The Bible

Literally 2 deep 5 them?

We could be talking about anything here.

...

Nice try

...

...

Move along.

Nice try, cocklover.

lol

...

How is what he said debunked and how is what he said about the talmud when it is explicitly about the old testament?

A lot of this just simply isn't a good description of the bible. I'm on Holla Forums though.

It's actually a very accurate description of it if you study theology and history.

At least we won ours.

It really is just a really good book of metaphors. But a rather decent book of metaphors. People just follow blindly like sheep without questioning between the lines.

This had nothing to do with the bible or conquering the holy land.

*tips menorah*

It was exactly the opposite.

Are you serious? talmud was created against the OT, dont you remember what Jesus said about pharisees?

No it isnt, you are talking about talmud and saying that is the OT, not sure if samefag is lying on purpose or he cant compute that talmud exists.

...

...

hahahaha HE FUCKING DESERVED IT

I am not sure why you mention the Talmud, but I am a little tired and (increasingly) tipsy, so I will probably unsdersta m tommorw.

They are dark white/semite related, plus did they have Israelites there?

Zipporah.

What?

I supposed next you will claim the books are meant for children?

If I didn't have work in the morning I would love to be arguing all night long. If this thread is still here Friday night than I will be here.

read the whole series !!

good mnight

Christian esotericism expert here ama.

what is the best Christian esotericism

What's your opinion on astrological great ages? I read that the golden calf story was about the changing of the age of Taurus into the age of Aries, which is why the worshipers were killed and Moses was depicted coming down the mountains with the ram's horns.
Likewise Jesus heralded the age of Pisces which is why there is so much fish related imagery associated with him, and once again he rejects the old order in favor of the new.

...

god night

Didn't Bush unironically claim that God told him to invade Iraq?

The third crusade was a meme

This is fucking retarded

The civil laws (eg. taxes, torts, capital crimes, debts, slavery, etc.) of the bible were never actually used as functional civil laws in either the kingdoms of Juda or Israel. (which were probably never united as one) Rather the laws were based on the decrees of the king - being fuedalistic warlordships that they were.
The laws of the bible were compiled and expanded from religious practise and wishful thinking of the priestly class who were used as tools by which ever empire held sway over the Levant region at the time. From the Assyrians to the Babylonians, and the Greeks to the Romans, they all enforced their civil laws and not those of any one practicular relgious group.
Some laws concerning religious matters (dietary, sacrifice, marriage, bodily matters, etc.) were left up to the individual religious groups/cults to hammer out on their own. There may have been some preference to the cult of EL and Astarte by the royal family (the Davidic dynasty), but there is no evidence of actual state funding being given to the cult outright via decree. The only thing that comes close to legal preference would have been the temple (if it ever existed to begin with), but even then the temple served as a treasury for the state.

People traveled freely in the ancient world, and if there is any truth to the main wife of Moses throwing some guys foreskin at Moses' feet, I would be inclinded that it was a strained marriage and that he would have felt inclined to get a concubine.

the next part TL:DR - race has never been a concrete regional identifier, neither then nor now. People go places and they fuck other people, and if the inbred Egyptians are to be held as an example then "doesn't matter, had sex" was taken very literally.

The Israelites weren't a national group until the actual foundation of the kingdom of Israel, and even then there were never, and to this day are not an ethnic group - there were just Canaanites who lived in the borders of the Kingdom. Moses and his wives were not Israelites, they were just Canaanites. The whole 12 tribes thing is just part of the origin story and has no provable historical basis, just like the ark, the exodus, etc.

Even most, but not all, modern Israelis are either European/Arab mixes or basically just the same as Arabs who reject the word Arab and champion the word Semetic, much like how Hispanics in the US might call themselves Mexican because it makes them feel special and not generic. There is and was no such thing as a unique Israeli ethnic group.
Inter-ethnic marriages, rulers, etc. weren't as big of a deal as language and local identity; hell, the queen of egypt, Cleoparta, was ethnically greek. The royal heads of Europe often had black mistresses or royal consorts, and the ruling class of Rome and Europe didn't even speak Latin or the local languages unless they had to - they spoke Greek and French respectively.

i think he justified it afterwards with christian bullshit ("I prayed to god and he said eat babies"). But there is video of Palin full on saying in a church that Iraq was either a mission from god/ the will of god. it's fucking horrifying.

