Nathan_Jr

Over the years, posters here have said victor paul wierwille is The Man of God, The Seventh The Man of God, and The Teacher. Consider for a moment how offensive those words must be to those who love God and to teachers. How offensive? N-word-with-hard-R offensive, that's how! No one has ever asked those posters to self edit in order to mitigate the risk of offense.

Thanks for the invitation, Raf. Kind of you to consider me, but I must, on principle, decline the invitation at this time. I can't offend anyone. The offended must choose to participate in the offense. Without that conscious participation, how can one be offended?

To say Ken Hamm is an idiot of the highest order is not an insult. It is an observable, demonstrable fact. How idiotic is the highest order? It’s at the level of flat-earth and four-crucified stupidity - the highest level. That someone would be offended by another’s description of a third person is difficult for me to understand. I can conceive of it, but it’s hard to understand. I don’t mean to invite discussion of this. I missed some posts. Not sure what’s going on and it doesn’t really matter, but I couldn’t resist another opportunity to write “four-crucified stupidity.”

Ken Hamm was mentioned.

I never assumed he was anything other than a literary figure.

Mmmph

Opinions and interpretations arise at anytime and forever. Everyone has them, even Pharisees, especially Paul. What does the text say, when it says it, how it says it, and where it says it? Read the text. Resurrection is not mentioned, nor is it implied. Abraham's faith, trust, fidelity, obedience was tested. (His beleeeving was NOT tested.) Would he slaughter his beloved, precious son if he was commanded? Turns out he would. And the commander couldn't be bothered to stop his obedient servant from going all the way. He had to send an angel instead.

Sounds rather mundane. Surely, the Lord would not have let Jephthah get off that easily had he broken his vow. I'm increasingly convinced Jephthah burned his daughter as promised.

let, Let, LET this be repeated... Charity wrote, "Having said all this, God’s need to test Abraham’s complete obedience in such a homicidal way shows he’s a narcissistic death-obsessed god. The fact that he pulls a ram out of his hat at the last second doesn’t change a thing."

Abraham was rewarded for his intentions, for what was in his heart, for his faith, NOT his beleeeving. His intentions were to slay his precious son. Because that's what God commanded him to do. But it's such a twisted scenario! I've read that story countless times and it always gives me anxiety. It really is a well-crafted narrative. A nail-biter all the way to the cliffhanger when the angel says, "Psych!" I mean WTAF! What a test! As dark as a Jordan Peele or Jason Bateman film, just not as good. And if victor is right about burnt offerings (he is demonstrably wrong), what did they do with the ram? "Oh, well," says Abe. "I'll let y'all deal with getting the ram untangled from that thicket, if you don't mind. I need to vomit and lay down awhile. Really need some alone time. Thanks for the mindfock."

If Jephthah did NOT make his daughter a burnt offering, which is to say, set her ablaze until only ash and smoke remained, but allowed her to live a celibate life instead, and the Lord never said a word either way, what does that make Jephthah? A liar? An oath breaker? A defecator into the mouth of God like victor? Do I need to read the rest of the book of Judges to find out what kind of calamity befalls Jephthah because he broke his vow to the Lord? Does he lose his eyeball before he dies a painful death? Will someone please spoil it for me?

The way I read it, and I'm not alone, is that she died a virgin because that's what she was at the moment her dad made good on the negotiated deal he made with the Lord. I don't need it to fit a theological glove. The story doesn't embarrass me. But I could be reading it wrongly - there's a chance. After all, hey, I didn't write the book. (Nor did God.) Judges 11 30 Jephthah made a vow to the Lord, saying, “If you really do hand the Ammonites over to me, 31 then whoever is the first to come through 52 the doors of my house to meet me when I return safely from fighting the Ammonites—he 53 will belong to the Lord, and 54 I will offer him up as a burnt sacrifice.” 39 After two months she returned to her father, and he did to her as he had vowed. She died a virgin. 70 Her tragic death gave rise to a custom in Israel. 40 Every year Israelite women commemorate the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite for four days. 70 tn Heb “She had never known a man.” Some understand this to mean that her father committed her to a life of celibacy, but the disjunctive clause (note the vav + subject + verb pattern) more likely describes her condition at the time the vow was fulfilled. (See G. F. Moore, Judges [ICC], 302-3; C. F. Burney, Judges, 324.) She died a virgin and never experienced the joys of marriage and motherhood. https://netbible.org/bible/Judges+11

Thats the pneuma!!!

Speaking in tongues is proof of nothing but itself. I'm trilingual in glossolalia and bilingual in interpretation. I would that you all speak in tongues as much as I do.

