• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Can Jewish law be fulfilled?

Pegg

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
im just curious as to which one of you will be the bigger person and stop with the argument

the scholar, or the student

*gets out popcorn*
 
H

Harmonious

Well-Known Member
Pegg said:
When we take into consideration that how God sees time is different to how we see it, then it becomes apparent that Adam did die in the same day that he ate from the tree

Psalm 90:4 For a thousand years are in your eyes but as yesterday when it is past,
And as a watch during the night
Click to expand...
Interesting. I think you're pushing it, but I could see that.

Seriously pushing it, though.

the christian view is that the snake was Satan the Devil who used a snake as a mouth piece.
Rev. 20:2 “And he seized the dragon, the original serpent, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years.”
Click to expand...
Yes, I know.

this thought is in harmony with the book of Job about this rebellious spirit being on the earth and secretly interfering with mankind
Click to expand...
No, actually it's not.

Job 1:6-7 “it came to be the day when the sons of the true God entered to take their station before J-, and even Satan proceeded to enter right among them. Then J- said to Satan: ‘Where do you come from?’ At that Satan answered J- and said: ‘From roving about in the earth and from walking about in it.’”
Click to expand...
Satan is not a rebellious spirit, especially not in Job. He is an angel that serves God. But he is often sent all over the place, and God asked what he was up to.

The thing is, Satan is not necessarily even ONE angel. Satan is a prosecuting angel. There are angels who ask for mercy on behalf of a soul, and there are angels who seek strict justice. Any angel asking for strict justice is a Satan, and they are only doing God's will.

No creature HAS free will, but humankind. Angels don't, so there are no rebellious angels.
 
H

Harmonious

Well-Known Member
Pegg said:
no amount of animal sacrifices could remove Adamic sin from us or the jews..
Click to expand...
The only one affected by Adam's sin is Adam. The concept of how God runs the world might have started with Adam, but we aren't judged because of Adam.

We are innocent until we have made ourselves guilty. Even if God intends to have a time when people no longer die, God does not judge us with Adam's sin.

Dying is part of the natural order of things, until God says otherwise.

only God can remove it by allowing us to live rather then die
Click to expand...
Eh.

this is why after 6,000 years of human history, people are still dying...even the ones who were getting thing right with God...even the ones who God said were upright and righteous..even the man Job who God said was 'perfect' still died.
Click to expand...
I'm not buying your explanation.

I understand that J- Witnesses believe as you do, who are a J- Witness. It is an interesting argument you bring, but I'm not buying it.
 
H

Harmonious

Well-Known Member
BigRed said:
Adam and Eve didn't have children until they left the garden.

BigRed
Click to expand...
You know... According to Jewish tradition, Cain and Abel were born in the Garden of Eden. Their story was not told until after they left it, though.

Seth wasn't born until after they left the Garden.

It would not be fair to say that Cain and Abel were only born after they were expelled, or that would be saying that children are a curse.

The curse of women is PAIN of childbirth, menstrual cramps, and the like. It makes more sense to me to understand that they were born before the punishment. That way, Eve knew the difference between giving birth to Cain and Abel, and to Seth.
 
H

Harmonious

Well-Known Member
smokydot said:
I didn't say it was my knowledge of hebrew. . .
Click to expand...
Yes you did.

and a concordance doesn't translate sentences. . .
Click to expand...
:rolleyes: Whatever.

The concordances I use don't translate ANYTHING. They just give me the location of things.

But your translation is not your own. You said that it WAS your knowledge of Hebrew.

I wasn't picking a dog in your argument with angellous. But you lied to ME. I won't forget that. (I may eventually forgive it, but I won't forget.)

it didn't come from a concordance. . .and what's it to you? . .
Click to expand...
I told you that I gave you my own translation. You said you got your information "from the Hebrew," when it was clear that it wasn't from the Hebrew.

And now you have the temerity to say that you didn't say what you did say.

your bias is showing. . .
Click to expand...
I didn't have one until now.

Assumes facts not in evidence.
Click to expand...
Whether it was concordance, or some other book, it doesn't matter. You lied about where you got your information. You said you got it from the Hebrew. Whether you got it from a concordance, a translation, whatever...

I don't really care, and that isn't a matter of importance to me.

What I DO care about is that you said that "you got it from the Hebrew," when you did no such thing. That was a lie.

You have earned a place as perona non grata for a while. Don't expect to see answers from me for a while.

If you didn't despise the NT so much, you would have more credibility on this. . .
Click to expand...
And that has nothing to do with the fact that I validated your translation of Genesis.

I have nothing more to say to you. You no longer amuse me.
 
H

Harmonious

Well-Known Member
Harmonious said:
Huh. How do you like that? I thought that was in a verse. Apparently, it was an oral learning that I mistakenly thought was in Genesis proper.

You are right. Good for you.
Click to expand...

smokydot said:
Do I get to be biased. . .assume the worst. . .and accuse you of being a rip-off artist?

Or do I "give you the benefit of the doubt" and take you at your word on this?

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2323612-post702.html
Click to expand...

The sad thing is that I was being sincere in my praise. Smoky scorned me for saying that he was right.

A good deed never goes unpunished...
 
Last edited:
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
Pegg said:
im just curious as to which one of you will be the bigger person and stop with the argument

the scholar, or the student

*gets out popcorn*
Click to expand...

There's only one student here.:yes:
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
Pegg said:
looks like Angellous is in the lead... for now :D


he's biting his tongue, but for how long )(
Click to expand...

Thou shalt not doubt daddy.:yes:

[btw, kudos to Harmonious for a cool head and consistently informative posts]
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
rakhel said:
What? and repost the post he keeps alluding to? Which seems to make little, if any, sense.
Click to expand...

It doesn't make sense - I suspect - because you don't grasp the context of the situation.

Harmonious admitted she was wrong and smoky was right, and congratulated him saying "good for you." He responds with an insult - misinterpreting the compliment (well, either that, or he's a complete jerk, which I don't think that he is).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top