Affiliated:

Willfully Ignorant. All Christians are willfully ignorant. Part of ignorance stems from ignoring subject matters which is what Christians do. I can even argue that to be one of the fundamental attributes of faith. I remember as a child constantly asking who created this God and being rebuked for thinking such thoughts and warned to never think or ask such questions again...

ok.

Affiliated:

I'll put the translations relevant to the point I'm making

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
Then God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years;

Deut 4:19 And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the Lord thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven.

You obviously dont know what you are talking about.

davidylan:

Deut 4:19 And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the Lord thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven.

You obviously dont know what you are talking about.

I quickly read deuteronmomy 4 in context. I don't see how that relates to the subject at hand but please enlighten me. What am I talking about?

Affiliated:

I quickly read deuteronmomy 4 in context. I don't see how that relates to the subject at hand but please enlighten me. What am I talking about?

Not a surprise. Deut 4:19 is quite simply a prohibition of attaching any prominence to the stars, sun and moon... that includes astrology. But just in case you are still confused... here is another -

Isaiah 47:13-14
Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up, and save thee from these things that shall come upon thee. Behold, they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame: there shall not be a coal to warm at, nor fire to sit before it.

davidylan:

Not a surprise. Deut 4:19 is quite simply a prohibition of attaching any prominence to the stars, sun and moon... that includes astrology. But just in case you are still confused... here is another -

Isaiah 47:13-14
Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up, and save thee from these things that shall come upon thee. Behold, they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame: there shall not be a coal to warm at, nor fire to sit before it.

Yes. I suspected that is where you were pointing out. Here's another one that's more explicit.

Deuteronomy 18:10-12
There shall not be found among you any ... that useth divination, or an observer of times.... For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD.

That was the whole point of what I was saying. In one place God says He made the stars for signs then in another place He says observing times is an abomination unto him. The bible is contradictory like that

Affiliated:

Yes. I suspected that is where you were pointing out. Here's another one that's more explicit.

Deuteronomy 18:10-12
There shall not be found among you any ... that useth divination, or an observer of times.... For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD.

That was the whole point of what I was saying. In one place God says He made the stars for signs then in another place He says observing times is an abomination unto him. The bible is contradictory like that

With all due respect, its either you are ignorant of the bible or intentionally dishonest. There is very little argument that the term "signs" in Genesis that you earlier quoted has NOTHING to do with astrology. Lets read the verse in its entirety and IN CONTEXT to understand it better. Gen 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

Quite clearly that verse refers to the sun, moon and stars as MARKERS for time - first to delineate the day from the night, the seasons from each other and as a marker/measure of time (days and years). It really doesnt need a phd in physics to figure out the true meaning of the verse. But of course one doesnt expect those who have wilfully placed wool in place of their brains to understand anything these days. All you need is to simply bleat about how the bible is contradictory and voila you think you just made sense.

And here's another scripture on the issue. Jesus when talking about the end times and his second coming to his disciples (Of which some of them were not supposed to die before his second coming. Jesus told them in Luke 21:25

25 “There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea.

Jesus was kind of the opposite of the old testament God so if Jesus' opinion counts then please star gaze all you want

@Affiliated:
Also consider this

Matthew 2:
After Jesus was born in Bethlehem
in Judea, during the time of King
Herod, Magi [a] from the east came to
Jerusalem 2 and asked, “Where is the
one who has been born king of the
Jews? We saw his star when it rose
and have come to worship him.

davidylan:

With all due respect, its either you are ignorant of the bible or intentionally dishonest. There is very little argument that the term "signs" in Genesis that you earlier quoted has NOTHING to do with astrology. Lets read the verse in its entirety and IN CONTEXT to understand it better. Gen 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

Quite clearly that verse refers to the sun, moon and stars as MARKERS for time - first to delineate the day from the night, the seasons from each other and as a marker/measure of time (days and years). It really doesnt need a phd in physics to figure out the true meaning of the verse. But of course one doesnt expect those who have wilfully placed wool in place of their brains to understand anything these days. All you need is to simply bleat about how the bible is contradictory and voila you think you just made sense.

I'll ignore the insults if you feel you can't pass a point across without such. Anyway I was taking everything word for word so when days and years are mentioned I assumed the signs can't be for time. If you want to take everything together in context then the sun, moon and stars hadn't been created then and day and night according to the bible isn't caused by the sun and moon

musKeeto: @Affiliated:
Also consider this

Matthew 2:
After Jesus was born in Bethlehem
in Judea, during the time of King
Herod, Magi [a] from the east came to
Jerusalem 2 and asked, “Where is the
one who has been born king of the
Jews? We saw his star when it rose
and have come to worship him.

I have. Thank you but I'm trying to limit my posts to God's words and actions. Some christians might argue that the wise men weren't christians

Affiliated: And here's another scripture on the issue. Jesus when talking about the end times and his second coming to his disciples (Of which some of them were not supposed to die before his second coming. Jesus told them in Luke 21:25

25 “There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea.

