Evolution According to Pheobe
Pastor Dave
If you've ever watched the show Friends, then you can
imagine how these characters talk and just how funny
this truly was! :)
Pheobe (Lisa Kudrow) was the airhead. Btw, if you ever
watched Friends and knew you had seen her somewhere
before, she played the ditzy waitress (Ursula) in the
restaurant that Paul (Paul Reiser) and Jaime (Helen Hunt)
would occasionally go to get lunch, on the sitcom show,
"Mad About You". :)
Anyway, back to the post... :)
Of course, Ross (David Schwimmer) is the scientist of
the show (Friends) and he spends the whole episode
trying to convince Pheobe (Lisa Kudrow), that evolution
is absolute! It is proved! It is the only possibility!
So Pheobe is standing there in the room, with Rachel
(Jennifer Aniston) and Monica (Courteney Cox) sitting
on the couch and Ross walks into the apartment, intent
on proving to Pheobe that evolution cannot be doubted
and that she needs to admit to that!
So with that in mind, let's take a look at the dialogue:
*************************************************************
<Rachel, Monica and Pheobe are in the apartment talking
and in walks Ross>
PHOEBE: Uh-oh. It's Scary Scientist Man!
ROSS: Ok, Phoebe, this is it! In this briefcase I carry
actual scientific facts! A briefcase of facts, if you will.
Some of these fossils are over 200 million years old!
PHOEBE: Ok, look, before you even start, I'm not
denying evolution, ok. I'm just saying that it's one
of the possibilities.
ROSS: It's the only possibility, Phoebe!
PHOEBE: Ok, Ross, could you just open your mind like
this much, ok (holds thumb and pointer finger together
very closely)? Wasn't there a time when the brightest
minds in the world believed that the world was flat?
And, up until like what, 50 years ago, you all thought
the atom was the smallest thing, until you split it open,
and this like, whole mess of crap came out. Now, are
you telling me that you are so unbelievably arrogant
that you can't admit that there's a teeny tiny possibility
that you could be wrong about this?!
<Ross now looks sheepish and speaking slowly, tries
to save himself by attempting to minimize the damage>
ROSS: There might be... a teeny... tiny... possibility.
PHOEBE: I can't believe you caved!
ROSS: <shocked look> What?!
PHOEBE: You just abandoned your whole belief system!
I mean, before, I didn't agree with you, but at least
I respected you! How, HOW, H-O-W are you going to
go into work tomorrow?! How, how are you going to
face the other science guys? How, how are you going
to face yourself?!
<Ross, in shock, closes his briefcase and leaves the room
quickly with his head down a bit>
PHEOBE : <speaking to everyone else> Oh! That was fun!
So who's hungry?
**********************************************************
Pheobe, in all her ditzimania, shows the absolute arrogance
of the evolutionist! They will surely respond now and claim
that they don't claim it's proved. But yet, if you doubt it
they ridicule you! And when cornered, they confess that
they are only giving you like a 0.01% that it is not true!
As I said... arrogance! And yet they hypocritically claim
that those who believe the Bible are arrogant, for claiming
that it's true, period! Yea, right! <lol> :)
I just love that episode! :)
Now here are the facts about what the Bible says!:
To believe in evolution, is to disbelieve the Bible.
And while you put (and capitalize) God's World above
God's Word, the fact is, that you cannot be a Christian
if you do not believe in the Creation, as it is stated
in the Bible.
Part of the message of salvation, is the Creation.
Believing in the Creator. When Paul preached to
those worshipping nature and said... "turn from
these vanities unto the living God, which made
heaven and earth and the sea and all things that
are therein:" - Acts 14:15 Paul believed it too.
The statements of those who claim to be Christians
and who also claim that evolution is true, are built
on a faulty premise, which is that one can believe
in Christ and in evolution. Scripturally, that isn't
possible. And they're trying to twist the first chapter
of Genesis to cover whatever they want to believe
about Him, so long as they believe He existed and
died on the cross, etc..
