"The bible test" Answered.

[MindForgedManacle]

Dammit max, I was in the middle of doing that. :p

[max-greece]

Dammit max, I was in the middle of doing that. :p

Sorry Dude. It actually didn't take quite as long as I thought - I normally have a lot more trouble with errant quote opening and closing so that the whole thing gets screwed up.

[Drich]

...that said keep in mind paul did write 2/3's of the nt.

No he didn't. Paul didn't write anywhere near 2/3rds of the text, he didn't even write anywhere near 1/3rd of the text! He wrote 23.5% of the text in 13 epistles. Luke wrote 2 books totalling 27.5% of the New Testament - ergo he wrote more than Paul did.

As I just said to you, you don't know your facts.

I see you have appealed to a red herring rather than address content. You stated that The NT says following the law was indeed possiable. Paul in Romans 7 clearly says it is not.. Why didn't you start here?

---

I have an active 14 page discussion going on this very topic..
http://atheistforums.org/thread-22249.html

In which you've been refuted repeatedly, and seemed to have stopped responding to me.

when where?

[MindForgedManacle]

In which you've been refuted repeatedly, and seemed to have stopped responding to me.

when where?

How about this at the end of page 15:

---

His Will Directs God to do what He does. God is not controled by a set of rules. The rules reflect what God does. (What you think you know, is backwards) for if God was subject to a standard of right and wrong, then that would mean God is not the Alpha and Omega. The Term means He is the first and last word/authority on all things. Meaning if God saw fit to have us kill and eat our first born, the rules of right and wrong would change to accept His will. Again that is what it is to be Alpha and Omega. There are no rules or standards above Him. He is the orgin of all rules and standards.

And yet again, we get on the "Drich avoids the question" ride. What directs what God wills? If it is not what he values, then it's necessarily arbitrary and random, since he does so for NO reason at all. Can be be any less intelligible?
Are you capable on answering a question without elision and tap dancing? You aren't even applying your own definitions correctly. If God's nature were the standard, then it's the most stupid possible objection to complain that God would be subject to it. And this is where we see the true problem with people who cannot reason properly: You say stupid shit without realizing the position you've put yourself in. If God's nature is the standard, OF COURSE he's going to be 'subject' to it. It's founded IN HIMSELF.

Really? You're going with that as what being the "Alpha and Omega" entails? Prey tell how God is the last say on them? The only way out is to give your opinion that he is, to appeal to your value in other words. Even God would have to do this.

No. The bible says Whatever God does is considered to be 'Good.' The difference? "doing good" subjugates the do gooder to the rules of 'good.' while If you Are the standard of Good then everything you do no matter what it is becomes 'good.'

Firstly, why should I care that the Bible says it? Inept, ignorant human authors on the one hand, and on the other, your appeal to the Bible saying it SHOULD be considered such, which is an appeal to a value. And even your own attempt to reason here is nonsensical. "No matter what God does"? Okay, what if God decides to not be himself? Contradictory, yes, but on your view then that's good, even though only God is to be considered such.

For example if God does 'good' then there is a paradox with what God did to Job and smashing babies against the rock. Now conversly if God is the standard of good then what happened to Job and the babies against rocks Becomes a 'good' act.

Drich, we already knew your were psychotic, no need to flaunt more than you have. Further, your response makes no sense (sensing a pattern here...) If God has no reason why he does things, he is no standard of anything at all, he just does things for no reason at all. Which is another self-defeating aspect I seem to have unearthed from you.

If this is true then you surly must have a biblical example of God's values changing...

Drich, tell me where I said that God's values change? Go on, I'll wait for you to realize your blunder.

In your system of belief in man's morality no of course their isn't if there were it would not be subject to change.

which is the very point of the thread. thank you.

Oh boy Drich, realized you couldn't respond to the rest I see. No Drich, I was pointing out that even if your worldview were true, there would be no 'absolute' morality. We know you have reasoning deficiencies Drich, I'd hate for you to reveal a reading comprehension one as well...

---

[ThomM]

The 'bible test.' http://ffrf.org/legacy/quiz/bquiz.php as per the other two threads on this subject.

1. What is the last of the Ten Commandments?
“You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”

2. What is the penalty for working on the Sabbath?
The penality for Breaking Any of the commandments was death. That was why Christ died on the cross. The 'good moral people' who wrote this test look deceive by isolating one commandment over the others.


3. What is God's name?
trick question. God does not have just one name as the question implies.
These are the formal names of God and their meanings.
http://www.gotquestions.org/names-of-God.html

4. How should parents treat a stubborn and rebellious son?
This question is also misleading. Because the answer it provides questions for was meant to only be answered from an Old testament Jewish perspective. Christians are to let their 'rebellious sons' leave as per the parable of the prodigal son Jesus himself told.

5. What happens if you are not a virgin on your wedding night?
again trick question. no one in the Old Testament nor the New testament HAD to be a virgin. There are many examples of people marrying without consenquence that were not virgins. This question leads one to believe one Had to be a virgin. This was not true unless (in the OT) one claimes to be or was repersented as a virgin.

6. What does the bible say about witches?
another trick question. This question is framed in such away as to mean there is only one answer.
Jews were commanded to not allow a witch to live. In Christianity there are examples of 'witches/sorcers' were converted to the faith

7. Which of these foods does the bible expressly permit you to eat?
This question narrows the field to only allow for locus to be permitted as food. when in truth any animal who grazed was acceptiable food while scavengers (pigs and shell fish) were forbidden. Without refrigeration these 'meats' spoil 3 times faster and are exposed/lthe animal ive in disease, filth, rot and death. Where animals who's primary food was green grass tended to be cleaner, and safer for the community.

8. When the Israelites conquered the Midianites, what part of the spoils of war was given to the priest as "the Lord's tribute"?
God took .02% of the 16,000 virgins left of the Midianites. One should ask what does it mean to be 'the lord's tribute?' The christian version would be to make them nuns, who cared for the tabnerical and helped the temple priests care for the people.

9. What is the origin of the "mighty men" giants known as nephilim?
this one they got completely wrong.
They were a cross breed from demons/fallen angels (who else was on earth besides man and woman?) 'sons of God and daughters of men.' This is mess was what was targeted in the Great flood.

10. What happened to Korah and his family, Israelites who thought they could deal directly with God without a human intermediary?
This question is also very misleading.
The earth opened up and swallowed them, but the reason why was not for the one stated. They tried to take over and push moses out/start a civil war. read Numbers 16

11. According to the bible, who created evil?
If God created everything then evil would be included.

Sin= anything not in the expressed will of God.
Evil= a strong desire or willful act to intentionally be outside of God's expressed will.

In away Evil is the proof of freewill. For if God's will for us is in His expressed will, and we have the ablity to willfully be outside it, that means we have a 'will' independant of God's own will for us.

Now ask, who has provided attonement for evil?

12. According to the bible, what is God not able to do?
The bible does not say God is not able to do anything. This question refers to when God was with Juda, and when juda's army was defeated by an army equiped with 'charriots of iron.' What the question writer does not seem to comperhend was what was going on through out the book of 'Judges.' (this story takes place in judges one.) God uses 'judges' or armies, or nations to defeat kill capture and otherwise punish the jews who have turned from God, and started worshiping other gods, or breaking other commands in all manner of different ways. The books of judges chronical a pattern of sin by the jews, punishment from God, repentance by the jews deliverence from their captors, and with in a generation or two the cycle starts again.. Judges 1 (where this story is found) tells of the beginning of the first fall.

