![Logan Jones](/img/default-banner.jpg)
- 58
- 419 995
Logan Jones
เข้าร่วมเมื่อ 7 มี.ค. 2017
I have a master’s of theological studies from Duke University, and a master’s of arts in New Testament from Talbot School of Theology
วีดีโอ
I Made a Movie about the Bible with AI
มุมมอง 1915 หลายเดือนก่อน
#ai #bible #sora I made a video of scenes from the Book of Acts with Runway.
The Theological Message of Genesis
มุมมอง 2175 หลายเดือนก่อน
#genesis #creation #bible This video is part of my longer video dealing with Genesis and evolution. th-cam.com/video/AIwdf7phR1A/w-d-xo.htmlsi=PvpPqYYO13gMJc0e
Does Evolution Contradict the Bible?
มุมมอง 6296 หลายเดือนก่อน
#evolution #bible #genesis Does evolution contradict the Bible. In this video, I explore what Genesis teaches and argue that the theory of evolution does not go against the teachings of Genesis. I look at the genealogies in Genesis, what Paul says about Genesis, the differences between the creation accounts, and many other things when trying to come up with an accurate view of Genesis.
The Bible Doesn’t Teach Satan’s Fall?
มุมมอง 1.7K7 หลายเดือนก่อน
The Bible Doesn’t Teach Satan’s Fall?
Why Don't Most Christians Know THIS about Inspiration?
มุมมอง 353ปีที่แล้ว
Why Don't Most Christians Know THIS about Inspiration?
This Hidden Message in the Bible has FINALLY Been Deciphered
มุมมอง 4.3Kปีที่แล้ว
This Hidden Message in the Bible has FINALLY Been Deciphered
The Lost Gospel Q Never Existed: Synoptic Problem and Q
มุมมอง 1.2Kปีที่แล้ว
The Lost Gospel Q Never Existed: Synoptic Problem and Q
How To Read & Understand The BIBLE: 6 Tips for Beginners!
มุมมอง 204ปีที่แล้ว
How To Read & Understand The BIBLE: 6 Tips for Beginners!
Synoptic Problem: Which Gospel Was Written First? (Markan Priority)
มุมมอง 7002 ปีที่แล้ว
Synoptic Problem: Which Gospel Was Written First? (Markan Priority)
Have You Noticed This Hidden Pattern in the 6 Days of Creation?
มุมมอง 2.8K2 ปีที่แล้ว
Have You Noticed This Hidden Pattern in the 6 Days of Creation?
Did the Talpiot Tomb Really Belong to Jesus? Probably Not
มุมมอง 4352 ปีที่แล้ว
Did the Talpiot Tomb Really Belong to Jesus? Probably Not
Who Was the Naked Man that Fled from Jesus in the Garden?
มุมมอง 2.3K2 ปีที่แล้ว
Who Was the Naked Man that Fled from Jesus in the Garden?
ARE MIRACLES REAL? Debunking David Hume's Argument Against Miracles
มุมมอง 2352 ปีที่แล้ว
ARE MIRACLES REAL? Debunking David Hume's Argument Against Miracles
Bart Ehrman: Are the Gospels Reliable? (a critique of his arguments)
มุมมอง 3762 ปีที่แล้ว
Bart Ehrman: Are the Gospels Reliable? (a critique of his arguments)
"Why I Became an Atheist" (Critiquing Genetically Modified Skeptic's Reasons for Leaving the Faith)
มุมมอง 3802 ปีที่แล้ว
"Why I Became an Atheist" (Critiquing Genetically Modified Skeptic's Reasons for Leaving the Faith)
Joe Rogan and Richard Dawkins Get the Evidence for Jesus Wrong
มุมมอง 3582 ปีที่แล้ว
Joe Rogan and Richard Dawkins Get the Evidence for Jesus Wrong
William Lane Craig's Animated Video on Evidence for the Resurrection (Review)
มุมมอง 2622 ปีที่แล้ว
William Lane Craig's Animated Video on Evidence for the Resurrection (Review)
Did Paul think Jesus was God?: Philippians 2 and the Second Adam
มุมมอง 2092 ปีที่แล้ว
Did Paul think Jesus was God?: Philippians 2 and the Second Adam
What Did Paul Actually Know About Jesus?
