Biblical matters

Fancy a pint? Join the crai­c and non-rugby topics here.

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Dave
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 24601
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 4:27 pm

Re: Biblical matters

Post by Dave »

UlsterAreBrill wrote:
if one non-christian man managed to injure a group of, if possible, violent young Christians boys, who would be in the right here?
I didn't answer the question because it is not relevant as you have twisted the sentences that I quoted from the Bible.

Let's get something clear, no person from this era was a Christian. Therefore introducing Christian's into this question you wish me to answer has no meaning. It wasn't the man who injured said boys it was two bears acting at behest of an apparently all powerful God.

There is no evidence to say that the boys were violent. However, to indulge you slightly, for someone to defend themselves using reasonable force against any sort of violence is of course a natural response.

If an all powerful being is intervening on behalf of a man, said being has unlimited options. Unleashing two bears to maul the boys was certainly callous and sadistic. He could have enabled a harmless escape with a really fast horse or the bears could have just scared the boys away. The options are limitless yet a reprehensible option was deliberately selected.

If you wish to ask me would it be right for an all powerful being to use two bears to maul a group of violent Christian boys, threatening a non-christian man? I would say it is still unethical, due to the unlimited responses at said beings disposal.
I have my own tv channel, what have you got?
User avatar
BaggyTrousers
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 30337
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: España

Re: Biblical matters

Post by BaggyTrousers »

UlsterAreBrill wrote:
BaggyTrousers wrote: Brillo ould son, you'd need to catch yersel on pal, no hint of the yutes being violent whatsoever, just mouthy wee gets, still, as Merv says, a good maulin's too good for them.

You also show yourself remarkably unaware of the times you are discussing. Folk (not FOLK) would have had a life expectancy of no more than about 40 years, barring Methusila .... or an odd crucifixion, a plague or seven, being fed to the lions like so many Scott Baldwins or similar simple twists of fate.

Young girls were married off, or probably killed as useless ugly bitches & a drain on the family, by the time they were in their teens. You may take it from me, one both old and eminently wise, that that man's daughters were not of adult age as you and I know it. Stop pontificating on matters you are guessing about, it reduces your credibility to that of an omadon, or to be kindly, a big simple lad. >EW :D

Anyway, who won between the Glens?
I'll admit it was wild speculation but not out of the question in regard to the young guys/boys/teens

However i'm not wrong on the life expectancy thing - take a re-read at Genesis 5 and you'll see Methuselah was 969 yes however no where was it recorded anyone lived only until 40

I'll paraphrase

Adam died when he was 930
Seth, 912
Enosh 905
Lamech 777

and so on. You've been helped :thumleft:
Brillo, I've just split my dickie laughing (I always dress formally for luncheon) and in mid convulsive bellowing my spats flew off and whacked a dog. You're a bad man Brillo

I'm now trying to decide if you are a comic genius or an utter fuchtard.

I'd say ould Adam's Apple would have been right and manky at that age. Did those chaps by any chance reveal the secret of fantastically/fantasy long life for I think we can agree that a world without my presence would be unrewardingly drab for the survivors?

Of course, you are simply being obtuse by pointing out such long-lived legends, you are referring to folk of some stature I assume. You may as well say that ancient Greeks lived to a ripe old age by quoting the example of Socrates, whose life was sadly cut short at 70 not by old age but by his conviction for impiety & death sentence which allowed him to "name his own poison", and of course he decided on a snifter of hemlock.

Socrates, of course, pre-dated the boy Jesus however, to suggest that the ancient Greeks lived to be septuagenarians would be a nonsense, one's station in life being crucially important in terms of survival and an average of 35 was common both in Greece & Ancient Rome. Amongst the major factors would have been high infant mortality dragging down the average.

I chose to believe received wisdom that those figures you state are merely fanciful biblical folklore.
NEVER MOVE ON. Years on, I cannot ever watch Ireland with anything but indifference, I continue to wish for the imminent death of Donal Spring, the FIRFUC's executioner of Wee Paddy & Wee Stu, and I hate the FIRFUCs with undiminished passion.
User avatar
BR
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 18579
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:12 am
Location: On a roll.

Re: Biblical matters

Post by BR »

Dave wrote:What, child abuse in the Bible? What about the time god made two bears maul 42 children for insulting a very sensitive Elisha.

2 Kings 2:23-25New International Version (NIV)

Elisha Is Jeered

23 From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” 24 He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys. 25 And he went on to Mount Carmel and from there returned to Samaria.
They called him Baldy! Fair enough, I say. I think he was very reasonable to stop at only two bears.
Can I come out from behind the sofa yet?
www.stoutboys.co.uk
User avatar
BR
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 18579
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:12 am
Location: On a roll.