13. According to the bible, where does God live?
This question is also misleading. God is everywhere, and therfore 'lives' everywhere. Heaven (the city that God builds After the events of revelation) is the final place, but from the beginning of time to now i can think of 1/2 a dozen places the bible mentions God has lived/lives. This question as stated if answered pushes someone to believe God only resides in one place, which is completely false.

14. According to biblical biology, what is a bat?
According to a language that had no word nor genus/species form of classification It lables a bat as a( עוֹף /`owph )which means a flying creature. http://www.blbclassic.org/lang/lexicon/l...5775&t=KJV

So how does this question fail? It assumes you all are to stupid to understand that the bible was not written in english, and that you will not or can not understand the difference between a literal translation, and a contextual translation. That the KJV is a literal translation and simply lumps bats in with a list of other 'flying creatures.'

15. According to biblical anatomy, where does thinking happen?
this one flat out misrepersents genesis 6
"Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."

16. How did Gideon demonstrate his family values?
'Family values' was not a precept then. what kind of person judges a man who lived in the past by laws that did not exist then? a dishonest man looking to stack the deck in his favor.

17. After Jephthah was victorious in battle, what sacrifice did he burn on the altar, as he had vowed to the Lord?
Judges 11 does not say what he did, just that he carried out his vow.

18. What price did David pay King Saul for his first wife?
this one is a little bit raceist/elietist. It implies 'we' are better because 'we' do not share the same customs.

19. How many sexual partners did King Solomon have?
again how can you judge a man by an non existant law? To super-impose your 'morality' on to life as it was 3000 years ago is just proud foolishness.

20. What happened to 42 little children who teased God's prophet Elisha for being bald and he cursed them in the name of the Lord?

again here the question writters are playing with the translations to change the meaning of the passage. the words in question are:
קָטָן qatan http://www.blbclassic.org/lang/lexicon/l...6996&t=KJV
Which can mean small, insignificant young, or unimportant
-and
נַעַר na`ar http://www.blbclassic.org/Bible.cfm?b=2K...JV#conc/23
which can mean Children, but can also mean:
a boy, lad, servant, youth, retainer, servant.

21. What reason did God give for tormenting Job?
None of the above answers were correct. Job was not given a reason.

22.According to the bible, what does Satan look like?

None of the above. Revelations 12 says there was a 'great sign' that of a dragon and goes on to describe answer b.
a 'great sign' is not a physical description. a Great sign points to symbology, or hidden meaning behind description. Which means what follows is not a physical description.

23. How does the biblical god treat haughty women?
Misleading question as there are several examples. In Christianity Meekness and humility is the cure for haughtness and pride in men and in women alike. If you were an old testament jew the treatment would be different. But, that's the thing the test gives do not mention. there haven't been any OT jews for over 2000 years.

24. In dollars (shekels), how much is a woman worth?
again when? Another misleading question. Jesus/God the Son was sold for 30 shekels of silver and put to death, while Herod's daughter was offered 1/2 of all of herods kingdom for something as trivial as a dance in Mark 6. The makes her net worth far above and beyond that of Jesus. another trick question.

25. What happens if a man rapes an engaged virgin in the city, and no one hears anything?
another misleading question. What is the time frame? The results are different for the Christian and the OT Jew.

26. What is the Mosaic Law punishment for being handicapped?
slick ploy. By denoting 'mosaic law' in this question is makes the others based in 'mosaic law' but not identified as mosaic law, as applicable to the Christian...
And yet they still manage to misdirect. There is no Hebrew word for Handicap in that time period. One was either considered clean or unclean. anyone considered 'unclean' could not worship in the temple.
some of the people we currently would consider 'handicap' would be considered unclean, but not all.

27. According to the bible, when may a husband have sex with his wife?
Paul says we should not deny ourselves to one another, unless we both agree to over come a given obstical first.

The correct answer is none of the above.

28. How should you feel when you dash babies against the rocks?
as happy as you felt when a woman's right to choose was established and supported by the state.

29. How many human generations were there before Jesus?
of who/what?
http://atheistforums.org/thread-14190.html

30. What Christmas tradition is expressly forbidden in the bible?
none of the above are forbidden.

Fore Paul tells us let no one tell use how when or what we use in worship.

31. According to Jesus, what must you do to have eternal life?
none of the above.
john 3:16 Jesus says: Fore God so loved the world that He gave his only son, that whomever believes in Him shall not perrish BUT HAVE ETERNAL LIFE.

32. According to Jesus, how should Christian disciples treat their parents?
none of the above.

Jesus told a pledge/ a wantobe a disciple --"Let the dead bury the dead"-- The rest of answer 'd' was made up by a self righteous heart.

33. According to Jesus, how should slaves be treated?
none of the above.

Jesus repeatedly says there is no difference between free or slave in the eyes of God and that we should treat EVERYONE the way we wish to be treated.

34. What did Jesus say about peace?
none of the above. Jesus said mat 10: 34 “Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. 35 For I have come to ‘set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law’; 36 and ‘a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.’[e] 37 He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. 38 And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. 39 He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it.

35. Which one of these phrases did Jesus not say about witnessing?
Jesus says many things about witnessing. He mentions as he quotes OT law, He teaches about it and He uses the word to describe a testamony. The question does not frame the answers in the correct context allowing the creation of a false dichotomy.

36. What personal sacrifice for "the kingdom of heaven" was Jesus talking about when he told his disciples, "He that is able to receive it, let him receive it"?
as the question reads, and the conclusion it provides none of the above.
Mark 9 says if an eye causes you to sin pluck it out for it is better to enter heave with just one eye...

37. According to New Testament medical advice, what should you do if you are sick?
seriously? Luke was a doctor, his profession was not condemned. which means the bible has nothing against people seeing doctors.

38. What does Paul prohibit a woman from wearing in church?
anything that draws attention to herself.

39. According to Paul, what is the role of women in the church?
This is the first actual question that can be answered with out special note.
"c"

40. What does Paul say about marriage?
If you can remain single then do so, but if you can't then marry.


41. Paul forbids divorce, but Jesus allows it under one circumstance. What is that circumstance?
Paul does not forbid divorce. Jesus allows divorice if one is not faithful to the marriage vows.

1cor 7: 15 But if the unbeliever wants a divorce, let it take place. In these circumstances the brother or sister in Christ is not bound. God has called you in peace (paul's words)

42. What group of people will make it into the heavenly choir?just a bad question.
a 'heavenly choir' is not mentioned in the New King James bible.(nor KJV, NIV, ERV)

43. Which one of these words is in the bible?
None of the above. the bible was not written in english

44. Where does the bible say that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights?
That is a phrase from the declaration of independance, and by men it meant only white male land owners.. Just ask Jefferson's slaves. (while free-er than most they were still slaves)

45. Should Christians allow nonbelievers into their homes?
Yes. As first century churches were conducted in homes so any potential 'new believer' would need to be first welcomed as an unbeliever.

46. Should Christian men kiss each other?
2000 years ago it was a formal greeting like a handshake. Even now this act is practice in that region.

47. Should Christians always give what they have to anyone who asks for it? No. we are to look and assess need and fill needs. If that means to go well beyond what is asked then the person in need should not have to ask. If that mean to give something other than what is needed then we are expected to do that as well. That is why Christ said if a man asks you to walk a mile go two or if he asks for a cloak be prepared to give him your tunic as well.

