Why Believe Jesus Never Had Sex?

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Again... skewed interpretation.

According to? You? Perhaps if you sent me a copy of your "decoder ring"?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

The OP is about Jesus, ...

Oh, I thought that christians believed that "jesus" was synonymous with "god".

Now you are saying otherwise?

 

[nPeace]

No-- I called all Creationist Websites as deliberately spreading falsehoods. Subtle, but distinct difference

No. You called all Creationist liars.

A link to a Creationist website isn't evidence. Sorry. Those people are simply incapable of telling the truth.

Or am I misinterpreting you, as you do the Bible?

 

[nPeace]

False. I was correct-- as they are all Creationist Links-- which are incapable of dissemination fact from fiction, because the authors don't understand the difference.

Okay. Let me take it a step at a time then.
Is this a Creationist website? Our controversial footprint discovery suggests human-like creatures may have roamed Crete nearly 6m years ago

 

[nPeace]

Your first line from THIS POST ALONE, contains a blatant falsehood:

"There can be no denying it. The evidence supports the truthfulness, and accuracy of the Bible in relation to it being historical accurate, prophetically reliable, and overall harmony."

You cannot sustain that statement, as the bible can easily be shown to contain falsehoods.

The most obvious? It's description of the earth as a flat plate or disc, resting on four pillars, and over-topped by a crystal dome structure. We know that simply isn't true. And so that proves the bible is inaccurate.

There are other glaring falsehoods as well: Talking animals, flaming shrubbery, flooding the entire planet, etc.

No. I did verify my statement with evidence, which you have not disproved.
You can't inject your interpretation of scripture, to prove scripture wrong.
Your interpretation is not a reliable source.

 

[nPeace]

1) Might Makes Right is a failed idea

2) I'm not a GOD, but I would think that an All Powerful, All Knowing deity could have done something OTHER than wiping out everyone on the entire planet, JUST because god gets mad at a tiny part of it...

Especially considering the people in question were behaving exactly as they were created to behave.

What you think, is not established truth or law. Have you appointed yourself supreme law giver and judge?
It's only a delusion - which doesn't change or affect anything.

 

[nPeace]

Who cares if it is or isn't? What you keep forgetting, is that "God's Morality" includes the taking of War Brides, that rape victims must marry their rapist (or be stoned to death), and that it is "moral" to punish the children -- to the Nth generation (where "N"=infinity) for the failures of the parents.

And that it's just fine to destroy the whole planet, including all the innocent animals, JUST to "punish" a fraction of it's inhabitants.

I've seen the "morality" of your god-- and it's an ugly one. Unworthy, really.

Millions of people care.
I'm not forgetting anything.

How does your reasoning and opinions affect the lives of millions of people, as did Jesus, and the Bible.

 

[ecco]

Perhaps you might have misunderstood my question.
I wasn't asking you to go back in time to Noah's day. Nor was I asking you to play God.
First, we do not have all the details so we cannot judge the situation there - and especially by our standards.
Second, we can't play God, because our standards, wisdom, power, etc., are nowhere near his, and if we think so, we are only dreamers.

No, I didn't misunderstand you question. However, you seem to have forgotten the context.
In the following I was clearly talking about God's genocide using a massive Flood.

I call killing almost every human being genocide.
I call killing all animals because His humans didn't turn out like He, with the power of omniscience, wanted them to, sick. Just plain sick.

You believe this petty, sick genocidal entity deserves worship and praise. That's really twisted.

You responded, in the context of the God and the Flood, asking what I would have done in similar circumstances..,.

I wonder if you would think that same way if you were ruling a domain, and 99.999% of your subjects were like this "twisted genocidal entity".
Would you kill all 99.999%? Perhaps cause them a bit of discomfort - maybe by putting them all in burning barrels and roll them down a hill?
Honestly, what would you do?

I hope you would do something to save the 0.001%,
According to the scriptures God did something. He didn't stand idly by twiddling his thumbs, while the earth became completely devoured in twisted depravity.
I think that is reasonable. I probably would have done the same, especially if that right rested on me alone.

To now say...

"I wasn't asking you to go back in time to Noah's day. Nor was I asking you to play God".​

...is really silly because that's exactly what you did.

None of which changes the fact that you believe this petty, sick genocidal entity deserves worship and praise.

