Should Billy Graham's legacy be rescued?

Feb 13, 2013 Full story: Q-Notes 1,638

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

Full Story

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1325 May 14, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>your reply was a little bit off topic wouldn't you say?
barry wrote:
<quoted text>how do you come to this conclusion? i always understood the josephus was from jeruselem.
http://www.infoplease.com/biography/var/flavi ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus
http://www.nndb.com/people/631/000101328/
so was he from jeruselem or not?
Who cares? You >>sole<< interest is vainly attempting to prove your myth-jew was a historical figure.

Of course, you cannot do that-- mainly because Jesus never was a real person.

Besides: Josephus also wrote about the Greek demigod, Hercules-- as if Hercules >>was<< 1/2 man, 1/2 god-- meaning Josephus believed Zeus was a real god...

... in short, his credibility is pretty low.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1326 May 14, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
And you just happen to agree with and quote Christian apologetics?
Try to hide your faith all you want, you're not fooling anyone.
<quoted text>
no, actually rene is an athiest/agnostic.
besides truth is still truth no mater who says it. your problem is you haven't been able to quote anyone in an intelligent matter that agrees with what you say or disagrees with what i say.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1327 May 14, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Lament means mourn especially on the matter of death.
Did you really humiliate yourself by posting cherry picked versions of the word? And then tally what versions said what? Seriously?
Guess what? 100% of versions say he made a vow for a burnt offering and 100% of versions say he kept that vow.
:)
<quoted text>
now if you want to discuss how he fulfilled a levitical vow then you must consider how the book of leviticus says that the vow can be fulfilled. she was not an acceptable candidate for a burnt offering so he could not fulfill the vow by offering her up in literal fire. it is that simple.
the book of leviticus does however give two options for completing the vow if the offerer did not have a suitable offering to offer.
jeptha would not be listed in the hebrews hall of faith if he had offered up on his own a sacrifice that he was #1 not qualified to offer nor #2 would he have been able to find a priest who would offer it.
the bottom line is that if he really did offer her in the fire his sacrifice would have been rejected by God and there fore would not have completed his vow.

now as for cherry picking versions i checked all modern english versions as they are listed on line. added up all the variations with the exception of the Oxford Jewish Bible which mixes english with what appears top be modern hebrew.
now if you want i could check the foreign versions that are listed on line but then you wouldn't except them because you couldn't understand them.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1328 May 14, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>no, actually rene is an athiest/agnostic.
besides truth is still truth no mater who says it. your problem is you haven't been able to quote anyone in an intelligent matter that agrees with what you say or disagrees with what i say.
True: truth does not require faith or belief to exist.

Reality is whatever is left--after you STOP believing in bullsh7t (bible).

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1329 May 14, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>now if you want to discuss how he fulfilled a levitical vow then you must consider how the book of leviticus says ....
Blah, blah, blah... your sad belief in cherry-picking of the bible is best answered here:
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not the point. What gives you the right to disobey any of your deity's commands, however immoral they may be, and however devastating such obedience would be to you and your victim?

Sure it's a horrible law. It always was. But its been Jehovah's law since OT days. What everybody here is asking you is how you justify disregarding it?

Let me put it in other terms that you can understand. On Judgment Day, how are you going to defend the choice to follow part (but not all) of the OT?

"But Lord, those were ridiculous demands!"

"Silence!!!"

What are you going to say then, keeping in mind that this very conversation will be the smoking gun that damns you?

If you can reject part of your bible, I can reject all of it for the same reason: it's ridiculous.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1330 May 14, 2013
Now you resort to lies. Typical.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>no, actually rene is an athiest/agnostic.
besides truth is still truth no mater who says it. your problem is you haven't been able to quote anyone in an intelligent matter that agrees with what you say or disagrees with what i say.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1331 May 14, 2013
Vows to Yahweh must be kept that is paramount to all. What was his vow? Burnt offering. Did he keep his vow? Yes.