48. Do the Ten Commandments prohibit incest or rape?
yes. You shall not commit adultry. Which means you are not to have sex with anyone other than your wife. You can not marry your mother sister brother or father.

49. If you lose a lawsuit, should you pay exactly what the court decides?
Christians are commanded to avoid law suits. Anything else would be a command to an OT jew which have been gone for 2000 years.

50. Can Christians ask their boss for a raise?
yes, but a slave can not.

I hope you can see the lenths and misdirection this test had to go to inorder to frame the bible and Christianity in the light you all have been basking in.

This is a shameful way to do to try and discredit what someone believes. It is lazy, 'immoral' and intelectually dishonest. If the bible is truly so unstable then why not just show it's faults where they truly are? what does it say about the effort it took to present the bible this way? what does it say about the willful ignorance or even obstinance to take something like this test to heart?

now that you know the truth I trust you will be willing to share the 'answers' to this 'test' as willingly as you were ready to share the test itself.

So - what YOU are saying - by ignoring the obvious things that are in the bible - is that YOU do not accept what the bible says to be of value to answer these questions - you take your own advise to them

And so - that begs a question - why should ANYONE consider YOUR answers of any value - you do not claim to be inspired by an all knowing god or to be inerrant as well!

[Drich]

You made a right abortion of this one Drichy

personal insult with no topical bearing on anything being discussed.

1. What is the last of the Ten Commandments?
“You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”

Ignoring the point that the 10 commandments are restated, differently. Also ignoring that this is the most useless instruction ever given. Thought crime.

The ten commandments are not given in an order of importance.
Christ says if we break the 'least of my commandments your guilty of breaking all of them.'

2. What is the penalty for working on the Sabbath?
The penality for Breaking Any of the commandments was death. That was why Christ died on the cross. The 'good moral people' who wrote this test look deceive by isolating one commandment over the others.

No its just illustrates how mad the commandments are.

personal insult with no topical bearing on anything being discussed.

3. What is God's name?
trick question. God does not have just one name as the question implies.
These are the formal names of God and their meanings.
http://www.gotquestions.org/names-of-God.html

Not a trick question but not a complete answer. One of his names is jealousy and that's no good name for a supposedly perfect being who suffers badly from it (and wroth, pride and vanity).

The word that describes God as 'perfect' refers to being complete/lacking nothing or whole.

If God was not able to manifest Jealousy a basic human emotion then God would be incomplete or lacking.

4. How should parents treat a stubborn and rebellious son?
This question is also misleading. Because the answer it provides questions for was meant to only be answered from an Old testament Jewish perspective. Christians are to let their 'rebellious sons' leave as per the parable of the prodigal son Jesus himself told.

Nonsense. A parable (that tries to sell deathbad conversion) does not over-rule a commandment.

A commandment is an order given directly from God. as in the 10 commandments, because they were written by the hand of God onto stone. The laws concerning social order/how to raise a son was a law given by moses. Hence the law of moses.
The laws of moses while inspired by God was not given directly by God.
Therefore not a command. The Story of the prodigal son however was given by God.
God the Son does indeed have the authority to change how we are to deal with a rebellious son.

5. What happens if you are not a virgin on your wedding night?
again trick question. no one in the Old Testament nor the New testament HAD to be a virgin. There are many examples of people marrying without consenquence that were not virgins. This question leads one to believe one Had to be a virgin. This was not true unless (in the OT) one claimes to be or was repersented as a virgin.

On the one hand - remember this answer for when we get to the incest / rape question later. On the other the law was the law - if a spouse chose not to tell that's not the point - although you could argue they were aiding and abetting.

so you admit, trick question.

6. What does the bible say about witches?
another trick question. This question is framed in such away as to mean there is only one answer.
Jews were commanded to not allow a witch to live. In Christianity there are examples of 'witches/sorcers' were converted to the faith

Its not a trick question although the answer was not complete.

If the test is limited by multiple choice and the complete answer is not in the bank of answers you have to choose from then that makes the question a trick question!!!

7. Which of these foods does the bible expressly permit you to eat?
This question narrows the field to only allow for locus to be permitted as food. when in truth any animal who grazed was acceptiable food while scavengers (pigs and shell fish) were forbidden. Without refrigeration these 'meats' spoil 3 times faster and are exposed/lthe animal ive in disease, filth, rot and death. Where animals who's primary food was green grass tended to be cleaner, and safer for the community.

So locust was the correct answer, not a problem then. As for the rest of your answer - and they had refrigeration in the early days of the Christian church when the dietary laws were abandoned?

No, but they (the gentiles) had perfected curing methods that perserved meats with salt and drying techniques. (not something nomads could easily do.)

8. When the Israelites conquered the Midianites, what part of the spoils of war was given to the priest as "the Lord's tribute"?
God took .02% of the 16,000 virgins left of the Midianites. One should ask what does it mean to be 'the lord's tribute?' The christian version would be to make them nuns, who cared for the tabnerical and helped the temple priests care for the people.

3.2 virgins? Are you sure? Never mind what being "the Lord's tribute" might have meant later - what did it mean at the time?

It meant that the .02% of virgins remained virgins and were santified as temple workers.

9. What is the origin of the "mighty men" giants known as nephilim?
this one they got completely wrong.
They were a cross breed from demons/fallen angels (who else was on earth besides man and woman?) 'sons of God and daughters of men.' This is mess was what was targeted in the Great flood.

That is the mess that God created sonny Jim - have a bit more respect for your Lord's work!

personal belief with no topical bearing on anything being discussed.

10. What happened to Korah and his family, Israelites who thought they could deal directly with God without a human intermediary?
This question is also very misleading.
The earth opened up and swallowed them, but the reason why was not for the one stated. They tried to take over and push moses out/start a civil war. read Numbers 16

Actually correct. There was no issue for the Israelites in dealing with God directly - that's a later Christian invention that had Jesus as some kind of broker for God.

11. According to the bible, who created evil?
If God created everything then evil would be included.

Sin= anything not in the expressed will of God.
Evil= a strong desire or willful act to intentionally be outside of God's expressed will.

In away Evil is the proof of freewill. For if God's will for us is in His expressed will, and we have the ablity to willfully be outside it, that means we have a 'will' independant of God's own will for us.

Now ask, who has provided attonement for evil?

Too fucked up to deal with. Simply put - other than the God's will aspect there is no way to differentiate many of the acts of God with purest evil.

12. According to the bible, what is God not able to do?
The bible does not say God is not able to do anything. This question refers to when God was with Juda, and when juda's army was defeated by an army equiped with 'charriots of iron.' What the question writer does not seem to comperhend was what was going on through out the book of 'Judges.' (this story takes place in judges one.) God uses 'judges' or armies, or nations to defeat kill capture and otherwise punish the jews who have turned from God, and started worshiping other gods, or breaking other commands in all manner of different ways. The books of judges chronical a pattern of sin by the jews, punishment from God, repentance by the jews deliverence from their captors, and with in a generation or two the cycle starts again.. Judges 1 (where this story is found) tells of the beginning of the first fall.

Long "answer" that ignores the question. God could not defeat iron chariots - whatever was going on in Judges- and your interpretation is a real stretch. Consider Samson - nothing to do with Jews worshipping Baal - Samson is the hero who defeated the Philistines.

Evidently my explaination was too difficult for you to comprehend.