 

[Kenny]

Who cares if it is or isn't? What you keep forgetting, is that "God's Morality" includes the taking of War Brides, that rape victims must marry their rapist (or be stoned to death), and that it is "moral" to punish the children -- to the Nth generation (where "N"=infinity) for the failures of the parents.

And that it's just fine to destroy the whole planet, including all the innocent animals, JUST to "punish" a fraction of it's inhabitants.

I've seen the "morality" of your god-- and it's an ugly one. Unworthy, really.

Again, a skewed view. But I understand why you view it that way.


So, if we both understand each others viewpoint... where's the beef?

 

[Kenny]

According to? You? Perhaps if you sent me a copy of your "decoder ring"?

Yes... you must be born-again for the words are spiritual words and must be understood by a spiritual being that is made in His image. Otherwise you are interpreting things through a western humanistic belief system. Two different languages.

You are born again by accepting the blood that He shed for the remission of your sins and accept Him as Lord and Savior and that he was risen from the dead.

Since you asked.

 

[ecco]

Okay. Let me take it a step at a time then.
Is this a Creationist website? Our controversial footprint discovery suggests human-like creatures may have roamed Crete nearly 6m years ago

What point are you trying to make with the posting of that link? What argument are you trying to support?

 

[nPeace]

No, I didn't misunderstand you question. However, you seem to have forgotten the context.
In the following I was clearly talking about God's genocide using a massive Flood.

You responded, in the context of the God and the Flood, asking what I would have done in similar circumstances..,.

To now say...

"I wasn't asking you to go back in time to Noah's day. Nor was I asking you to play God".​

...is really silly because that's exactly what you did.

None of which changes the fact that you believe this petty, sick genocidal entity deserves worship and praise.

I still think you misunderstood me, but if you think you didn't, I can't change your mind from what you think, but one thing I do know for sure is that you are not God, so you can't possibly know that you understood me correctly - especially after I clarified that you didn't.

I wonder if you would think that same way if you were ruling a domain, and 99.999% of your subjects were like this "twisted genocidal entity".

If you are not running away from the question, I would appreciate if you answered. However, you are your own man, so it's entirely up to you.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Then to get kids from Seth, it was Seth + Eve for awhile? And the, perhaps Adam and Seth's daughter(s)?

Ya know, I have for so many years, even when I was a very devoted Baptists, where all these other people came from, such as where did Cain get his wife? Seth porking Eve would explain this, especially considering Lot's daughters jumped daddy's bones.

 

[nPeace]

What point are you trying to make with the posting of that link? What argument are you trying to support?

This is to Bob, not you... I think.

 

[viole]

Well, look who is back. Been away myself for a while.

If we do not have the (sexual) self discipline to resist sex then it is better if we go on and get married. Are you still confused?

Why? Does it help to get that self discipline?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Kenny]

No. I did verify my statement with evidence, which you have not disproved.
You can't inject your interpretation of scripture, to prove scripture wrong.
Your interpretation is not a reliable source.

It's seems to be a habit for @Bob the Unbeliever .

 

[Kenny]

None of which changes the fact that you believe this petty, sick genocidal entity deserves worship and praise.

hmmmmm... no.

Letting the rape of Nanking to be a worldwide problem is a sick humanity. You did say your supported that instead of the atomic bomb?

 

[nPeace]

It's seems to be a habit for @Bob the Unbeliever .

Only Him?
I know what you mean though, but can we blame them for trying?

Do you notice though, how Bob keeps shooting himself in the foot.

You cannot use the bible to "prove" the bible. Sorry, but that's exactly what you (and your false links) attempt to do.

Yet he is using his interpretation of the Bible to try and disprove the Bible.

It's description of the earth as a flat plate or disc, resting on four pillars, and over-topped by a crystal dome structure. We know that simply isn't true. And so that proves the bible is inaccurate.

There are other glaring falsehoods as well: Talking animals, flaming shrubbery, flooding the entire planet, etc.

Apparently the gun was loaded and went off.
You would think that by now he would know not to use a loaded gun.

For these guys, trying to disprove the Bible is like trying to clear a 5 meter high bar, without a vault pole.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Except when he didn't allow men to rule themselves: See the Noah Flood story for the worst example. But also Moses in Egypt for another example.

First, regarding Exodus....surely you can figure this out, why Jehovah God stepped in? His people were forced into slavery!!
Grief, man! God can’t protect His people? (I’m surprised you didn’t also mention Babylon, or Assyria; same reason: He was protecting His obedient people! cf. 2 Thessalonians 1:6.)

