Paul and his 500 unknown witnesses ?

and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born. 

(1 Corinthians 15:5-8)

It's funny how Paul never mentioned Mary Magdalene at all how comes? How absurd that Paul gave a random number of 500, yet gave no more information about them?. Why did Paul omit Mary Magdalene since the very first person according to the gospels was Mary Magdalene. Doesn't this tell us that Paul was not really aware of the so called resurrection event!. Paul even goes as far as saying :

But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:8)

Notice how Paul said anyone who preaches a different gospel then what he has then let them be cursed. Point one is that Mark, Matthew, Luke and John decades later preached a different gospel since not a single quotations Paul made about Jesus is found in any of the gospels. Point two the four gospels explicitly mention Mary Magdalene as a disciple of Jesus and allegedly for the first to meet Jesus after the so called resurrection event, which Paul never made any mention of. Clearly that a problem for Christians to solve.

The other problem we have with Paul's exaggerated number is that Peter statement contradicts with it.

And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,) (Acts 1:15)

The above tells us Peter spoke to about 120 people not 500. Nor does the gospels speak of Jesus allegedly met with 500 people? Also one has to question why did Paul say 500 and did he expect to get caught out?. And the answer is no why because of many reasons below is a list of few reason why Paul could have lied written by Bob Seidensticker he makes some extremely valid point why the whole appearance to  500 witnesses  cannot be accepted.

Let’s think this through. Imagine that we’re in that church in Corinth and we have just received Paul’s letter.

1. What does “appeared” mean? Jesus “appeared” to Paul as a vision (Acts 9:3–9), but Paul uses the same verb to refer the appearance of Jesus to Peter, James, and the 500 as well as to Paul. Could Paul think that the appearance to everyone was as a vision?

2. Who are these 500 eyewitnesses? Names and addresses, please? To find out, someone would need to send a letter back to Paul, at that moment 200 miles across the Aegean Sea in Ephesus. If a church member had the money, time, and guts to write this letter, why would Paul have deigned to reply?

Even if Paul had witnessed Jesus in front of the 500 (he hadn’t), it’s possible he wouldn’t have known a single person in that crowd. And even if Paul thought the number were accurate, “500 eyewitnesses” might be all he had heard, and he wouldn’t have been able to back it up with any evidence.

3. How many will still be around? Paul wrote this epistle in about 55CE about a supposed event that occurred over 20 years earlier. Of the 500 eyewitnesses, how many are still alive and still in Jerusalem, ready to be questioned?

4. Who could make this trip? Jerusalem is 800 miles away, and getting there would involve a long, dangerous, and expensive trip.

5. How many candidates for this trip? Paul had only started the church in Corinth a couple of years earlier. There would probably have been less than 100 members.* Would even one have the means and motivation to make the big trip to Jerusalem?

6. Who would challenge Paul? If the founder of the church says something, who’s likely to question it? There might well have been people who were unimpressed by Paul’s message, but these would never have joined the church. Others within the church might have become disappointed and left. Even if these people had wanted to embarrass Paul, they wouldn’t have been in the church community to learn of the claim.

7. What did the eyewitnesses actually see? Let’s imagine that we have the money and daring to make the trip, we have a plan for whom to interview in Jerusalem, and we’re rebellious enough to spit in the face of our church’s founder to see if he’s a liar.

After many adventures, we reach Jerusalem. What will the eyewitnesses say? At best they’ll say that, over 20 years ago, they saw a man. Big deal—that’s uninteresting unless they saw him dead before. Had they been close enough to the movement to be certain that they recognized Jesus? Human memory is notoriously inaccurate. There’s a big difference between the certainty one has in a memory and its accuracy—these don’t always go together.

8. So what? Suppose all these unlikely things happen: we make the long trip, we search for eyewitnesses, and we conclude that Paul’s story is nonsense. If we successfully make the long trip back, what difference will this make? Even if we had the guts to tell everyone that Paul’s story was wrong, so what? Who would believe us over the church’s founder? We’d be labeled as bad apples, we’d be expelled from the church, the church would proceed as before, and Paul’s letter would still be copied through the centuries for us to read today!

9. Why is this even compelling evidence? No gospel uses this anecdote as evidence. For whatever reason—that they’d never heard it or that they had and felt that it was uninteresting—the gospels argue that this is unconvincing evidence. Why should we think otherwise?

The above list made by Bob Seidensticker completely destroyed Pauls Lies to Corinthians.