Evolutionists are great at getting people to ask the wrong
questions! The real question is; "What does it mean to
believe in Jesus Christ?". Believing in Jesus Christ also
means believing in what He said AND what the Bible
(the WHOLE Bible) says about Him.
So what does it say about Christ? After all, who
is He? Well, the Bible says He's the Creator.
John 1:1-3
1) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word
was with God, and the Word was God.
2) The same was in the beginning with God.
3) All things were made by him; and without him
was not any thing made that was made.
14) And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt
among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory
as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of
grace and truth.
Now if He's the Creator, then He knows how it happened.
So the question then becomes, what did Jesus consider,
"the beginning"? In Matthew 19, Jesus refers to Adam
and Eve as the beginning of humankind. They talk about
misreading the Bible, but where does Jesus say, "Once
man and ape split off from a common ancestor and finally
developed into modern humans, then Adam and Eve..." ???
You see, it is THEY who are misreading the Bible and
twisting it! I'm simply reading it as it's written!
Jesus also told us that Moses was speaking about Him.
And note what He said...
John 5:45-47
45) Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father:
there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom
ye trust.
46) For had ye believed Moses, ye would have
believed me: for he wrote of me.
47) But if ye believe not his writings, how shall
ye believe my words?
Now notice the last verse. If we don't believe what Moses
wrote about Him, then how can we believe what He says?
That's a very powerful statement!
So what did Moses write of Him? Well, a number of things.
Right now, we're going to focus on the relevant passages.
But let's understand first, that it was Christ who was
dealing with Moses. It was Christ who spoke to Moses.
It was Christ who followed them out there (1 Cor 10:1-4).
And what did Christ say about the Creation to Moses?
8) Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9) Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10) But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD
thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou,
nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant,
nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger
that is within thy gates:
11) For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth,
the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh
day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day,
and hallowed it.
He said "six days". Now you either believe Him, or
you don't. Period. Anything else you say, is adding
to the Bible, since the Bible says, "six days". You
can speculate about the "six days", but that's all you
have, is speculation and anything you say, is adding
to the Bible. Those who try to make it into millions
of years have the big problem. Speaking of this seven
day period (six days and the Sabbath), did God command
man to work six millions years and rest for one million
years? No. It's clear that He is talking about six literal
days of Creation, when the passage is taken in context.
In order to make it anything other than six literal days,
you have to rip it out of its context of the Sabbath day
rest, period!
The fact is that "In the beginning, God created"...
And He did it in six days and said He did it in six days
(Exodus 20:11). Jesus believed that and referenced it,
in Matthew 19:3-8 and in other places. The original
Hebrew word for "day" ("yom"), is never used to mean
anything but a literal day in the Bible, when a numerical
adjective is present ("second, third, etc.). Are we to
believe that this is somehow the one exception?!?
The Bible also makes it clear that no one died before Adam.
"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be
made alive." - 1 Corinthians 15:22
If that isn't true and man existed before Adam, then
the whole concept of Jesus as our Saviour is ridiculous,
since God would be holding everyone since Adam
responsible for their sin and no one before that.
And what about the other humans alive at the time,
if Adam was not the first man? And why would we
need a Saviour, if evolution is true? Man is an animal
and is simply acting as God made Him to act. Like an
animal. If there is no original sin from one man, then
where is the need for a Saviour? Yet the Bible makes
it clear that we do need a Saviour and that Jesus is,
"the last Adam".
"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be
made alive." - 1 Corinthians 15:22
"And so it is written, The first man Adam was made
a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening
spirit." - 1 Corinthians 15:45
As atheist Richard Bozarth said... "Evolution destroys
utterly and finally the very reason Jesus' earthly life
was supposedly made necessary. Destroy Adam and
Eve and the original sin and in the rubble, you will
find the sorry remains of the Son of God. If Jesus was
not the Redeemer... and this is what evolution means,
then Christianity is nothing."
Yet the Bible tells us that Jesus was "the second Adam",
not, "the second ape".