มุมมอง 2242 ปีที่แล้ว
What Did Paul Actually Know About Jesus?
When Were the Gospels Written: Dr. Jonathan Bernier Makes a Case for Early Dates
มุมมอง 7912 ปีที่แล้ว
When Were the Gospels Written: Dr. Jonathan Bernier Makes a Case for Early Dates
Why Don't Christians Obey the Old Testament? (An Answer You Probably Haven't Heard)
มุมมอง 2582 ปีที่แล้ว
Why Don't Christians Obey the Old Testament? (An Answer You Probably Haven't Heard)
Did the Historical Jesus Claim to Be God? (Hint: YES)
มุมมอง 4132 ปีที่แล้ว
Did the Historical Jesus Claim to Be God? (Hint: YES)
This Letter by the Apostles is Actually REAL! And It Gives Evidence for the Reliability of the Bible
มุมมอง 2.8K2 ปีที่แล้ว
This Letter by the Apostles is Actually REAL! And It Gives Evidence for the Reliability of the Bible
How Advanced Technology Has Finally Deciphered the Dead Sea Scrolls
มุมมอง 5252 ปีที่แล้ว
How Advanced Technology Has Finally Deciphered the Dead Sea Scrolls
New Archaeological Discovery Supports the Reliability of the Bible: Gideon Inscription
มุมมอง 7273 ปีที่แล้ว
New Archaeological Discovery Supports the Reliability of the Bible: Gideon Inscription
Pompeii: How a Volcano Destroyed an Ancient City
มุมมอง 4.7K3 ปีที่แล้ว
Pompeii: How a Volcano Destroyed an Ancient City
Proof of Miracles: These Are the Miracles I've Personally Experienced
มุมมอง 4763 ปีที่แล้ว
Proof of Miracles: These Are the Miracles I've Personally Experienced
Have you read the Gospel of Mary Magdalene? I highly recommend you do. Trust me, Jesus was married and had children. I'm not sure why it's so hard to believe he has descendants to this day.
Definition of hearsay: the report of another person’s words as a witness.
Wasnt it a young man like puberty age?
The Bible isn't "historical" evidence. It is not a historical text; it has no other volumes to compare itself to in order to form a historical consensus. It doesn't even include dates or a timeline in the text. For example, if 500 years from now we are trying to determine if World War 2 was a real historical event, we would have access to thousands upon thousands of competing volumes and documents from different authors and published at different dates, all claiming the same dates, scenarios and characters. this is strong historical evidence. With the Bible, we have all anonymous authors, with no dates, describing different variations of the same accounts in a compendium of short-stories that we know for fact was intentionally doctored by political motivated institutions multiple times throughout history. Obviously, we can draw from other forms of archaeological and non-Christian literature to determine historical legitimacy for many Christians figures and stories, but the Bible in and of itself is not historical. Even if you are Christian, belief in the Bible as factual (not historical) requires faith, not objective reality.
They were attempting to arrest him and he slipped out of his garment to avoid capture, just as Joseph had left his coat behind as he fled from Potipher’s wife. Even if you have to run naked don’t let yourself be captured by the authorities. Run.
