Should Billy Graham's legacy be rescued?

Should Billy Graham's legacy be rescued?

There are 1635 comments on the Q-Notes story from Feb 13, 2013, titled Should Billy Graham's legacy be rescued?. In it, Q-Notes reports that:

President Barack Obama with Rev. Billy Graham at his house in Montreat, N.C., April 25, 2010.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Q-Notes.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#1510 May 23, 2013
If you clicked them you obviously didn't read them or understand the material in them as they clearly back up what I stated.

Again, Isaac was to be offered up as a sacrifice and the Hebrew word for what was to be done to him is the same Hebrew word used for Jephthah's vow. So again Yahweh did command a child to be sacrificed, what another angel did is irrelevant to that fact. And again your personal apologetic spin on burnt offering doesn't change the meaning of the words. A burnt offering is a burnt offering and a vow made to Yahweh especially for a victory in war would require the vow to be kept regardless of niceties. You are on one hand trying to day the ancient Hebrews sinned and strayed from what Yahweh wanted but in the case of Jephthah are trying to claim he did everything right? Nonsense the bible clearly shows he was rash and hot headed.

Yahweh commanded his people stone their children to death for being disobedient. If such a thing was taught, which it obviously was you have to either say the people refused to follow the so called orders of your god 100% or you have to admit that at least some would have.

Regardless of they did or didn't we clearly see your god ordered children to be brutally and savagely killed.

I don't see why apologetics fight the passages about Jephthah's daughter so hard as they are obvious and clear. Your god murdered children all the time in the bible. From the flood, to infanticide in Egypt to sending bears to maul children for teasing a bald dude.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>funny how i've clicked on everyone of your links.
you refuse to accept the parameters of a "burnt offering.
now you keep making a claim that children were stoned for disobeying their parents. however you #1 are wrong.#2 you can not explain to us the process required to even stone a child and #3 you can not find one instance where it is recorded that it actually happened.
barry

Pisgah, AL

#1511 May 23, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Give me an example where it is appropriate to stone your child to death?
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...
I know what the bible says, of course you will probably have an apologetic rational that requires the changing of words yes?
<quoted text>
Deut. 21
18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.
21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

this was your claim;
"Meanwhile children were being stoned to death for disobeying their parents.... As ordered by Yahweh."

so;
#1 by looking at the passage that you reference we can see that it is not about disobeying your parents. all children including you have disobeyed our parents. what you have claimed is a distortion of what actually was to happen.
#2 the word is "son" not children. your implication is that when little johnny disobeys mommy that mommy and daddy can just stone him. no little children are going to be drunkards. your implication not only is incorrect but is dishonest.
#3 the hebrew word for gluttony has very little to do with food but a gluttony for riotous, dishonest and immoral living.
#4 the hebrew word for rebellious literally means a "striker" which would imply that he fights and abuses his parents.
#5 the parents were not the ones to stone them. they had to take that son to the legal authorities and present their case. in presenting their case they were bringing great shame to themselves as parents and risked the condemnation of the authorities on their own lack of proper care for their child in his up bringing.
#6 perhaps that is the reason that we have no example recorded for us of a son being brought by his parents and stoned.
the real trial was not about the son. those facts would be evident. the real trial was about the parents.

i found this interesting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_McElroy
it was not just an OT thing.

oh, and btw, it appears that you were the one changing words. as you chose to use the word "children" instead of "son".
barry

Pisgah, AL

#1512 May 23, 2013
emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text>
This response has nothing to do with my statement. If God wanted to tell Abraham that he son was the son of promise, all he had to do was tell him rather then play a cruel trick on him.
you think it was cruel. apparently abraham didn't think so.
barry

Pisgah, AL

#1513 May 23, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Actually it was an angel that told Abraham to stop, not Yahweh.
<quoted text>
that is your limited understanding of the phrase in question.
i'll bet it was the same "angel" that told him in the first place.
barry