What you believe cannot possibly be reconciled with
Scripture and it makes Jesus a useless, made over
monkey, without the ability to be a sacrifice.
"And so it is written, The first man Adam was made
a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening
spirit." - 1 Corinthians 15:45
The Bible tells us that death came by sin and sin
came by Adam...
"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world,
and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men,
for that all have sinned:" - Romans 5:12
The Bible tells us that Jesus believed in Adam and Eve
and after all, He should know. He was there!
"And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read,
that he which made them at the beginning made them
male and female," - Matthew 19:4
And now, notice the next verse. While the evolutionists
try to put millions of years into the Creation (which
Genesis 1 & 2 doesn't support), what did Jesus say about it?
"But from the beginning of the creation God made them
male and female." - Mark 10:6
Not just "the beginning", as if it were millions of years
ago, but rather, the beginning OF THE CREATION.
They were there, right from go, just like all other life,
separated only by a few days. And Jesus tells us that
it happened. Remember, in Mat 19:4, He said...
"Have ye not READ...". Now, is He talking about Darwin's
book here? No. He is confirming the Genesis account!
So what conclusions can logically be drawn from this?
1) Jesus was right and knew what He was talking about,
since He was there and it was done through Him.
That is the logical conclusion to draw from the Bible
itself.
2) Jesus believed in the Creation, as described in Genesis,
but He just didn't know modern science, which of course,
means that He couldn't have been there at the Creation
and the Bible is lying about that. This would disqualify
Him as our Saviour, since our Saviour has to be free
from sin and error and therefore, there's no point in
evolutionists saying that they believe in Him as such.
3) Jesus was intentionally lying about who He was,
or intentionally misleading the people, even though
He knew evolution was reality, which of course,
disqualifies Him as Saviour and means that the
concept of original sin is a lie, which, once again,
means that God lied about it in His written word
to mankind.
You see, no matter what you do, you cannot escape these
facts. Either Jesus was right, or He was wrong, or He was
lying. One of those three. If it's the first, then you are
a liar, when you claim to believe in evolution and call
Jesus your Lord and Saviour. It simply cannot be.
You may not have seen that and if it was unintentional
on your part, then so be it. But now you know.
As Jesus said...
"If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had
not had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin."
- John 15:22
And there is no more excuse for it. Now it is sin to you,
because you know better.
You do what you want, but your way is the way that,
"misreads the Bible" and it is you who must resolve
the problems that your belief brings to the table.
As for me, I have a hard time believing anyone is saved,
who says that He believes in Jesus as His Lord and Saviour
and evolution, when in order to do so, he must call Jesus
a liar, or ignorant and try to convince me that it's okay to
say that he believes the end and yet, rejects the beginning.
As I said, Genesis 1 & 2 do not allow for evolution. So
my advice to you, is to pick a side, because you can't pick
both. They are incompatible! I hope you'll pick the side
with God.
The funny part is, that science actually lines up with
the Bible. Man started in northern Africa, for example.
And instead of you questioning how long ago that happened,
you choose to accept what unbelievers say and question
the Bible's time line. You may say you're not doing that,
but you are!
The claim that "God used evolution to do it", is called,
"Theistic Evolution". And now, here's something funny
about theistic evolutionists, considering that they deny
the Creation account, when we look at what else they
believe, claiming to be Christians:
Theistic evolutionists are out to please men, rather than
God. They claim to believe in a virgin birth, people rising
from the dead, water turned into wine and yet, they don't
believe that God created the heaven and the earth in six
literal days, thereby making hypocrites of themselves.
Why do they deny the creation account and believe in
evolution? Because man says it isn't so and they would
rather try to please men, instead of choosing to believe
God and stand up for Him. Preachers who claim theistic
evolution are the biggest hypocrites of all and are in the
most danger. Why? Read Isaiah 9:16; Jeremiah 23:1,
50:6. What do YOU stand for? "...choose this day whom
you will serve. ...as for me and my house, we will serve
the Lord." - Jos 24:15
So they believe in a virgin birth, water turning into wine,
people rising from the dead, etc. and then claim that I'm
some kind of nut, because I believe that God created it
all in six literal days! :)
And btw, when that water was turned into wine,
did it take months, or years to happen? No!
