Soapbox - Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


shiloh357 last won the day on May 16

shiloh357 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

29,721 Excellent

About shiloh357

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Standing for Israel and defending Israel from Islam, anti-Zionism and Replacement theology.

Recent Profile Visitors

18,727 profile views
  1. "Holy Spirit" interpretation of the Bible? Do you have any idea how many false teachings are blamed on the Holy Spirit? The Holy Spirit is often exploited by false teachers who want to pull the rug out from under the feet of anyone who challenges their teaching.
  2. In Missouri, you can stay on them forever. You simply have to work around 20 hours week. If you can work 20 hours, you can work 40 hours. I think a graded reduction would be the best way. Someone applies for Food Stamps, they get 100% the first month, 80% the 2nd month, 60% the 3rd month and so on, so that they realize there is an end in sight. It will push them to find work, knowing that they will get less and less each month.
  3. Modern Judaism is not the religion of the Old Testament. Modern Judaism is a first century adjustment to the loss of the temple. Rabbi Yochanan Ben Zakkai ruled in 72 AD at the council of Yavneh that the works of the law would replace the sacrifices. In addition, Judaism is dictated more by the Talmud than by the Scriptures.
  4. That's not really true. In Muslim culture a woman has to have four witnesses to convict a man of rape and that is really hard since the testimony of a woman in Islam is not considered reliable. Rape is a crime, but men are rarely if ever prosecuted for it. That's because if a woman accuses a man of rape but cannot secure four witnesses, what she has now confessed to is having sex outside of marriage and she can be prosecuted as an adulterer. While raping Muslim women is against Muslim law (but rarely enforced), raping non-Muslim women is not. And that is why we saw such a sharp increase of incidents of rape in Europe after the Muslim refugees came to countries like Germany and Sweden. The Muslim rape of a woman is almost impossible to prove under Muslim law which is always weighted in the man's favor. If she cannot secure four witnesses and the rapist claims the sex was consensual, the woman is pretty much helpless to counter that. Her testimony is worthless and the responsibility is mostly on the woman to avoid sexual encounters and to remain pure. If she doesn't have four witnesses then she is considered as making a false accusation without evidence. Here is a fatwa from an Islamic site that makes that case: However, it is not permissible to accuse the father of rape without evidence. Indeed, the Sharee’ah put some special conditions for proving Zina (fornication or adultery) that are not required in case of other crimes. The crime of Zina is not confirmed except if the fornicator admits it, or with the testimony of four trustworthy men, while the testimony of women is not accepted. Hence, the statement of this girl or the statement of her mother in itself does not Islamically prove anything against the father, especially that the latter denies it. Therefore, if this daughter has no evidence to prove that her accusations are true, she should not have claimed that she was raped by her father and she should not have taken him to the court. But if what she says is true, then she has the right to ask for protection from him even by taking him to the court so that he would not continue committing this evil or practice more sinful acts with her. In this case, she would claim his dissoluteness and her fear of his evil so that she will be kept apart from him. Allaah Knows best. It is because of this, that honor killings are permitted. A man can kill his wife or daughter as fornicators if they were raped, as they have done damage to his honor. No, that is not how you determine a rape culture. American culture is not a rape culture. We do not condone it, we do not ignore it. We have laws against it. Every culture has a seedy underbelly and a faction that is morally indifferent to sin and to crime. The laundry list you provide does not represent the whole, or the majority of American culture and is not a defense of Islamic culture either. We have many crimes in this country that are committed several times an hour and do not define our culture. There is an aggravated assault every 40 seconds, a burglary every 14 seconds, a vehicle theft every 42 seconds. Those stats are from 2010, but haven't likely changed, for the better. Those things do not define our culture. We are not like Islam.
  5. This is a good thing. We have too many able-bodied people taking advantage of Food Stamps who don't need them and way too much waste on both programs and it is time that we trim the fat. The Food Stamp program should and Welfare both need to be trimmed quite a bit. Food Stamps are supposed to be a safety net for people who need help while looking for gainful employment. It was never intended to be form of income, which is how some people use it. We need to get people off of Food Stamps and other forms of government assistance and back into jobs so they can help shoulder the tax burden instead of being the tax burden. There is a lot of fat in our government that reasonable cuts would get rid of and funds diverted to things actually worth paying for that will make us a better country.