Pisgah, AL

#1514 May 23, 2013
emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text>
I am letting the bible interpret itself. It is you who are trying to rewrite it.
and what references from the Bible did you use to let the Bible interpret its self?
barry

Pisgah, AL

#1515 May 23, 2013
emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet in the bible, God's warriors massacre men , women and children.
<quoted text> Yet the bible says that those who have bastards; that they and their descendants should be condemned for several generations
war is war. there is no end of it unless the source of it is eliminated.
now as for bastards you will have to explain your use of the word condemn. you know, give some examples of how it was applied. they certainly weren't condemned to hell.
godmegur

Pittsburgh, PA

#1516 May 23, 2013
youtube.com/watch... …
Get real Billy isnt worth the Tax Payer Money
barry

Pisgah, AL

#1517 May 23, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
If you clicked them you obviously didn't read them or understand the material in them as they clearly back up what I stated.
Again, Isaac was to be offered up as a sacrifice and the Hebrew word for what was to be done to him is the same Hebrew word used for Jephthah's vow. So again Yahweh did command a child to be sacrificed, what another angel did is irrelevant to that fact. And again your personal apologetic spin on burnt offering doesn't change the meaning of the words. A burnt offering is a burnt offering and a vow made to Yahweh especially for a victory in war would require the vow to be kept regardless of niceties. You are on one hand trying to day the ancient Hebrews sinned and strayed from what Yahweh wanted but in the case of Jephthah are trying to claim he did everything right? Nonsense the bible clearly shows he was rash and hot headed.
Yahweh commanded his people stone their children to death for being disobedient. If such a thing was taught, which it obviously was you have to either say the people refused to follow the so called orders of your god 100% or you have to admit that at least some would have.
Regardless of they did or didn't we clearly see your god ordered children to be brutally and savagely killed.
I don't see why apologetics fight the passages about Jephthah's daughter so hard as they are obvious and clear. Your god murdered children all the time in the bible. From the flood, to infanticide in Egypt to sending bears to maul children for teasing a bald dude.
<quoted text>
ok, here is an example of your delusion.

from your post#1465
"But the lines do not appear in earlier copies of his work. Link Barry won't click.
http://www.truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm" ;
so now lets see what that link says;
"When the earliest Greek texts are analyzed, it is obvious that the Testimonium Flavianum interrupts the flow of the primary material..."

funny how it seems that the tf does appear in the earlist greek texts.
also no mention is made of the fact that the earlier syriac manuscripts also contain the tf in a different form.
that fact strongly supports the idea that the tf was in the original and someone tampered with it in order to "help" our understanding.
and all the other sites make no mention at all of earlier existing manuscripts.

so yes i click and i read. i would suggest that you might want to read and think about it before you post a site.
barry

Pisgah, AL

#1518 May 23, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
If you clicked them you obviously didn't read them or understand the material in them as they clearly back up what I stated.
Again, Isaac was to be offered up as a sacrifice and the Hebrew word for what was to be done to him is the same Hebrew word used for Jephthah's vow. So again Yahweh did command a child to be sacrificed, what another angel did is irrelevant to that fact. And again your personal apologetic spin on burnt offering doesn't change the meaning of the words. A burnt offering is a burnt offering and a vow made to Yahweh especially for a victory in war would require the vow to be kept regardless of niceties. You are on one hand trying to day the ancient Hebrews sinned and strayed from what Yahweh wanted but in the case of Jephthah are trying to claim he did everything right? Nonsense the bible clearly shows he was rash and hot headed.
Yahweh commanded his people stone their children to death for being disobedient. If such a thing was taught, which it obviously was you have to either say the people refused to follow the so called orders of your god 100% or you have to admit that at least some would have.
Regardless of they did or didn't we clearly see your god ordered children to be brutally and savagely killed.
I don't see why apologetics fight the passages about Jephthah's daughter so hard as they are obvious and clear. Your god murdered children all the time in the bible. From the flood, to infanticide in Egypt to sending bears to maul children for teasing a bald dude.
<quoted text>
"Again Isaac..."
so if it is the same word, and it is; and isaac was offered up to the satisfaction of God; and isaac did not die at the altar; then what makes you think that jeptha's daughter died in her offering?