If God was with Juda, and Juda fell to Iron Chariots, then God handed (intentionally) Handed them over to their enemies. One could argue 'nut-huh' if in the rest of the book nothing like this happened again.. But, as I pointed out Judges is all about God handing the jews over to their enemies for punishment till they repented, and the cycle continued for a very long time.

13. According to the bible, where does God live?
This question is also misleading. God is everywhere, and therfore 'lives' everywhere. Heaven (the city that God builds After the events of revelation) is the final place, but from the beginning of time to now i can think of 1/2 a dozen places the bible mentions God has lived/lives. This question as stated if answered pushes someone to believe God only resides in one place, which is completely false.

Your answer is evasive - the question stands. Where God lives has nothing to do with your answer - I live in my house - but that doesn't stop me moving around outside.

Define Omni-present. If God is everywhere all at once where does He live? Everywhere all at once. My answer is not 'evasive.' It makes you Think beyond the boundries of your question.

14. According to biblical biology, what is a bat?
According to a language that had no word nor genus/species form of classification It lables a bat as a( עוֹף /`owph )which means a flying creature. http://www.blbclassic.org/lang/lexicon/l...5775&t=KJV

So how does this question fail? It assumes you all are to stupid to understand that the bible was not written in english, and that you will not or can not understand the difference between a literal translation, and a contextual translation. That the KJV is a literal translation and simply lumps bats in with a list of other 'flying creatures.'

In other words - bird is the correct answer.

Stupid or obstinate? The word the Hebrews use to describe a bat directly translates into 'flying creature.' Bat's are flying creatures and birds are flying creatures.
The ancient Hebrews did not have scientific catagories you are trying to force on their explaination. Which makes you stupid (intentionally ignorant) or obstinate (refuses to accept verfied fact.) Because you are no longer just ignorant (unaware) of the situation.

15. According to biblical anatomy, where does thinking happen?
this one flat out misrepersents genesis 6
"Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."

Avoidance? How about Mark Chapter 7: 18 And he said to them, “Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, 19 since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?”[f] (Thus he declared all foods clean.) 20 And he said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. 21 For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, 22 coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. 23 All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”

Define Heart, or rather define καρδία, If you did you see that this greek word (as found in mark 7) can mean a blood pump, but if one were honest to the context he would see it also means: denotes the centre of all physical and spiritual life
the vigour and sense of physical life
the centre and seat of spiritual life
the soul or mind, as it is the fountain and seat of the thoughts, passions, desires, appetites, affections, purposes, endeavours
of the understanding, the faculty and seat of the intelligence
of the will and character
of the soul so far as it is affected and stirred in a bad way or good, or of the soul as the seat of the sensibilities, affections, emotions, desires, appetites, passions

http://www.blbclassic.org/lang/lexicon/l...2588&t=KJV

16. How did Gideon demonstrate his family values?
'Family values' was not a precept then. what kind of person judges a man who lived in the past by laws that did not exist then? a dishonest man looking to stack the deck in his favor.

The phrase may not have existed but the value one puts on one's family did as a concept - if we are going to throw around the dishonest tag....

Haven't you pointed out yourself in other threads the lack of 'family values' in OT soceity? The way daughters were sold and generally treated as opposed to the males? Does this reflect anything resembling what we know to be 'family values?'

So tell me again about your version of honesty...

17. After Jephthah was victorious in battle, what sacrifice did he burn on the altar, as he had vowed to the Lord?
Judges 11 does not say what he did, just that he carried out his vow.

And that vow was? Now who's being dishonest?

http://atheistforums.org/thread-14912-pa...t=Jephthah

Start at post 56, and then please re-reference question #8 for precidence.

18. What price did David pay King Saul for his first wife?
this one is a little bit raceist/elietist. It implies 'we' are better because 'we' do not share the same customs.

As a Jew I can tell you its not racist nor elitist. What was the price Drich?

100 dead philistines, and a token from each.

19. How many sexual partners did King Solomon have?
again how can you judge a man by an non existant law? To super-impose your 'morality' on to life as it was 3000 years ago is just proud foolishness.

There is no judgement in the question other than the reader's own. How many? And don't go telling me that was morally OK in those days - it was fucking unheard of (or should that read unheard of fucking?)

A man was allowed to have as many wives and He could afford to have/could stand to have.

20. What happened to 42 little children who teased God's prophet Elisha for being bald and he cursed them in the name of the Lord?

again here the question writters are playing with the translations to change the meaning of the passage. the words in question are:
קָטָן qatan http://www.blbclassic.org/lang/lexicon/l...6996&t=KJV
Which can mean small, insignificant young, or unimportant
-and
נַעַר na`ar http://www.blbclassic.org/Bible.cfm?b=2K...JV#conc/23
which can mean Children, but can also mean:
a boy, lad, servant, youth, retainer, servant.

Nope - its you that is playing with the translations to try to cover up the horrific nature of the story.

The only thing I have done is shed light on your witch hunt and backed it with legitmate reference material.

21. What reason did God give for tormenting Job?
None of the above answers were correct. Job was not given a reason.

It didn't ask if Job was given the reason it asked what the reason was. Another side-step non-answer.

God did not Give a reason, because God did not torment job. Satan tormented Job. Even so God protected Job from experiencing Satan's full wrath.

22.According to the bible, what does Satan look like?

None of the above. Revelations 12 says there was a 'great sign' that of a dragon and goes on to describe answer b.
a 'great sign' is not a physical description. a Great sign points to symbology, or hidden meaning behind description. Which means what follows is not a physical description.

Yeah - whatever.

So you agree its a bad or misleading question?

23. How does the biblical god treat haughty women?
Misleading question as there are several examples. In Christianity Meekness and humility is the cure for haughtness and pride in men and in women alike. If you were an old testament jew the treatment would be different. But, that's the thing the test gives do not mention. there haven't been any OT jews for over 2000 years.

That's like saying there haven't been any ancient Greeks for 2000 years so we don't need to worry about their laws.

We don't worry about the greeks... law makers and history students might, but this country does not work on ancient greek law. so yes i agree you are right.

24. In dollars (shekels), how much is a woman worth?
again when? Another misleading question. Jesus/God the Son was sold for 30 shekels of silver and put to death, while Herod's daughter was offered 1/2 of all of herods kingdom for something as trivial as a dance in Mark 6. The makes her net worth far above and beyond that of Jesus. another trick question.

Not a trick question at all, nor is it invalidated by variations in values assigned to different things.

It is a trick question because it misleads the reader into thinking that women had a lessor value than men. when infact I provided an example where God the Son was sold for far less than what Herod's daughter (A woman) was worth.

25. What happens if a man rapes an engaged virgin in the city, and no one hears anything?
another misleading question. What is the time frame? The results are different for the Christian and the OT Jew.

Is the exact phrase within the question used in the NT? If not then its reasonable to surmise the reference is to the OT version. Why the constant avoidance of giving the answer?

Because a woman's rape was treated differently in the NT verses the OT.
http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-rape.html

---

26. What is the Mosaic Law punishment for being handicapped?
slick ploy. By denoting 'mosaic law' in this question is makes the others based in 'mosaic law' but not identified as mosaic law, as applicable to the Christian...
And yet they still manage to misdirect. There is no Hebrew word for Handicap in that time period. One was either considered clean or unclean. anyone considered 'unclean' could not worship in the temple.
some of the people we currently would consider 'handicap' would be considered unclean, but not all.

Oh well - that's alright then, as long as some of the disabled are in we can ignore those that are banned. WTF Drich?