Re: Biblical matters

Post by BR »

pwrmoore wrote:
UlsterAreBrill wrote:
pwrmoore wrote:
UlsterAreBrill wrote:
Dave wrote: I'm pretty sure it is in the Bible?

Mark 9:43

If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out
Not following what you're saying I'm afraid, my point is that it's a contradiction to be abuse children and so on and claim you're a christian. And if they do claim they are a Christian, I would really question where they get it from. Explain the reasoning behind the verse you quoted rather than just plucking it from thin air
Genesis 19 v 8
Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.
Sounds like child abuse to me...
There is no mention of what age they are so to claim they are children because they are referred to as daughters is immediately a wrong assumption - just because they haven't "known man" means little here as well as the context of where Lot was, in Sodom, was full of homosexuality, hence why the people trying to rape the men refused his daughters and tried to force their way in to the house
It is possible they were over the age of consent (neither you nor I know the answer to that and it does not mention whether these daughters are 5, 10, 15 or 40) but I don't see any justification for making an assumption that they have reached adulthood) this man has given his daughters without their consent to other men to use as they see fit. That is an abuse of his children. I'm not prepared for you to wriggle out on a technicality that they could be adults they are still being abused.
Hang on! Surely the assumption is that 'as you see fit' means he trusts the person.

If, for example, he was to hand his 12 year old daughters to me to do as I see fit, then there would be no issues of child abuse. (Unless having to work in a kitchen 20 hours a day is now counted as child abuse by the tree-hugging liberals)
Can I come out from behind the sofa yet?
www.stoutboys.co.uk
User avatar
Dave
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 24601
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 4:27 pm

Re: Biblical matters

Post by Dave »

BR wrote:
Dave wrote:What, child abuse in the Bible? What about the time god made two bears maul 42 children for insulting a very sensitive Elisha.

2 Kings 2:23-25New International Version (NIV)

Elisha Is Jeered

23 From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” 24 He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys. 25 And he went on to Mount Carmel and from there returned to Samaria.
They called him Baldy! Fair enough, I say. I think he was very reasonable to stop at only two bears.
You and Merve should invest in a few grizzlies.
I have my own tv channel, what have you got?
User avatar
BR
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 18579
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:12 am
Location: On a roll.

Re: Biblical matters

Post by BR »

Dave wrote:
BR wrote:
Dave wrote:What, child abuse in the Bible? What about the time god made two bears maul 42 children for insulting a very sensitive Elisha.

2 Kings 2:23-25New International Version (NIV)

Elisha Is Jeered

23 From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” 24 He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys. 25 And he went on to Mount Carmel and from there returned to Samaria.
They called him Baldy! Fair enough, I say. I think he was very reasonable to stop at only two bears.
You and Merve should invest in a few grizzlies.
We're going to catch a big one. We're not scared.
Can I come out from behind the sofa yet?
www.stoutboys.co.uk
User avatar
BaggyTrousers
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 30337
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: España

Re: Biblical matters

Post by BaggyTrousers »

BR wrote:
Dave wrote:
BR wrote:
Dave wrote:What, child abuse in the Bible? What about the time god made two bears maul 42 children for insulting a very sensitive Elisha.

2 Kings 2:23-25New International Version (NIV)

Elisha Is Jeered

23 From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” 24 He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys. 25 And he went on to Mount Carmel and from there returned to Samaria.
They called him Baldy! Fair enough, I say. I think he was very reasonable to stop at only two bears.
You and Merve should invest in a few grizzlies.
We're going to catch a big one. We're not scared.
I'm reminded of the tale by Myles NaGopaleen about the two men who worked with bears in the circus, one routinely worked in the cage with them, the other terrified. One day the braver man was smitten with chronic pain and told the other, "the show must go on".

In a ruddy funk, the less brave man was stricken with fright all day but amazingly at showtime, in he went with the bears and the show did go on. Taken aback his partner asked him why he had appeared fearless having always been terrified of the bears. The new hero smiled and produced two hypodermic needles from a drawer and declared, "there's safety in numb bears".

I'm happy to join you & Merv in this enterprise of scaring mouthy wee gets with bears, but perhaps the ould hypodermic would be well advised.