You're spreading disinfo and intentionally lying about the contents of people's posts. Christian shills resort to jewish posting tactics. What a surprise.

I'm not the esoteric fellow, but here's a bit;

The kingdoms of Juda and Israel were never united pre-exile, but were a bit like cousin states, with similar religions, prefered currencies, etc. Like how the greek city states were similar but different.
After the Assyrian collapse, a failed bit at independence, and the resulting babylonian exile, the ruling class of both nations built a single mythology in the bible, with it being added into, edited, etc. over the years.

The Levant region had it's own native pantheon, much like the greek had Zues, Hades, etc, and how the Germanic tribes had Woden, Frier, etc. Within the Canaanite pantheon there was the cheif head god, EL, and his sons, one of whom was Baal Haddad. The worship of EL was so widespread that the name was used as a suffix for thousands of names; Dani-EL, Isra-EL, Samu-EL, etc.
The cheif diety of the Israelites was the Canaanite bull god EL, and the next biggest regional cult was that of Bal-Hadad, who was the son of EL and symbolized with the calf. It's the bull of EL that was featured so heavily in the temple of mount Moriah's great basin, and through the frequent references for the sacrifice of a flawless bull.
The story of Moses were not one of historical account, but of the Israelite priestly class basically saying;
"look at these people exercising their fundamental right to worship, and see how they've chosen to worship the calf of Baal? Fuck them and their competing religious group. Fuck them all. Screw this calf shit! We want Bullshit! Yay Bullshit! We want the bull, not the wussy son the Bull!"

The golden calf was Baal, and the cult of Baal became so villified for being competition to the post exile state-cult of EL that the name was co-opted by early Christians as Baalzebub - who evolved into Satan.

In Juda the god EL was also the major diety, but Yahweh, Astarte (who was worshiped at the temple). The better educated Israelites seem to have been the cheif editors of the bible, and thus the practises of pre-exile Juda are not as well known, but it is assumed that the Judaeans (?) were not as homogeneous as the Israelites.

...

Genesis was a metaphorical description of ancient wisdom, that as well as pure historical nonfiction from a certain perspective which is often misinterpreted. The rest of the old testament was a comedy where the kingdom of Judah got screwed for not being subservient to Israel and the rightful ruling tribe of Ephraim. The new testament was a tragedy of deceit that resulted in the crucifixion of millions, the Revelation was a curse against the son of man and Israel.

Too bad, so sad, the best looking of Judah all are related to the ruling tribe of Ephraim. The moral of the story of the Davidic dynasty is they needed Ephraim, Ephraim didn't need Judah. After all, David came from the hills of Ephraim, related to Ephraim and that's what made him the best of Judah.

Matthew and Mary were betraying Joseph in Jesus name.

Disinfo, shameful at that.

93:9.6.The teaching of Melchizedek was full and replete, but the records of these days seemed impossible and fantastic to the later Hebrew priests, although many had some understanding of these transactions, at least up to the times of the en masse editing of the Old Testament records in Babylon.

93:9.7.What the Old Testament records describe as conversations between Abraham and God were in reality conferences between Abraham and Melchizedek. Later scribes regarded the term Melchizedek as synonymous with God. The record of so many contacts of Abraham and Sarah with "the angel of the Lord" refers to their numerous visits with Melchizedek.

93:9.8.The Hebrew narratives of Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph are far more reliable than those about Abraham, although they also contain many diversions from the facts, alterations made intentionally and unintentionally at the time of the compilation of these records by the Hebrew priests during the Babylonian captivity. Keturah was not a wife of Abraham; like Hagar, she was merely a concubine. All of Abraham's property went to Isaac, the son of Sarah, the status wife. Abraham was not so old as the records indicate, and his wife was much younger. These ages were deliberately altered in order to provide for the subsequent alleged miraculous birth of Isaac.

we dont know what you talking about jew thing buddy

93:9.9.The national ego of the Jews was tremendously depressed by the Babylonian captivity. In their reaction against national inferiority they swung to the other extreme of national and racial egotism, in which they distorted and perverted their traditions with the view of exalting themselves above all races as the chosen people of God; and hence they carefully edited all their records for the purpose of raising Abraham and their other national leaders high up above all other persons, not excepting Melchizedek himself. The Hebrew scribes therefore destroyed every record of these momentous times which they could find, preserving only the narrative of the meeting of Abraham and Melchizedek after the battle of Siddim, which they deemed reflected great honor upon Abraham.