What other choice do you have when dealing with the dead?

27. According to the bible, when may a husband have sex with his wife?
Paul says we should not deny ourselves to one another, unless we both agree to over come a given obstical first.

The correct answer is none of the above.

Again avoiding the question - which again contains the specific text to look for (hint - its doesn't come from Paul).

When the question was framed it used the qualifying pharse "According to the bible" As the works of Paul are apart of the bible Paul's words Should be included in an honest assessment of scripture. because they are not this is another misleading question that has the reader believe there is only one correct answer which is contained in the bank of multiple choice answers given. Which again is incomplete so that the dishonest test writers could push their agenda over truth.

28. How should you feel when you dash babies against the rocks?
as happy as you felt when a woman's right to choose was established and supported by the state.

Fuck you you twat. No-one ever feels elation over an abortion you ignorant shit. Elation over murdering babies is only on your fucking God's instructions.

two things, maybe if you can be bothered come down off your high horse first and re-read what I wrote. you'd be able to identify the straw man you put in place of my arguement. If you can indeed find your way down, know in your heart that i did not say a woman is always happy when goes into get an abortion, as your straw man suggests. i said YOU Should feel like like you did when the state/goverment radified the law that makes a woman's right to choose her current lifestyle over the life of her baby/ or like you did when that law was challenged and up held. Your delusional if you do not think Roe v wade was celibrated. Your more delusional if you don't think 'we' consider it a victory everytime an attempt to ban abortion is shot down.

The questions ask how should one feel when one smashes babies against rock. The answer is simple. The same way you feel when the state radified the laws concerning abortion.

2nd thing Roe/wade (the woman) was happy to get the abortion and out of the millions slaughtered since then I am willing to bet my life she was not the only one.

29. How many human generations were there before Jesus?
of who/what?
http://atheistforums.org/thread-14190.html

30. What Christmas tradition is expressly forbidden in the bible?
none of the above are forbidden.

Fore Paul tells us let no one tell use how when or what we use in worship.

Again - wrong answer - the clue is in the question.

Uh, no.
Christmas celibrations were not instituted scripturally there fore there aren't any rules concerning the celibration of Christmas for or against. The closest thing we have is what Paul said about ALL days a given believer wishes to celibrate for one reason or another. col 2:16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.

31. According to Jesus, what must you do to have eternal life?
none of the above.
john 3:16 Jesus says: Fore God so loved the world that He gave his only son, that whomever believes in Him shall not perrish BUT HAVE ETERNAL LIFE.

Which is also a lie. 144,000 Jews get into heaven without paying any heed to that fuckwit Jesus. You showed me that one.

Who says they don't?
It just says 144,000 jews 12k from each tribe. We do not know the extent of what these Jews did or will do.

32. According to Jesus, how should Christian disciples treat their parents?
none of the above.

Jesus told a pledge/ a wantobe a disciple --"Let the dead bury the dead"-- The rest of answer 'd' was made up by a self righteous heart.

Now what are you talking about? A self righteous heart that wrote in the gospel?

The self righteous heart who wrote answer 'd'

33. According to Jesus, how should slaves be treated?
none of the above.

Jesus repeatedly says there is no difference between free or slave in the eyes of God and that we should treat EVERYONE the way we wish to be treated.

Wrong answer again. The question is looking for a specific answer.

which does not reflect the whole truth of the bible. The question is designed to cherry pick, thus allowing the dishonest people involved with this 'test' to push a one sided view of the bible.

34. What did Jesus say about peace?
none of the above. Jesus said mat 10: 34 “Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. 35 For I have come to ‘set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law’; 36 and ‘a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.’[e] 37 He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. 38 And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. 39 He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it.

Well Christianity has certainly never brought peace, big on misery though - which must be just a bonus on the list.

35. Which one of these phrases did Jesus not say about witnessing?
Jesus says many things about witnessing. He mentions as he quotes OT law, He teaches about it and He uses the word to describe a testamony. The question does not frame the answers in the correct context allowing the creation of a false dichotomy.

Talking about not framing answers in the correct context - you are the king of that.

36. What personal sacrifice for "the kingdom of heaven" was Jesus talking about when he told his disciples, "He that is able to receive it, let him receive it"?
as the question reads, and the conclusion it provides none of the above.
Mark 9 says if an eye causes you to sin pluck it out for it is better to enter heave with just one eye...

Yeah - and that Mark reference is relevant how exactly?

READ MARK 9 THE QUESTION WAS BASED ON WHAT WAS FOUND IN MARK 9

37. According to New Testament medical advice, what should you do if you are sick?
seriously? Luke was a doctor, his profession was not condemned. which means the bible has nothing against people seeing doctors.

Another question dodged.

How?
When one was sick if they could afford it they went to/had a doctor, if not they either died or they lived. For everyone else in the time of miricals, the bible says ask an elder of the church to pray over you and lay hands on you. Which is what the poor did by the thousands when Christ was ministring to israel.

The rest is just more of the same answering the wrong question, evading the question and complaining about the question. I got too bored at this point to continue.

Is this truly your best effort? is this what you were making all of your fuss over? You didn't even finish and yet in your mind you somehow silenced and discredited my whole effort?


Sorry greasy your best was found wanting.

---

So - what YOU are saying - by ignoring the obvious things that are in the bible -

You didn't even read the OP did you, and yet you feel your ready to have this discussion? Infact I felt I could not ignore the obvious truth that was being ignored, in favor of the cherry picking that was going on in this 'test.'

is that YOU do not accept what the bible says to be of value to answer these questions - you take your own advise to them

IF You Read the OP you would have noted that I (on more than a 12 occasions) point to scripture that was being over looked frame the bible in an untrue light.

And so - that begs a question - why should ANYONE consider YOUR answers of any value - you do not claim to be inspired by an all knowing god or to be inerrant as well!

All i claim is to provide is the obvious truth as provided by a whole complete look of the bible.

Now that your questions have been answered, i have one based on your 'logic.'

Why should ANYONE consider THE BIBLE TEST answers of any value- they do not claim to be inspired by an all knowing god or to be inerrant as well!
In fact I have shown them to be in error on just about every single question and answer they asked!!! Yet you still defend them! What does that say about your ablity to descern viable valid content?

From the side lines it simply looks like your defending your faith and ignoring the facts that have invalidated this 'test.' Which leads to my question, do you consider yourself a man of faith?

[max-greece]

You made a right abortion of this one Drichy

personal insult with no topical bearing on anything being discussed.

That is not a personal insult. You are a mental cripple - now that's a personal insult.

1. What is the last of the Ten Commandments?
“You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”

Ignoring the point that the 10 commandments are restated, differently. Also ignoring that this is the most useless instruction ever given. Thought crime.

The ten commandments are not given in an order of importance.
Christ says if we break the 'least of my commandments your guilty of breaking all of them.'

Again this was not the question. Which is the last of the commandments- not which is the least. No wonder you are doing so badly here - your reading comprehension is as bad as your writing.

2. What is the penalty for working on the Sabbath?
The penality for Breaking Any of the commandments was death. That was why Christ died on the cross. The 'good moral people' who wrote this test look deceive by isolating one commandment over the others.

No its just illustrates how mad the commandments are.

personal insult with no topical bearing on anything being discussed.

Again not a personal insult. Having a bad day?

