Friday, 14 October 2016

Paul the deciever !

Paul deceived people to join him 
“Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law. To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.” – 1 Corinthians 9:19-23

---------------------------
Paul is confessing in the above passage that, he acted as a Jew in order to convert them to his faith. He even acted as a pagan so that he can lure them to his religion. The above verse shows that Paul would go in great lengths to spread his religion by deception. Let’s see now what the experts have to say on the above passage.
Loyal D. Rue who is a Professor of religion and Philosophy at Luther college, comments on the passage, he writes:
“In the Christian tradition there is very early precedent for the use of deceptive means for evangelistic purposes. St. Paul himself makes a remarkable admission of his chameleon-like behaviour in the winning converts. Like the consummate used-car salesman, Paul pretends to share the concerns of his immediate audience in order to manipulate them into submitting to his Gospel: “Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law. To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some.”  
By the Grace of Guile: The Role of Deception in Natural History and Human Affairs [Copyright 1994] By Loyal D. Rue page 243-244
In the Book “Shell Games: Studies in Scams, Frauds, and Deceits (1300-1650)” Richard Raiswell says that deception is endorsed in the Bible if it is for just cause:
“In his letter to the Corinthians, Paul describes how he deliberately masqueraded in false colours in order to advance the cause of the faith: ‘To the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law.’ If the apostle can become all things to all men, then it would see that Scripture implicitly endorses deception when practiced in pursuit of a just cause. Perhaps most conclusively, though, God himself seems not have been above engaging in a little deception from time to time. To ruin Ahab, King of Israel, for instance, the Lord became a lying spirit in the mouth of Ahab’s prophets. Later, speaking through the person of Ezechiel to certain of the elders of Israel, God makes it clear that if the prophet appears to have been deceived in some matter, this deception is of divine origin. In the New Testament, Christ also appears on occasion to have been less than honest. When, after the resurrection, Peter and Cleopas set off for the town of Emmaus, they encountered Christ on the road; as they approached their destination, Luke records that Christ pretended to go further.”  
Shell Games: Studies in Scams, Frauds, and Deceits (1300-1650) [Copyright 2004] by Margaret Reeves, Richard Raiswell, Mark Crane page 16 – 17

Further evidence which shows Paul openly confessing to the Christian Corinthians that he used deception against them. The verse states:
Now granted, I have not burdened you; yet sly as I am, I took you in by deceit! – Corinthians 12:16


PAUL EXPOSED!!!!

Thursday, 13 October 2016

Where are the tablets?




The missing tablets !!!!!!

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



We read in exodus 32:15-16 moses received the two tablets which had writings on both sides?

how big were these tablets that Moses had?? Let's find out from Jewish sources!!

Tradition tells us that they were thick square blocks of stone, six handbreadths tall, six handbreadths wide, and three handbreadths deep. In modern measurements, that is about 18″ × 18″ × 9″. The sages of the Talmud demonstrate how tablets of this size—along with a few other relics—fit neatly into the Ark of the Covenant that Moses made as described in Exodus. Talmud, Bava Batra 14a.

From the above explanations which comes from rashis we are told the two tablets were very small that Moses carried with one hand Exodus 32:15

Now coming to Exodus 34:27 where god said write these words down, how does that answer the question where God said this bible you possess is a revelation from me.??? Was the entire Pentateuch written on two small tablets no bigger then a phone book??? 

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

Where are those tablets now?? The answer is missing they are missing we don't have them anymore... Infact Moses predicted after him the Jews will turn to corruption so he ordered the tablets be kept in the ark of the covenant, however this is missing !  


Moses commanded the Levites who carried the ark of the covenant of the LORD,
"Take this Book of the Law and place it beside the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God. There it will remain as a witness against you. (Deuteronomy 31:25-26)


This brings us to another problem : Did the The ark of the covenant hold the tables only ??? 



