₦airaland Forum

Do you think tanakh was written in one century? Bwahahahah

sonmvayina:
Lol..

Continue your research..

You still have a very long way...

I passed this your stage in 2006......

You will catch up..don't let the length deter you..

You passed this stage and you don’t know what “semitic” means?
You paid heavily for your education and you are this empty?

You’ve shown you are nothing but a dullard who only assumes and has ZERO references to what he’s saying.

You’ll learn.

Banilla:
■ Whatever it's called, you get it. The write isn't here but his story is... You can question it's meaning, you're allowed to. I could be wrong, that's why I asked for different opinions...
■ But you are allowed to read the book and say, "maybe this is what it means"...

1. Yeah, you can ask its meaning but to assert your opinion as being superior to that of the writer when you didn't get the same revelation is to basically reject the story and its writer's claims. So, is that your intention?

2. Giving a story an interpretation based on private ideas that do not hold as far as what is written is essentially the same as asserting one's opinions as being of better value than what is written. That is what religious folks/con men do.

Nothing in that story suggests childhood is goodness — that idea does not even come close to being the reality for the vast majority out there—, nor is sexual maturity the reason provided for the realization that Adam and Eve had of their unclothedness in the garden. So, inserting these ideas into the story where they were not originally contained, means you are rewriting the story itself to fit your personal theory.

Dtruthspeaker:
See blind atheist.

The Bible clearly showed that they had children ONLY AFTER BEING THROWN OUT OF THE GARDEN. So you devils on top all your problems do not know how to read

But that's my point.

Hence, after leaving childhood (The garden of Eden) behind, they had children.

Maynman:
Lol braindead

Always assuming with zero knowledge and understanding.

You are only deceiving yourself

Read and learn from history, you’ll rather wallow in your ignorance, post your references, you’ll keep quiet like a dullard!

Please send me a link to “Babylonian Torah”

Do you even know Babylonian Talmud has NOTHING to do with Babylonia?

Illiterate, ezra was writing the tanakh for over 100 years bwahahahah

Retard..

Who is talking about Isaiah..

What's the difference between Torah and Talmud?

Kobojunkie:
1. Yeah, you can ask its meaning but to assert your opinion as being superior to that of the writer when you didn't get the same revelation is to basically reject the story and its writer's claims. So, is that your intention?

2. Giving a story an interpretation based on private ideas that do not hold as far as what is written is essentially the same as asserting one's opinions as being of better value than what is written. That is what religious folks/con men do.

Wrong! I didn't claim to know best... I asked for opinions after sharing mine. I clearly stated that I'm curious.

Just accepting the story is a proof of gullibility. You question things to learn.

sonmvayina:
Retard..

Who is talking about Isaiah..

What's the difference between Torah and Talmud?

Cretin..

Your cryus and marduk story is gotten from where?

What do you understand by Torah and Talmud?

Maynman:
Do you think tanakh was written in one century? Bwahahahah



You passed this stage and you don’t know what “semitic” means?
You paid heavily for your education and you are this empty?

You’ve shown you are nothing but a dullard who only assumes and has ZERO references to what he’s saying.

You’ll learn.

You have not added any meaningful point since the inception of this thread. All you do is to troll and screen shot from Wikipedia with passages you don't understand and has no resemblance to what is being discussed..

Please waka pass..

Kobojunkie:
1. Yeah, you can ask its meaning but to assert your opinion as being superior to that of the writer when you didn't get the same revelation is to basically reject the story and its writer's claims. So, is that your intention?

2. Giving a story an interpretation based on private ideas that do not hold as far as what is written is essentially the same as asserting one's opinions as being of better value than what is written. That is what religious folks/con men do.

Nothing in that story suggests childhood is goodness — that idea does not even come close to being the reality for the vast majority out there—, nor is sexual maturity the reason provided for the realization that Adam and Eve had of their unclothedness in the garden. So, inserting these ideas into the story where they were not originally contained, means you are rewriting the story itself to fit your personal theory.

interpreting it. Yes, that's what I'm doing. I could be wrong. The Bible remains the same. Who cares about my ideas?

The reason is a talking snake who gave Eve an unknown fruit to eat. We know.