3. What is God's name?
trick question. God does not have just one name as the question implies.
These are the formal names of God and their meanings.
http://www.gotquestions.org/names-of-God.html

Not a trick question but not a complete answer. One of his names is jealousy and that's no good name for a supposedly perfect being who suffers badly from it (and wroth, pride and vanity).

The word that describes God as 'perfect' refers to being complete/lacking nothing or whole.

If God was not able to manifest Jealousy a basic human emotion then God would be incomplete or lacking.

An argument I have used myself to prove that God was invented by man rather than the other way around. God does not have a sense of humour, a sense of proportion or, indeed, any sense in his dealings with us.

4. How should parents treat a stubborn and rebellious son?
This question is also misleading. Because the answer it provides questions for was meant to only be answered from an Old testament Jewish perspective. Christians are to let their 'rebellious sons' leave as per the parable of the prodigal son Jesus himself told.

Nonsense. A parable (that tries to sell deathbad conversion) does not over-rule a commandment.

A commandment is an order given directly from God. as in the 10 commandments, because they were written by the hand of God onto stone. The laws concerning social order/how to raise a son was a law given by moses. Hence the law of moses.
The laws of moses while inspired by God was not given directly by God.
Therefore not a command. The Story of the prodigal son however was given by God.
God the Son does indeed have the authority to change how we are to deal with a rebellious son.

Erm......bullshit (the bit in bold). The laws of Moses were not commands? Where do you get this shit from? You think Mosaic law was optional at the time?

5. What happens if you are not a virgin on your wedding night?
again trick question. no one in the Old Testament nor the New testament HAD to be a virgin. There are many examples of people marrying without consenquence that were not virgins. This question leads one to believe one Had to be a virgin. This was not true unless (in the OT) one claimes to be or was repersented as a virgin.

On the one hand - remember this answer for when we get to the incest / rape question later. On the other the law was the law - if a spouse chose not to tell that's not the point - although you could argue they were aiding and abetting.

so you admit, trick question.

You "logic" escapes me there.

6. What does the bible say about witches?
another trick question. This question is framed in such away as to mean there is only one answer.
Jews were commanded to not allow a witch to live. In Christianity there are examples of 'witches/sorcers' were converted to the faith

Its not a trick question although the answer was not complete.

If the test is limited by multiple choice and the complete answer is not in the bank of answers you have to choose from then that makes the question a trick question!!!

No - that just means you choose the best fit answer - have you never completed a multiple choice exam?

7. Which of these foods does the bible expressly permit you to eat?
This question narrows the field to only allow for locus to be permitted as food. when in truth any animal who grazed was acceptiable food while scavengers (pigs and shell fish) were forbidden. Without refrigeration these 'meats' spoil 3 times faster and are exposed/lthe animal ive in disease, filth, rot and death. Where animals who's primary food was green grass tended to be cleaner, and safer for the community.

So locust was the correct answer, not a problem then. As for the rest of your answer - and they had refrigeration in the early days of the Christian church when the dietary laws were abandoned?

No, but they (the gentiles) had perfected curing methods that perserved meats with salt and drying techniques. (not something nomads could easily do.)

So the question was perfectly AOK. Of the list presented you had to chose the one that was allowed under the dietary laws. I am not familiar with Roman meat curing procedures so I will take your word on it.

8. When the Israelites conquered the Midianites, what part of the spoils of war was given to the priest as "the Lord's tribute"?
God took .02% of the 16,000 virgins left of the Midianites. One should ask what does it mean to be 'the lord's tribute?' The christian version would be to make them nuns, who cared for the tabnerical and helped the temple priests care for the people.

3.2 virgins? Are you sure? Never mind what being "the Lord's tribute" might have meant later - what did it mean at the time?

It meant that the .02% of virgins remained virgins and were santified as temple workers.

So 3.2 virgins were "sanctified" as temple workers - that's your answer?

9. What is the origin of the "mighty men" giants known as nephilim?
this one they got completely wrong.
They were a cross breed from demons/fallen angels (who else was on earth besides man and woman?) 'sons of God and daughters of men.' This is mess was what was targeted in the Great flood.

That is the mess that God created sonny Jim - have a bit more respect for your Lord's work!

personal belief with no topical bearing on anything being discussed.

Say what? You are now saying God's first version of creation was a fuck up. Perfect God needs 2 goes to get the earth right? You are just making this stuff up as you go along aren't you?

10. What happened to Korah and his family, Israelites who thought they could deal directly with God without a human intermediary?
This question is also very misleading.
The earth opened up and swallowed them, but the reason why was not for the one stated. They tried to take over and push moses out/start a civil war. read Numbers 16

Actually correct. There was no issue for the Israelites in dealing with God directly - that's a later Christian invention that had Jesus as some kind of broker for God.

No comment here - I'm surprised.

11. According to the bible, who created evil?
If God created everything then evil would be included.

Sin= anything not in the expressed will of God.
Evil= a strong desire or willful act to intentionally be outside of God's expressed will.

In away Evil is the proof of freewill. For if God's will for us is in His expressed will, and we have the ablity to willfully be outside it, that means we have a 'will' independant of God's own will for us.

Now ask, who has provided attonement for evil?

Too fucked up to deal with. Simply put - other than the God's will aspect there is no way to differentiate many of the acts of God with purest evil.

Also ignored?

12. According to the bible, what is God not able to do?
The bible does not say God is not able to do anything. This question refers to when God was with Juda, and when juda's army was defeated by an army equiped with 'charriots of iron.' What the question writer does not seem to comperhend was what was going on through out the book of 'Judges.' (this story takes place in judges one.) God uses 'judges' or armies, or nations to defeat kill capture and otherwise punish the jews who have turned from God, and started worshiping other gods, or breaking other commands in all manner of different ways. The books of judges chronical a pattern of sin by the jews, punishment from God, repentance by the jews deliverence from their captors, and with in a generation or two the cycle starts again.. Judges 1 (where this story is found) tells of the beginning of the first fall.

Long "answer" that ignores the question. God could not defeat iron chariots - whatever was going on in Judges- and your interpretation is a real stretch. Consider Samson - nothing to do with Jews worshipping Baal - Samson is the hero who defeated the Philistines.

Evidently my explaination was too difficult for you to comprehend.

If God was with Juda, and Juda fell to Iron Chariots, then God handed (intentionally) Handed them over to their enemies. One could argue 'nut-huh' if in the rest of the book nothing like this happened again.. But, as I pointed out Judges is all about God handing the jews over to their enemies for punishment till they repented, and the cycle continued for a very long time.

He lost intentionally? Of course he did.

13. According to the bible, where does God live?
This question is also misleading. God is everywhere, and therfore 'lives' everywhere. Heaven (the city that God builds After the events of revelation) is the final place, but from the beginning of time to now i can think of 1/2 a dozen places the bible mentions God has lived/lives. This question as stated if answered pushes someone to believe God only resides in one place, which is completely false.

Your answer is evasive - the question stands. Where God lives has nothing to do with your answer - I live in my house - but that doesn't stop me moving around outside.

Define Omni-present. If God is everywhere all at once where does He live? Everywhere all at once. My answer is not 'evasive.' It makes you Think beyond the boundries of your question.

A, Its not my question.
B, This is coming from the Bible isn't it. So you are now saying the Bible is wrong? Good to know.