The bottom line was, if His people as a whole were being obedient, He allowed no one to harm them. And if their enemies tried, He destroyed them, thereby serving as a warning for other nations to leave them alone! The Gibeonites learned it, were spared, and blessed by God for it! More on the Gibeonites:

“Unlike the other Canaanites, the Gibeonites realized that despite their military strength and the greatness of their city, resistance would fail because Jehovah was fighting for Israel. Therefore, after the destruction of Jericho and Ai, the men of Gibeon, apparently also representing the three other Hivite cities of Chephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (Jos 9:17), sent a delegation to Joshua at Gilgal to sue for peace. The Gibeonite ambassadors—dressed in worn-out garments and sandals and having burst, skin wine-bottles, worn-out sacks, and dry, crumbly bread—represented themselves as being from a distant land, hence not in the way of Israel’s conquests. They acknowledged Jehovah’s hand in what had earlier befallen Egypt and the Amorite kings Sihon and Og. But wisely they did not mention what had happened to Jericho and Ai, as such news could not have reached their “very distant land” before the supposed departure. Israel’s representatives examined and accepted the evidence and covenanted with them to let them live.—Jos 9:3-15.

Shortly thereafter, the ruse was uncovered. But the covenant remained in force;.....When Joshua confronted the Gibeonites about their craftiness, they again acknowledged Jehovah’s dealing with Israel and then placed themselves at his mercy, saying: “Now here we are, in your hand. Just as it is good and right in your eyes to do to us, do.” They were then constituted gatherers of wood and drawers of water for the assembly and for Jehovah’s altar.—Jos 9:16-27.

Although Joshua and the other chieftains had been tricked into making a covenant with the Gibeonites, this was evidently in harmony with Jehovah’s will. (Jos 11:19) Proof of this is seen in the fact that when five Amorite kings sought to destroy the Gibeonites, Jehovah blessed Israel’s rescue operation; he even hurled down great hailstones upon the foe and miraculously extended the daylight for battle. (Jos 10:1-14) Also, both in seeking a covenant of peace with Israel and in appealing to Joshua for help when threatened, the Gibeonites manifested faith in Jehovah’s ability to fulfill his word and to effect deliverance, something for which Rahab of Jericho was commended and that resulted in the preservation of her life and that of her household. Moreover, the Gibeonites had a wholesome fear of Israel’s God.—Compare Jos 2:9-14; 9:9-11, 24; 10:6; Heb 11:31.”

Gibeon — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

Now, as for the Flood.....briefly, this fact is almost always overlooked: according to Genesis 6:1-4, Angels, ie., “sons of God” (compare Job 1:6; Job 2:1; Job 38:7) became disobedient (2 Peter 2:4; Jude 1:6), having sex with women... "all who they chose".... and producing giant, powerful offspring called the Nephilim. Does that sound uncannily similar to Greek, Roman and other mythologies, with 'gods', i.e., powerful ones, having sex with women, and producing offspring like Hercules? With all mythologies, there is always a kernel of truth, i.e., based on some facts

No wonder Jehovah stepped in! Too bad they didn't take Noah seriously, to get on the Ark! -- Matthew 24:36-39

So the "suffering" is just FINE, so long as it's not Infinite? What about Hell, then?

ooooops!

Read my previous post to you, #296, wherein I address the issue of death. Did you read it?

Hell is nothing more than the grave, i.e., Sheol, from which everyone will be resurrected!

Read Genesis 42:38. Here it is in the Douay-Rheims version:
"But he said: My son shall not go down with you: his brother is dead, and he is left alone: if any mischief befall him in the land to which you go, you will bring down my gray hairs with sorrow to hell."
Look at other translations of this verse from BibleHub: Genesis 42:38

See that?? ***Hell is just the grave.!***

Your view of the Bible is based on the lies Christendom has taught...so was mine, at one time! Although I never became an atheist.

And the Bible says Hell (Greek, "Hades") will be emptied! -- Revelation 20:13-14
So it's not eternal....another lie!

 

[Deeje]

So. You never-EVER ate a Cheeseburger in your life? Because your "God's Law" forbids all cheeseburgers.

Apart from the fact that I try to avoid all "suicide food" whenever possible, where would I find a prohibition on cheeseburgers in God's law? The prescribed Jewish diet was very healthy actually, keeping them safe from many of the food borne diseases prevalent in the nations around them.