Maynman:
Cretin..

Your cryus and marduk story is gotten from where?

What do you understand by Torah and Talmud?

I asked you a question .

Don't be rude...and answer..

Use your Wikipedia if you may..

Banilla:
I'm not saying sex is bad.

But maybe the creation story just tells us what we are.

The garden of Eden represents childhood, which is goodness... Sexual maturity made Adam and Eve (humans) aware of their bodies and gave them the knowledge of good and bad, also giving them the choice to commit sin. That's the corruption of innocence; adulthood.

Adam and Eve had children when they were thrown out of the garden of Eden... Not before.

You are calling sex sin and you say you didn't call it bad, that's exactly what you are calling it.

sonmvayina:
You have not added any meaningful point since the inception of this thread. All you do is to troll and screen shot from Wikipedia with passages you don't understand and has no resemblance to what is being discussed..

Please waka pass..

And you have not added any reasonable point since the beginning of this thread, all you do is abuse, assume ignorantly from your smelling ass without single knowledge of what you are saying, you are empty.

Post your references and shut me up.

Please use your brain!

sonmvayina:
I asked you a question .

Don't be rude...and answer..

Use your Wikipedia if you may..

What about my earlier question i asked you like a week ago, don’t be rude and answer.

Please post a reference to where yahweh is the son of enkil and enlil.

Banilla:
■Wrong! I didn't claim to know best... I asked for opinions after sharing mine. I clearly stated that I'm curious.
■ Just accepting the story is a proof of gullibility. You question things to learn.

1. That is the problem! You shared your opinion —your personal interpretation— and then you asked for opinions that also amount to interpretations.

2. Wrong! That story is the only account given of the event at the time in question. No one else was there. So, until you obtain another more credible account from a different even more reliable source of what in fact took place at the time, you have not else to do but accept the writer's account as told by Him. You can and should question it. But to suggest your opinions matter as far as the particular account given when you have absolutely no way of validating such an idea... nah!

Banilla:
■ interpreting it. Yes, that's what I'm doing. I could be wrong. The Bible remains the same. Who cares about my ideas?
■ The reason is a talking snake who gave Eve an unknown fruit to eat. We know.

1. Interpreting is wrong, particularly where scripture is concerned. Scripture remains the same but guess what many of the beliefs of those who claim to believe in the God of scripture differ completely from what is in fact written in scripture, why? Because what they believe are instead interpretations as they majorly reject what is written much like you. So, while you are in great company — over 2 billion and counting —, you are numbered among those who reject Scripture.

2. Why bother with scripture at all as it is covered from the beginning to the end of many outrageous claims? Like a man walking on water, a chariot of fire from heaven, angels, etc. Why bother with it at all?

LordReed:
You are calling sex sin and you say you didn't call it bad, that's exactly what you are calling it.

No. You don't understand. I'll try to explain.

Sex isn't bad. Sexual maturity is the period humans find themselves more self-conscious and aware of the world. In other words, humans become truly knowledgeable only after reaching puberty, from the age of 9. Knowing what's good and bad and realising we have free will gives us the option to do good or do bad.

As people sexually mature, they develop mentally too...

Childhood is goodness not because of the lack of sex but because of the lack of sexual/mental maturity which comes before sex. Sexual/mental maturity is bad because of the exposure it offers...


When I say it's bad, I'm not condemning it... The Bible talks about God's love for children, so I imagine God favours childlike behaviour.

Banilla:
That's why you're losing weight. Fight for yourself, Jesus didn't put you up to this.

I don't own myself, The Lord owns me, so I must represent Him!

Banilla:
You edited the comment to insult me... May the god you serve deliver you.

Truth is always painful to the guilty.

Banilla:
1. What race/ethnicity were they?

Don't know, don't care, not important I don't know your race)/ethnicity, neither do I care and as is proven here, it is not important which is why no one has asked you

2. Who were the people already living on earth? When God marked Cain...

Banilla:
3. Did we all descend from Adam and Eve? How? Also explain why there are so many races...