Everything else is you adding to the story biblical fan fiction.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>now if you want to discuss how he fulfilled a levitical vow then you must consider how the book of leviticus says that the vow can be fulfilled. she was not an acceptable candidate for a burnt offering so he could not fulfill the vow by offering her up in literal fire. it is that simple.
the book of leviticus does however give two options for completing the vow if the offerer did not have a suitable offering to offer.
jeptha would not be listed in the hebrews hall of faith if he had offered up on his own a sacrifice that he was #1 not qualified to offer nor #2 would he have been able to find a priest who would offer it.
the bottom line is that if he really did offer her in the fire his sacrifice would have been rejected by God and there fore would not have completed his vow.

now as for cherry picking versions i checked all modern english versions as they are listed on line. added up all the variations with the exception of the Oxford Jewish Bible which mixes english with what appears top be modern hebrew.
now if you want i could check the foreign versions that are listed on line but then you wouldn't except them because you couldn't understand them.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1332 May 14, 2013
Yahweh ordered Abraham to sacrifice his son so child sacrifice was nothing new to him. Isaac was saved because he was the hope of the people. Jephthah's daughter was a mere girl with no significance not even warranting a name in the bible.
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>Blah, blah, blah... your sad belief in cherry-picking of the bible is best answered here:

It aint necessarily so wrote, "<quoted text>
That's not the point. What gives you the right to disobey any of your deity's commands, however immoral they may be, and however devastating such obedience would be to you and your victim?

Sure it's a horrible law. It always was. But its been Jehovah's law since OT days. What everybody here is asking you is how you justify disregarding it?

Let me put it in other terms that you can understand. On Judgment Day, how are you going to defend the choice to follow part (but not all) of the OT?

"But Lord, those were ridiculous demands!"

"Silence!!!"

What are you going to say then, keeping in mind that this very conversation will be the smoking gun that damns you?

If you can reject part of your bible, I can reject all of it for the same reason: it's ridiculous."

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1333 May 14, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Yahweh ordered Abraham to sacrifice his son so child sacrifice was nothing new to him. Isaac was saved because he was the hope of the people. Jephthah's daughter was a mere girl with no significance not even warranting a name in the bible.
<quoted text>
Well, the rules of the bible do place women in a sub-human category, right below sheep and goats...

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1334 May 14, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Now you resort to lies. Typical.
<quoted text>
Lies are all he has to work with, don'cha know?

:D

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1335 May 14, 2013
I wonder if he listens to christian rock?

http://news.yahoo.com/heavy-metal-singer-tim-...
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Lies are all he has to work with, don'cha know?
:D

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1336 May 14, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
I wonder if he listens to christian rock?
http://news.yahoo.com/heavy-metal-singer-tim-...
<quoted text>
What else?

Hypocrisy is a primary requirement for all True Believers™ after all.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1338 May 14, 2013
I'm sure they will bleat he's not really a Christian or some such nonsense.
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>What else?

Hypocrisy is a primary requirement for all True Believers™ after all.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1339 May 14, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
I'm sure they will bleat he's not really a Christian or some such nonsense.
<quoted text>
Of course! Just like they do with all people who fall out of favor from their fan-club.

I keep expecting Pat Robertson to >>really<< put his foot in it, and get the "he's not one of ours" treatment...

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1340 May 14, 2013
Another thing about the whole Jephthah mess is this.

How many times do we hear Christians say the Israelites sinned or didn't honor god and that's why they were punished. It seems you can't go ten minutes with an OT hero without them doing something to anger Yahweh and face the heat for it.... Everyone except Jephthah that is!

Apparently he did everything just right! No missteps or sins no sir!

Even though the bible paints him out to be this angry, not so bright warrior... So Moses and Solomon screw up but Jephthah? No way! Lol!

“My hand is over my crotch.”

Since: Jan 10

It's time to put it to use

#1341 May 15, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Who cares? You >>sole<< interest is vainly attempting to prove your myth-jew was a historical figure.
Of course, you cannot do that-- mainly because Jesus never was a real person.
Besides: Josephus also wrote about the Greek demigod, Hercules-- as if Hercules >>was<< 1/2 man, 1/2 god-- meaning Josephus believed Zeus was a real god...
... in short, his credibility is pretty low.
They love quoting Joe, even though he was not even a near contemporary of any biblical figure.

“My hand is over my crotch.”