  6. That's because she is crazy. And she is deadly evil. There is a long list of dead political opponents in her wake. She has a pathology about being president. She flew into a violent rage when she realized she had lost the election. That is not the actions of a woman in her right mind. Add to that she is a habitual liar and can lie to your face when the truth sounds better. Even Anderson Cooper from CNN was mystified at how he could show her a clip of her saying something and two seconds later, she lies to his face saying she never said what he showed her that she said in the video. A person who can do that, who will murder anyone in her path if she thinks they are a threat, is not a normal person firing on all cylinders. It was even admitted by someone her staff that doesn't like the average American, even the people who voted for her. They are all expendable in her eyes. They were a means to an end. She would probably sell her own family members into slavery if she thought it would win her the presidency.
  7. Yeah we already talked about that. All of the methods used to date the earth often return false readings, specially on things where we know the age of the item being tested. You can tell by the article that the tests were done with the assumption of old earth already in place prior to the experiment. So they went in to find what they wanted to find. Hardly a scientific way to approach something like that.
  8. No, not like in Revelation because Revelation is prophecy and in Genesis 1 we are dealing with a historical narrative and so you have two different types of literature that require their own hermeneutic rules. You don't read a fictional novel the same way you read a historical biography. You don't read a newspaper the same way you read Shakespeare. This is about interpretation, not translation. Genesis 1 has no figurative devices anywhere in the text. If you disagree, I challenge you to produce them any figurative devices you can find in Genesis 1 and then explain what they are figurative of. Figurative devices include metaphors, similes, hyperbole, symbolism, etc. It is very clear that the 24 day is what is meant and that can be demonstrated through both context AND how the Bible refers to the days of creation as literal days elsewhere. The Bible interprets itself, but there are scholars who study the Bible and don't believe it or simply don't think the Bible is inerrant or infallible. They are scholars, but they are not really "knowledgeable." Yes and I think critically about these things and you can see from my previous posts on this thread that I have put a lot of thought into this and the truth is that you cannot defend OEC view without sloppy hermeneutics and an abandonment of the doctrines of inerrancy, inspiration and the authority of Scripture.
  9. That is irrelevant, actually. That God is outside of time really has no bearing on the fact that God is speak to people who are bound to linear time. He speaks to us in terms we can understand. If God meant that the days of creation were long epochs of time, there are better and easier ways to make the point in the Hebrew language. God is good at communication and He doesn't stutter or choose the wrong words. In Exodus 20 God reiterated that he made the heavens and earth in 6 days. Again, if he meant something else, either God is not omniscient, or he lied and His word cannot be trusted.
  10. There is no reason to read the Bible if you're not going to take it literally. When do you take the Bible literally? If Genesis isn't supposed to be literal, then what about other parts of the Bible? How about parts you care about? How about eternal life? Should we take John 3:16 literally? Should we take what the Bible says about sin literally? I mean, at what point do you start taking the Bible literally? Do take salvation literally? Why? The problem is that for an text to be allegorical, the text would have to indicate that allegory is being used. Every time the Bible uses allegory, it lets you know it is using allegory. Genesis has NOTHING in it that indicates that it is to be taken as allegorical. And you obviously don't understand what allegory is if you are saying that the 6 days of creation are allegorical of long epochs of time. That is not how allegory works. Allegory is used to teach moral lessons, where the objects being allegorized stand for different things. Allegory is not a method or device of interpretation. Allegory is a teaching tool, meant to illustrate a moral or spritual lesson. So right there, you really don't understand the terms you are throwing around. Here is the BIG problem for you, and how you approach the Bible. If parts of the Bible are not supposed to be taken literally, how do you know which parts are literal and which parts are not? What is your method for knowing the difference? I mean, we could easily take your method and say that Jesus' miracles never happened or that