There was nothing in the ark except the two stone tablets that Moses had placed in it at Horeb, where the LORD made a covenant with the Israelites after they came out of Egypt. (1 kings 8:9)


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


having a golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was a golden jar holding the manna, and Aaron's rod which budded, and the tables of the covenant; (Hebrews 9:4)


Old Testament  tells us the Ark of the Covenent held the tablets only, whereas the New Testament  tells us it also had jar full of manna and Aaron's rod?? The question is why would the book of kings miss out the rest of the contents and hebrews not?? 

Did it take 1500 years until the Jews knew what other contents were inside the Ark? It had to be an unknown Author to tell us.

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





The LORD said to Moses, “Cut for yourself two tablets of stone like the first, and I will write on the tablets the words that were on the first tablets, which you broke. (Exodus 34:1)

When Moses came down from Mount Sinai, with the two tablets of the testimony in his hand as he came down from the mountain, Moses did not know that the skin of his face shone because he had been talking with God. (Exodus 34:29)

--------------
we have couple of damaging problems with these two verses. can anyone tell me what they are?


(Problem 1)

Exodus 34:1 Yahweh says cut out another set of two tablets and he will write the words that were on the first tablets. well that's not true, since the commandments in Exodus 20 are not the same as the second set Exodus 34, thus Yahweh either lied or made an abrogation. Also one should note how comes Moses didn't make mention of the previous commandment being different then the new one? Surely he could not have forgotten what the previous "10 COMMANDMENTS" were, if he could remember to write them down in the book of Exodus for everyone to read? Also from chapter 19 to 34 Yahweh gives Moses even longer laws to tell the children of Israel sure 10 commandments would be nothing for a man who remember 20 chapters of commandments?


(Problem 2)

According to Deuteronomy 10:1-5, following God’s instructions, Moses built a wooden chest before he went up the mountain with the unmarked, second tablets that he prepared. After he came down with them, newly inscribed by God, he put them in the chest that God told him to make. This parallels, and is likely based on, Exodus 34:1-4, where God tells Moses to prepare the second tablets, but makes no mention of the building of a wooden chest for them. Nor is there mention of Moses putting the second tablets in a chest in Exodus 34:29. this means either the author wasn't aware of Deuteronomy or there was not wooden chest made in the first place, which places Deuteronomy as a dubious source in contrast to Exodus.


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


Moses led the people out of the camp toward God, and they took their places at the foot of the mountain. (Exodus 19:17)

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

The Gemara cites additional homiletic interpretations on the topic of the revelation at Sinai. The Torah says, “And Moses brought forth the people out of the camp to meet God; and they stood at the lowermost part of the mount” (Exodus 19:17). Rabbi Avdimi bar Ḥama bar Ḥasa said: the Jewish people actually stood beneath the mountain, and the verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, overturned the mountain above the Jews like a tub, and said to them: If you accept the Torah, excellent, and if not, there will be your burial. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: From here there is a substantial caveat to the obligation to fulfill the Torah. The Jewish people can claim that they were coerced into accepting the Torah, and it is therefore not binding. Rava said: Even so, they again accepted it willingly in the time of Ahasuerus, as it is written: “The Jews ordained, and took upon them, and upon their seed, and upon all such as joined themselves unto them” (Esther 9:27), and he taught: The Jews ordained what they had already taken upon themselves through coercion at Sinai. (Talmud habbat 88a:5)


The Gemara provides the background for this claim: As it is written: “And they stood at the nether part of the mount” (Exodus 19:17), and Rav Dimi bar Ḥama says: The verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, overturned the mountain, i.e., Mount Sinai, above the Jews like a basin, and He said to them: If you accept the Torah, excellent, and if not, there,under the mountain, will be your burial. The nations of the world will claim that they too could have been coerced to accept the Torah. (Avodah Zarah 2b:15)

Rashi Commentary

בתחתית ההר AT THE NETHER PART OF THE MOUNTAIN — According to its literal meaning this signifies “at the foot of the mountain”. But a Midrashic explanation is, that the mountain was plucked up from its place and was arched over them as a cask, so that they were standing בתחתית beneath (under) the mountain itself (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 19:17:2Shabbat 88a).