"Yahweh commanded his people stone their children to death for being disobedient."

no, he didn't.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#1519 May 23, 2013
Abraham was a savage tribal shaman not a modern humanist so naturally he would see things differently.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>you think it was cruel. apparently abraham didn't think so.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#1520 May 23, 2013
Your apologetic personal opinion erased and rightfully so as biblical fan fiction. Your son is still your child yes? Yes. And of they are unruly you are to snatch them up, being them to the elders and have them stoned to death.

This is the command of your savage, dark god.

Unruly son? Stone him to death.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>Deut. 21
18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice;
21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die:

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#1521 May 23, 2013
No Yahweh spoke to him and commanded him to sacrifice his son. Even if Yahweh was just fcking with him to see if he would do it why? I thought your god was supposed to be all knowing omniscient and omnipotent? The alpha and the omega?

If that were true he should have been able to know everything about him and wouldn't need to play such a practical joke on him.

Regardless burnt offering is pretty cut and dry yes? Jephthah didn't say an approved burnt offering did he? Nope.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>that is your limited understanding of the phrase in question.
i'll bet it was the same "angel" that told him in the first place.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#1522 May 23, 2013
Yet the young attractive virgins were kept as spoils of war to be enjoyed by the men who killed their family as ordered by your god. Kind of shoots your argument to pieces eh?

Jesus was a bastard himself yes?
barry wrote:
<quoted text>war is war. there is no end of it unless the source of it is eliminated.
now as for bastards you will have to explain your use of the word condemn. you know, give some examples of how it was applied. they certainly weren't condemned to hell.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#1523 May 23, 2013
Right there user a false witness.. Demonstrated over the centuries to be a forgery.

Are you really this stupid, or just being purposely obtuse?
barry wrote:
<quoted text>ok, here is an example of your delusion.

from your post#1465
"But the lines do not appear in earlier copies of his work. Link Barry won't click.
http://www.truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm" ;
so now lets see what that link says;
"When the earliest Greek texts are analyzed, it is obvious that the Testimonium Flavianum interrupts the flow of the primary material..."

funny how it seems that the tf does appear in the earlist greek texts.
also no mention is made of the fact that the earlier syriac manuscripts also contain the tf in a different form.
that fact strongly supports the idea that the tf was in the original and someone tampered with it in order to "help" our understanding.
and all the other sites make no mention at all of earlier existing manuscripts.

so yes i click and i read. i would suggest that you might want to read and think about it before you post a site.
barry

Pisgah, AL

#1524 May 23, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Abraham was a savage tribal shaman not a modern humanist so naturally he would see things differently.
<quoted text>
lol i think i'd take old abraham any day over today's modern humanists. those fellows are so kind and compassionate [not] that their life is really boring. they are so educated that they are stupid. let's see abraham was never on welfare, never collected ss and provided a secure and comfortable life style for a large group of people. he took responsibility for his extended family. defended them from outside aggressors. was respected by his neighbors and was a successful business man. i can see why you don't like him.
barry

Pisgah, AL

#1525 May 23, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
No Yahweh spoke to him and commanded him to sacrifice his son. Even if Yahweh was just fcking with him to see if he would do it why? I thought your god was supposed to be all knowing omniscient and omnipotent? The alpha and the omega?
If that were true he should have been able to know everything about him and wouldn't need to play such a practical joke on him.
Regardless burnt offering is pretty cut and dry yes? Jephthah didn't say an approved burnt offering did he? Nope.
<quoted text>
you might want to read that passage again and show me where it specifically says that God directly talked to him. now he may have but it doesn't say so. then you can explain to us why the "angel of the Lord" can not possibly be God himself.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#1526 May 23, 2013
Again I am undecided of you are really this stupid or being purposely obtuse.

