Is the Bible Literally True? No, of Course Not!

[gfm7175]

It's amazing how those tasteless wafers just melt in your mouth. Put one on the tongue and start the stopwatch.

While melting away, the remaining wafer remnants kind of stick to the roof of one's mouth a bit too. I suppose that's what the subsequent bit of wine is for.

 

[gfm7175]

Right... so you don't have an actual example. You're just talking out of your ass again.

You can't just pretend it away, dude.

TOO FUNNY!

 

[Into the Night]

I once had to make a Sedar meal, and that involved making unleavened bread. I remember thinking "Why don't they just say it in English? Why don't they just say 'don't add yeast for it to rise'?" In any event, after I made unleavened bread, I realized that there was no difference between unleavened bread and leavened bread that I smooshed with my fingers.

Heh. It is basically the same recipe as for making crackers.

Additionally, it was explained to me that the Israelites were required to eat unleavened bread because they were going to be in such a hurry to get out of Egypt, that they couldn't afford to just dilly-dally waiting for the bread to rise. I remember thinking "... but Moses knew of this days in advance! Couldn't he have instructed the Israelites to make their bread in advance ... or just not eat bread that evening?"

It's kinda hard to store food when you're a slave, and they had to eat something. They were facing a hard march, even though God was with them.

I also remember wondering if any Egyptians learned of the secret recipe for avoiding the Angel of Death, who apparently couldn't distinguish between Egyptians and Israelites, and had to sniff their breaths to find out which ones had eaten unleavened bread.

The Angel of Death wasn't using unleavened bread or sniffing anyone. It was a mark left on the doorposts and lentil. The Egyptians didn't know of the mark, and in any case, would've been insulted to apply it or even find such a mark on their own doorposts and lentil. Nevertheless, some Egyptian doors WERE marked by the Hebrews to save first born slaves they had inside. The Egyptian masters found the mark the next day on their own door and were horrified at it.

Pharaoh's palace, of course, had no such mark. His first born son died of the pestilence that night.

What if the Egyptians simply hadn't eaten any leavened bread? There were just too many holes in this story for my liking.

Again, the bread is not what stopped the Angel of Death.

It's amazing how those tasteless wafers just melt in your mouth. Put one on the tongue and start the stopwatch.

Heh. They ARE kind of flavorless, aren't they? Personally, I find there are better crackers available (but they aren't Kosher!).
Remember, the Jews are celebrating their freedom from slavery, and probably use this flavorless stuff to remind them of the bondage they were in at the time.
Like most things over the span of many years, the memorial holiday meal and it's significance has been distorted and modified. Now, the Sader meal is served on a special plate (often ornate), and the head of the household recites by rote memory the Hebrew verses in the Torah relating to the story. Everything is purchased to prepare the meal, and even preparing it is religiously significant to many of them.

The idea, of course, is to pass the story on to the children, that the eventful day may never be forgotten, and how the Hebrews were freed by the hand of God.

 

[Into the Night]

Here we go.... time to start claiming you answered questions you didn't answer. Lol..

No. It seems you think it's time to start asking the same question over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over like a mindless automaton.

Argument of the Stone fallacy.

 

[gfm7175]

Use English.

I did. If you wish to comprehend what I said, then you need to learn English (since I do not speak Liberal).

 

[gfm7175]

You just beat me!

He beat me too.

 

[ZenMode]

Mark 9:1 (ESV)

“Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power.”

Jews, of which Jesus was one, didn't believe that the soul of saved people went to Heaven after they died. The idea of saved people going to heaven is something that came about long after Jesus died. Jews believed, as stated in the OT, that God was going to come back to Earth and return it to pre-Fall, Garden of Eden condition. This is what "Kingdom of God" refers to. The Earth would be a literal Kingdom of God. God would raise believers from the grave if they had already died.

Over the years, Christians have tried to modify the meaning of Mark 9:1 for reasons that should be obvious. They claim it's a reference to the Transfiguration. In Mark 9:1, Jesus tells his disciples that some of them won't be dead before God returns and recreates his "Kingdom" on Earth. I think we all know that God didn't return during Jesus life, the life of his disciples that lived on after his death or during any generation over the past 2000 years. The Transfiguration, according to all three accounts, happened a week after Jesus made this declaration. Odd that he would say that "some standing here" will not taste death, given that it was only a week later. Granted, life expectancy wasn't what it is today, but should we believe that some of his disciples would die in a week?