Look for Morton Smith
The garment falling and exposing nudity is another hint to the Old Testament. Jesus was to die, he was in the Garden going through the turmoil. Adam and Eve, were in the garden when they sinned, and then realised they were naked and shame became them. Jesus being arrested, the symbol of the male figure running in a shroud of linen, aka the son of god, the linen falling and exposing nudity. Exposing the flesh of man. Linen in the ancient Mediterranean was a common dressing for the dead. Jesus would be wrapped in linen mere hours later after he was killed. And the nudity exposed without shame as the figure of the male ran from the garden represents the nudity of man as god created them before the fall of Adam... both of these things happened in a garden. Which was symbolic. The fall of man in a garden, the fall of Christ to his death in a garden. The linen shroud, representing the death of Christ, falls, and man is cleansed of his sin... nude without shame as the sin is cleansed. That's what the figure of the male running represents... there's a reason why the running figure is mysterious, and it's esoteric and spiritual...and if you read the New Testament, you will know Jesus spoke in parables and symbology. But I guess you guys prefer bumming instead. @dr.bitterbrains-xf9pr
Jesus was definitely crucified for caught being with a naked boy and not for anyone's sins
@@STREETJESSUS ummm what??? It wasn’t illegal for men to sleep with young boys back then. It was actually quite common. Of all the theories for why Jesus was crucified, this was is definitely the most out there
@@loganpeterjones they are following a satanist called ammon on youtube, who claims jesus was a child trafficker...edgy meme boys. they don't really understand history or the depths of symbology within these ancient texts.
@@loganpeterjones yes but somone who claimed to be god while sleeping with kids was supposedly punished
@@STREETJESSUS ???
check out Dr Ammon Hillman at Lady Babylon for more depth on this.....
no thanks, hes trying to say jesus was a homo pedo. the garment dropping at the arrest represents the nakedness of Adam and Eve being revealed once the snake introduced them to Sin, now Jesus is to die, the garment drops and nudity is back being revealed, the shame is no more in christ, the sin is no more in christ because humanity who wants back in the heavenly garden will repent and sin no more. It's called symbology. Jesus in the Garden, Adam and Eve in the Garden. But yeah... it's easier and funner to think someone was being bummed I guess. Great job guys.
Can you count? I see 1 not 3
There are some who believe that the fall of Satan didn't occur before Adam and Eve but rather when Jesus was crucified. At that moment, all beings in the universe saw the true character of Satan and cast him out of heaven. He then came down to Earth for a short time. Keep in mind that God measures time differently, with one day for God being equivalent to 1,000 years. Therefore, if Satan fell on the fourth day, he would only have two days left until the Sabbath, which marks the seventh millennium. This could be considered a short time, representing the “last days”
You didnt understand anything! Watch lady babylon
Youre right, they 'win' a point. Problem is christianity is complete unprooveble nonsens.
I gotta tell ya kid, you do good work.
John 21:20-24 confirms the Gospel of Judas 🙏😮😮😮🤔🤔🤔🧐🧐🧐. This is Foster watching from Ghana .
Ammon!
Thanks brother.
So why is the book of John so different than the others? Why are they all different? Because they were told by different people in different times
Will there be speaking in the movie?
But it was a young boy, wrapped in medicinal linen and naked. That still doesn’t explain this scenario at all.
No it was a young man. And it fits this scenario quite well.
@@loganpeterjones “neaniskos” is definitely used to describe a boy, usually one who is a servant as well
Not medicinal, but burial, and “gynou” simply means body and not what Hillman suggests.
@@owenswabi That’s simply not true. It often means “young man.” For example, it means young man in Matt 19:20, 22; Acts 5:10. Also, notice how in 1 John 2:13, the young men (νεανισκοι) are distinguished from the children.
medical linen? what are you talking about? everyone wore linen back then. and it's symbolic! the garment dropping at the arrest represents the nakedness of Adam and Eve being revealed once the snake introduced them to Sin, now Jesus is to die, the garment drops and nudity is back being revealed, the shame is no more in christ, the sin is no more in christ because humanity who wants back in the heavenly garden will repent and sin no more.
Check out Dr. Amon Hillman. He is a Classical philologist, who is the upmost expert in reading ancient Greek wait till you hear what he has to say
They looks like us 😮 i mean us as Arab
How does anyone claim to know what was in the “original manuscripts” if we have no “original manuscripts” ? Who were those “eyewitnesses” ?