It happened instantly!
And when Jesus healed people, did He say, "Okay, now,
I've done my part, but make sure to go to a doctor and
take your antibiotics for 10 full days!"??? No! They were
healed instantly!
So it seems that the "time" that the evolutionists say is
required, isn't required at all!
How can anyone say that God needed "time" to create,
when even time itself was a creation?!
And how can anyone try to weasel out of responding
to these facts, by saying that I try to limit God, by
saying that He didn't do it through evolution?!
1) *I* didn't say it! *GOD* did, in His written word!
2) What is more spectacular and what would take,
"more power"? Setting off a spark and letting
nature do it? Or doing it all yourself and making
it happen in six literal, 24 hour days?!
3) And how is it that they don't notice, that evolution
contradicts the Bible, in that it says that the Sun
was created before the Earth, when the Bible says
that the Earth was created before the Sun? Hello?
4) And how could the plant life, that needs insects
for pollination to survive, have survived all of
those years (if each day was really "millions of
years"), without the insects to pollinate them,
since the plant life was created on Day 4 and
the insects weren't created until Day 5?!
Believe what you want! But don't insult my intelligence
by trying to claim that both are true!
And if you claim that evolution is true, then please
explain to me how it is that all you have, is your
claim and not one shred of proof for what you believe
and yet, you call it "scientific fact"!
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
"Other things may change us, but we start and end
with family." - Anthony Brandt
In My Fathers House
[...]
> Pheobe, in all her ditzimania, shows the absolute arrogance
> of the evolutionist!
She was a character in fiction.
Jude Alexander
"In My Fathers House" <hso...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3142a4a1-add4-4867...@u16g2000pru.googlegroups.com...
She was a character in fiction.\
ROTFLMAO!
Wild Bill
"In My Fathers House" <hso...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3142a4a1-add4-4867...@u16g2000pru.googlegroups.com...
As was Jesus in the Bible!
Ike E 11/16/09
First "day:" God establishes the rules of physics which would govern the
creation, all summed up in the proto-atom, which explodes with unimaginable
light and heat, filling the new universe to its expanding edges. The light
begins to congeal into galaxies, and the darkness begins to reveal itself as
matter and antimatter annihilate each other, leaving only the extra matter
particles in their wake.
Second "day:" The planets begin to congeal, taking on both form and
atmospheres (bearing in mind that Genesis is an earth-centric book, but what
was happening here was happening elsewhere in the universe, as known today
by anyone with a better-than-third-grade education).
Third "day:" The earth (as well as every other planet in the universe),
begins to take on its surface conditions. Here, the first evolutionary
trunk--the plant kingdom--began to take place.
Fourth "day:" As the light fades from the universe in general, the OTHER
celestial bodies (which were going through the same processes as our solar
system) begin to reveal themselves. HERE is where CONVENTIONAL days and
nights begin (as opposed to the macro "days and nights" that started from
the Big Bang).
Fifth "day:" The other evolutionary trunk, the animal kingdom, begins. (This
"day" continues up through the dinosaurs, as what the prophet describes next
are the more refined animals we have today).
Sixth "day:" God brings forth the refined animals, and the top of the
evolutionary chain, the beast man, the natural man (a.k.a. the "Gentiles"),
generic and plural, men and women, complete the natural process.
And this "day" is STILL in process, and Revelation declares that God did
create, and is creating, and will continue to create anything that will be
created until He is finished creating (i.e. the end of the universe).
Seventh "day:" His rest, yet to come, and anyone who opposes His will will
not enter into that rest, but will be locked into the singularity that is
the universe.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the science we're
discovering now matches the outline given by the prophet (from an
earth-centric viewpoint) regarding the evolutionary natural creation
process, flat-earther, and only an idiot would miss the parallelism between
the Bible and the science.