14. According to biblical biology, what is a bat?
According to a language that had no word nor genus/species form of classification It lables a bat as a( עוֹף /`owph )which means a flying creature. http://www.blbclassic.org/lang/lexicon/l...5775&t=KJV

So how does this question fail? It assumes you all are to stupid to understand that the bible was not written in english, and that you will not or can not understand the difference between a literal translation, and a contextual translation. That the KJV is a literal translation and simply lumps bats in with a list of other 'flying creatures.'

In other words - bird is the correct answer.

Stupid or obstinate? The word the Hebrews use to describe a bat directly translates into 'flying creature.' Bat's are flying creatures and birds are flying creatures.
The ancient Hebrews did not have scientific catagories you are trying to force on their explaination. Which makes you stupid (intentionally ignorant) or obstinate (refuses to accept verfied fact.) Because you are no longer just ignorant (unaware) of the situation.

Still bird then.

15. According to biblical anatomy, where does thinking happen?
this one flat out misrepersents genesis 6
"Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."

Avoidance? How about Mark Chapter 7: 18 And he said to them, “Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, 19 since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?”[f] (Thus he declared all foods clean.) 20 And he said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. 21 For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, 22 coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. 23 All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”

Define Heart, or rather define καρδία, If you did you see that this greek word (as found in mark 7) can mean a blood pump, but if one were honest to the context he would see it also means: denotes the centre of all physical and spiritual life
the vigour and sense of physical life
the centre and seat of spiritual life
the soul or mind, as it is the fountain and seat of the thoughts, passions, desires, appetites, affections, purposes, endeavours
of the understanding, the faculty and seat of the intelligence
of the will and character
of the soul so far as it is affected and stirred in a bad way or good, or of the soul as the seat of the sensibilities, affections, emotions, desires, appetites, passions

http://www.blbclassic.org/lang/lexicon/l...2588&t=KJV

"καρδία" means heart in Greek. Don't play that game with me - I live here for fuck's sakes. Jesus is talking about your physical heart. He shows in the quote that he has no understanding of medicine or the human body - or rather exactly the understanding that was prevalent at the time. Whilst he could be talking about a person's centre in much the same way we do that argument is totally undermined by "Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, 19 since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?”[f] (Thus he declared all foods clean.) "

16. How did Gideon demonstrate his family values?
'Family values' was not a precept then. what kind of person judges a man who lived in the past by laws that did not exist then? a dishonest man looking to stack the deck in his favor.

The phrase may not have existed but the value one puts on one's family did as a concept - if we are going to throw around the dishonest tag....

Haven't you pointed out yourself in other threads the lack of 'family values' in OT soceity? The way daughters were sold and generally treated as opposed to the males? Does this reflect anything resembling what we know to be 'family values?'

So tell me again about your version of honesty...

Actually I am not sure you haven't confused me with someone else. I do not recall such a discussion. It is, however, irrelevant. The question doesn't ask if Gideon's family values were out of sync with the rest of the OT - it asked how he demonstrated them.

I will assume, for now, you are not deliberately obfuscating so we don't have to bring your honesty up for question again.

17. After Jephthah was victorious in battle, what sacrifice did he burn on the altar, as he had vowed to the Lord?
Judges 11 does not say what he did, just that he carried out his vow.

And that vow was? Now who's being dishonest?

http://atheistforums.org/thread-14912-pa...t=Jephthah

Start at post 56, and then please re-reference question #8 for precidence.

Avoided the question a second time I see.

18. What price did David pay King Saul for his first wife?
this one is a little bit raceist/elietist. It implies 'we' are better because 'we' do not share the same customs.

As a Jew I can tell you its not racist nor elitist. What was the price Drich?

100 dead philistines, and a token from each.

Why the reticence to say foreskin?

19. How many sexual partners did King Solomon have?
again how can you judge a man by an non existant law? To super-impose your 'morality' on to life as it was 3000 years ago is just proud foolishness.

There is no judgement in the question other than the reader's own. How many? And don't go telling me that was morally OK in those days - it was fucking unheard of (or should that read unheard of fucking?)

A man was allowed to have as many wives and He could afford to have/could stand to have.

Are you under the impression that all 3000 of Solomon's sexual partners were his wives?
Anyway - nothing wrong with the question then.

20. What happened to 42 little children who teased God's prophet Elisha for being bald and he cursed them in the name of the Lord?

again here the question writters are playing with the translations to change the meaning of the passage. the words in question are:
קָטָן qatan http://www.blbclassic.org/lang/lexicon/l...6996&t=KJV
Which can mean small, insignificant young, or unimportant
-and
נַעַר na`ar http://www.blbclassic.org/Bible.cfm?b=2K...JV#conc/23
which can mean Children, but can also mean:
a boy, lad, servant, youth, retainer, servant.

Nope - its you that is playing with the translations to try to cover up the horrific nature of the story.

The only thing I have done is shed light on your witch hunt and backed it with legitmate reference material.

No, you haven't. You are debating whether it says children, boy, lad, servant, youth, retainer or servant without addressing what happened to them? Is it OK if it was servants teasing Elisha when the bears came out and ripped them to shreds?

21. What reason did God give for tormenting Job?
None of the above answers were correct. Job was not given a reason.

It didn't ask if Job was given the reason it asked what the reason was. Another side-step non-answer.

God did not Give a reason, because God did not torment job. Satan tormented Job. Even so God protected Job from experiencing Satan's full wrath.

OK - I will grant you that God didn't do the torturing - he let Satan do it. You've made up the bit about God protecting Job from experiencing Satan's full wrath. Now the question, properly qualified should be changed to: "What was the reason God allowed Job to be tortured by Satan?"
And no doubt you think that makes God come out better.

22.According to the bible, what does Satan look like?

None of the above. Revelations 12 says there was a 'great sign' that of a dragon and goes on to describe answer b.
a 'great sign' is not a physical description. a Great sign points to symbology, or hidden meaning behind description. Which means what follows is not a physical description.

Yeah - whatever.

So you agree its a bad or misleading question?

OK Drich - one to you.

23. How does the biblical god treat haughty women?
Misleading question as there are several examples. In Christianity Meekness and humility is the cure for haughtness and pride in men and in women alike. If you were an old testament jew the treatment would be different. But, that's the thing the test gives do not mention. there haven't been any OT jews for over 2000 years.

That's like saying there haven't been any ancient Greeks for 2000 years so we don't need to worry about their laws.

We don't worry about the greeks... law makers and history students might, but this country does not work on ancient greek law. so yes i agree you are right.

The important thing here is what do the, apparently optional, Mosaic laws (that are not commands) say about how to treat a haughty woman.

24. In dollars (shekels), how much is a woman worth?
again when? Another misleading question. Jesus/God the Son was sold for 30 shekels of silver and put to death, while Herod's daughter was offered 1/2 of all of herods kingdom for something as trivial as a dance in Mark 6. The makes her net worth far above and beyond that of Jesus. another trick question.

Not a trick question at all, nor is it invalidated by variations in values assigned to different things.

It is a trick question because it misleads the reader into thinking that women had a lessor value than men. when infact I provided an example where God the Son was sold for far less than what Herod's daughter (A woman) was worth.

You are reading way more into the question that there is. There is no mention of relative values. It just asks what the value of a woman is.

25. What happens if a man rapes an engaged virgin in the city, and no one hears anything?
another misleading question. What is the time frame? The results are different for the Christian and the OT Jew.

Is the exact phrase within the question used in the NT? If not then its reasonable to surmise the reference is to the OT version. Why the constant avoidance of giving the answer?