Line upon line and precept upon precent there is often multiple meaning and at times deeper meanings. Such as when they speak of the king of Tyre but jumps to a strange place called the Garden of Gods I’m sorry sir you error. There are three heaven in the Bible the heaven above, then a 2nd heaven where Angels roam and a third heaven where Gods thrown. I’m sorry sir you error.
I was just telling my daughter last night how my favorite books are the Acts and Paul's letters that follow. The fact that the epistles lack the emotion of the Gospels makes them easier to really internalize and think critically about.
As for your upcoming topic, James is written to believers with the context of proving your faith interpersonally (practically), whereas Paul's teachings get limited to him discussing our position with God. God knows our heart. Clearly these aren't actually contradictory, and Paul's writings also deal with outwardly proving our faith too. I used to be a firm believer in the camp that "faith without works is dead" refers to a lack of good works being evidence of the proclaimer is in fact a nonbeliever. This still can be true, but I now believe it primarily is linked to Romans 1:17: "For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith." "Faith without works" is dead because it will not reproduce. You cannot lead others to Christ when your life is in conflict with Christ. Generations fall away because they see the works (or rather, lack of) in their elders.
Thanks for your comment! I look forward to hearing your thoughts on my upcoming video. I used to take a similar position to you (that James is giving the explanation of faith from an outside perspective, and Paul from God’s perspective), but now I have a slightly different perspective. I think that James and Paul are using different definitions for the word translated faith (pistis). This word can mean belief, trust, or faithfulness. James is using the definition of belief, meaning that belief is not enough (even the demons believe and fear), whereas Paul is using pistis to mean faithfulness. Even the passage you just cited (Romans 1:17) is quoting Hab. 2:4, and the word pistis is a translation of the Hebrew word for faithfulness. Paul often uses pistis to mean faithfulness, as I intend to show in the video.
I also believe Jude is written by Jesus' brother.
This is such a farrago of lies, distortion, cherry picking and bad history. Like some baby-faced TH-camr can "prove" things that better minds haven't been able to.
These were all found in a trash heap, right? Did anyone question why these were all trashed?
Jewish children become adults at 12 and 13 years old. Boys bar mitzvahs are at 13 years old.
I hope that these outstanding Papyri are, at the very least, digitally scanned and made public so that those with the desire can attempt to translate them. I suspect there is more coming that will be revealed from 1st Century scholars. And thank you for this, as I did not know there was the "potential" for a great deal more to be revealed. But I am not surprised.
Actually Yehovah has been used by rabbis, they kept the Holy name secret only speaking it to pass it on to younger rabbi scholars.
In my scripture studies it has become clear that the account in Genesis 1 is only an account of ***spirits*** being created IN HEAVEN. The waters, firmament, earth, plants, sun, moon, stars, animals and humans created are ALL spirits being prepared to be given a physical part. The "days" are days in Heaven because the spirit for our sun is not created until the fourth day. God rested for one of His days after Genesis 1, but not after Genesis 2 so we know the creation of Adam and Eve in Genesis 2 is NOT the same account as the creation of male and female spirits in Genesis 1:26-27. In Genesis 2:7 two things come together: the breath of life (the spirit created in Genesis 1) and dust of the earth. So we do not have yet an account of the creation of our physical earth and universe except for the few details in Genesis 2. Since God is eternal, the earth and universe can be old.
Scholars claim the Epistle of James was written by the half-brother of Jesus, but another option that is not discussed and it was more likely written by the Apostle James. Peter, James, and John retained their apostleship to the circumcision (Galatians 2:9). The epistle was addressed to the twelve tribes who will be scattered during the last days or Daniel's 70th week. Obviously it had to be written before James' martyrdom in Acts 12. The epistle does not record the conclusion of Acts 15:7-11 in the matter of salvation by grace through faith.
Starting at 11:07, I explain why I think it’s more likely written by James the brother of Jesus than by another James.