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


There was nothing inside the Ark but the two tablets that Moses placed [there] at Horeb, when the LORD made [a Covenant] with the Israelites after their departure from Egypt. (2 Chronicles 5:10)

Wait! Somethings not right here? Doesn't the book of Deuteronomy which was supposedly written by Moses himself say " the Torah was also placed inside the Ark of the Covenant".

Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee. (Deuteronomy 31:26)


How comes the Ark which Solomon brought did not have the Torah inside Where did it go?

Daat Zkenim commentary

לקח את ספר התורה הזה, “take this book of the Torah!” according to a Midrash, on this date, the seventh day of the month of Adar, Moses personally wrote 13 Torah scrolls one each for the twelve tribes. He read out of each one before each of the tribes passages of warning, exhorting them to observe the Torah meticulously. He read to the men and women separately, warning them to treasure their Torah scroll and protect it from all hazards. Moses took the thirteenth Torah scroll and deposited it in the Holy Ark next to the second set of Tablets. This interpretation is based on the text of this verse, which appears portray him as instructing the priests to do so, [as being “only” a Levite he had no access to the Holy Ark inside the tabernacle. Ed.]


Rabbeinu Bahya Commentary


. ושמתם אותו מצד ארון ברית ה' אלוקיכם, “you are to place it on the side of the Ark of the Covenant with the Lord your G’d.” It was to be placed inside the Ark, on the side of the Tablets. The verse refers to the text of the song in Haazinu. It should be deposited there next to the Torah scroll seeing that its text was part of the Torah. It was to remain there permanently.


(Talmud Bava Batra 14b:3


Rabbi Meir, who says that the Torah scroll rested inside the Ark, what does he do with this verse: “Take this Torah scroll and put it at the side of the Ark” (Deuteronomy 31:26)? The Gemara answers: He requires that verse to teach that the Torah scroll was placed at the side of the tablets, and that it was not placed between the two tablets, but it was actually placed inside the Ark at the side of the tablets.


How comes the Torah scrolls were not inside the Ark of the Covenant, where did it disappear to if the chest was unopened? Either Solomon picked up the wrong Ark of the Covenant or the people of Moses did not listen to his instruction and put the Torah inside the Ark of the Covenant. This means the author who claimed in Deuteronomy 31:26 that the Torah was placed inside lied and gave misinformation to its readers, deceiving them to believe something which never happened.




If the "Torah" was placed in the Ark of the Covenant by the followers of Moses by his instructions (Deuteronomy 31:26), how comes it wasn't in the Ark when Solomon brought it back?  (2 Chronicles 5:10)

Where did the Torah go? Who opened the Ark and took out the Law of Moses, which was supposedly in the safest place on earth, inside the Ark of Covenant build by the order of Yahweh (Exodus 25:10-40)

Christians claim they have the Torah from the time of Moses, yet according to the own biblical sources the "Torah"(law of Moses) was missing before the time of Solomon.

The question is, how do you know the "Torah" which you have now is the exact same Torah which Moses wrote and put inside the Ark? How do you even know if Moses even put the Torah inside the Ark? If Moses's followers really put the Torah or Law of Moses inside the Ark, why wasn't it found inside the Ark?

containing the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant. Inside the ark were the gold jar of manna, Aaron's staff that had budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant. (Hebrews 9:4)


Christians rather than asking us about the Torah of Moses. Ask yourself where and what happened to the Law of Moses i.e. the Torah which Moses wrote placed inside the Ark. How did it disappear into thin air?  If it was that easy to open the Ark and take the Torah, then it wouldn't be hard to rewrite a new Torah.


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





Rabbi Shimon said to him: Is it possible that the Torah scroll was missing a single letter? But it is written that God instructed Moses: “Take this Torah scroll and put it by the side of the Ark of the Covenant” (Deuteronomy 31:26), indicating that the Torah was complete as is and that nothing further would be added to it. (Talmud Menachot 30a:7)



If nothing was included after the Torah was placed inside the Ark (Talmud Bava Batra 14b:3), how did (Chapter 31:26 all the way till the end of Deuteronomy chapter 34:12 make its way to the Torah when it was safely locked inside the Ark? Who opened the Ark and added all those chapters?