------------------

For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: After that, he was seen of above five hundred brothers at once; of whom the greater part remain to this present, but some are fallen asleep. (1 Corinthians 15:3-6)

Question :

1) Where in scriptures (Tanack) does it state, Jesus will die for sins?

2) Where in scriptures (tanack) does it state, Jesus would be buried and rise after 3 days?

3) Paul said Jesus met Cephas first? Where in the gospels does it say Cephas was the first to meet Jesus?

4) Paul after meeting Cephas, Jesus met the twelve. who was the twelve disciples since Judas was included?

5) Paul said Jesus was seen by 500 brothers. who exactly were these people, why didn't Paul give any names?

6) Paul said 500 brethren saw Jesus. Paul made no mention of Mary Magdalene and the other Mary's or the empty tomb? Didnt Jesus have any female disciples? Luke says he did?

7) If Paul was the earliest to write about the resurrection, why did he not speak of the empty tomb?

Paul was not aware of the empty tomb, nor was he aware of Judas Iscariot or Mary.

we conclude by Paul's own admission

"If my lie is spreading the truth of God why am I judged a sinner " (Romans 3:7)

But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice. Yes, and I will continue to rejoice, (Philippians 1:18)

Corruption!

We must first of all know that the entire Bible is corrupted and unreliable and is mostly filled with man-made laws and corruption!




Bible confirms this "`How can you say, "We [the Jews] are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?' (From the NIV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"



The Revised Standard Version makes even clearer: "How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie.   (From the RSV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"

In either translation, we clearly see that the Jews had so much corrupted the Bible with their man-made cultural laws, that they had turned the Bible into a lie!

(Note the Hebrew text uses the word Torah) so the text should says " How can you say we are Wise and have the Torah of the Lord with us when the scribes have altered it and made it into a lie!"

------------------

See Also Deuteronomy 31:25-29 where Moses of the bible  predicted the corruption/tampering of the Law (Bible) after his death.

The Book of Moses predicted that the Law (Bible) will get corrupted.  The Book of Jeremiah which came approximately 826 years after did indeed confirm this corruption.

Yahweh called himself Baal!

“And in that day, declares the LORD, you will call me ‘My Husband,’ and no longer will you call me ‘My Baal.’ (Hosea 2:16)

-------------

the above verse clearly indicates that Yahweh was known as  Baal.  this tells us people were worshiping him as Baal a false deity.  No wonder Matthew said Jesus and his family went to offer to Baal 

So Joseph got up and took the Child and His mother while it was still night, and left for Egypt. 15He remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophet: "OUT OF EGYPT I CALLED MY SON."

(Matthew 2:15)

The above is a prophecy which Matthew claimed was fulfilled, taken from the Old Testament collection book of Hosea. Let's read this fulfilled passage :

"When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.

(Hosea 11:1)

----------------

Seems like a straight forward prophecy, but if the NT author claims this is a true fulfillment of Jesus then Hosea is telling us an epical story of what happened during that childhood of Jesus. Let's carry on reading the next verse as to get more deep into this story :

But the more I called to him, the farther he moved from me, offering sacrifices to the images of Baal and burning incense to idols. (Hosea 11:2)

Did you catch the joke, Matthew only quoted half of Hosea. he didn't include that Jesus and his family went to offer a sacrifice to Baal. We can conclude "Yahweh is Baal" an idol what pagans worshiped. "The occurrence of Baal in the proper names of families of patriots like Saul, David, Jonathan, Joash (the father of Jerubbaal), and indeed merely such a name as Bealiah, ‘Jehovah is Baal’ (1 Chronicles 12:5)"

Here comes the sucker punch! Below we shall show from the Hebrew text that Yahweh called explicitly clled himself Baal!

Indeed, your husband is your Maker-- His name is Yahweh of Hosts-- and the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer; He is called the God of all the earth. (Isaiah 54:5)

Notice from the above verse Yahweh is Undeniably calling himself the Husband. Interestingly the Hebrew text says  בָּעַל Baal, so the text should read like this :

Indeed, your Baal is your Maker-- His name is Yahweh of Hosts-- and the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer; He is called the God of all the earth. (Isaiah 54:5)

There you have it "Yahweh is Baal" who the pagans worshiped through Idols. Even his alleged son acknowledged it which Matthew tried to hide but got caught out.

Jonathan struggles to answer a simple Question!