@@loganpeterjones I appreciate your thoughts, but the big three on the mount of Transfiguration would be likely to write epistles especially after the Epistle to the Hebrews. James, Peter, John, and Jude were all apostles to Israel and God has unfinished business with Israel. Daniel's 70th Week needs to be completed and it is called the last days as mentioned in James 5:3. James is not intended for Christians doctrinally. May the Lord bless.
@@Purewordsoftruth1611 thanks for your comment. I agree that the epistle of James was written to Jews (specifically Jewish believers), but I don’t see why this fact makes it unlikely to be written by James the brother of Jesus
@@loganpeterjones in the grand scheme of things the human author doesn't really matter. It seems to make sense to me of the Jewish nature of the letter, which the brother of Jesus could have understood also. May the Lord bless you.
@@loganpeterjones I agree with you. Most likely it was written by James of Alphaeus (Matt 10:3), one of the 4 cousins of Our Lord. (Matt 13:55, sons of St. Joseph's elder brother, Judas is Thaddeus, son of James in Luke 6:15 who wrote the Letter of Jude in the Bible). St. James was the Bishop in Jerusalem and was martyred there. In Jude verse 1, he calls himself a slave of Jesus Christ and brother of James. Likewise, in James 1:1, he calls himself a slave of God and of the Lord, Jesus Christ. Both were older (Judas, a few and James, several years) than Our Lord.
James? One of his cousins? Sure. Jesus didn’t have a biological brother or sister. If he did, He wouldn’t have said to Mary, standing/kneeling next to John by the cross “Behold your son.” And to John, “Behold your mother.” He placed John in charge of caring for Mary upon His passing, and in fact John stayed under John’s roof from that point on. This wouldn’t have been necessary had James or others were brothers of Jesus. James was likely Jesus’ cousin or other close relative of Jesus.
The Greek word adelphos does indeed mean brother, indicating that James was a biological brother. Regarding the passage you bring up, to me it seems likely that Jesus said this on the cross because at that time, Jesus is biological brothers were still skeptical of him and his ministry. It wasn’t until Jesus‘s resurrection appearance to James that James became a believer.
Jesus most certainly had four 1/2 brothers and at least two sisters. The Holy Bible says in Mark 6:3, "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him." Brothers mean brothers, not cousins. Even in the counterfeit bible called the Douay-Rheims states, "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joseph, and Jude, and Simon? are not also his sisters here with us? And they were scandalized in regard of him."
I don't care at all who wrote James. All that really matters is that it is extremely early. The argument that it is poorly attested in the earliest writers is no evidence at all. Those writers were from the Paulinist-gentile tradition and were not familiar with the writings of the Jewish-Christian church. I feel certain that the original Gospel of the Hebrews, James, Jude and the Didache are all First Century.
I mostly agree with your criticisms of Dibelius, but that does not make a positive case for the authenticity of James. We know that several early texts were falsely attributed to James, and the church tradition assigning James the just to this epistle comes rather late. Nothing in the epistle itself points to James' authorship anyway, except for the name, which as you discussed is quite common. And I don't buy your process-of-elimination guess. Although it is possible that James the Just wrote the epistle, the evidence just doesn't seem to back up that tradition.
Thanks for your comment! I agree that there are several other documents claiming to be by James, but the key distinction between them and the epistle of James is that these other documents were written long after James was already dead, automatically excluding him from possibly being the author. However, as I argued in the video, the internal evidence in the epistle indicates that it was written very early, well during the lifetime of James. This is important because it would be much harder for a document to be passed off as being by James while James was still alive to either confirm or reject its authenticity. Especially since James, as the leader of the church in Jerusalem; had numerous resources at his disposal, it would’ve been fairly easy for him to confirm that he was not the author, in which case it is unlikely so many people would have continued copying it down and disseminating it, knowing that he was not actually the author.