But, of course, you think YOU are a child of the second process when you're
not; you're a child of the first process, which is why you don't understand
anything about the Bible, which started with a "two-tree" story and ends
with a "two-tree" story. In fact, one of the reasons you can't understand
the END of the Bible is that you don't understand the BEGINNING of it.
It's only when CHILDREN such as you keep trying to hold onto your childish
notions that the problem arises.
[snip]
Ike
Ike E 11/16/09
"Wild Bill" <bils...@daytonwa.net> wrote in message
news:hec8cq$cja$1...@news.parasun.com...
And you know this how?
Ike
Wild Bill
"Ike E 11/16/09" <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:hedk07$hk5$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
It's called research, Ike. Here, let me spell it out for you...Naw, your ego
can't handle that!
>
> Ike
>
Ike E 11/23/9
Let's see this "research"--I have a few surprises for you that will blow
your doors off.
Ike
Terry Cross
With this quote we see, once again, the real target is not the denial
of Jehovah or the establishment of an allegedly invaluable scientific
truth (Evolution), but the destruction of Christianity and the
elimination of Jesus.
And such a surprise -- the author of the quote has a Jewish name.
Not only is Jewish hostility to Jesus historical and ubiquitous, it
takes many forms, including the pretense to Atheism as a fake
religious and political platform, as shown above and in these
newsgroups.
TCross
Pastor Dave
<tcro...@hotmail.com> spake thusly:
Huh?
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
What part of 'THOU SHALT NOT' don't you understand?
Terry Cross
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 10:12:33 -0800 (PST), Terry Cross
OK, I did not make understandable, right? Probably, a failure to trim
the context is a significant element of my failure.
I am commenting on the statement by Richard Bozarth, an alleged
Atheist making an unambiguously anti-Christian and anti-Jesus
statement. To Bozarth, the meaning of Evolution is that "Jesus is not
the redeamer."
Sweeping away the gazillion volumes written on Evolution, to Atheist
Bozarth, the essence of the subject is the destruction and ruination
of the Jesus "myth."
And Bozarth is a characteristically Jewish name, a heritage with long
and broad history of anti-Christian attacks. Hope that clarifies the
post.
TCross
Ike E 11/23/9
"Terry Cross" <tcro...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:480e5136-52a2-4df5...@y32g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
[snip]
> Not only is Jewish hostility to Jesus historical and ubiquitous, it
> takes many forms, including the pretense to Atheism as a fake
> religious and political platform, as shown above and in these
> newsgroups.
Once more for the dolt: Not "Judaism." Phariseeism, Sadduceeism, and
Herodianism.
True Judaism--as Jesus, the Disciples, and most of the NT writers were
"Jews"--has no problems with Jesus, and Jesus has no problem with true
"Judaism," (which He taught).
Unfortunately, certain idiots think that they can separate the Old Testament
from the New and arrive at any sort of truth.
Ike
Terry Cross
wrote:
> "Terry Cross" <tcros...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
The Old Testament aside, the Jews of today claim direct religious and
philosophical descent from the Pharisees.
TCross
Ike E 11/23/9
> The Old Testament aside,
You wish...
> the Jews of today claim direct religious and
> philosophical descent from the Pharisees.
Oh, are they?
Funny. I've met a few "Jewish" Christians who "hear" Jesus, which would
prove that they are "Jews indeed," just like Jesus said...
Joh 8:31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue
in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
Now, I know that the vast majority of those calling themselves "Jews are
not, but do lie," but that has NOTHING to do with the validity of the Old
Testament, nor Jesus' reliance on it--the very notion is preposterous. More
important it's NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS to try and sort one from the
other--Jesus will do that in due course of time.
But your notion that the Old Testament is fraudulent simply because YOU
DON'T LIKE IT nor UNDERSTAND IT is beyond ludicrous--Jesus couldn't even BE
the Messiah WITHOUT IT.