Moses snatched the tablets from Gods hand.

"the Holy One wanted to seize them from Moses’s hand, but Moses’s hand had the better of it and seized them from Him."

[Jerusalem Talmud Taanit 4:5:2]

Wednesday, 12 October 2016

half man half goat?

Do you believe in Half Man Half Goat? The Bible does


We read in the fairy tale book Isaiah, yahweh putting his judgement on the nation and how the creatures of nature will react, and amongst the creatures we find a half man half goat? Let's read the verse :

The wild beasts of the desert shall also meet with the wild beasts of the island, and the satyr shall cry to his fellow; the screech owl also shall rest there, and find for herself a place of rest. (Isaiah 34:14)

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

If you read from the beginning  of the chapter, it speaks on  how yahweh will start his judgment ,the stars will dissolve his sword is drenched in blood, his vengeance will start  smokes reaching the heavens burning from generations to generations etc... But the interesting part is when we reach verse 14.. How the creatures of earth will start communicate and adress each other amongst them is a creature known as SATYR?

One must know what a SATYR is? 


Oxford dictionary definition :

satyr
ˈsatə/
noun
noun: satyr; plural noun: satyrs; noun: wood satyr; plural noun: wood satyrs
  1. 1
    GREEK MYTHOLOGY
    one of a class of lustful, drunken woodland gods. In Greek art they were represented as a man with a horse's ears and tail, but in Roman representations as a man with a goat's ears, tail, legs, and horns.

    ----------

    Enough said........ Can you really accept such absurdities!!!

Tuesday, 11 October 2016

Seems like bible has many gods?


Nowhere was Jesus ever called God, nor did he claim to be one ! Yet the very same bible is filled with other prophets and men's who were called God!




Moses was called a God ? 

Then the LORD said to Moses, "See, I make you as God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet. (Exodus 7:1)

Aaron will be your spokesman to the people. He will be your mouthpiece, and you will stand in the place of God for him, telling him what to say. (Exodus 4:16)

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

Isaiah was called Lord ? 

Again the LORD (Isaiah) spoke to Ahaz (Isaiah 7:10)

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

People thought Herod was a god ?

They shouted, "This is the voice of a god, not of a man."
(Acts 12:22)

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

The Jews were called God's 

"I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High.'
(Psalms 82:6)

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

Even Paul and barnabas were called god's 


When the crowds saw what Paul had done, they raised their voice, saying in the language of Lycaonia, “The gods have come down to us in the likeness of men!” They called Barnabas Zeus, and Paul they called Hermes, because he was the chief speaker. The priest of Zeus, whose temple was in front of the city, brought oxen and garlands to the gates, and would have made a sacrifice, joined by the multitudes." (Acts 14:11-13).


How about the IAM statement other then Jesus, Prophets and men's have also made the same statement :


John 8:58 Jesus said IAM 

John 9:9 the blind beggar said IAM 

Exodus 3:4 Moses said IAM 

Genesis 22:11 Abraham said IAM 

Matthew 26:22 All the disciples said IAM 

So are they all gods??

Do Christians speak the truth? Let the bible speak



True or False?



Almost all Christians  claim they have the Holy Spirit with them (or Inside Them) this is when they start to prophesy and boast they were inspired by the Holy Spirit, but the Golden Question is how do they know they don't have an Evil Spirit with them? It's Crystal Clear from the Bible Yahweh has Two Spirits that Proceed to Humans, One Good the other Evil! 

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


Now the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD terrorized him. (1 Samuel 16:14)


("The evil spirit from God came upon Saul, and he prophesied.")