Isaac was to die as a human sacrifice as ordered by Yahweh yes? You agree yes? This is what your god commanded Abraham to do yes?

Right as Abraham was going to kill his child as a human sacrifice to you god an angel came to stop him yes? You agree right? That is what happened right?

Jephthah's vow was for a burnt offering for whatever came out of his house first to greet him right? You agree this was his vow yes? He didn't say an approved offering or any other qualifiers yes?

Then it says he kept his vow right? You agree it says he kept his vow yes?

Again I keep waiting for this passage showing his daughter working at the temple. The closest you have is a passage saying the women ( not the men I notice ) go to mourn her sacrifice.

Yes your god ordered his people to stone their unruly acting disobedient children to death and you know it.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>"Again Isaac..."
so if it is the same word, and it is; and isaac was offered up to the satisfaction of God; and isaac did not die at the altar; then what makes you think that jeptha's daughter died in her offering?

"Yahweh commanded his people stone their children to death for being disobedient."

no, he didn't.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#1527 May 23, 2013
He forced his slave girl into marriage and pregnancy. Then he threw his beloved son who she gave birth to along with her into the harsh deadly wilderness with a bottle of water. He then ties his son to an alter for the purpose of being a human sacrifice.

By today's standards he would be a sociopath regardless of the so called happy ending of these people he abused.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>lol i think i'd take old abraham any day over today's modern humanists. those fellows are so kind and compassionate [not] that their life is really boring. they are so educated that they are stupid. let's see abraham was never on welfare, never collected ss and provided a secure and comfortable life style for a large group of people. he took responsibility for his extended family. defended them from outside aggressors. was respected by his neighbors and was a successful business man. i can see why you don't like him.
barry

Pisgah, AL

#1528 May 23, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Your apologetic personal opinion erased and rightfully so as biblical fan fiction. Your son is still your child yes? Yes. And of they are unruly you are to snatch them up, being them to the elders and have them stoned to death.
This is the command of your savage, dark god.
Unruly son? Stone him to death.
<quoted text>
now that we are clear that your implication of it being children as in any little child was at best misleading, now that we are clear that it wasn't for disobedience as you tried to claim, and now that we are clear that it was a charge that had to be proven and accepted by the authorities; let's get down to the facts of the culture. there were no prisons as we have today. a family ruined could lead to a village or a city ruined. if this son was nothing more than a rebellious criminal who would eventually cause the death of innocent people and could destroy the economy of a city, yes, they would take measures to protect themselves. one way or another he would be gone. God was providing a way for them to protect themselves.
i like your choice of calling him an unruly son. once again you try to prejudice the discussion by using an inaccurate word.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#1529 May 23, 2013
So god does not tell him to do it? God doesn't say for him to sacrifice Isaac?

Try genesis 22:1-2

God says to him sacrifice him as a burnt offering.

Now later does god tell him to stop?

Nope an angel comes Yahweh remains silent.

Genesis 22:11 an angel. God is never described as an angel, indeed angels are beneath him remember?

Sad how an atheist has to school you on your own religion. Perhaps you should study the bible before making a blithering jackass out of yourself.

The Abraham myth is nice though because we see Isaac was to be a burnt offering and the Abraham story lays out clearly how a burnt offering was done.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>you might want to read that passage again and show me where it specifically says that God directly talked to him. now he may have but it doesn't say so. then you can explain to us why the "angel of the Lord" can not possibly be God himself.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 4 min Dogen 3,224
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 7 min Dogen 83,822
Where have all the Atheists gone? (Apr '17) 33 min blacklagoon 3 131
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) 1 hr Frindly 4,964
News Tampa Teacher @LoraJane Hates Christians, Promo... (May '17) 3 hr NW Jade 1,194
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 3 hr ChristineM 4,003
hell is a real place. so.. ahtiesm is a faux li... 20 hr Eagle 12 - 15
More from around the web