Smoothies rule. >EW
NEVER MOVE ON. Years on, I cannot ever watch Ireland with anything but indifference, I continue to wish for the imminent death of Donal Spring, the FIRFUC's executioner of Wee Paddy & Wee Stu, and I hate the FIRFUCs with undiminished passion.
User avatar
UlsterNo9
Lord Chancellor
Posts: 5725
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 10:02 pm

Re: Biblical matters

Post by UlsterNo9 »

In a fight 2 bears vs 42 boys..... who would really win?

The bears would have no chance. Clearly made up.

I'd pay to watch that. Half time entertainment.
BRING OUR BOYS HOME #BOBH
THROWN UNDER THE BUS AND EXILED 14/04/18
User avatar
big mervyn
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 14375
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 2:22 pm
Location: Overlooking the pitch (til they built the old new stand)

Re: Biblical matters

Post by big mervyn »

Methuselah must have been gutted to miss out on 4 figures.
Volunteer at an animal sanctuary; it will fill you with joy , despair, but most of all love, unconditional love of the animals.
Big Neville Southall
User avatar
Dave
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 24601
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 4:27 pm

Re: Biblical matters

Post by Dave »

42 on 2...even Ulster couldn't mess up that overlap.
I have my own tv channel, what have you got?
User avatar
BaggyTrousers
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 30337
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: España

Re: Biblical matters

Post by BaggyTrousers »

big mervyn wrote:Methuselah must have been gutted to miss out on 4 figures.
Almost certainly, parrots will seldom have been as gutted. I hear he was from a family of long livers and floating kidneys. I further believe he used the age-old children's counting tactic of "one, two, skip a few, ninety-nine, a hundred" which would place him closer to a true age of around 39, a brave decent age for the times.

Problem solved.
NEVER MOVE ON. Years on, I cannot ever watch Ireland with anything but indifference, I continue to wish for the imminent death of Donal Spring, the FIRFUC's executioner of Wee Paddy & Wee Stu, and I hate the FIRFUCs with undiminished passion.
User avatar
BR
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 18579
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:12 am
Location: On a roll.

Re: Biblical matters

Post by BR »

UlsterNo9 wrote:In a fight 2 bears vs 42 boys..... who would really win?

The bears would have no chance. Clearly made up.

I'd pay to watch that. Half time entertainment.
But 39 of the boys were out with knee injuries.
Can I come out from behind the sofa yet?
www.stoutboys.co.uk
User avatar
Neil F
Lord Chancellor
Posts: 4045
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:34 am
Location: Berlin

Re: Biblical matters

Post by Neil F »

big mervyn wrote:Methuselah must have been gutted to miss out on 4 figures.
If the young-earthers are right, Methuselah had lived for more than half of the entirety of human history and the only thing of note he did was have children. What a boring fecker he must have been!
User avatar
Rooster
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 40137
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 12:39 am
Location: Chicken coop 17

Re: Biblical matters

Post by Rooster »

Neil F wrote:
big mervyn wrote:Methuselah must have been gutted to miss out on 4 figures.
If the young-earthers are right, Methuselah had lived for more than half of the entirety of human history and the only thing of note he did was have children. What a boring fecker he must have been!
Thats those religious types with no TV, just shag every evening for entertainment :lol:
“That made me feel very special and underlined to me that Ulster is more than a team, it is a community and a rugby family"
Rory Best
User avatar
Shan
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 11524
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: Limerick

Re: Biblical matters

Post by Shan »

UlsterAreBrill wrote:
Not at all but my point is, no matter what I write, even if you see it logical or not you can purely dismiss it as "biblical", you don't believe the bible so you wouldnt believe what i'm saying so what is the point?

Anyway if you insist on an answer, there is no contradiction there

Two different laws (statements) need applied two different ways. For example take the two statements, "too many cooks spoil the broth" and "many hands make light work". Take a scenario where you are in a kitchen, if every statement is to be applied in all scenarios, where would that leave you?

The same is true for these two laws. Both have to be applied in different scenarios. Take a second scenario - you are bound to love your neighbour i.e. all mankind. Someone comes in and murders your whole family, but is caught and you are free to punish them as you see fit. Would it be a contradiction for you to exact justice on him by taking his life? Or will you "love your neighbour" and let him walk away with no consequence?

The second command is to be applied to specific scenarios and is a response to sin. If you label it a contradiction you are taking away all consequences of sin
Thanks for the answer.

Just one question - Is it reasonable to assume that people would take revenge on somebody who hasn't sinned against them or wronged them in some way, given that revenge is a reactionary only activity?
It is a man's own mind, not his enemy or foe, that lures him to evil ways.
Post Reply