No True Scotsman

Victor is just making up bullshonta and fashioning gloves from the bloody pelts of dead baby rabbits. Nowhere, NOWHERE, in the text does it say Jephthah sent his daughter to live out her days in the temple. The text says he did with her as he was bound by his oath: he set her ablaze until nothing but ash and smoke remained! The Hebrew word for burnt offering is olah. Hebrew is read right to left. (Can you see what's coming?) The LXX usually translates this Hebrew word holokaustos. Now, does the Greek make it clear? Let's look at the law by which the readers and writers of Judges would have been informed. "Leviticus 1 (NET) Burnt-Offering Regulations: Animal from the Herd 3 “‘If his offering is a burnt offering from the herd, he must present it as a flawless male; he must present it at the entrance of the Meeting Tent for itsacceptance before the Lord. 4 He must lay his hand on the head of the burnt offering, and it will be accepted for him to make atonement on his behalf. 5Then the one presenting the offering must slaughter the bull before the Lord, and the sons of Aaron, the priests, must present the blood and splash the bloodagainst the sides of the altar, which is at the entrance of the Meeting Tent. 6Next, the one presenting the offering must skin the burnt offering and cut it into parts, 7 and the sons of Aaron, the priests, must put fire on the altar and arrange wood on the fire. 8 Then the sons of Aaron, the priests, must arrangethe parts with the head and the suet on the wood that is in the fire on the altar. 9Finally, the one presenting the offering must wash its entrails and its legs in water, and the priest must offer all of it up in smoke on the altar—it is a burnt offering, a gift of a soothing aroma to the Lord. Animal from the Flock 10 “‘If his offering is from the flock for a burnt offering—from the sheep or the goats—he must present a flawless male, 11 and must slaughter it on the northside of the altar before the Lord, and the sons of Aaron, the priests, will spladangs blood against the altar’s sides. 12 Next, the one presenting the offering must cut it into parts, with its head and its suet, and the priest must arrange them onthe wood that is in the fire on the altar. 13 Then the one presenting the offering must wash the entrails and the legs in water, and the priest must present all of it and offer it up in smoke on the altar—it is a burnt offering, a gift of a soothingaroma to the Lord." ----------- Either the word says what it means and means what it says right there in the verse where it says it, or the whole Bible from Genesis to Revelation falls apart. Hey! I didn't write the book

Did Abraham misunderstand? (There's probably a glove for that.) One might expect him to be admonished for not understanding, for not listening and for not obeying what Yahweh actually said and meant. But, no, he was rewarded for doing exactly as commanded. The Sacrifice of Isaac (NET) 22 Some time after these things God tested Abraham. He said to him, “Abraham!” “Here I am!” Abrahamreplied. 2 God said, “Take your son—your only son, whom you love, Isaac—and go to the land of Moriah! Offer him up there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I will indicate to you.” 3 Early in the morning Abraham got up and saddled his donkey. He took two of his young servants with him, along with his son Isaac. When he had cut the wood for the burnt offering, he started out for the place God had spoken to him about. 4 On the third day Abraham caught sight of the place in the distance. 5 So he said to his servants, “You two stayhere with the donkey while the boy and I go up there. We will worship and then return to you.” 6 Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and put it on his son Isaac. Then he took the fire and the knifein his hand, and the two of them walked on together. 7 Isaac said to his father Abraham, “My father?” “What is it, my son?” he replied. “Here is the fire and the wood,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?” 8 “God will provide for himself the lamb for the burnt offering, my son,” Abraham replied. The two of them continued on together. 9 When they came to the place God had told him about, Abraham built the altar there and arranged the woodon it. Next he tied up his son Isaac and placed him on the altar on top of the wood. 10 Then Abraham reached out his hand, took the knife, and prepared to slaughter his son. 11 But the angel of the Lord called to him fromheaven, “Abraham! Abraham!” “Here I am!” he answered. 12 “Do not harm the boy!” the angel said. “Do not do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God because you did not withhold your son, your only son, from me.” 13 Abraham looked up and saw behind him a ram caught in the bushes by its horns. So he went over and got the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son. 14 And Abraham called the name of that place “The Lord provides.” It is said to this day, “In the mountain of the Lord provision will be made.” 15 The angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven 16 and said, “I solemnly swear by my own name, decrees the Lord, that because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, 17I will indeed bless you, and I will greatly multiply your descendants so that they will be as countless as the starsin the sky or the grains of sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the strongholds of their enemies. 18 Because you have obeyed me, all the nations of the earth will pronounce blessings on one another using the name of your descendants.”

let, Let, LET me repeat this... Raf wrote, "Lesson: If God tells you to kill your kid, the morally correct answer is "NO YOU BLOOMING SOCIOPATH! I WILL NOT KILL MY SON! AND IF THAT'S YOUR IDEA OF A TEST, I'D BETTER HAVE PASSED BY SAYING NO, YOU SICK THUCK!" But no, Abraham is the HERO of this story. Unless he were alive today. Someone kills their kid today and says God told them to do it, you KNOW he's psychotic, no questions asked. But it happens in the desert 5,000 years ago and you're supposed to say "What Incredible Faith!" NO!"

Ah, but Yahweh allowed the satan and his princes to do it. It's an idiom. Math, see? Tailoring. Bespoke baby deer skin gloves. If I allow my toddler to walk into the street, if I sit on the curb sipping a beer while watching him get run over by a car, as if watching a football game, who is responsible? What should I say? "That'll teach these people to drive cars on the street." No! I'll tell you what killed that little boy.

Since I was a child I’ve wondered the same. Yahweh had to pay himself with the life of his only begotten to forgive a debt? He was the creditor, he held the note, but he paid himself? With his only begotten son’s life? Now everyone must feel guilty and submit? What passive aggression! WTF? How does this even make sense? As a father myself, I can think of no deed more wicked than murdering my own son as a means to… accomplish… … ANYTHING!!!!!!!!!

I suspect he means natural, physical, mammalian death. What was it like before I was were born? I don’t know. I don’t remember. So, I am not afraid of death. I won’t even know that I’m dead.

Didn’t he have something to do with that “spiritual” Ghost Busters book? All that ectoplasm and other such pseudo-scientific bullshonta?

I didn't remember. I should watch it again myself. It has been a few years.

The Sharpton debate is my least favorite, because, well, Sharpton. If you can tolerate William Lane Craig's grating tone, that one is decent. Hitch always said Dinesh D'Souza was his most formidable opponent - those debates are good and lively. There are many more worth watching, but the one with Frank Turek is the most fun for me.

Use the original definitions as they were intended. Don't let context distort your understanding.