@@loganpeterjones Thanks for the reply. As far as I know, though, we don't have any good evidence that places James before ca. 230 CE. In particular, I don't buy Bauckham's argument that it must have been written earlier. The letter may seem to be aimed at Christians, but it pretends to be addressed to Jews, not Christians. This pretense does not mean that it was written at a time when Jewish Christians still thought of themselves as Jews, as Bauckham argues. Besides, even if Bauckham is correct that it was written to Jewish Christians, well, there were plenty of Jewish Christians around in the second and third centuries.
Thanks for your response. I do think we have good evidence for an early date: specifically the arguments from Bauckham I mentioned. When you say that the author could have been pretending to be writing at an earlier date, and therefore create an epistolary situation that matches an earlier date, it’s important to realize that you’re now moving on to an argument based on the idea of pseudonymity, in contrast to your original argument that we simply don’t know which James is being identified in the opening of the letter. I don’t find it very plausible that the indications of an early date are the result of pseudonymity. While it’s technically possible a pseudonymous author would go to such lengths to deceive his audience, ancient readers didn’t engage in the same type of critical evaluation of texts to determine authenticity that is performed by modern post-enlightenment scholars. Quite frankly, most ancient readers would be more likely to determine authenticity based on whether or not something conformed with their theological viewpoints. It seems unlikely that the author would go to such ingenious pains to deceive a future, more critical audience rather than focusing his efforts on deceiving his present audience. And while there certainly were Jewish Christians later on in the church, the author of this letter doesn’t seem to be distinguishing Jewish Christians from Gentile Christians. He seems to be starting with the assumption that believers in Jesus are Jews. This would indicate a very early date for the letter before many Gentiles were converted to the Jesus movement
@@loganpeterjones Thanks for the reply. I do tend to agree with you that the author was not trying to make the content of his letter seem like it came from an earlier date. Or at least, he was not trying very hard. Unfortunately, your argument that it looks early is unpersuasive, and so that is where we disagree. More specifically, I disagree with you that the letter was "written before there was a clear distinction between Jews and Christians". This does not seem to me to be the case. Please note that I am *not* arguing the letter is pseudonymous. (Although it could be---in my opinion that is an open question.) Instead, I was referring to a different kind of "pretense": the address to the twelve tribes of Israel. This cannot be taken as literally intended. It might be an open letter written to all Jewish people, but obviously it was actually sent to each individual Jewish person. Furthermore, if the scholars are correct who argue that chapter 2 is a response to Paulinism, then the author would have expected Christians to read it, and not just Jewish people. But this does not mean the author failed to distinguish between Jewish and Christian believers. Nor does it strike me as requiring any kind of "ingeneous pains". It just means he used a literary device whereby he addressed a letter to Jewish people even though he appears to have expected Christians to read it.
@@WalkingWithGodstuff Thanks for your comment, and for clarifying your position. As for your argument, you claim that the letter could not literally be sent out to each and every Jewish person. However, Bauckham explains that Jews regularly wrote letters from Jerusalem to circulate in the Diaspora. After giving a series of specific examples, Bauckham writes, “We can be sure that such letters were regularly sent, as more general references to communications from the temple authorities to the Diaspora on calendrical and other matters confirm” (p. 20). He explains that James is “addressed not to a specific Christian community in its specific situation, as the major Pauline letters are, but to any and every Jewish Christian community in the Diaspora to which it might circulate” (p. 21). Therefore, the opening can indeed be taken as literally intended, and we need not suppose any “pretense.” As for your second point that some scholars see it as responding to a later version of Paulinism, I think that’s a great point, and that’s what I intend to dedicate my entire next video to. I originally intended to include that topic in this video, but I realized it would be too long. But overall, there is no need to suppose James is using some sort of literary device by addressing his letter to the 12 tribes (what device this would be, I’m not sure). Rather, it seems most likely that he is following a standard convention of writing a letter from Jerusalem to the diaspora with the expectation that it will be circulated.
