100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Blood sacrifice | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
Sin_and_Sorrow
on
Thu 02/23/12 09:49 PM
|
|
..can we not use the hypocrisy works of King James as reference? o.o what hypocricy? Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bible, in particular his version, does it or does it not speak against acts of homosexuality? ..if so, then he was a hypocrite, and was also a dude who loved controversy. ..Just saying. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With this statement, it is insinuating Moses had people "sacrifice" animals as to bring him food in secret, but not allowing the people to know he was just eating the "sacrifices". Is it so hard to believe that perhaps Moses lied? Yeshua (Jesus) has openly stated that Moses created the law concerning divorce and that it was never God's idea... Jeremiah 7:21-23 New King James Version (NKJV) 21 Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: “Add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices and eat meat. 22 For I did not speak to your fathers, or command them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices. 23 But this is what I commanded them, saying, ‘Obey My voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be My people. And walk in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well with you.’ Jeremiah 8:8 New King James Version (NKJV) 8 “How can you say, ‘We are wise, And the law of the Lord is with us’? Look, the false pen of the scribe certainly works falsehood. Did Yeshua not also call Moses' law "your laws" and NOT "God's laws"? Is it so hard to believe that perhaps Moses lied? Nope, the lord instructed it personally. Leviticus 1 1And the LORD called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying, 2Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man of you bring an offering unto the LORD, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd, and of the flock You can't have it both ways. Someone lied... I highly doubt it was Yeshua and Jeremiah who were the deceivers... I reread that verse. It's not saying the LORD didn't instruct it at all, just says did not instruct it after he brought them out of egypt. Futher investigation of the specific verses need to be looked into, for I do not specifically know the time frame in mention. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..can we not use the hypocrisy works of King James as reference? o.o what hypocricy? Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bible, in particular his version, does it or does it not speak against acts of homosexuality? Leviticus 18:22 22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bible, in particular his version, does it or does it not speak against acts of homosexuality? ..if so, then he was a hypocrite, and was also a dude who loved controversy. ..Just saying. So, there's what I meant to say, before I bumped post.. Just fyi Cowboy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..can we not use the hypocrisy works of King James as reference? o.o what hypocricy? Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bible, in particular his version, does it or does it not speak against acts of homosexuality? ..if so, then he was a hypocrite, and was also a dude who loved controversy. ..Just saying. Leviticus 18:22 22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. How is he a hypocrit though? Let's first understand what homosexuality is, rather then the normal view of it. Homosexuality is the physical action of sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman. Two men "loving" one another is by no means "homosexual". So where is the hypocricy at? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..can we not use the hypocrisy works of King James as reference? o.o what hypocricy? Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bible, in particular his version, does it or does it not speak against acts of homosexuality? ..if so, then he was a hypocrite, and was also a dude who loved controversy. ..Just saying. Leviticus 18:22 22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. How is he a hypocrit though? Let's first understand what homosexuality is, rather then the normal view of it. Homosexuality is the physical action of sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman. Two men "loving" one another is by no means "homosexual". So where is the hypocricy at? Read about King James. There are letters that are attributed to him in which he admits to "loving" another man and he uses Yeshua's love of his desciple "Whom he loved the most" as justification for keeping a male lover. That, and it's common belief that he also struck any mention of reincarnation from his "version". He was surely a hypocrite or at least severly mis-guided... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..can we not use the hypocrisy works of King James as reference? o.o what hypocricy? Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bible, in particular his version, does it or does it not speak against acts of homosexuality? ..if so, then he was a hypocrite, and was also a dude who loved controversy. ..Just saying. Leviticus 18:22 22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. How is he a hypocrit though? Let's first understand what homosexuality is, rather then the normal view of it. Homosexuality is the physical action of sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman. Two men "loving" one another is by no means "homosexual". So where is the hypocricy at? Read about King James. There are letters that are attributed to him in which he admits to "loving" another man and he uses Yeshua's love of his desciple "Whom he loved the most" as justification for keeping a male lover. That, and it's common belief that he also struck any mention of reincarnation from his "version". He was surely a hypocrite or at least severly mis-guided... weather King James is homosexual or not is irrelevant. King James didn't "write" the bible, only translated the original scriptures. So where again is the hypocricy? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..can we not use the hypocrisy works of King James as reference? o.o what hypocricy? Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bible, in particular his version, does it or does it not speak against acts of homosexuality? ..if so, then he was a hypocrite, and was also a dude who loved controversy. ..Just saying. Leviticus 18:22 22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. How is he a hypocrit though? Let's first understand what homosexuality is, rather then the normal view of it. Homosexuality is the physical action of sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman. Two men "loving" one another is by no means "homosexual". So where is the hypocricy at? ..lol, fact you don't see it, is funny. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..can we not use the hypocrisy works of King James as reference? o.o what hypocricy? Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bible, in particular his version, does it or does it not speak against acts of homosexuality? ..if so, then he was a hypocrite, and was also a dude who loved controversy. ..Just saying. Leviticus 18:22 22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. How is he a hypocrit though? Let's first understand what homosexuality is, rather then the normal view of it. Homosexuality is the physical action of sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman. Two men "loving" one another is by no means "homosexual". So where is the hypocricy at? ..lol, fact you don't see it, is funny. It's funny you see something that is not there. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..can we not use the hypocrisy works of King James as reference? o.o what hypocricy? Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bible, in particular his version, does it or does it not speak against acts of homosexuality? ..if so, then he was a hypocrite, and was also a dude who loved controversy. ..Just saying. Leviticus 18:22 22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. How is he a hypocrit though? Let's first understand what homosexuality is, rather then the normal view of it. Homosexuality is the physical action of sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman. Two men "loving" one another is by no means "homosexual". So where is the hypocricy at? Read about King James. There are letters that are attributed to him in which he admits to "loving" another man and he uses Yeshua's love of his desciple "Whom he loved the most" as justification for keeping a male lover. That, and it's common belief that he also struck any mention of reincarnation from his "version". He was surely a hypocrite or at least severly mis-guided... weather King James is homosexual or not is irrelevant. King James didn't "write" the bible, only translated the original scriptures. So where again is the hypocricy? The dude himself. Was. A walking pile of hypocrisy. I got no problem with the 'content' of his Bible. ..just him. That's all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..can we not use the hypocrisy works of King James as reference? o.o what hypocricy? Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bible, in particular his version, does it or does it not speak against acts of homosexuality? ..if so, then he was a hypocrite, and was also a dude who loved controversy. ..Just saying. Leviticus 18:22 22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. How is he a hypocrit though? Let's first understand what homosexuality is, rather then the normal view of it. Homosexuality is the physical action of sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman. Two men "loving" one another is by no means "homosexual". So where is the hypocricy at? ..lol, fact you don't see it, is funny. It's funny you see something that is not there. "I am a Christian." "I am gay." "I like lying and spreading rumors." "I like murder and torture." ...... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..can we not use the hypocrisy works of King James as reference? o.o what hypocricy? Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bible, in particular his version, does it or does it not speak against acts of homosexuality? ..if so, then he was a hypocrite, and was also a dude who loved controversy. ..Just saying. Leviticus 18:22 22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. How is he a hypocrit though? Let's first understand what homosexuality is, rather then the normal view of it. Homosexuality is the physical action of sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman. Two men "loving" one another is by no means "homosexual". So where is the hypocricy at? Read about King James. There are letters that are attributed to him in which he admits to "loving" another man and he uses Yeshua's love of his desciple "Whom he loved the most" as justification for keeping a male lover. That, and it's common belief that he also struck any mention of reincarnation from his "version". He was surely a hypocrite or at least severly mis-guided... weather King James is homosexual or not is irrelevant. King James didn't "write" the bible, only translated the original scriptures. So where again is the hypocricy? The dude himself. Was. A walking pile of hypocrisy. I got no problem with the 'content' of his Bible. ..just him. That's all. I would then suggest not sending him a Christmas card this year. What in the world does this have to do with anything though? It is irrelevant weather James was homosexual or not, is irrelevant on who translated the scriptures. It's the scriptures themselves, not who translated it or why. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..can we not use the hypocrisy works of King James as reference? o.o what hypocricy? Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bible, in particular his version, does it or does it not speak against acts of homosexuality? ..if so, then he was a hypocrite, and was also a dude who loved controversy. ..Just saying. Leviticus 18:22 22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. How is he a hypocrit though? Let's first understand what homosexuality is, rather then the normal view of it. Homosexuality is the physical action of sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman. Two men "loving" one another is by no means "homosexual". So where is the hypocricy at? ..lol, fact you don't see it, is funny. It's funny you see something that is not there. "I am a Christian." "I am gay." "I like lying and spreading rumors." "I like murder and torture." ...... Again, who cares if James was gay or not? Who cares if HE was hypocritical? "HE" did not "write" the scriptures, merely translated already written knowledge. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Thu 02/23/12 10:17 PM
|
|
The sacrifices were eaten, except the really burnt offerings. It was all about food. It would be a waste of life and food to slaughter an animal and then just let it rot or let the worms eat it.