Ike
Terry Cross
True Jews, false Jews, Old Testament -- I suggest you go back and read
what was written:
> > Not only is Jewish hostility to Jesus historical and ubiquitous, it
> > takes many forms, including the pretense to Atheism as a fake
> > religious and political platform, as shown above and in these
> > newsgroups.
I did not say Jewish hostility was "universal" -- note that. If you
want further evidence of that hostility to Jesus, read the Talmud.
TCross
Ike E 11/23/9
I've been "reading what was written" since I was five, and I get it.
Just because it doesn't make sense to YOU, or YOU don't like what is
written, in no way changes its validity.
>>> Not only is Jewish hostility to Jesus historical and ubiquitous, it
>>> takes many forms, including the pretense to Atheism as a fake
>>> religious and political platform, as shown above and in these
>>> newsgroups.
> I did not say Jewish hostility was "universal" -- note that. If you
> want further evidence of that hostility to Jesus, read the Talmud.
I'm well aware of what the "Jews who say they are Jews, and are not, but do
lie" have to say.
That STILL doesn't invalidate the Old Testament.
Jesus was a Jew. The Disciples were Jews. Paul was a Jew. James was a Jew.
John Mark was a Jew. None of them had any problems with Judaism, and they
CERTAINLY did not have any problems with the Old Testament--they all quoted
and relied on it heavily. What they had problems with were Phariseeism,
Sadduceeism, and Herodianism.
Ike
Terry Cross
No problems? Let's pick one for you for your focus: Jesus said the
Sabbath was made for humankind, not humankind for the Sabbath. Past
tense. Nothing about "that was then and this is now."
Just, "Sabbath was made ..."
But Moses and Jehovah had it different. When human and Sabbath came
into collision, human lost, Sabbath won. The man gathering firewood
was stoned. To death. For gathering sticks for a fire on the
Sabbath.
Those are irreconcilable differences in priority.
TCross
Pastor Dave
<tcro...@hotmail.com> spake thusly:
Which does not mean that he was wrong.
The fact is, he was right. Evolution does mean just that.
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
Abortion = 1 dead, 1 wounded.
Ike E 11/23/9
[snip]
>> I'm well aware of what the "Jews who say they are Jews, and are not, but
>> do
>> lie" have to say.
>
>> That STILL doesn't invalidate the Old Testament.
>
>> Jesus was a Jew. The Disciples were Jews. Paul was a Jew. James was a
>> Jew.
>> John Mark was a Jew. None of them had any problems with Judaism, and they
>> CERTAINLY did not have any problems with the Old Testament--they all
>> quoted
>> and relied on it heavily. What they had problems with were Phariseeism,
>> Sadduceeism, and Herodianism.
> No problems? Let's pick one for you for your focus: Jesus said the
> Sabbath was made for humankind, not humankind for the Sabbath.
Which in NO WAY invalidated the Sabbath, dunderhead--just the Pharisees'
ABUSE OF IT.
You really are quite stupid.
[snip the rest of the ignorant idiocy]
Ike
Terry Cross
wrote:
> "Terry Cross" <tcros...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Was Moses abusing the Sabbath when he had the man gathering firewood
stoned to death?
TCross
Terry Cross
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:04:20 -0800 (PST), Terry Cross
And who among the Atheists would know that? Not one of scientific
mind. Only one with specific anti-Jesus intent.
TCross
Ike E 11/23/9
> Was Moses...
Stop asking questions that are above your pay grade.
[snip]
Ike
Pastor Dave
<tcro...@hotmail.com> spake thusly:
>> The fact is, he was right. �Evolution does mean just that.
>
>
>And who among the Atheists would know that? Not one of scientific
>mind. Only one with specific anti-Jesus intent.
Which is just about all of them, which is why
you don't see/hear them attacking Hinduism. :)
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
"Weakness of faith ought not be mistaken for falseness
of promise." - Unknown
Terry Cross
I think you should answer, Ike. Hurling insults is not a reasonable
substitute.