It's not shocking to see Jonathan in a predicament where he is unable to answer questions posed on him. Take off instance in this video clip which was taken from the debate between Jonathan mclatchie and Dr Shabir Ally in London. During Question time I asked Jonathan a simple Question wether Jesus was God?. If Jesus was God how does God get tempted and bewitched by Satan!. Simple Question right? Not for Jonathan I thought the guy would explode from his facial expression and vocal stuttering. Jonathan was struggling to answer a Simple Question he's desperate attempt made him lose the plot!.

He said God can make Satan do things by his own permission and he used job as an example?. His answer had absolutely no relationship with the question since Satan willing went to Jesus and wiling left him. Notice how Jonathan said God must of given permission to Satan to do certain things? Really Jonathan.!

He further said everything already belonged to Jesus as mentioned in Mark and Matthew but Satan was refereeing to the spiritual kingdom? Jonathan really lost the plot. If that's the case Jonathan Why did Satan offer him the spiritual kingdom when Satan knew  His father was the owner? Jonathan knew he wasn't making any sense so he dropped the mic and sat down.

If Jonathan is troubled by one single Question I asked, I wonder how he's going to cope with Tougher question I have for him.

The Bible alteration is more recent than the introduction of the Happy Meal.

We have evidence of changes that have been made to the Bible, which many Christians regard as the infallible, untouched, and uncorrupted Word of God.

The key question is, where can these alterations be found?

They are found within the Torah, a text read by both Christians and Jews. Let us examine the relevant passages and investigate the claim that corruption entered the text.

The New American Standard Bible is a popular English translation, a revision of the American Standard Version of 1901. It was completed in 1971 and then revised and updated in 1995. I want to highlight one major change in one passage of the NASB — a case in which the 1995 update alters — and is intended to reverse –  the text of the 1971 NASB.

Those dates are important in understanding the reason for this change. …

----------------

Now, let us look at the analysis of come critical Bible verses which have been edited in the context of contemporary views on abortion which brings us to the text I want to highlight here as another example of politicized distortion via translation: (Exodus 21:22-25.)

 

Here is how Exodus 21:22-25 read in the New American Standard Bible’s 1977 revision of its 1971 original translation:

 

“And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is not further injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.” (Exodus 21:22-25)

 

You can see how this fits in the context of the chapter. Here is another category of victim for which another set of punishments for violence is given. If a pregnant woman gets struck “so that she has a miscarriage,” but is not herself injured, then the man who struck her must pay a fine. But if the woman herself is injured, then the same rules and punishments for striking any other (non-slave) person apply — “life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, etc.”

But here’s the same passage in 1995 in the updated current version of the NASB:

“If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.”  (Exodus 21:22-25)

“So that she has a miscarriage” has been replaced with “so that she gives birth prematurely.”

Wait… what?  Why the distinction between miscarriage and premature birth with no injury (presumably to the fetus/baby)?  Because this change in the text fits with the new view on abortion which started to pervade U.S. politics starting in the late 1970s:

Here's what happend :

something changed between 1977 and 1995 — something that had nothing to do with scholarship, language, accuracy, fidelity or readability.

 

American politics had changed between 1977 and 1995. It had polarized and radicalized millions of American Protestants, rallying them around a single issue and thus, as intended, rallying them behind a single political party.

 

In 1977, the sort of American Protestants who purchased most Bibles couldn’t be summed up in a single word. But by 1995, they could be: “abortion.”

 

And for anti-abortion American evangelicals, Exodus 21:12-27 was unacceptable. It suggested that striking and killing an unborn fetus was in a separate category from striking and killing a “person.” Strike and kill a free person, you get the death penalty. Strike and kill an unborn fetus, you get a fine.

 

And so in 1995, like those earlier translators who invented and inserted “Junias,” the translators of the NASB reshaped this passage. “She has a miscarriage, yet there is not further injury” would, in consideration of the changes in American politics since 1977, henceforth be transformed into “she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury.”

 

Politics — specifically, the political desire to control women — shaped the translation of that text. The translators changed the words of the Bible to make it seem like it supported their political agenda. They changed the words of the Bible so that others reading it would not be able to see that its actual words challenged and contradicted their political agenda. …

 

Conclusion :

 

So the Bible is the “unchanging and inerrant” word of God Almighty, according to these fundamentalists who “read the Bible literally”… until, apparently, it says something that they don’t like.  And then, what’s the solution?  Apparently, the solution is to change the text to say what they want it to say. Isn't this sufficient evidence proof that the bible has been changed recently.