You never EVER wore modern cotton blended fabrics? Because your "God's Law" forbids mixed fabrics.

This law applied only to Israel....I am not Jewish. Jewish attire identified them as God's people.

And so on, and so on, and so on-- down the list of more that 600 God's Laws I have no doubt you are now just ignoring...

Again those laws were given only to Israel....not to Gentiles unless there is a restatement of a certain law that applied to Gentiles.

Jesus' apostles restated a few things in Acts 15 when Jewish Christians wanted to enforce circumcision on Gentile Christians. There was no compulsion to force a Jewish law on non-Jews with a few important exceptions.....the apostles stated.....

"For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you except these necessary things: 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from what is strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!” (Acts 15:28-29)

But here's my POINT:

## Breaking God's Law permitted Newton to invent that whole Physics Thing, which proved the bible was wrong about the earth being at the Center of the Universe

Let me first say that it was never the Bible that insisted that the Earth was the centre of the universe....it was the church. That is an important difference. It was foretold that "Christianity" would become corrupted and history shows how deep that corruption went. Don't blame God for what corrupt humans did.

## Breaking God's Law permitted Science to displace Religion, as the Principle Method of Discovery.

And thank goodness that people realised the church's misplaced authority over matters of science. Men like Galileo were persecuted because they dared to speak up and tell the truth. The church was eventually forced to recognise that it was wrong about many things....but none of its conclusions were based on scripture in the first place.

Without which, your computer would never have been invented in the first place...

Oh dear.....confusing the church's many mistaken notions with God in any way, is a big mistake. The church was so powerful in those early times that I believe she was completely corrupted in her conduct and teachings from the get go. It is sobering to contemplate that when Jesus comes to judge mankind, he will reject "many" as those he has "NEVER" known. (Matthew 7:21-23) That means that he has never recognised them as his disciples from the beginning. Christendom began with Roman Catholicism in the 4th century....it's been a downhill run ever since. The Reformation broke the power of the Roman church, but it ended up dividing "Christianity" into literally thousands of bickering factions. You think God approved of that? Is he really that stupid? He foretold it, so why do so many fail to see it?

And the #1 Breaking God's Law? Finally permitted Gays to Marry in the USA, making for millions of Happy People who were formally not-that-happy.

This one I will have to defer to the Bible on. "Marriage" is a sacred institution given by God to introduce children into a stable family relationship with the balance of both a mother and a father. Gay marriage cannot naturally produce children and the balance of the sexes is either completely missing or is very confused.

Kids are meant to have a Mom and Dad....not two Moms or two Dads. We are seeing now the fallout of "sexual identity" changing the way children see themselves, challenging the way they interpret sexuality. "Gender fluidity" is now seen as trendy and "gay" couplings at school are becoming a "thing". Did we ever hear of such things in generations past?

If you have had anything to do with gay people, the one thing you notice in average conversation is the absence of any mention of the opposite gender in general conversation unless they are speaking about a relative. The gender balance is completely missing.

Sex in the Bible has always been confined to the bonds of marriage from the beginning, and any departure from the original standard is a breach of God's law....period!

It seems a strange thing to me that "marriage" as an institution (in the west at least,) has been seen as a dying institution among hetero couples for decades now, but strangely it seems to dominate the thinking of gays all over the world. Such a "marriage", I do not believe will ever be recognized by God, so gay people will only ever have a secular claim to the institution. God will not change his definition of marriage to suit the desires of gay people....we have to change our ideas to align with his. We have those choices right now, so it's really an "eat, drink and be merry" scenario, and when it's over....it's over. I believe that people who think otherwise are kidding themselves. Just my opinion based on many years of Bible study.

So we all have our choices to make, based on what we believe....don't we?
Sexual immorality in the Bible is unlawful sexual activity with someone to whom you are not legally (and scripturally) married. Immorality does not depend on gender......so gays are no more guilty of sexual immorality than heterosexuals are.....but they are no less guilty of it in an unscriptural marriage either. That is how I see things. In this very PC mad world, common sense and the right to hold a conscience view is sadly disappearing. I have an equal right to hold my views as anyone. I can explain what I believe and why I believe it, but at the end of the day I will not be forced to compromise on my strongly held values....nor will I force my beliefs on others.

So I have to disagree with your statement.

You are free to disagree all you wish, but your posts seem to demonstrate a sad amount of misunderstanding and complete ignorance of the facts. If one is to make an informed choice about anything....we should at least have all the information....don't you think?