The next day an evil spirit from God came forcefully on Saul. He was prophesying in his house, while David was playing the lyre, as he usually did. Saul had a spear in his hand
(1 Samuel 18:10)

What's worse Paul the founder of Christianity wasn't aware if he had the Holy Spirit yet Christians claim they have lol

Yet in my judgment she is happier if she remains as she is. And I think that I too have the Spirit of God. (1 Corinthians 7:40)

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

Christians are in trouble now unless they can prove to us they have the Actual Good Spirit from Yahweh  not the Evil Spirit? ASK THEM FOR PROOF AND WATCH THEM TURN TO INSULTS!! ( don't forget to ask them how does God Have Good and Evil Sprits doesn't that sounds Absurd lol )

manuscript tampering

Bart Ehrman on Luke 3:22 and Anti-Adoptionism

this post, Is  about Bart Ehrman’s discussion of Luke 3:22 in his book, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early Christological Controversies on the Text of the New Testament.
The context of Luke 3:22 is Jesus’ baptism by John.  The King James Version for that verse reads: “And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.”  Ehrman’s argument is that “in you I am well pleased” is actually an attempt to theologically correct an earlier reading: “today I have begotten you.”  Why was this attempt made, according to Ehrman?  Essentially, there were adoptionists who believed that Jesus became the Son of God and Christ at his baptism, when God anointed Jesus with the Holy Spirit.  But there were Christians who disagreed with the adoptionists, believing instead that Jesus was God’s son before his baptism.  The Christian scribes who believed that Jesus was God’s son prior to his baptism changed the text to read “in you I am well pleased” instead of “today I have begotten you,” since the latter reading implied that Jesus became God’s son when he was baptized.  The change made Luke 3:22 say that God was acknowledging Jesus as his son, not making Jesus into his son at that time.
Ehrman offers text-critical grounds for his view that “today I have begotten you” was an earlier reading than “in you I am well pleased.”  In the second-third centuries C.E., Ehrman argues, “today I have begotten you” was the predominant (maybe even the only) reading.  Ehrman mentions such names as Justin, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and others, but I’ll quote Justin Martyr.  Justin says the following in Dialogue with Trypho 88, when discussing Jesus’ baptism:


For God never said to any angel what he said to Jesus: "You are my Son. Today I have become your Father." God also said, "I will be his Father, and he will be my Son."
(Hebrews 1:5)


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

Just want to add another part to barts discussion :


(Biblical resurrection tampering!)




but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. (Luke 24:3)


In Luke 24:3,Codex Bezae and most of the Old Latin texts do not have the phrase 'the Lord Jesus' in 'they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus' Clearly, the phrase 'the Lord Jesus' was added by a scribe to make sure that the Gospels recorded that the women went to the right tomb. The phrase 'the Lord Jesus' only occurs in the Gospels here and in Mark 16:19 (another addition by a scribe!) and it is hard to see why the phrase would have been dropped if it were original to Luke's Gospel. 

-----------


He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: (Luke 24:6)


In Luke 24:6,Codex Bezae and most of the Old Latin texts do not have the phrase 'He is not here, but has been raised'. Clearly, this phrase was added by a scribe to make sure that the women knew that Jesus had been raised It is hard to see why the phrase would have been dropped if it were original to Luke's Gospel. 
-----------

When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. (Luke 24:40)


Codex Bezae and many Old Latin texts do not include Luke 24:40 - 'having said this, he showed them his hands and feet'. Either some scribe added this verse, or some scribe dropped it. It is hard to see why any scribe would drop the verse. It is easy to see why a scribe would add the verse, basing it on John 20:20. He would have had to alter it as John 20:20 mentions 'hands and side' and there was no spear-thrust in Luke's Gospel, but that would only be a small change. It would all help to show that the Gospels 'recorded' a physical resurrection. 

--------------------------
There you go We have clear evidence that Christians tampered with the text of the Gospels to make them better evidence for the Resurrection. How much tampering went on that we don't have evidence of?

Bible is clear the Messiah will be saved !


If the Disciples of Jesus doubted why should you agree?.



It's sounds absurd when Christians claim the crucifixion was a fulfilment and the disciples were aware of it?? 