 

[goat]

Anti-theist Richard Dawkins sided with Christian culture because of the jew genocide of Palestinians. What a phony Dawkins turned out to be. He spent decades claiming all religions are garbage but like Freud in Moses and Monotheism, Dawkins extends an olive branch to the religion he spent his entire career attacking.

 

[gfm7175]

I'll ask a question that you won't answer. What specifically am I changing? Example?

RQAA.

You are changing the words of John and Mark. RE: the Mark passage, you are specifically leaving out the words that clearly tell you which day he and John are both talking about, specifically the words "when it was customary to sacrifice the Passover lamb" --- That means that Mark is saying that it was the 14th of Nisan. It's the same thing when John mentions "day of preparation of Passover" or whatever the specific language was.

The timeline of some of the major events on the 14th of Nisan looks like this:

end of the 13th of Nisan --> SUNSET ---> beginning of the 14th of Nisan --> Disciples ask Jesus where to prepare the "Last Supper" meal --> Jesus and his disciples eat the "Last Supper" meal ---> Jesus and his closest disciples go to Gethsemane --> Jesus hands himself over to the authorities wanting to seize him ---> Jesus gets illegally tried in sham trials all throughout the night --> Jesus gets inspected by Pilate and Pilate finds no fault in him (IOW Jesus is "unblemished" and "suitable" for sacrifice) --> Jesus gets nailed to the cross --> Jesus utters his final words and "gives up the ghost" (Passover lambs are also being slaughtered now) --> Jesus gets buried in the tomb before the "high sabbath" the next day --> SUNSET --> beginning of the 15th of Nisan --> the slaughtered Passover lambs are now being eaten during the evening hours.

ALL of those events occurred within the very same day, the 14th of Nisan. It was a LOOOOOONG and unimaginably painful day for Jesus, but thank GOD for his sacrifice!

 

[Kafka]

Anti-theist Richard Dawkins sided with Christian culture because of the jew genocide of Palestinians. What a phony Dawkins turned out to be. He spent decades claiming all religions are garbage but like Freud in Moses and Monotheism, Dawkins extends an olive branch to the religion he spent his entire career attacking.

Any specific link? And why does one's siding with or against Israel mean it has something to do with religion? Israel isn't a religion...it's a country with a government which can be questioned because it isn't god itself.

 

[Kafka]

RQAA.

^^^^Letting your socks show, Into the Night.

 

[goat]

Any specific link? And why does one's siding with or against Israel mean it has something to do with religion? Israel isn't a religion...it's a country with a government which can be questioned because it isn't god itself.

Claiming israel isn't a religious state shows you haven't done your homework. It's like saying the US isn't a Christian state. One can't become potus without pretending to be a Christian who vows allegiance to israel.

 

[Kafka]

Claiming israel isn't a religious state shows you haven't done your homework. It's like saying the US isn't a Christian state. One can't become potus without pretending to be a Christian who vows allegiance to israel.

You clearly don't know the difference between a theocracy and a regular democracy. The fact that you have to claim this country for you and your particular sect has no bearing or reality on me. I'm an atheist and I am an equal to you and every single one of your fellow "believers". You own this country no more than any single group does.

Please take your faith and enjoy it to the maximum, but remember: no one who is not in your faith gives a flying fuck about what you believe.

 

[Guno צְבִי]

Anti-theist Richard Dawkins sided with Christian culture because of the jew genocide of Palestinians. What a phony Dawkins turned out to be. He spent decades claiming all religions are garbage but like Freud in Moses and Monotheism, Dawkins extends an olive branch to the religion he spent his entire career attacking.

Eat shit and die yurt

1.5 million Armenians died in the Armenian genocide.
6 million Jews died in the Holocaust.
800,000 Tutsis died in the Rwandan genocide.
2 million Bangladeshis in the Bangladeshi genocide.
300,000 in the East Timor genocide
500,000 in the Syrian genocide.
100,000 in the Papua New Guinea genocide.
IAround 30,000 have died in the war Hamas started.
A third were members of Hamas
Accusing Israel of engaging in genocide is simply a lie.
An anti Semitic lie .
And those engaging in it are in essence pissing on the corpses of the millions who died in actual genocides.

