Here Come the Horsemen!

[R W G R]

"Australia's Darling river is running with water again after a drought in the middle of the decade reduced it to a trickle. But the rains feeding the continent's fourth-longest river are not the undiluted good news you might expect. For the cloudbursts also create ideal conditions for an unwelcome pest – the Australian plague locust.

The warm, wet weather that prevailed last summer meant that three generations of locusts were born, each one up to 150 times larger than the previous generation. After over-wintering beneath the ground, the first generation of 2010 is already hatching. And following the wettest August in seven years, the climate is again perfect. The juveniles will spend 20 to 25 days eating and growing, shedding their exoskeletons five times before emerging as adults, when population pressure will force them to swarm.

It is impossible to say how many billions of bugs will take wing, but many experts fear this year's infestation could be the worst since records began – 75 years ago."

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/australia-faces-worst-plague-of-locusts-in-75-years-2089919.html

[Blunt]

Yeah sure... It's a bible prophecy being fulfilled.... Not a natural phenomenon.

[Bluesky]

I don't understand. Why can't a natural event be a fulfillment of a biblical prophecy?

[Blunt]

I don't understand. Why can't a natural event be a fulfillment of a biblical prophecy?

Because said natural events were happening before the bible was written. Why would it be considered prophetic to predict something that's happened for centuries, or even thousands of years, to keep happening?

Oh, and not to mention the bible is littered with false prophecies... which when demonstrated, are no doubt considered by the Christian to be "metaphors".

[Soundbear]

Because said natural events were happening before the bible was written. Why would it be considered prophetic to predict something that's happened for centuries, or even thousands of years, to keep happening?

Oh, and not to mention the bible is littered with false prophecies... which when demonstrated, are no doubt considered by the Christian to be "metaphors".

So who would have any respect for a prophet who said, "It's gonna rain next year"??

Haven't noticed any "litter". Can you be specific??

[Bluesky]

Blunt.. using just the Bible tell me which prophecy among the many that you have no doubt studied in particular did you think is a false one? (Don't look at any website now).

[R W G R]

Oh, and not to mention the bible is littered with false prophecie

as in ...

[Blunt]

Well, how about when God tells Adam not to eat the fruit from the tree in the middle of the garden: "for when you eat of it you will surely die."

Adam eats from it, and lives for what, 900 years?


Blunt.. using just the Bible tell me which prophecy among the many that you have no doubt studied in particular did you think is a false one? (Don't look at any website now).

And I didn't use a website, that's just one I noticed myself... I've only read the old testament, and the book of revelation from the new testament

But I imagine I can dig up a tonne of noted false prophecies using the internet, hence why you told me not to use it...?

[Soundbear]

Excuse me, Blunt, but I'm pretty sure Adam would have lived forever in the garden.

But now he's dead, unless you know something I don't.

So it seems to me that the prophecy would be correct.

Bluesky, lets let him use the internet. He's got no chance otherwise.

Make 'em good, Blunt.

[Soundbear]

Here Blunt

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/proph/long.html

If you're honest, you'll pick a few and ask for answers.

if not, I hope you find this site as funny as I did!!!

[Blunt]

Excuse me, Blunt, but I'm pretty sure Adam would have lived forever in the garden.

But now he's dead, unless you know something I don't.

So it seems to me that the prophecy would be correct.

Bluesky, lets let him use the internet. He's got no chance otherwise.

Make 'em good, Blunt.

God said "for when you eat of it you will surely die"

Adam did not die when he ate of it. He lived for like a thousand years.

How is that not a false prophecy? God said he'd die when he ate of it, and he didn't. Seems pretty straightforward.

[Bluesky]

A knowledge of the idiomatic use of the word day is helpful here.
A perusal of the use of the word 'day' in some other contexts resolves this problem.

Look at 1 Kings 2:37

It says: The day you leave and cross the Kidron Valley, you can be sure you will die; your blood will be on your own head.

The fellow did not die that self-same day. Was that considered a failed prediction? No. It is an idiom that means.. on the day you do this, you are sentenced to die..

Another necessary factor in understanding the Genesis reference: The Bible regards and treats a moral separation from God as death. Spiritual death.
Example: Eph 2:1
As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient.
4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.

[Soundbear]

God said "for when you eat of it you will surely die"

Adam did not die when he ate of it. He lived for like a thousand years.

How is that not a false prophecy? God said he'd die when he ate of it, and he didn't. Seems pretty straightforward.

Ever think of this?? We aren't in the land of the living, we're in the land of the dying. Everyone dies. But Adam lived in a place where he would NOT die. And then he was cast out.

Now you might nit pick about what the King James Version says, or you might consider what the original writer was actually trying to tell us.

[Blunt]

Scramble for semantics boys... That's right.

"When you eat this, you will die."

Pretty straightforward.

Why else would the serpent in the next passages be saying "You won't die when you eat it." ?

He's calling bull**** on God saying you'll die if you eat it, the serpent is saying you won't.

They ate it, they did not die when (BEING GOD'S KEY WORD) they did. The serpent was right, God was full of it.

[NewCasa]

Scramble for semantics boys... That's right.

"When you eat this, you will die."

Pretty straightforward.

Why else would the serpent in the next passages be saying "You won't die when you eat it." ?

He's calling bull**** on God saying you'll die if you eat it, the serpent is saying you won't.

They ate it, they did not die when (BEING GOD'S KEY WORD) they did. The serpent was right, God was full of it.

It's not semantics Blunt. What they are saying is that before Adam at it, he was immortal, but after he ate it he became mortal.

[Blunt]

It's not semantics Blunt. What they are saying is that before Adam at it, he was immortal, but after he ate it he became mortal.