If that's the case why did they doubt? Surely they should of been waiting for such a fulfilment right! Why did Peter rebuke Jesus when Jesus apparently mentioned he has to suffer! Surely Peter should of accepted it right?? Unless he knew the messiah has to live and not get crucified!!!!  


Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. "Never, Lord!" he said. "This shall never happen to you!" (Matthew 16:22)

Below is a few passages showing how the disciples doubted Jesus was crucified 

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


When they heard that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it. (Mark 16:11)


These returned and reported it to the rest; but they did not believe them either.
(Mark 16:13)


Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen. (Mark 16:14)


When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted.
(Matthew 28:17)



But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense. (Luke 24:11)


And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? (Luke 24:41)


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

Note the Old Testament is very explicit in stating that the Messiah and righteous ones will,be saved by God. 


Messiah is saved 


Now this I know: The LORD gives victory to his anointed (MESSIAH). He answers him from his heavenly sanctuary with the victorious power of his right hand
(Psalm 20:6)


For the LORD loves the just and will not forsake his faithful ones. Wrongdoers will be completely destroyed; the offspring of the wicked will perish.
(Psalm 37:28)

Those who know your name trust in you, for you, LORD, have never forsaken those who seek you.

For the LORD is righteous, he loves justice; the upright will see his face.

You, LORD, will keep the needy safe and will protect us forever from the wicked,

You will destroy their descendants from the earth, their posterity from mankind.

Do not hide your face from me, do not turn your servant away in anger; you have been my helper. Do not reject me or forsake me, God my Savior.

Love the LORD, all his faithful people! The LORD preserves those who are true to him, but the proud he pays back in full.

The LORD loves righteousness and justice; the earth is full of his unfailing love.

For those who are evil will be destroyed, but those who hope in the LORD will inherit the land.

I was young and now I am old, yet I have never seen the righteous forsaken or their children begging bread.

But all sinners will be destroyed; there will be no future for the wicked.

The LORD protects and preserves them-- they are counted among the blessed in the land-- he does not give them over to the desire of their foes.

"Gather to me this consecrated people, who made a covenant with me by sacrifice."

For the LORD will not reject his people; he will never forsake his inheritance.

May his descendants be cut off, their names blotted out from the next generation.

but the wicked will be cut off from the land, and the unfaithful will be torn from it.

you will not join them in burial, for you have destroyed your land and killed your people. Let the offspring of the wicked never be mentioned again.

he says: "It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth."


The above statements found in the bible is enough to nail those absurd a claims made by Christians!!!!




Does semen come out from the rib and backbone as christians claim?

Refuting missionaries 


Sperm is stored in the epididymis which is not in the testicles but above them, the sperm which comprises 2 to 5 % of seminal fluid that travels through the epididymis up
Through the vas deferens duct, and around the bladder. Together the seminal vesicle and the prostrate gland, produce 90% of the fluid in semen. This mixture travels through the prostrate and is joined by mucus from the bulbourethral glands, just below the prostrate. 

It is at this point that the semen is fully formed. Compromising both sperm and the seminal fluids as we can see just prior to coming out the body. All components of the semen are mixed near the prostrate, which is centred in the body, between the backbone and the ribs, or between the spine and the chest, which is between the back and front of the abdomen or torso. and the most certainly not in the testicles or in the lower body at all.  

Someone may object by saying the ribs are too high to say "the prostrate is between the backbones and the ribs" to this objection we answer that the head is still between the shoulders even though it is too high and the genitals are still between the legs even though they are too high.







The above explanation should be sufficient that the  answer is NO, Semen does not come out from the ribs or backbone rather it's formed between the two!


So let man consider from what he is created. He is created from an emitted fluid that issued from between the sulb and the tara’ib. (86:5-7)

Shaykh `Abd al-Wahhâb al-Turayrî of IslamToday.com writes:
The phrase “mâ’ dâfiq” (emitted fluid) is not restricted in meaning to sperm but is used in Arabic for both the sperm and the egg. Ibn Kathîr, in his commentary on this verse, writes: “It emanates from the man and the woman, and with Allah’s permission, the child comes forth as a product of both.”