 

[IBDaMann]

Heh. It is basically the same recipe as for making crackers.

Yes, but Saltines are so good. Have you ever tried eating just one? I imagine that priests and ministers don't dispense Saltines because they don't want people getting back in line for more. "Hey! Could someone pass the box over here?"

The Angel of Death wasn't using unleavened bread or sniffing anyone. It was a mark left on the doorposts and lentil.

Yes! Now it's coming back to me. I must confess that I haven't read it in a while and was operating off of (faulty) memory, but I remember it now that you mention it. It definitely was the mark.

So why so much emphasis on the unleavened bread? Was Moses simply pushing a preferred matzo recipe?

Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses: for whosoever eateth leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel.

What's going on here? Why the preoccupation with unleavened bread? Wouldn't it have been more productive to have the Israelites just eat chopped liver?

Also, all the Israelites had to slaughter a lamb that was "without blemish." What if someone only had blemished lambs? HOSED!

Anyway, getting back to crackers, I guess that being slaves and all, they didn't have much in the way of caviar to put on the crackers. Wouldn't a better prohibition have been "thou shalt not eat thy bread with smoked salmon for seven days"?

Ye shall eat nothing leavened; in all your habitations shall ye eat unleavened bread.

I get the point, but someone somewhere had to be asking "What the heck does Yahweh have against yeast?"

And the people took their dough before it was leavened, their kneadingtroughs being bound up in their clothes upon their shoulders.

The Egyptians didn't know of the mark, and in any case, would've been insulted to apply it or even find such a mark on their own doorposts and lentil.

Why didn't Moses warn the cattle as well? Why did Yahweh need to kill all the firstborn of the cattle? I think it could reasonably have been expected that no cattle had any unblemished lambs to slaughter? Sure, there were some cows and bulls that were particularly distraught, but what was the point?

Nevertheless, some Egyptian doors WERE marked by the Hebrews to save first born slaves they had inside. The Egyptian masters found the mark the next day on their own door and were horrified at it.

I don't think the Egyptians were horrified.

And the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they lent unto them such things as they required. And they spoiled the Egyptians.

Pharaoh's palace, of course, had no such mark. His first born son died of the pestilence that night.

I think he ate leavened bread. I'm fairly certain of it. I think you are downplaying the role of the unleavened bread. If there's one thing you should take away from the passover is that leavened bread brings bad news.

Again, the bread is not what stopped the Angel of Death.

I still think that it had to be a factor, but I'm thinking that this all changed, though, with the coming of Jesus Christ. I think that the New Testament made leavened bread "holy" again. The miracle of the loaves was exclusively leavened bread.

Why do you think that Christians love bagels and not matzo?

Heh. They ARE kind of flavorless, aren't they?

There is no existing instrumentation that can measure the flavor of eucharistic wafers to within any useful margin of error.

Personally, I find there are better crackers available (but they aren't Kosher!).

Actually, Ritz has some kosher crackers. It's the Cheez Whiz that's doubtful.

Remember, the Jews are celebrating their freedom from slavery

Well, they certainly aren't celebrating the unleavened bread.

Like most things over the span of many years, the memorial holiday meal and it's significance has been distorted and modified.

I hope you aren't implying that it has all been politicized and commercialized. You must be a conspiracy theorist.

Now, the Sader meal is served on a special plate (often ornate), and the head of the household recites by rote memory the Hebrew verses in the Torah relating to the story. Everything is purchased to prepare the meal, and even preparing it is religiously significant to many of them.

Do you mean something like these $60 porcelain Seder meal plates that I'm sure every Israelite had?

The idea, of course, is to pass the story on to the children, that the eventful day may never be forgotten, and how the Hebrews were freed by the hand of God.

The rainbow didn't get an expensive, ornamental porcelaine plate (sigh).

 

[BidenPresident]

I did. If you wish to comprehend what I said, then you need to learn English (since I do not speak Liberal).

bye

 

[goat]

You clearly don't know the difference between a theocracy and a regular democracy. The fact that you have to claim this country for you and your particular sect has no bearing or reality on me. I'm an atheist and I am an equal to you and every single one of your fellow "believers". You own this country no more than any single group does.