Imagine due to certain legal policy the words of the bible change!!

Doesn't this remind you of what the book of Jeremiah said?

How can you say we are wise and have the Torah when the lying scribes have changed it (Jeremiah 8:8)

 

The (Real) Ten Commandments (EXPOSED)

                              

Most people are familiar with the "Ten Commandments" that were given to Moses in the book of Exodus (Ex. 20:3-17), but what these people don't realize, is that these are not the Ten Commandments that were placed in the Ark of the Covenant.  God didn't even call the commandments mentioned in Exodus 20, The Ten Commandments.  The actual Ten Commandments were given in Exodus 34:14-26.  As you can see below, they are much different than the ones that Christians are fighting to put up in our schools and courtrooms.

                              

_________________________________________________________________________

                                

                                   The Ten Commandments

1.  For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God:

2.  Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.

3.  The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep.

4.  All that openeth the matrix is mine; and every firstling among thy cattle, whether ox or sheep, that is male.

5.  Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest: in earing time and in harvest thou shalt rest.

6.  And thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, of the firstfruits of wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year's end.

7.  Thrice in the year shall all your menchildren appear before the LORD God, the God of Israel.

8.  Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven; neither shall the feast of the Passover be left until the morning. 

9.  The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring unto the house of the LORD thy God.

10.  Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk.

___________________________________________________________________________

After giving these commandments, God said...

Exodus 34

27  And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel.

28  And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

This is the only place in the Bible in which you will see commandments from God being call "The Ten Commandments".

-----------------------------------------------

Evidence Jesus was a follower of the Law of OT

A) “For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished.  Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”  (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)  Clearly the Old Testament is to be abided by until the end of human existence itself.  None other then Jesus said so.

B) All of the vicious Old Testament laws will be binding forever.  "It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid."  (Luke 16:17 NAB)

C) Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets.  He hasn’t the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament.  "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets.  I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.  Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place."  (Matthew 5:17 NAB)

D) "All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness..."  (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB)

E) "Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God." (2 Peter 20-21 NAB)

F) Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law.  Mark.7:9-13  "Whoever curses father or mother shall die"  (Mark 7:10 NAB)

G) Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating.  He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: “He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.”  (Matthew 15:4-7)

H) Jesus has a punishment even worse than his father concerning adultery: God said the act of adultery was punishable by death. Jesus says looking with lust is the same thing and you should gouge your eye out, better a part, than the whole.  The punishment under Jesus is an eternity in Hell.  (Matthew 5:27)

I) Peter says that all slaves should “be subject to [their] masters with all fear,” to the bad and cruel as well as the “good and gentle.”  This is merely an echo of the same slavery commands in the Old Testament. 1 Peter 2:18

J) “Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law" (John7:19) and “For the law was given by Moses,..." (John 1:17).

K) “...the scripture cannot be broken.” --Jesus Christ, John 10:35

Did King David and King Solomon have the law with them?

Ask any Christian did King David and King Solomon ever read the Torah. The most sound answer would  be a direct yes, but the question is did they really know of the Torah. If they did why didn't they obey certain laws which were directed to them, take for example :

A King must not multiply wives to himself. (Deuteronomy 17 17)

yet we know King Solomon had hundreds of wives (1 Kings 11:1-3). The text even goes as far as saying the more wives you have would turn your heart away from the Lord. Now had King Solomon ever read the Torah wouldn't he apply it's law and commandments upon himself. the the same applied to King David he had many wives, how about this law :

A King must not multiply horses to himself. (Deuteronomy 17:15-16)

Again we know from the Bible King Solomon had thousands of horses. (1 Kings 4:26). Had King Solomon ever read the Torah, or even had it read to him by a priest quoting the law from Deuteronomy wouldn't he have observed it. 

Here's the interesting part which proves King David and King Solomon did not have a copy of the Torah with them. we shall show  how the scribes have tampered with the texts to save themselves from such embarrassments, let's take it step by step.

When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law, taken from that of the Levitical priests (Deuteronomy 17:18)

The continuation of the law of Deuteronomy  reads the "King should write for himself on a scroll a copy of the is law"  did this happen? and the answer is no, we have no evidence from the Bible whatsoever, where King David or King Solomon wrote on a scroll a copy of the law The closest we get is, where King David instructs his son King Solomon the following :

"I am going the way of all the earth. Be strong, therefore, and show yourself a man. "Keep the charge of the LORD your God, to walk in His ways, to keep His statutes, His commandments, His ordinances, and His testimonies, according to what is written in the Law of Moses, that you may succeed in all that you do and wherever you turn, 

( 1 kings 2-3)

The above passage could also be used by Christians claiming that King David informed King Solomon to abide by the law of Moses. But notice what the texts from Deuteronomy 17 reads 

"When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law, taken from that of the Levitical priests "

Nowhere did King David or King Solomon write for themselves in a scroll the law of Moses. Nor did they abide by the law which King David had instructed his son to keep and follow.