ROCK AND ROLL

Sorry if that was offensive, I have just had a hard time lately concerning the topic.

Thanks?

no u
I actually read it, thanks for the information. I cannot say much because I am not an expert. It sounds uncivilized. I do not like it.

Holla Forums acts like Jews.

bump

bit of another thing; the idea of banning the image of god/EL/Yahweh was probably only introduced by the priestly class after the exile as a way of reenforcing the monopoly over god to the Juda/Israelites.

Before the exile there was certainly an image of god in popular imagination. This image may have been a bearded man with two sets of wings, wearing a head-cone hat thingy with bull horns, or it may have been a man sitted on a wheeled throne, and without as much finery. This image would have been atop the cheribum sided throne {the bible literally says the cherubim were in the pattern of a chariot}, and this would be on the mercy seat - which we can see today, sort of.

The two closest things to the ark would be the ark of Edfu temple, and the Ark from the tomb of king Tut. Even down to the raised platform of about 8cm tall {a crown thereabout a hand breadth wide} and the four bronze [not gold] rings are the corners of the ark base. [note the based was like a sled, not footed, as the hebrew word used is corners, not feet].

The ark held the stone tables in the last part of Exodus, the ones which mention goat milk. The idea of the pot of manna, and the almond rod being in the staff was bullshit.

But you want to know the real cool part - you can see the ruins of a temple in turkey today. Not the ruins of Jebus [the Davidic era name for Jerusalem}, but the ruins of Tel Ayinat. Here's a comparative touch; In 1kings we read of the temple, 70 cubits long and 20 cubits wide, not counting the wraparound storage chambers. This would make the temple as big as the temple of Jupiter, the vatican of ancient Rome.

Are we to expect that little Juda, whose currency was so short in silver content that archaelogical digs have shown that Tyrian shekels were prefered over domestic shekels, a nation which never held independence, nor had an empire, had a massive golden temple that envied Rome? Bullshit.

In the destruction of the temple in Chronicles the capiter, the hollow, 6 sided bronze cowling of the pillars shrinks, from cubits tall, down to 3. That's a 40% reduction! If this 40% reducion is applied to the dimensions of the temple, we see that it is almost, centimeter to centimeter, a perfect match to the temple of Tel Aiyinat.

The temple almost certainly as a polytheistic institution, worshipping both EL/Yahweh and his wife Astarte. Priests wold have sold blessings, repackaged herbal folk cures, faith healing, hookum trinkets, and settled desputes for a fee. There was no gold, save for maybe the gold leaf on the statue of EL on the ark seat, and maybe a spoon or bowl that came into direct contact with the holy incense. The six sided pillars probably had stone cores and sheets of hanging or stacked bronze cowling the pillars and held secure with maypoled chains.

The outside would have been painted, like the temple of Egypt and Greece and Rome. Phoenicians and Canaanites liked red and yellow with blue highlights. So what we're seeing here isn't a big, grand, glittering temple of limestone and marble. We're seeing a small, gaudy, mudbrick and limestone temple used for local worship. One which might slaughter a few dozen sheep and goats a year, and maybe a bull on the biggest holiday. It's as dirty, as paganistic, and as human as any religion was and/or is. and that's what makes it amazing. It's not the bible that's cool, it's the truth behind it that was covered up.

...

...

...

...

Not all christians are creationists. There are many who see the stories as the parables they are; teachings of values to live your life by. There are many out there who don't take it literally. One person I know eplained his faith to me, and it was closer to pantheism, or buddhism, in essence. But he labels himself as a christian.

...

...

...

Abrahamic Religions throwing rocks at each other.

Muslim, Jews, Christians. All same.

...

If you were the Infinite Supreme Being, what would be the point of evolving rational sentient beings if you just did everything instantaneously for them? Wouldn't you just create a perfect world with perfect beings instead? (Its possible there are numerous perfect worlds already)

But what if there is value in a free will universe subject to the process of natural biological evolution…