…The words translated as “backbone” (sulb) and “ribs” (tarâ’ib) are not understood in Arabic to belong to the same person. Arabs understand the “sulb” to refer to a part of the male body and the “tarâ’ib” to a part of the female. Ibn Kathîr states: “It refers to the ‘sulb’ of the man and the ‘tarâ’ib’ of the woman…” He then quotes this interpretation on the authority of the Prophet’s companion Ibn `Abbâs. This same understanding is given in all the major classical works of Qur’anic commentary.


breasts (plural) in Arabic is الثديين  althadiiyn. Now interestingly in Ezekiel 23:3 
in the Arabic Bible the word for breasts is Taraib, ترائب,. The question is why 
didn’t they use الثديين althadiiyn and instead used ترائب Taraib? Well the reason 
behind is this is, the word ترائب Taraib describes the female in a whole, unlike 
the word breast الثديين althadiiyn which is specific. The other reason is 
“embarrassment” since Ezekiel 23 is giving a description of two harlots 
and their indecent behaviour, the Arabic Bible thought it would be better 
to use the word ترائب Taraib to describe the actions towards the women in a 
less vulgar way and avoid using names of specific body parts for the readers. 
For example the Arabic Bible would translate it as “ the (women) were 
touched by men” not “their (breast) were pressed by men” the wordings 
change the description portrayed by the author.
 
ترائب Taraib  is a unique Arabic word for women.
 
Lane’s Lexicon says:
Tara’ib: … most of the authors on strange words affirm decidedly that it (tara’ib) is peculiar to women. (Lane’s Lexicon, p.301) 
All of the major commentaries of the Quran confirm that the tara’ib is 
peculiar to women. Ibn Katheer writes in his tafseer (commentary) of the Quran:



It (fluid) emanates from the man and the woman, and with Allah’s permission, 
the child comes forth as a product of both. (Tafseer Ibn Katheer)

Thus when the Quran uses the word “Taraib” it is referring to the women. Now coming to the word sulb. Sulb صُلْبِ mean “loins” we can also confirm this from the Arabic Bible. Exodus 1:5 used the word صُلْبِ sulb to describe the offspring of Jacob. صُلْبِ sulb is a masculine word and will not be used for the female gender, its only used for males. Thus, صُلْبِ sulb and tara’ib are separate from each other male and female.  


So Surah 86 is not referring to the man only, rather the verse is referring to man and women together. “Fluid that issued from between the man and the women”


"Sperm" between the backbone & ribs is not the correct reading. The arabic word used in Surah 86:6 is مَاءٍ (water) not نُطْفَةً (sperm). The correct reading should be "water" between the backbone & ribs. From context Surah 86:5-8 is speaking about the creation of man.






synecdochical 


  1. adjective
     using the name of a part for that of the whole or the whole for the part; or the special for the general or the general for the special; or the material for the thing made of it
    synonyms:synecdochic
    figurativenonliteral
    (used of the meanings of words or text) not literal; using figures of speech
For the record there are various way (methods) of explaining this. Sulb means male and Tara'ib means female. You can also using modern day technology see where the fetus or developed baby is situated the positioning showing its between the backbone and ribs of the mother.










lets the turn the tables


Sperm coming out from David's bowels?
------------
And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy SEED after thee, which shall proceed out of thy BOWLES, and I will establish his kingdom. (2 Samuel 7:12)

And David said to Abishai, and to all his servants, Behold, my son, which came forth of my BOWELS, seeketh my life: how much more now may this Benjamite do it? let him alone, and let him curse; for the Lord hath bidden him. (2 samuel 16:11)

Thy seed also had been as the sand, and the offspring of thy bowels like the gravel thereof; his name should not have been cut off nor destroyed from before me. (Isaiah 48:19)

The true God whom Christians are avoiding.

We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true...