Jesus was kind of the opposite of the old testament God so if Jesus' opinion counts then please star gaze all you want

and how exactly do the above have anything to do with astrology? Matthew 24:29 (which is simply matthew's retelling of the same story in Luke 21) paints a clearer picture of what was being talked about here.

29 “Immediately after the distress of those days

“‘the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’

Note the "signs" talked about here - Solar and lunar eclipses and meteor showers.

Affiliated:

I'll ignore the insults if you feel you can't pass a point across without such. Anyway I was taking everything word for word so when days and years are mentioned I assumed the signs can't be for time. If you want to take everything together in context then the sun, moon and stars hadn't been created then and day and night according to the bible isn't caused by the sun and moon

Remove the mote in your eye first scurrilous hypocrite. That was why i asked you THREE times to make sure i did get your correct when you labeled ALL christians as wilfully ignorant dolts.

If you dont want others to insult you... perhaps you should not insult them first. If you cant take it, dont give it. now back to the topic.

.

davidylan:

and how exactly do the above have anything to do with astrology? Matthew 24:29 (which is simply matthew's retelling of the same story in Luke 21) paints a clearer picture of what was being talked about here.

29 “Immediately after the distress of those days

“‘the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’

Note the "signs" talked about here - Solar and lunar eclipses and meteor showers.

Please take the bible as it is and not as you feel it should be. Luke didn't say He was retelling Matthew's story (and how do you know it's not the other way round?) and Matthew didn't say meteors will fall from the sky. neither did He say the earth will block the moon from the sun. He said the moon will not give its light (The moon doesn't have any light)

Affiliated:

I'll ignore the insults if you feel you can't pass a point across without such. Anyway I was taking everything word for word so when days and years are mentioned I assumed the signs can't be for time. If you want to take everything together in context then the sun, moon and stars hadn't been created then and day and night according to the bible isn't caused by the sun and moon

the above here makes zero sense with all due respect.

Now lets read Gen 1:14 again real slow... Gen 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

So what you "assume" is that God created the sun, moon and stars first to mark time (delineate night and day), for astrology (signs) and then back to marking time (seasons, days and years)? Senseless.

I could not understand the last line you wrote. Sounded like confused word salad to me... i read it like 5 times trust me.

Affiliated:

Please take the bible as it is and not as you feel it should be. Luke didn't say He was retelling Matthew's story (and how do you know it's not the other way round?) and Matthew didn't say meteors will fall from the sky. neither did He say the earth will block the moon from the sun. He said the moon will not give its light (The moon doesn't have any light)

Read Matthew 24 and Luke 21. Its practically the exact same story with a few minor editorial changes here and there. You cant just force your opinion into the bible just because you are desperate to read a contradiction where there is none.

I dont understand what you mean by the earth blocking the moon from the sun... senseless. No one said such a thing.

The moon not giving its light... simple - lunar eclipse. The moon gives light in that it reflects that of the sun.

davidylan:

the above here makes zero sense with all due respect.

Now lets read Gen 1:14 again real slow... Gen 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

So what you "assume" is that God created the sun, moon and stars first to mark time (delineate night and day), for astrology (signs) and then back to marking time (seasons, days and years)? Senseless.

I didn't write the book

davidylan:
I could not understand the last line you wrote. Sounded like confused word salad to me... i read it like 5 times trust me.

Genesis
1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

And in between

1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

If you took time to read it you'll see that there was evening and morning and photosynthesis before the sun

davidylan:

Read Matthew 24 and Luke 21. Its practically the exact same story with a few minor editorial changes here and there. You cant just force your opinion into the bible just because you are desperate to read a contradiction where there is none.

I dont understand what you mean by the earth blocking the moon from the sun... senseless. No one said such a thing.

The moon not giving its light... simple - lunar eclipse. The moon gives light in that it reflects that of the sun.

I am not forcing my opinion. I am just reading the words and accepting them the way they are. If you are correct, both Matthew and Luke are writing what Jesus said. Its not my fault that they recorded different things.

A Lunar eclipse is when the earth blocks the moon from the sun. Are you not the one opining that to be what Matthew meant when He said the moon would not give its light? He never said it would be due to an eclipse

Affiliated:

I didn't write the book



Genesis
1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

And in between

1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

If you took time to read it you'll see that there was evening and morning and photosynthesis before the sun

ok so you've pivoted from Gen 1:14 to talk about photosynthesis before the sun? Obviously you're just another confused troll flinging mud against the wall brainlessly and hoping something, anything sticks.

And to think this was the turd calling christians ignorant...

Affiliated:

I am not forcing my opinion. I am just reading the words and accepting them the way they are. If you are correct, both Matthew and Luke are writing what Jesus said. Its not my fault that they recorded different things.

A Lunar eclipse is when the earth blocks the moon from the sun. Are you not the one opining that to be what Matthew meant when He said the moon would not give its light? He never said it would be due to an eclipse

Matthew didnt have the benefit of the english language and of course could not have written his bible to reflect modern day language. I suppose that should be clear even to a 2 yr old downs syndrome baby.