Because a woman's rape was treated differently in the NT verses the OT.
http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-rape.html

Again though - not the question.
[/quote]

[Drich]

Again this was not the question. Which is the last of the commandments- not which is the least. No wonder you are doing so badly here - your reading comprehension is as bad as your writing.

If you can admit there is not order of importance there is no 'last commandment.' Because if there is no order then anyone can freely compile them in any order they wish so long as they do not change the content or number of the questions.

A commandment is an order given directly from God. as in the 10 commandments, because they were written by the hand of God onto stone. The laws concerning social order/how to raise a son was a law given by moses. Hence the law of moses.
The laws of moses while inspired by God was not given directly by God.
Therefore not a command. The Story of the prodigal son however was given by God.
God the Son does indeed have the authority to change how we are to deal with a rebellious son.

Erm......bullshit (the bit in bold). The laws of Moses were not commands? Where do you get this shit from? You think Mosaic law was optional at the time?

straw man, take the time to read what was written and try it again.

If the test is limited by multiple choice and the complete answer is not in the bank of answers you have to choose from then that makes the question a trick question!!!

No - that just means you choose the best fit answer - have you never completed a multiple choice exam?

No, you just correct the test if the answers are completely wrong. What school did you go to that forced conformity to the point of bending minds to accept wrong answers? In the states we do not punish for not always coloring in the lines.

Say what? You are now saying God's first version of creation was a fuck up. Perfect God needs 2 goes to get the earth right? You are just making this stuff up as you go along aren't you?

what are you talking about? You are just making this stuff up as you go along aren't you?

He lost intentionally? Of course he did.

Again stupid or just plain obstinate? The JUDGES were Judements levied against the Jews by God! Both books ARE FILLED With God Leading the Jews into battle and making the intentionally loose. The books of Judges is one example after another after another of a cycle of Sin, Defeat, repentance, deliverance, then sin, defeat in battle, then repentance and so on.

Therefore it stands to reason the example in Judges 1 was the first example of this.

How can you be a jew and not know this?

Define Omni-present. If God is everywhere all at once where does He live? Everywhere all at once. My answer is not 'evasive.' It makes you Think beyond the boundries of your question.

A, Its not my question.

i did not answer your question I answered the question posted in the test.

B, This is coming from the Bible isn't it.

Actually my answer does.

"καρδία" means heart in Greek. Don't play that game with me - I live here for fuck's sakes.

Where do you live that speaks Koine Greek?

Jesus is talking about your physical heart.

Uh, no. not even close.

He shows in the quote that he has no understanding of medicine or the human body - or rather exactly the understanding that was prevalent at the time. Whilst he could be talking about a person's centre in much the same way we do that argument is totally undermined by "Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, 19 since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?”[f] (Thus he declared all foods clean.) "

Now keep reading sport:
20 And he said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. 21 For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, 22 coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. 23 All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”

So it is your opinion that Jesus said all of the above mentioned comes from your physical blood pump?
Because contextually to me Christ is refering to the secondary meaning to the word:centre of all physical and spiritual life
the vigour and sense of physical life
the centre and seat of spiritual life
the soul or mind, as it is the fountain and seat of the thoughts, passions, desires, appetites, affections, purposes, endeavours
of the understanding, the faculty and seat of the intelligence
of the will and character
of the soul so far as it is affected and stirred in a bad way or good, or of the soul as the seat of the sensibilities, affections, emotions, desires, appetites, passions

http://atheistforums.org/thread-14912-pa...t=Jephthah

Start at post 56, and then please re-reference question #8 for precidence.

Avoided the question a second time I see.

i see you failed to read the required reference material to warrant your continued participation in this discussion.

Why the reticence to say foreskin?

why the obsession over foreskin?
(To answer your question: To give you an oppertunity to not obsess over foreskin, and still get the answer to your question)

No, you haven't. You are debating whether it says children, boy, lad, servant, youth, retainer or servant without addressing what happened to them? Is it OK if it was servants teasing Elisha when the bears came out and ripped them to shreds?

Yes.

OK - I will grant you that God didn't do the torturing - he let Satan do it. You've made up the bit about God protecting Job from experiencing Satan's full wrath.

Satan wanted to kill Job. Did Job die?

Now the question, properly qualified should be changed to: "What was the reason God allowed Job to be tortured by Satan?"
And no doubt you think that makes God come out better.

I just skimmed through all 42 chapters of Job just to answer this question correctly and accuratly.

The first thing we need to note is God did not torment job as the 'test question' implies. God placed a hedge or shield around Job protecting him. When tested God simply removed Job's shield. Satan tormented Job just to see if he would break. Which is the proof that Satan is Evil. If Saten were not he could have blessed Job, but it was in his heart to break job with torment, and loss.

The second reason I see for the trial of job was found in the response of his friends and wife. They assumed for 20 some odd chapters that Job did something wrong and accused/guessed at what he did so he would confess. When in truth (via this book) God does not punish the wicked in this life. Bad things happen to good people, because that is what happens in this life. (We do not live under the full protection of God. We are therefore subject to Evil and consenquences of evil and the evil one.)

So why did God allow for Job's torment?
To show the rest of us that we are not living under God's roof yet and therefore not under His full protection. This means Good is not always rewarded and evil is not always punished. Sometimes Good people are made to endure hardship and evil people live easy.. for a time.

You are reading way more into the question that there is. There is no mention of relative values. It just asks what the value of a woman is.

This question what was the value of a woman, it did not ask the value of a man, Men were sold along side women at that time to ask the price of one and not give a nod to the fact that the other was also sold is misleading.

Because a woman's rape was treated differently in the NT verses the OT.
http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-rape.html

Again though - not the question.

The question can not be answered as stated because a time reference is needed to frame the response. If a woman under the conditions of the question was raped in the OT the responce would be "A" if She was raped as a Christian the answer would be completely different.

Because there is no time reference the question can not be accuratly answered given the choices provided.

[ThomM]

SO - you claim the "OBVIOUS TRUTHS" in the bible

Something that is TRUE is something for which YOU can provide PROOF of.

Until YOU can provide real proof that a god exists - and it is YOUR god - and YOU would be the first to do it - you can't actually do that

Sorry - but there are NO obvious TRUTHS to the bible - the bible is a BELIEF of a religious group

THe use of the word "TRUTH" is the most basic lie of theists
IF they were Honest - they would use the word - BELIEF - since that is ALL they actually have

AS far as the BIBLE test - the test did NOT say that is represented the ENTIRE message of the bible - something YOU are claiming. IT merely pointed out 50 things that are actually IN THE BIBLE

YOUR claim that there are other things that contradict them - does not change the facts - the test was accurate to its own purpose.

AND those things in the test ARE in the bible.

So - if they ARE in the bible - and YOU show contradictions to them - you have - yourself - shown the bible as an unreliable source. I have said over and over again in these groups - that you can normally contradict a quote from the bible - with ANOTHER quote from the bible. So thank you for PROVING that the bible is worthless.

[Aractus]

---

No he didn't. Paul didn't write anywhere near 2/3rds of the text, he didn't even write anywhere near 1/3rd of the text! He wrote 23.5% of the text in 13 epistles. Luke wrote 2 books totalling 27.5% of the New Testament - ergo he wrote more than Paul did.

As I just said to you, you don't know your facts.

---

I see you have appealed to a red herring rather than address content. You stated that The NT says following the law was indeed possiable. Paul in Romans 7 clearly says it is not.. Why didn't you start here?

Because you don't know your facts, and this has been proved to you time and time again.