Was Moses abusing the Sabbath when he had the man
stoned to death for gathering firewood on the Sabbath?
If the man was destroyed for the Sabbath, he must have been made for
the Sabbath. But Jesus said the Sabbath was made for humankind, not
the reverse. And Jesus' statement is fully retroactive to the time of
Moses, making Moses wrong.
TCross
Ike E 11/23/9
[snippeth]
> I think you should answer, Ike.
If you can't understand the basics, how are you going to understand the
nuances and complexities?
[snip]
Ike
Wild Bill
"Ike E 11/23/9" <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:hekd4b$2fe$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Yeah Terry! Haven't you learned yet that only Ike knows what the Bible
really says? (snicker, chortle, tongue in cheek)
>
> [snip]
>
> Ike
>
Terry Cross
wrote:
> "Terry Cross" <tcros...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:7540aa18-6875-4b1a...@u25g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>
> [snippeth]
>
> > I think you should answer, Ike.
>
> If you can't understand the basics, how are you going to understand the
> nuances and complexities?
Should I presume all this is merely prelude to an answer?
I have shown you that the Pharisees were more like Moses than Jesus
was. The Pharisees' main problem was being to much like Moses, and
Jesus led the world away from Moses.
Where the Pharisees wanted to stone the woman for adultery, Jesus gave
her forgiveness. And the followers of Jesus never stoned anyone for
anything.
Where the Pharisees wanted strict observance of the Sabbath, Jesus
argued that the Sabbath was made for humankind, not the reverse.
Where the Pharisees washed their hands again and again that Jesus
mocked them, Exodus contains dozens of Mosaic laws and rules for
washing hands, for example, to cleanse the "issue" of copulation.
Where the Pharisees were following Mosaic instructions and killing
animals in the temple to dabble in the blood, Jesus drove the priests
out of the Temple with a scourge and forbade anyone to carry a vessel
in the Temple.
TCross
Doug
wrote in article
<3d79360d-2e59-4f4f...@v15g2000prn.googlegroups.com>:
> On Nov 25, 3:03 pm, "Ike E 11/23/9" <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> "Terry Cross" <tcros...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:7540aa18-6875-4b1a-
b0c6-227...@u25g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> [snippeth]
>>
>> > I think you should answer, Ike.
>>
>> If you can't understand the basics, how are you going to understand the
>> nuances and complexities?
>
>
> Should I presume all this is merely prelude to an answer?
>
> I have shown you that the Pharisees were more like Moses than Jesus was.
> The Pharisees' main problem was being to much like Moses, and Jesus led
> the world away from Moses.
>
> Where the Pharisees wanted to stone the woman for adultery, Jesus gave
> her forgiveness. And the followers of Jesus never stoned anyone for
> anything.
>
> Where the Pharisees wanted strict observance of the Sabbath, Jesus
> argued that the Sabbath was made for humankind, not the reverse.
>
> Where the Pharisees washed their hands again and again that Jesus mocked
> them, Exodus contains dozens of Mosaic laws and rules for washing hands,
> for example, to cleanse the "issue" of copulation.
>
> Where the Pharisees were following Mosaic instructions and killing
> animals in the temple to dabble in the blood, Jesus drove the priests
> out of the Temple with a scourge and forbade anyone to carry a vessel in
> the Temple.
>
> TCross
Re: "Jesus drove the priests out of the Temple with a scourge"
Actually it was "those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the
money changers" who were driven out, and the sheep and the oxen. Not the
priests. See John 2:13-16.
--
Doug
Ike E 11/23/9
> On Nov 25, 3:03 pm, "Ike E 11/23/9" <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> "Terry Cross" <tcros...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
>> news:7540aa18-6875-4b1a...@u25g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>
>> [snippeth]
>
>>> I think you should answer, Ike.
>
>> If you can't understand the basics, how are you going to understand the
>> nuances and complexities?
> Should I presume all this is merely prelude to an answer?
No. You should presume that your thesis is so idiotic that it doesn't MERIT
an answer.
[snippeth]
Ike