Jesus never rose from the dead. There is no end to what we could just erase from the Bible by not taking the Bible literally. All doctrines of the Christian faith find their point of origin either directly or indirectly in the first three chapters of Genesis. If the story didn't really happen the way the Bible says it did, then the Bible is not our final authority and we cannot anchor our hearts to it. And if that is the case, then we should not be putting all of our faith in what it says about salvation or eternal life. Your approach to the Bible is rife with theological problems and you have apparently applied no critical thinking to what you believe. You really haven't thought this through. You're just basing everything on books you've read and taking their word for it, no questions asked.
  11. We do not have a university that uses the ability to rape women as a recruiting tool. You really expect anyone to believe that kind of false claim? It is addressed because in Islam, rape is okay. It is approved and promoted. No one in the US is promoting rape, no religion or any other ideology as a part of our culture. What we are seeing in Europe is a submission to Islam and European governments sacrificing their own women to brutality of the Muslim refugees who are having a free-for-all against European women. They are raping women and the European governments are more concerned about multi-culturalism and appeasing Muslim sensitivities than they are about protecting their own people from these Islamic knuckle draggers. All you're doing is trying to deflect from those facts and trying to run interference for Muslims.
  12. The flat earth idea does not come from taking the Bible literally. It comes from taking the Bible at face-value and people get those two things confused. The Bible uses the same phenomenological language we still use today when we speak of the "four corners of the earth" or when we still refer to "sunrise" and "sunset." To take the Bible "literally" means to read the Bible as literature. The biblical writers never say the earth is flat. But they simply referred to imagery that expresses what they observe, not what we know to be scientifically accurate. They are accurate from an observational standpoint, though. The earth, from someone standing on it, cannot detect how fast the earth is actually traveling in space and how fast we are rotating on the axis. From our observational standpoint, the earth is standing still and the sun is traveling around it. That is what we still observe, even to this day. The Bible uses figurative devices and it uses figurative imagery to make a greater point, not to establish a cosmology. To take the Bible literally means to understand what the author was intending to convey. It is not a wooden, face-value approach that is used by those who claim the Bible advocates for a flat earth. To say the Bible promotes a flat earth is to appeal to a sloppy, incompetent handling of biblical hermeneutics.
  13. The problem is that exegesis is more just having dictionaries. I read Hebrew and am seminary trained in Hebrew grammar, as well. Anyone with even a basic knowledge of Hebrew can tell that what you're promoting isn't exegesis. Hebrew is a very nuanced language and that means that one word can have more than one meaning depending on the context. You can't apply the meaning that suits your theology to a given word. The literary context drives our understanding on what a word means as it is used in that context. There is no amount of Hebrew linguistics that will make "yom" means "Billions of years" in Genesis 1. Your argument that Genesis 1 is allegorical is also defeated by Hebrew grammar. The form of Genesis 1 is that of a historical narrative, not at allegory. For anyone to say it is allegorical simply demonstrates that you are getting that from someone who doesn't know what they are talking about. The repeated phrase "and God said..." at the start of each creative event demonstrates a chronological historical account, and not poetry, not allegory. It is a historical account and that is all it is. The rest of the Bible treats Genesis 1 as historical, as well. Not all biblical scholars are Christian scholars. There are scholars of the Bible who have made a career out of studying the Bible and they don't believe a word of it. They see it in the same way we view Greek mythology. And if you're going to say that the text is allegorical, then you ARE saying that we cannot trust the text as written.
  14. Yes we do. American culture doesn't promote rape and never has. Not everything that happens in our country is the result of our culture. In Islam they have an actual rape culture that the liberal media and Muslim sympathizers would prefer to sweep under the rug. In Islam, rape is a virtue, and women who are raped are murdered for dishonoring their family by being raped. That is not the case in America. We prosecute rape as a crime in our culture, despite the misinformation and falsehoods you promote. Islam has a rape culture and we do not. And anyone who says otherwise is simply not telling the truth.
  15. It's too bad you don't apply that principle to yourself when you're bashing Trump.