by HeyThere 51 Replies latest watchtower bible
No, I believe God helps one to adapt to one's situation, he doesn't take one out of the situation.
.
Then why do humans need god?
Since he only allows nature to take its course (according to your opinion) and does nothing to help mankind progress or raise their level of awareness beyond their current state, then god is useless baggage.
Well, at least I can prove my belief. He hasn't taken anybody out of the situation, except Enoch and Elijah who were exceptions. But we are digressing from the thread, which is about animal sacrifice. This is what we do today, we just don't call it sacrifice. We even discard the blood, just like they did.
God is going to change things. That's why he gave the prophecies. Time will tell.
And isnt this a bit of overkill with the poor animals ? 1Kings,8:62-66
"Twenty-two thousand cattle , and a hundred and twenty thousand sheep , that the King and all the sons of Israel might inaugurate the house of jehovah"
That's nothing. How about killing 99.99% of all animals in the great flood, in order to kill a few humans? What about killing 100% of plants on the planet in the same process?
Now that we are on the subject, why didn't Noah go around collecting plants to be saved in the Ark as well? If Jehoober could fly polar bears over oceans to reach the middle east, couldn't he fly some banana and mango trees to be saved as well?
Yes, surely the Bible makes a lot of sense. Especially the way it explains that before the flood, it had never rained before. But i'm pretty sure that rain forests like the Amazon are only 4000 years old right?
Well, at least I can prove my belief
.
using that imagination again, I see. You are a funny fellow.
I think you will find the blood is considered a valauble by product of the slaughter process Vid & is not discarded.
@ red: How about killing 99.99% of all animals in the great flood, in order to kill a few humans? What about killing 100% of plants on the planet in the same process?
Maybe it was part of god's "helping them to adapt" methodology.
Vidqun:"He hasn't taken anybody out of the situation, except Enoch and Elijah who were exceptions."
In Exodus, God delivered his people from inescapable slavery to the Egyptians, into a prosperous nation. He didn't just leave them to it.
Vidqun:"Well, at least I can prove my belief."
To back up this claim, can you start a thread and show, or at least highlight where we can find, the proof?
I stand corrected. Blood is utilized today to manufacture various products.
Except for named examples, which is hearsay, nobody has been taken out of their situation and placed somewhere else. That's the evidence I was referring to. Perhaps you know of proof to the contrary? The Israelites were led out of Egypt, not removed from their situation. They still had to deal with the Egyptian military, amongst other obstacles.
I prefer Hollywood's version of the flood legend. It explains a lot of things. Darn it, there goes that imagination yet again.
Seriously, RT interviewed a writer that researched the legend of Atlantis. According to Plato this superior civilization, called Atlantis = Island of Atlas, flourished around 8 or 9 thousand years ago. Such a view was also maintained by various Rabbis, which interpreted the the first two verses of Genesis 1 as a unit, rejecting the absolute view of "God created the heavens and the earth." They interpret these as saying: "In the beginning [of the present order of things] God shaped the heavens above and the earth below. Now the earth had become waste and wild [probably by previous catastrophe], etc." See Rotherham's The Emphasized Bible, footnote. This is more in line with current evidence (e.g., the dinosaurs).
Bottom line: Our understanding of history is limited. So what exactly happened there we don't know. Was the flood global or regional? Was Australia included or excluded? According to Ray Franz, Hebr. 'arets = earth/land.
heresay is not "evidence".
V: Perhaps you know of proof to the contrary?
You brought it up, not us. The burden of proof is on you.
V: I prefer Hollywood's version of the flood legend. It explains a lot of things.
It explains nothing. It's a Hollywood movie about a fictional event.
V: Bottom line: Our understanding of history is limited. So what exactly happened there we don't know.
Interesting. Just recently on this thread you were speaking in absolutes.
Bottom line: Our understanding of history is limited. So what exactly happened there we don't know. Was the flood global or regional? Was Australia included or excluded?
Let's entertain the thought for a minute that it was local. So in order to destroy some humans in the area, God decides to flood area above the highest peeks in the region. The highest peek in the region is Mount Damavand about 18 000 ft above sea level. So the water rises to 18000 ft and how does it now flow out of the region? Let me guess.. God build invisible walls to contain the water.
Now if God only killed people in that region for not believing in him, how is that fair when other people in other parts of the planet were allowed to live?