Had King David really followed the book of Deuteronomy then why did he marry so many women, which was forbidden for him to do so according to the divine law. If  Solomon had really followed the Book of Deuteronomy the why did he also marry so many women and own hundred or thousands of horses which was forbidden for him to do so, again according to the divine law. What's worse they never wrote the law on a scroll as instructed not did any of their priests encourage or remind them the law.

Thus the law of Moses or the Torah (Pentateuch) was not available during the time of King David and King Solomon. Ultimately there are no manuscripts of the Pentateuch which dates back to the time of King David or King Solomon. The most earliest manuscripts which is available for the Pentateuch dates back to around 200BC, that's 200 years before the time of Jesus which says a lot, when the Torah from the time of Moses to Jesus would have been around 1500 years, and not a shred of Manuscript can be located for the last 1300 years prior to 200BC. According to Biblical scholars the manuscripts where lost or deteriorated throughout time. The question is if the manuscripts were lost or deteriorated throughout time how do you know what the original is?. No wonder King David and King Solomon did not follow the law since the law wasn't even with them, It was written much later. 

-----------------------

King David did not punish his son Amnon for raping his sister Tamar why? Read 2 Samuels 13. Rashi says man can marry his step sister.

 

2 samuels 13:13

 

Because he will not keep me from you. I am permitted to you because my mother became pregnant with me when she was still a gentile, pretty woman⁵The laws concerning the taking of gentile woman during war is discused in Devorim begginning in 21:10. The Torah calls her a יְפַת תּוֹאַר, “pretty woman.” that Dovid took conjugally in war. And someone who has a son or daughter from a gentile handmaid is not considered his child for any legal matter.

-------------

Jesus of the NT did not inherit the throne

When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law, taken from that of the Levitical priests (Deuteronomy 17:18)

If Jesus took the throne of David, Luke 1:32 when did he write his own scroll of law of the priest & follow it?

 Deuteronomy 17:19 further states:

"It is to be with him, and he is to read it all the days of his life so that he may learn to revere the Lord his God and follow carefully all the words of this law and these decrees" 

Are they all gods?

Below is a small sample on how names can be attributed to God yet no Jew thinks them to be God, unlike Christians who think calling jesus Lord or Emmanuel makes him God!. All those listed names of people and places will destroy that weak argument Christians make. There's also a list of who is speaking God or the author You decide.

There he set up an altar and called it El Elohe Israel. (Genesis 33:20)

Hebrew (אֱלֹהֵ֥י אֵ֖ל) the god, is the altar god?

Moses built an altar and called it The LORD is my Banner. (Exodus 17:15)

Hebrew ( נִסִּֽי׃ יְהוָ֥ה) yahwh is the banner Is god the banner of the alter?

So Gideon built an altar to the LORD there and called it The LORD Is Peace. To this day it stands in Ophrah of the Abiezrites. (Judges 6:24)

Hebrew (יְהוָ֥ה) yahwh Is the alter god??

There was a certain man from Ramathaim, a Zuphite from the hill country of Ephraim, whose name was Elkanah son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite. (1 Samuels 1:1)

Hebrew ( אֱלִיה֛וּא) ’ĕ-lî-hū  means my god is he!, Does that make Elihu a god?

Year after year this man went up from his town to worship and sacrifice to the LORD Almighty at Shiloh, where Hophni and Phinehas, the two sons of Eli, were priests of the LORD. (1 Samuel 1:3)

Hebrew ( עֵלִ֗י) Eli means my god Does that make Eli a god?

He went to his father's home in Ophrah and on one stone murdered his seventy brothers, the sons of Jerub-Baal. But Jotham, the youngest son of Jerub-Baal, escaped by hiding. (Judges 9:5)

Hebrew (יוֹתָ֧ם) yō-w-ṯām jotham means the perfect god Is jotham a perfect god??

Then the LORD said to Moses, "See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet. (Exodus 7:1)

Hebrew (אֱלֹהִ֑ים) Was Moses a god?

then his master must take him before the judges. He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life.

