted: Do you see the word, polygamist, anywhere there? Why don't you follow the trail. And not only are you putting words in my mouth...but you're also putting the wrong smiley. My smiley was an eye-roller, it is appropriate since that's how it felt. The angry smiley you pinned is not....because I am not angry. IF you haven't noticed, it's not anger at all that I feel in most, if not all, of the topics we've been arguing about! FYI, deliberately mis-quoting someone is dis-honest. There is no rational discussion with someone bent on being dishonest, for how can you reason with a liar?

Or to get your argument straight if you're going to criticise or use it to make a point. After all, it's only sensible to know or understand the "enemy" before engaging it! Or to criticise it. Or to use it for your argument. Or rebutt. And most especially if one is going to be mocking about it. Surely Kimmy, only a fool wouldn't know the importance of that.