Back in those days, they didnt have a clue how the moon got its light (now we know it merely reflects light off the sun) so of course it made sense to describe a lunar eclipse as the "moon failing to give its light".

I dont understand the point of your drivel really. 1000 yrs AFTER matthew was born, Charles Darwin was still calling the appendix a vestigial organ. with the benefit of modern medicine, now we know better... i dont see you running to throw Darwin under the bus either.

davidylan:

ok so you've pivoted from Gen 1:14 to talk about photosynthesis before the sun? Obviously you're just another confused troll flinging mud against the wall brainlessly and hoping something, anything sticks.

And to think this was the turd calling christians ignorant...

OK. willfully ignore the photosynthesis part if you want to. But isn't it evident that there was evening and morning before God created the sun?

Affiliated:

OK. willfully ignore the photosynthesis part if you want to. But isn't it evident that there was evening and morning before God created the sun?

Only if you think that somehow the bible is chronological in nature.

Oh perhaps an apology to your dad is in order, unfortunately he just hadnt read his bible well enough to refute the nonsensical idiocy of his illiterate son.

davidylan:

Matthew didnt have the benefit of the english language and of course could not have written his bible to reflect modern day language. I suppose that should be clear even to a 2 yr old downs syndrome baby.

Back in those days, they didnt have a clue how the moon got its light (now we know it merely reflects light off the sun) so of course it made sense to describe a lunar eclipse as the "moon failing to give its light".

I dont understand the point of your drivel really. 1000 yrs AFTER matthew was born, Charles Darwin was still calling the appendix a vestigial organ. with the benefit of modern medicine, now we know better... i dont see you running to throw Darwin under the bus either.

Charles Darwin didn't claim to be an Omniscient God. The bible by itself has held its words to a perfect standard and even a single ignorant statement or mistake renders it useless

Affiliated:

Charles Darwin didn't claim to be an Omniscient God. The bible by itself has held its words to a perfect standard and even a single ignorant statement or mistake renders it useless

Stupid. I was comparing Darwin's error to Matthews. Matthew didnt claim to be omniscient either.

davidylan:

Only if you think that somehow the bible is chronological in nature.

Oh perhaps an apology to your dad is in order, unfortunately he just hadn't read his bible well enough to refute the nonsensical idiocy of his illiterate son.

OK. if you claim the bible isn't in chronological order I can respect that (I don't know where you got that absolute statement though) but if you want me to give you contradictions that you can't refute, I'll be happy to oblige you

davidylan:

Stupid. I was comparing Darwin's error to Matthews. Matthew didnt claim to be omniscient either.

So the words recorded in the books of Matthew aren't the words of God

Affiliated:

OK. if you claim the bible isn't in chronological order I can respect that (I don't know where you got that absolute statement though) but if you want me to give you contradictions that you can't refute, I'll be happy to oblige you

From reading the bible... not every chapter or book is placed in the exact time frame.

Frankly it looks to me that you are another desperate lost soul just trolling around. you dont seem to have any clue about these "contradictions" you bleat about. My mind tells me you are simply going to copy them from off the web. Go right ahead.

Logicboy03 I hope you're having fun. All I try to do is reason respectfully then I and my dad get abused. I would have shared this story on the thread but its already plain to see

davidylan:

From reading the bible... not every chapter or book is placed in the exact time frame.

Frankly it looks to me that you are another desperate lost soul just trolling around. you dont seem to have any clue about these "contradictions" you bleat about. My mind tells me you are simply going to copy them from off the web. Go right ahead.

First answer my question. The words written in the book of Matthew aren't the words of God?

Affiliated: Logicboy03 I hope you're having fun. All I try to do is reason respectfully then I and my dad get abused. I would have shared this story on the thread but its already plain to see

and this, in your book is what counts for "reason respectfully"?

Affiliated: I used to go to church a while back so as not to offend the family and I kept my skepticism to myself. I had a girlfriend at that point but after dating for about a year I told her that religion is a grand scam. She actually became terrified of me and didn't talk to me again. I didn't feel bad because while I respect religious belief for the comfort it provides the same way I respect alcohol, [size=16pt]i view people that feed into religion as hypocritical willfully ignorant idiots[/size]... I don't want to spend my limited time with idiots.

Well thanks for the "respect". Now go cry to your mommy...

Affiliated:

First answer my question. The words written in the book of Matthew aren't the words of God?

because you are?

davidylan:

and this, in your book is what counts for "reason respectfully"?



Well thanks for the "respect". Now go cry to your mommy...

Lol. that statement wasn't directed at anybody and I would never direct it at anybody. This is a thread for atheists and I was talking to fellow atheists.

There's no reason for you to be so pained by your ignorance as to seek to lash out at everyone. As regards the Matthew part, If you are so confused by now as to no longer know what you are saying then you can go to bed.