Please take your faith and enjoy it to the maximum, but remember: no one who is not in your faith gives a flying fuck about what you believe.

It's mostly American Christians who go off to fight all these for-profit Wall Street wars. They are loyal to this country no matter what, yet for some reason the FBI and DHS sees them as a threat to the establishment and is targeting them for prosecution. Can you explain why?

 

[Into the Night]

Yes, but Saltines are so good. Have you ever tried eating just one?

Heh. I prefer club crackers or Ritz crackers.

I imagine that priests and ministers don't dispense Saltines because they don't want people getting back in line for more. "Hey! Could someone pass the box over here?"

I see you like Saltines.

Yes! Now it's coming back to me. I must confess that I haven't read it in a while and was operating off of (faulty) memory, but I remember it now that you mention it. It definitely was the mark.

Rather a nasty stain on the wood, to be sure. Of course, the Hebrews were leaving those homes anyway.

So why so much emphasis on the unleavened bread? Was Moses simply pushing a preferred matzo recipe?
What's going on here? Why the preoccupation with unleavened bread?

Not just the unleavened bread, but bitter herbs as well, to remind them of the bitterness of bondage.

Wouldn't it have been more productive to have the Israelites just eat chopped liver?

They were taking the animals with them.

Also, all the Israelites had to slaughter a lamb that was "without blemish." What if someone only had blemished lambs? HOSED!

Oh, I'm sure some Rabbi could be found to 'unblemish' it with a blessing.

Anyway, getting back to crackers, I guess that being slaves and all, they didn't have much in the way of caviar to put on the crackers. Wouldn't a better prohibition have been "thou shalt not eat thy bread with smoked salmon for seven days"?

They DO like their Lox.

I get the point, but someone somewhere had to be asking "What the heck does Yahweh have against yeast?"

Who knows? Likely someone complained.

Why didn't Moses warn the cattle as well? Why did Yahweh need to kill all the firstborn of the cattle? I think it could reasonably have been expected that no cattle had any unblemished lambs to slaughter? Sure, there were some cows and bulls that were particularly distraught, but what was the point?

The point was the sacrifice itself.

I don't think the Egyptians were horrified.

Considering their door posts were stained with the mark, and it was put there by some Hebrew, they were certainly insulted. If someone came along and painted your doorposts and lentil with lamb's blood, how would you feel?

I think he ate leavened bread. I'm fairly certain of it. I think you are downplaying the role of the unleavened bread. If there's one thing you should take away from the passover is that leavened bread brings bad news.

Being freed from bondage is generally good news.

I still think that it had to be a factor, but I'm thinking that this all changed, though, with the coming of Jesus Christ.

It changed dramatically. Jesus Christ did away with the sacrifice, replacing it with the sacrament instead.

The sacrifice of the best of the flock was a similitude of the sacrifice by God in placing his Son here on Earth in a mortal body, to be sacrificed for the sake of the world.
Once it became past tense, the sacrifice served no further purpose. Christ was resurrected and conquered even death.

The sacrament is used instead now, the bread to remember the body that was slain for the sake of the people of the world, and the wine (or water) to remember the blood that was spilled for the sake of the people of the world.

I think that the New Testament made leavened bread "holy" again.

Only if blessed.

The miracle of the loaves was exclusively leavened bread.

Probably was.

Why do you think that Christians love bagels and not matzo?

Because they can buy it from Jewish owned bagel bakeries.

There is no existing instrumentation that can measure the flavor of eucharistic wafers to within any useful margin of error.

The only instrumentation is a person's own taste buds, and what he likes to taste.

Actually, Ritz has some kosher crackers. It's the Cheez Whiz that's doubtful.

Heh. It's amazing what's Kosher these days! That only means it was blessed by a Rabbi.

Well, they certainly aren't celebrating the unleavened bread.

Sader is a solemn ceremony. I wouldn't call it a 'celebration'. Over the years, they did lighten it up a bit for the kids. Sort of like the way Disney sanitized Grimm's fairy tales.

I hope you aren't implying that it has all been politicized and commercialized. You must be a conspiracy theorist.

Do you mean something like these $60 porcelain Seder meal plates that I'm sure every Israelite had?

Yup. It's been commercialized just like Christmas and Easter.

I guess you can see now why Jesus was so angry with the merchants in the temple.