Where do you think the Ritual of eating the flesh of Christ and drinking the wine representing the blood came from? Ancient aliens, the Dracos, ate raw meat and drank blood and that includes humans. They were worshiped as Gods long before the time of Adam and Eve in ancient civilizations. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The sacrifices were eaten, except the really burnt offerings. It was all about food. It would be a waste of life and food to slaughter an animal and then just let it rot or let the worms eat it. Where do you think the Ritual of eating the flesh of Christ and drinking the wine representing the blood came from? Ancient aliens, the Dracos, ate raw meat and drank blood and that includes humans. They were worshiped as Gods long before the time of Adam and Eve in ancient civilizations. Where do you think the Ritual of eating the flesh of Christ and drinking the wine representing the blood came from? It came from. Jesus was speaking in parables once again. They weren't eating and drinking his blood or flesh. 26And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. 27And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; 28For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..can we not use the hypocrisy works of King James as reference? o.o what hypocricy? Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bible, in particular his version, does it or does it not speak against acts of homosexuality? ..if so, then he was a hypocrite, and was also a dude who loved controversy. ..Just saying. Leviticus 18:22 22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. How is he a hypocrit though? Let's first understand what homosexuality is, rather then the normal view of it. Homosexuality is the physical action of sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman. Two men "loving" one another is by no means "homosexual". So where is the hypocricy at? Read about King James. There are letters that are attributed to him in which he admits to "loving" another man and he uses Yeshua's love of his desciple "Whom he loved the most" as justification for keeping a male lover. That, and it's common belief that he also struck any mention of reincarnation from his "version". He was surely a hypocrite or at least severly mis-guided... weather King James is homosexual or not is irrelevant. King James didn't "write" the bible, only translated the original scriptures. So where again is the hypocricy? The dude himself. Was. A walking pile of hypocrisy. I got no problem with the 'content' of his Bible. ..just him. That's all. I would then suggest not sending him a Christmas card this year. What in the world does this have to do with anything though? It is irrelevant weather James was homosexual or not, is irrelevant on who translated the scriptures. It's the scriptures themselves, not who translated it or why. ..you don't find it all hypocritical to keep referencing the version written by the one who defiles it the most? o.O ..if Hitler rewrote the Bible, would you recite that version over and over? ..There's like 50 versions, why do we always gotta be using the James version? I only reference the International. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The sacrifices were eaten, except the really burnt offerings. It was all about food. It would be a waste of life and food to slaughter an animal and then just let it rot or let the worms eat it. Where do you think the Ritual of eating the flesh of Christ and drinking the wine representing the blood came from? Ancient aliens, the Dracos, ate raw meat and drank blood and that includes humans. They were worshiped as Gods long before the time of Adam and Eve in ancient civilizations. Where do you think the Ritual of eating the flesh of Christ and drinking the wine representing the blood came from? It came from. Jesus was speaking in parables once again. They weren't eating and drinking his blood or flesh. 26And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. 27And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; 28For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. ..you just reconfirmed what Jeannie said. (bold above) And then she went on to state such existed long before Adam and Eve.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The sacrifices were eaten, except the really burnt offerings. It was all about food. It would be a waste of life and food to slaughter an animal and then just let it rot or let the worms eat it. Where do you think the Ritual of eating the flesh of Christ and drinking the wine representing the blood came from? Ancient aliens, the Dracos, ate raw meat and drank blood and that includes humans. They were worshiped as Gods long before the time of Adam and Eve in ancient civilizations. Where do you think the Ritual of eating the flesh of Christ and drinking the wine representing the blood came from? It came from. Jesus was speaking in parables once again. They weren't eating and drinking his blood or flesh. 26And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. 27And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; 28For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. ..you just reconfirmed what Jeannie said. (bold above) And then she went on to state such existed long before Adam and Eve.. I find ritualistic cannibalism a bit sick and demented... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I find ritualistic cannibalism a bit sick and demented... Shhhhhhh! ..that's twice in one day we agree. :O |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..can we not use the hypocrisy works of King James as reference? o.o what hypocricy? Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bible, in particular his version, does it or does it not speak against acts of homosexuality? ..if so, then he was a hypocrite, and was also a dude who loved controversy. ..Just saying. Leviticus 18:22 22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. How is he a hypocrit though? Let's first understand what homosexuality is, rather then the normal view of it. Homosexuality is the physical action of sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman. Two men "loving" one another is by no means "homosexual". So where is the hypocricy at? Read about King James. There are letters that are attributed to him in which he admits to "loving" another man and he uses Yeshua's love of his desciple "Whom he loved the most" as justification for keeping a male lover. That, and it's common belief that he also struck any mention of reincarnation from his "version". He was surely a hypocrite or at least severly mis-guided... weather King James is homosexual or not is irrelevant. King James didn't "write" the bible, only translated the original scriptures. So where again is the hypocricy? The dude himself. Was. A walking pile of hypocrisy. I got no problem with the 'content' of his Bible. ..just him. That's all. I would then suggest not sending him a Christmas card this year. What in the world does this have to do with anything though? It is irrelevant weather James was homosexual or not, is irrelevant on who translated the scriptures. It's the scriptures themselves, not who translated it or why. ..you don't find it all hypocritical to keep referencing the version written by the one who defiles it the most? o.O ..if Hitler rewrote the Bible, would you recite that version over and over? ..There's like 50 versions, why do we always gotta be using the James version? I only reference the International. Again, king James didn't "write" the bible, he TRANSLATED it. What someone does behind closed doors is all their business. I use the king jame because it is translated from the original scriptures, the rest eg., "International, lexham english, good news translation, ect" are translated from the king james version, not the original scriptures. That is why I stick to the King James, for we all know when things are translated over and over somewhere along the line they occassionally change a little. If I knew how to read hebrew i would read the original scriptures lol. |
|
|
|
|