I think you might find this youtube channel Very interesting , a video that will get you straight there is " Have You Not Read The 7777th verse via Truth is Christ ; enjoy
Thank You for showing me that there are a multiple in past and now of scholars that think their the "fixers" of ALMIGHTY INFALLIBLE AUTHORITY GOD JESUS CHRIST "WORD" (KJVB Isaiah 52: 14 Revelation 19: 13 John 1: 1 -17,17:17:14:6) ; Ecclesiastes 12: 12-14 . Congratulations on your Marriage
KJV James !!!!!!!
I’d say we’re somewhat more educated about science, life and religion than those 2000+ years ago.
INTERESTING--
That is untrue, there is a case before the Supreme Court right now upholding Jewish women's rights to their religion, which allows abortion.
How is it untrue? I literally cited my sources.
Just because they are Jewish does not mean they are doing the correct thing under halachik (torah) law. Just because they identify as Jewish does not mean that they actually hold like the Jewish law tells them. So, it is possible fire these women to be Jewish and pro abortion despite what the torah (bible) says.
@@loganpeterjones Josephus is a suspect narrator as he was a toady for the romans and told them what they wnated to hear rather than what the truth is. Also the Nicene Council dabbled a bit in their translation of the Bible. Soo for the history "sources" they are suspect. Currently for the last few 1000 years or so, abortion has been permissible by Jewish Law. Halacha so there is indeed a case before the supreme court currently because based on religion Jewish women should be able to access abortion. Interesting to see how it goes but I'm thinking that Xtian nationalism is the evil of the day.. We will see. America is not a Christian Nation so ..yea.
Yea your leveling all the other parts that contradict it. Bibles and holy scriptures are just men writingbshit down to justify what they believe
They were clearly okay with circumstantial abortions at the very least. Arguing anything else is anti-biblical. There's literally an abortion ritual for cheating wives in Numbers. "‘The priest shall bring her and have her stand before the Lord. Then he shall take some holy water in a clay jar and put some dust from the tabernacle floor into the water. After the priest has had the woman stand before the Lord, he shall loosen her hair and place in her hands the reminder-offering, the grain offering for jealousy, while he himself holds the bitter water that brings a curse. Then the priest shall put the woman under oath and say to her, “If no other man has had sexual relations with you and you have not gone astray and become impure while married to your husband, may this bitter water that brings a curse not harm you. But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”- here the priest is to put the woman under this curse-“may the Lord cause you to become a curse[a] among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.” Numbers 5:18-22 That's not even getting into all the child-sacrifice we're finding the Israelites did with the Molak sacrifices, which have been glossed over by centuries because we couldn't interpret the Hebrew word "Molag" and assumed it was another deity. Turns out it was a burnt offering of a child to get favor from YHWH. Now we know that the at least some Israelites practiced child sacrifice again, it's right there in the Exodus. “You shall not put off the skimming of the first yield of your vats. You shall give Me the firstborn among your sons. You shall do the same with your cattle and your flocks: seven days it shall remain with its mother; on the eighth day you shall give it to Me." Exodus 22:28-29 I swear, Christians will read anything but the Bible.
Exposure still exists in many poorer cultures.
To be fair, these people also banned wearing cotton and wool at the same time, the eating of bat eggs, and their holy book includes a talking magical donkey. Hard to pick and choose the parts one should take seriously. As it turns out, historically, it's only taken seriously if it agrees with your own political and social views. Otherwise we would be bashing infants against rocks all the time (Psalm 137:9) and feeding children to bears if they make a joke about baldies (Kings 2:23-25) So, if we pick and choose the bits that are sacred at any given time, are they actually sacred? To be fair though, I don't think I've ever seen a jew eat a bat egg.
Considering they were called racial slurs i think you should add some black people, I'm just saying.
Can you rephrase that statement?
There was 1 man named Adam, the first man. God didn't make like 12 of them to gang bang Eve.
In PALESTINE 🇵🇸 also Jesus’s dad was Joseph. You’ve been gaslit for 2,000 years
It’s anachronistic to refer to the land that Jesus lived as “Palestine.”
Muslim propaganda