(Exodus 21:6)

Hebrew (הָֽאֱלֹהִ֗ים) judges are referred as Elohim Are judges gods??

"The strong among the mighty ones shall speak of him and his helpers from the midst of Sheol, 'They have gone down, they lie still, the uncircumcised, slain by the sword.' (Ezekiel 32:21)

Hebrew (גִּבֹּרִֽיםאֵלֵ֧י  ) Were they all gods??

In the third year of Hoshea son of Elah king of Israel, Hezekiah son of Ahaz king of Judah began to reign. (2 kings 18:1)

Hebrew(חִזְקִיָּ֥ה) Hezekiah means mighty god Is Hezekiah a god?

But his bow remained steady, his strong arms stayed limber, because of the hand of the Mighty One of Jacob, because of the Shepherd, the Rock of Israel,(Genesis 49:24)

Is god the rock of isreal?

For in Scripture it says: "See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame." (1 Peter 2:6)

Is god a stone?

So this is what the Sovereign LORD says: "See, I lay a stone in Zion, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone for a sure foundation; the one who relies on it will never be stricken with panic. (Isaiah 28:16)

Is god a stone??

Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar, Perez the father of Hezron, Hezron the father of Ram, (Matthew 1:3)

Was ram the Hindu god his ancestor?

"A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more." (Matthew 2:18)

Hindu Rama??

And all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy souls: for Joseph was in Egypt already. (Exodus 1:5)

Out of his loins ?

If you dwell in this land, I will build you up and I will not pluck you up, for I have repented of the evil that I have done to you. (Jeremiah 42:10)

Does Yahweh repent ?

Jacob set up a stone pillar at the place where God had talked with him, and he poured out a drink offering on it; he also poured oil on it. (Genesis 35:14)

Jacob offering drink to a stone pillar?

 

And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire? (Zachariah 3:2)

Was this Lord speaking of another Lord?

-----------------------------

Whos speaking?

Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven; (Genesis 19:24)

The Lord descended in the cloud and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the Lord. The Lord passed before him and proclaimed, “The Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, (Exodus 34:5-7)

The LORD said to Satan, "The LORD rebuke you, Satan! The LORD, who has chosen Jerusalem, rebuke you! Is not this man a burning stick snatched from the fire?" (Zachariah 3:2)

I have overthrown some of you, as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, and ye were as a firebrand plucked out of the burning: yet have ye not returned unto me, saith the Lord.( Amos 4:11)

But I will have mercy upon the house of Judah, and will save them by the Lord their God, and will not save them by bow, nor by sword, nor by battle, by horses, nor by horsemen. (Hosea 1:7)

And he said, Certainly I will be with thee; and this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee: When thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain. (Exodus 3:12)

Then the LORD said to Moses, "Come up to the LORD, you and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel. You are to worship at a distance,(Exodus 24:1)

The LORD set a definite time, saying, "Tomorrow the LORD will do this thing in the land."So the LORD did this thing on the next day, and (Exodus 9:5-6)

How can you even think of taking this book seriously ?

The LORD would speak to Moses face to face, as one speaks to a friend. Then Moses would return to the camp, but his young aide Joshua son of Nun did not leave the tent. (Exodus 33:11)

Whoever inserted the text saying that God spoke to Moses "face to face, as one speaks to a friend.  (Exodus 33:11) apparently failed to check that this was consistent with the main narrative, which at verse 20 has God saying to Moses "you cannot see my face

But," he said, "you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live." (Exodus 33:20)

---------------------

Christians may try to respond by saying “no that was a metaphorical statement it wasn't a literal Face to Face” but notice the proceeding statement “THEN Moses would return to the camp”. Moses would return to the camp, which means he would have met Yahweh in person like a friend does and have a chat and then get back to his camp. It’s  pretty clear this isn't a metaphorical statement, rather a  literal one.

This puts Christians into a dilemma, if Moses saw the Face of Yahweh why did Yahweh lie and say no man can see his face? If he didn't see Yahweh's Face why does the text say Moses would speak Face to Face like one speaks to his friend?  And please save yourselves from embarrassment by saying one can speak to his friend over the Phone without seeing him. There was No Phones 3000 years ago!!

It makes no sense, one moment Yahweh and Moses speak face to face, next moment Yahweh says to Moses he can’t see his face. unless the entire story was a lie made up by people who did not know what the proceeding verses were as the texts were being tampered and updated.