Since: Jan 10

It's time to put it to use

#1342 May 15, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>now if you want to discuss how he fulfilled a levitical vow then you must consider how the book of leviticus says that the vow can be fulfilled. she was not an acceptable candidate for a burnt offering so he could not fulfill the vow by offering her up in literal fire. it is that simple.
the book of leviticus does however give two options for completing the vow if the offerer did not have a suitable offering to offer.
jeptha would not be listed in the hebrews hall of faith if he had offered up on his own a sacrifice that he was #1 not qualified to offer nor #2 would he have been able to find a priest who would offer it.
the bottom line is that if he really did offer her in the fire his sacrifice would have been rejected by God and there fore would not have completed his vow.
.
That's an assumption that you based upon because if God accepted an burnt human offering that it will be a contradiction to the laws of Leviticus. As I said before, the bible is filled with contradictions. The bible says that we should not be judged by the sins of our ancestors, yet numerous times in the bible, people are penalized by the sins of their ancestors.

No where in your bible does it say that God rejected the burnt offering. The scriptures implies that God accepted the offering.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1343 May 15, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, the rules of the bible do place women in a sub-human category, right below sheep and goats...
Can we keep your dating habits out of it?

“My hand is over my crotch.”

Since: Jan 10

It's time to put it to use

#1344 May 15, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Yahweh ordered Abraham to sacrifice his son so child sacrifice was nothing new to him. Isaac was saved because he was the hope of the people. Jephthah's daughter was a mere girl with no significance not even warranting a name in the bible.
<quoted text>
Exactlly! You hit it right on the spot. Girls can be sacrificed, boys, no. Our friend Barry is doing his little dance, claiming that just because Leviticus forbids human sacrifice that this means God would not accept such a thing. But we all know that the biblical God obeys his owns laws when he wants to. For example, the bible says that children should not be judged or persecuted for the sins of their parents. A pretty good law when you consider the fact that in imperial China and Japan, whole families could be killed for the actions of one member. But then several stories in the bible contradict this law.
The story of Adam and Eve. We all have original sin from those two. In order to save ourselves, we must beg God to save us. Women are cursed with pregnancy and they must be submissive to their hubbies because of Eve's actions
2-The curse of Canaan. Ham sees his father naked and laughs, but instead of punishing Ham, Noah curses the children of Ham's son Canaan. No explanation as to why Noah cursed Canaan's children but not Ham's other children. It is much likely that the Jews used that story to justify the conquest of Canaan
3-The numerous children massacred during the conquest of Canaan.
4-The curse on the descendants of Saul.
5-The murder of Job's children
I could go on and on.

“My hand is over my crotch.”

Since: Jan 10

It's time to put it to use

#1345 May 15, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, the rules of the bible do place women in a sub-human category, right below sheep and goats...
If you look at the buybull, you will see two different creation stories. One where plants and animals were created first, then man and women jointly. The second has Adam being created first, then animals. It is only when the all knowing God realizes that Adam is not satisfied with the animals, that he creates women. In other words, God expected Adam to fk animals. Interestingly, no mention is made of God creating male and female animals separately. So the all knowing God thought that Adam should engage in a menage with male and female animals before coming to the conclusion that Adam needed a female, not female animals.

The reason I posted this story was to add to your point. You said that the bible considers women to be less the animals. It is interesting that in the 2nd story of creation, all living things are considered as objects for us men to own and to pleasure us. Women come after animals when God realized that animal fking is not good.

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.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Ferguson Police Are Being Relieved Of Their Dut... 2 min grave digger 2,851
Response to Bill O'Reilly: Jesus Didn't Start a... 2 min rabbee yehoshooah... 317
Obama vows "relentless" fight against ISIS 4 min Black Rhino 212
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 4 min Chilli J 116,732
'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 4 min DITCH MITCH 153,993
The President has failed us (Jun '12) 5 min positronium 263,122
West Plains billboard depicts Obama wearing a t... (Oct '08) 7 min grave digger 1,026
Who do you side with in Ferguson? 9 min Peace 4,461
Anti-gay Tenn. billboard stirs religion debate 10 min eJohn 240
•••

US News People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••