 

[IBDaMann]

I see you like Saltines.

I have to make sure there are none around. If I see some out in the open, I convince myself that I'll have "just one" ... and then I do ... and then I remember too late that I can't eat just one.

Rather a nasty stain on the wood, to be sure. Of course, the Hebrews were leaving those homes anyway.

Technically, that's vandalism. I bet that's one of the reasons why Jews are not overly welcome in Egypt today. They probably never made restitution.

Not just the unleavened bread, but bitter herbs as well, to remind them of the bitterness of bondage.

You know, now I'm remembering that as well. That's right ... bitter herbs. Shouldn't they have had sweet fruit to celebrate the sweetness of freedom?

They were taking the animals with them.

You might have a point. I don't think the animals would fare quite as well without their livers.

Oh, I'm sure some Rabbi could be found to 'unblemish' it with a blessing.

I suppose Moses could have done it as well. Agreed.

They DO like their Lox.

Yep. Personally, I'm a cream cheese fanatic.

The point was the sacrifice itself.

That's a party foul. The Israelites were supposed to sacrifice to Yahweh, not the other way around.

If someone came along and painted your doorposts and lentil with lamb's blood, how would you feel?

Is the blood from an unblemished lamb or a blemished lamb?

Being freed from bondage is generally good news.

Agreed. Point taken. The Israelites should have had fruit instead of bitter herbs.

It changed dramatically. Jesus Christ did away with the sacrifice, replacing it with the sacrament instead.

I think this was a very constructive change, and very practical. There's wisdom there. Also, I bet farmers were relieved at the good news.

Christ was resurrected and conquered even death.

That's not easy to do, that's for sure.

The sacrament is used instead now, the bread to remember the body that was slain for the sake of the people of the world, and the wine (or water) to remember the blood that was spilled for the sake of the people of the world.

Think of the health code ordinances that would make sacrifices rather impractical. Actually, the 1st Amendment would preclude most of such ordinances.

The only instrumentation is a person's own taste buds, and what he likes to taste.

The margin of error exceeds the amount of wafer flavor.

Heh. It's amazing what's Kosher these days! That only means it was blessed by a Rabbi.

I believe it means that a Rabbi oversaw the processing and verifies that it meets with Jewish law.

Sader is a solemn ceremony. I wouldn't call it a 'celebration'.

Only because they chose bitter herbs instead of fresh fruit. You can't very well celebrate with bitter herbs.

Yup. It's been commercialized just like Christmas and Easter.

They've been commercialized?

I guess you can see now why Jesus was so angry with the merchants in the temple.

It was more than just the oxen.

 

[ZenMode]

RQAA.

You are changing the words of John and Mark. RE: the Mark passage, you are specifically leaving out the words that clearly tell you which day he and John are both talking about, specifically the words "when it was customary to sacrifice the Passover lamb" --- That means that Mark is saying that it was the 14th of Nisan. It's the same thing when John mentions "day of preparation of Passover" or whatever the specific language was.

The timeline of some of the major events on the 14th of Nisan looks like this:

end of the 13th of Nisan --> SUNSET ---> beginning of the 14th of Nisan --> Disciples ask Jesus where to prepare the "Last Supper" meal --> Jesus and his disciples eat the "Last Supper" meal ---> Jesus and his closest disciples go to Gethsemane --> Jesus hands himself over to the authorities wanting to seize him ---> Jesus gets illegally tried in sham trials all throughout the night --> Jesus gets inspected by Pilate and Pilate finds no fault in him (IOW Jesus is "unblemished" and "suitable" for sacrifice) --> Jesus gets nailed to the cross --> Jesus utters his final words and "gives up the ghost" (Passover lambs are also being slaughtered now) --> Jesus gets buried in the tomb before the "high sabbath" the next day --> SUNSET --> beginning of the 15th of Nisan --> the slaughtered Passover lambs are now being eaten during the evening hours.

ALL of those events occurred within the very same day, the 14th of Nisan. It was a LOOOOOONG and unimaginably painful day for Jesus, but thank GOD for his sacrifice!

I didn't change any words. In one account, Jesus tells his disciples where to prepare the Passover meal, they eat it together, he's arrested and dies the next day. In the other account, he is dead on the day before - the day of preparation.