Sure! Male and female Ibo Amaka must give birth after their Kind, thus we have tall Amaka, short Amaka, black, anaka, brown amaka, yellow amaka albino amaka, K-leg Amala, Bow leg Amala you get the drift etc

Banilla:
4. Where was the garden of Eden? What happened to it?

Don't know, don't care, not important! I don't know your land and no one here has asked you your land, so it is not relevant.

Any further reasonable question?

Kobojunkie:
1. Interpreting is wrong, particularly where scripture is concerned. Scripture remains the same but guess what many of the beliefs of those who claim to believe in the God of scripture differ completely from what is in fact written in scripture, why? Because what they believe are instead interpretations as they majorly reject what is written much like you. So, while you are in great company — over 2 billion and counting —, you are numbered among those who reject Scripture.

2. Why bother with scripture at all as it is covered from the beginning to the end of many outrageous claims? Like a man walking on water, a chariot of fire from heaven, angels, etc. Why bother with it at all?

Outrageous claims, yes... But maybe they are parables (right word?)

If you get the meaning, you know better... I've read most of the Bible, it's not a storybook. Seems like something old wise men wrote to guide their descendants.

Dtruthspeaker:
I don't own myself, The Lord owns me, so I must represent Him!



Truth is always painful to the guilty.



Don't know, don't care, not important I don't know your race)/ethnicity, neither do I care and as is proven here, it is not important which is why no one has asked you

2. Who were the people already living on earth? When God marked Cain...



Sure! Male and female Ibo Amaka must give birth after their Kind, thus we have tall Amaka, short Amaka, black, anaka, brown amaka, yellow amaka albino amaka, K-leg Amala, Bow leg Amala you get the drift etc



Don't know, don't care, not important! I don't know your land and no one here has asked you your land, so it is not relevant.

Any further reasonable question?

See. The Bible has a lot of loopholes. It doesn't make perfect sense. So it's either trash or there are precious hidden meanings.... But you Christians just take it as it is. Even though you can't defend it.

Banilla:
I'm not religious, just curious

Unfortunately, "religious" is a thing many receive in breast milk without realising. That's why you say God-good, Satan-bad. That's religion.

Imagine you picked up Genesis 1-5 and read it with no religious preconditioning whatsoever so the words you read have no religious pre-meaning to you. Can you do that? In Jesusspeak, you'd be becoming as a child.

First thing you'd likely ask is why was Man demoted from "mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground", to a naked gardener in Eden. Ref.

And when you realise that those who ate the fruit did not fall down dead, but went on to live another 800 years, you'd likely ask who was the God and who the serpent was. Ref

My point is, we are discussing a book written by humans, while some think they are discussing the writings of gods.

Banilla, the refs will show you some of my pasts on the subject and the usuals it attracts.

Banilla:
See. The Bible has a lot of loopholes. It doesn't make perfect sense. So it's either trash or there are precious hidden meanings.... But you Christians just take it as it is. Even though you can't defend it.

And I am telling you to bring whatever you think is wrong for us to examine it and see if it is truly wrong, so fire away! I can still address one or 2 before sleep sends me to heaven.

Banilla:
■Outrageous claims, yes... But maybe they are parables (right word?)
■ If you get the meaning, you know better... I've read most of the Bible, it's not a storybook. Seems like something old wise men wrote to guide their descendants.

1. There is a pattern to even a parable and the story told in Genesis 2 - 3 does not follow such a pattern and so cannot be assumed a parable. There is no hidden message or lesson contained nor does the writer in any way assert there to be found. so what you are searching for does not exist.
2. Then how and why did you decide that this particular story isn't meant to be taken literally or accepted as-is?

budaatum:
Unfortunately, "religious" is a thing many receive in breast milk without realising. That's why you say God-good, Satan-bad. That's religion.

Imagine you picked up Genesis 1-5 and read it with no religious preconditioning whatsoever so the words you read have no religious pre-meaning to you. Can you do that? In Jesusspeak, you'd be becoming as a child.

First thing you'd likely ask is why was Man demoted from "mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground", to a naked gardener in Eden. Ref.

And when you realise that those who ate the fruit did not fall down dead, but went on to live another 800 years, you'd likely ask who was the God and who the serpent was. Ref

My point is, we are discussing a book written by humans, while some think they are discussing the writings of gods.