It is semantics, because God clearly states in most biblical translations that "When you eat it, you will die."

Adam doesn't die when he eats it.

Whether or not he was immortal until he ate the fruit isn't critical to the point, God didn't say "When you eat it, you will become mortal.", he didn't say "When you eat it, you'll be sentenced to eventually die."

To lose immortality isn't to die. Sorry, but it's not.

[Bluesky]

1 I have cited other Old Testament passages with the same wording to show you that in Hebrew usage, the writers did not mean "in the same day"

2. I have shown you Biblical passages that show you that death also means spiritual death, a state that exists when morally separated from God, a state that Adam indeed entered into on the same day. Another way of translating that passage is "in dying, you shall die."

To show that a word has a wider range of meaning by pointing you to other Biblical passage is very valid in the world of logic. It is not mere semantics. Why will you not concede my points? Be kind enough to show me that my points are not valid.

[NewCasa]

It is semantics, because God clearly states in most biblical translations that "When you eat it, you will die."

Adam doesn't die when he eats it.

Whether or not he was immortal until he ate the fruit isn't critical to the point, God didn't say "When you eat it, you will become mortal.", he didn't say "When you eat it, you'll be sentenced to eventually die."

To lose immortality isn't to die. Sorry, but it's not.

If Adam did not eat it, he would not die.

If Adam ate it, he would die.

God clearly stated "When you eat it, you will die."

Change 'when' to 'if'. Not a great leap I think. But then, I'm not real big on arguing semantics :)

[Blunt]

If Adam did not eat it, he would not die.

If Adam ate it, he would die.

God clearly stated "When you eat it, you will die."

Change 'when' to 'if'. Not a great leap I think. But then, I'm not real big on arguing semantics :)

'If' instead of 'when' completely changes the context and meaning. 'If' leaves the death sentence open ended, 'when' is the time frame for the death sentence fulfillment, based upon completion of the action (eating the fruit)

If you want to substitute alternative words to make the bible make sense to you, then you've successfully demonstrated that you have no argument without the use of false pretense.

Congratulations.

Bottom Line: God said "When you eat this fruit, you will die." Adam ate the fruit and did not die upon doing so.

False prophecy.

[R W G R]

Bottom Line: God said "When you eat this fruit, you will die." Adam ate the fruit and did not die upon doing so.

False prophecy.

Not at all. Your lack of theology makes you think in such a linear fashion you don't understand what "die" meant in the passage.

Mankind died when Adam went against God. It took Jesus to give man life again. God was not talking about human death, but spiritual death-death of the soul.

[Bluesky]

Someone is bound and determined to be right. Darn the facts!

[Soundbear]

Here, Blunt.

With your understanding level, these should be great!!

Q: What kind of motor vehicles are in the Bible?
A: Jehovah drove Adam and Eve out of the Garden in a Fury.
A: David's Triumph was heard throughout the land.
A: Honda... because the apostles were all in one Accord.
A: 2 Cor. 4:8 describes going out in service in a Volkswagen, "We are pressed in every way, but not cramped beyond movement."

[Bluesky]

Oh nooooo!

[KDawg]

It is semantics, because God clearly states in most biblical translations that "When you eat it, you will die."

Adam doesn't die when he eats it.

Here's my take:

Before Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit they were bound to live forever, according to the record in Genesis. I'm sure this can be agreed upon.

When they ate the fruit they started to die, ie. they started aging (biologically started dying) and it took 900 years for Adam to actually stop breathing.

Today we start to age the day we are born, but it only takes 75-85 years on average for us to stop breathing.

God told Adam and Eve they would die if they ate the fruit, and He was right.

[Bluesky]

Blunt doesn't believe any of it anyway; he is trying to argue something WE believe in, but on HIS terms, not on the terms of the Bible itself.
At least that is my take from his lack of response to my counters... 'No' is not an argument. It's denial.

[Soundbear]

Has seemed on many occasions, in various topics, that common sense takes a ride when someone just HAS to disagree with us.

[Blunt]

Here's my take:

Before Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit they were bound to live forever, according to the record in Genesis. I'm sure this can be agreed upon.

When they ate the fruit they started to die, ie. they started aging (biologically started dying) and it took 900 years for Adam to actually stop breathing.

Today we start to age the day we are born, but it only takes 75-85 years on average for us to stop breathing.

God told Adam and Eve they would die if they ate the fruit, and He was right.

Not "if" they ate the fruit, "when" they ate the fruit.

[Blunt]

Here, Blunt.

With your understanding level, these should be great!!

Q: What kind of motor vehicles are in the Bible?
A: Jehovah drove Adam and Eve out of the Garden in a Fury.
A: David's Triumph was heard throughout the land.
A: Honda... because the apostles were all in one Accord.
A: 2 Cor. 4:8 describes going out in service in a Volkswagen, "We are pressed in every way, but not cramped beyond movement."

Drove is a verb with multiple meanings; when is not.
Triumph cars were not around until the 20th century
Accord & Honda, also 20th century
Volkswagen - 20th century

Next

[Bluesky]

;) He thought you were serious, SB.

[KDawg]

Not "if" they ate the fruit, "when" they ate the fruit.

Gen 3:3 reads,

But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. I don't think that's an "if vs. when" statement. However, Adam and Eve are still dead.

[Blunt]

Gen 3:3 reads,
I don't think that's an "if vs. when" statement. However, Adam and Eve are still dead.

Not referring to that, I'm referring to Gen 2:17
"you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."
Total when statement.


;) He thought you were serious, SB.

Well, I didn't actually... But you never know with that guy, he has a history of posting some really silly **** and seriously believing it...