Banilla, the refs will show you some of my pasts on the subject and the usuals it attracts.

The Serpentum has come again.

Banilla:
■See. The Bible has a lot of loopholes. It doesn't make perfect sense.

1. That is actually not correct. There is a lot of sense in what is written in it, only you have to be willing to take your time to accept what is written and then process it as you would in that case.

Banilla:
No. You don't understand. I'll try to explain.

Sex isn't bad. Sexual maturity is the period humans find themselves more self-conscious and aware of the world. In other words, humans become truly knowledgeable only after reaching puberty, from the age of 9. Knowing what's good and bad and realising we have free will gives us the option to do good or do bad.

As people sexually mature, they develop mentally too...

Childhood is goodness not because of the lack of sex but because of the lack of sexual/mental maturity which comes before sex. Sexual/mental maturity is bad because of the exposure it offers...


When I say it's bad, I'm not condemning it... The Bible talks about God's love for children, so I imagine God favours childlike behaviour.

If the fruit is sex and the sex/fruit is anathema to the god which resulted in punishment then are you not calling sex a sin? Besides you just repeated it again: Sexual/mental maturity is bad. Those are your words.

budaatum:
Unfortunately, "religious" is a thing many receive in breast milk without realising. That's why you say God-good, Satan-bad. That's religion.

Imagine you picked up Genesis 1-5 and read it with no religious preconditioning whatsoever so the words you read have no religious pre-meaning to you. Can you do that? In Jesusspeak, you'd be becoming as a child.

First thing you'd likely ask is why was Man demoted from "mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground", to a naked gardener in Eden. Ref.

And when you realise that those who ate the fruit did not fall down dead, but went on to live another 800 years, you'd likely ask who was the God and who the serpent was. Ref

My point is, we are discussing a book written by humans, while some think they are discussing the writings of gods.

Banilla, the refs will show you some of my pasts on the subject and the usuals it attracts.

This true. Humans wrote the Bible. I was wondering if there was something to the story.

But thank you for this.

The old testament is a puzzle.

Banilla:
This true. Humans wrote the Bible. I was wondering if there was something to the story.

But thank you for this.

The old testament is a puzzle.

Correction! It is God Himself Who wrote the first 5 books. All other books identifies their human writer.

That deviltum tried to change last year but he saw what I told him 4 years ago that after all his stupid blasphemies he can never be accepted by God again forever and so this is him now returning to his former stupid full devilhimself.

If you still have a chance for eternal life, cutting him off is a good start.

You already know that it is only a devils are like suicide bombers; they must always drag other people to die with them.

LordReed:
If the fruit is sex and the sex/fruit is anathema to the god which resulted in punishment then are you not calling sex a sin? Besides you just repeated it again: Sexual/mental maturity is bad. Those are your words.

I clearly stated that the punishment were just responsibility for men and womanhood for women. Which is very natural. Even male animals do the work providing shelter and food while the females conceive, give birth and raise the children...

God doesn't exist. The devil doesn't either. Sexual maturity is awareness and that's what the fruit represents. Obviously, after sexual maturity comes children and responsiblity.

Banilla:
This true. Humans wrote the Bible. I was wondering if there was something to the story. But thank you for this. The old testament is a puzzle.

It is not a puzzle at all. Only one whose understanding is overwhelmed by what is written in it assumes it is a puzzle when it is far from that.

Banilla:
The old testament is a puzzle.

That’s because it’s gotten from different sources, written by unknown authors from different centuries.

Kobojunkie:
It is not a puzzle at all. Only one whose understanding is overwhelmed by what is written in it assumes it is a puzzle when it is far from that.

Fine, answer these.

1. What race/ethnicity were they? (Adam and Eve)

2. Who were the people already living on earth? When God marked Cain...

3. Did we all descend from Adam and Eve? How? Also explain why there are so many races...

4. Where was the garden of Eden? What happened to it?

Maynman:
That’s because it’s gotten from different sources, written by unknown authors from different centuries.

Thank you

Dtruthspeaker:
Correction! It is God Himself Who wrote the first 5 books. All other books identifies their human writer.

After this, don't you dare speak to me again.