God demanded through revelation, that the fraud, lies, and impositions being presented and preached about him, as facts, from the “so called testaments” cease!!!
You must be talking about evolution
The Pig-tooth Man
And whatever happen to Ida
Here are more complex frauds
A similar bone structures in a bat's wing, a porpoise's flipper, a horse's leg, and a human hand that indicate their evolutionary origin in a common ancestor;
Archaeopteryx, a fossil bird with teeth in its jaws and claws on its wings, the missing link between ancient reptiles and modern birds;
Peppered moths on tree trunks, showing how camouflage and predatory birds produced the most famous example of evolution by natural selection; but the pictures were fraudulent and the moth were simply glued on the trees.
Darwin's finches on the Galapagos Islands, thirteen separate species that diverged from one when natural selection produced differences in their beaks, and that inspired Darwin to formulate his theory of evolution;
fruit flies with an extra pair of wings, showing that genetic mutations can provide the raw materials for evolution;
a branching-tree pattern of horse fossils that refutes the old-fashioned idea that evolution was directed;
drawings of ape-like creatures evolving into humans, showing that we are just animals and that our existence is merely a by-product of purposeless natural causes.
My personal Fav Haeckel's Fraud
In 1866, guided by the bias of evolution and atheism, German embryologist and philosopher Ernst Haeckel, concluded that evolutionary the stages of species from single cells to humans (phylogeny) were repeated in embryological development (ontogeny) of each species. He surmised that, being highest on the evolutionary tree, human embryos should pass through the stages of the lower or more primitive species, namely single cell, to fish, to amphibian, to reptile, to mammal, to human. So convinced that he was right, he self-proclaimed the "Biogenetic Law": Ontogeny Recapitulates Phylogeny. However, it was neither a law nor correct. It was fraud.
Haeckel supplied drawings as evidence of his “scientific law,” which can still be found in textbooks to convince students that evolution is a fact. The truth is, Haeckel’s drawings are wrong. Worse yet, they were intentionally created to mislead viewers to “see” what Haeckel believed to be true.
Find me 1 fraud based on fact not opinion in the bible. I'll wait.
Which testaments? Christians have an Old and a New Testament. The LDS also have the Book of Mormon, another testament. Muslims have the Qur'an, which they believe to be a complete testament.
And prove your revelation.
Just an FYI, all those "so-called testaments" prohibit fraud.
But Valerie, the OT belongs to the Jews. You can't hi-jack it from them to suit your context. Christianity has nothing to do with the Jews and their faith. Just ask a Rabbi and you'll see how quickly they shred the NT to pieces.
The Christians claim they have the New Covenant now, so the OT and its laws no longer apply to them. Their words, not mine.
Christians can't play "Double Dutch" whenever they want to make their point. Please be consistent.
Nonsense. Jesus was a Jew, as were all the original disciples. And not every Christian thinks the old covenant magically doesn't apply to them any more. The Covenant with Noah (made in the Old Testament) applies to everyone. What was decided in the Acts of the Apostles was not that the Mosaic Covenant no longer applied, but that non-Jews didn't need to convert to Judaism in order to be Christian. Jewish believers were still expected to be Jewish. And in the Gospels, Jesus never said He came to abolish the law.
And your claims are completely irrelevant to the discussion, since both Testaments prohibit fraud.
Amen! Amen! Matthew 5:17-1817"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."
Jesus came to fufilled the law, because we all fall short.
Please hold your breath while you wait. your religion will keep you perking.
earnestshubs.. I dreamed about you last night! You lived in a flat that could be moved to the inner city (near airport). This high rise flats moved on stilts and runners! weird!!!! x
Truthhurts...Please don't post a mile of your canned "copy and paste" stuff that has nothing to do with the hub...or i might have you thrown outta here for rules vialation. haha
There seems to be such a hatred of Christ it is palpable. If there is no God then why bother with a man from galilee from two millenia ago ?
Even the devil can't get his mind off Jesus.
Please sir...God and your christ are not related.
Funny you should use the term indoctrination, it would seem to me that the religion of Humanism that is so prevelent today is what is being indoctrinated now, I have written a hub on this, truly you might find it interesting reading
Wrong fatfist. There is a seamless transition from the Old Testament to the New Testament. The Old Testament is revealed in the New Testament.
Galatians 3:29 "And if you be Christ's, then are you the seed of Abraham, heirs according to the promise."
Galatians is part of the NT, make. I bet you didn't know that. It's ok, not many so-called Christians do anyway.
Anybody can write X testament that is a SEAMLESS and SMOOTH transition from the OT, Quran, etc. All one would have to do is write that same sentence you just typed into X testament.
Show us this smooth transition from the OT where it mentions Jesus, please.
If you went in court and made this claim in front of a judge, you would either get laughed out of court, or get slapped with a straight-jacket and thrown in an insane asylum. What makes you think you can get away with this nonsense here?
Of course I know that Galatians is in the New Testament. The fact that the New Testament was written by Israelites from the tribes of Judah and Benjamin kind of blows chunks in your theory. If I was to go to court for this I would be swearing on a Bible that has both the Old Testament and the New Testament. Thanks fatfist, you are allowing me to show that the roots of Christianity are as old as the world itself.
So I can't pass up this opportunity. Jesus Christ is the Word.
John 1:1-3 "1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made."
Paul used to belong to the OT mafia. Then he became disgruntled and switched to Christianity by citing a dream as his excuse. Then he writes a letter to the Galatians. No original of the letter is known to survive. The earliest reasonably complete version available to scholars today, named P46, dates to approximately the year 200 A.D., approximately 150 years after the original was presumably drafted. There is no original. Anybody can add what they want to it. Was there a version control system in place to track revisions?
You can swear to the OT & NT & Quran for all the judge cares. You will still look like a fool in court. I hope for your sake, you don't have Judge Judy.
I can add that same verse you quoted to my X testament and claim that it's a seamless transition from the OT. And according to your church logic, I would be 100% correct. Your logic!
Let's just cut the crap and show us the verses in the OT that mention Jesus, please.
You want us to prove a negative, ya right. Lets see your proof!
Prove a negative? What do you mean?
What do I need to prove?
You need to prove the POSITIVE that Jesus is mentioned in the OT!
You're saying the transition only exists if Jesus is mentioned. If he specifically isn't mentioned then you say there's no proof. You prove the two have nothing to do with each other, we're already satisfied they do we have all the proof we need.
Here you are fatfist, chew on these verses for your transition, and if you know your new covenant as well as you know your own mind, you will see that these verses directly refer to Jesus.
1Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?
2For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.
3He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
4Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
5But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
6All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
7He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
8He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
9And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
10Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
11He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.
12Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
The Gospel writers might also have known these verses, soooo.... (just sayin')
Well, aqua is assuming that the authors did not become biased by surreptitiously "peeking" into the OT.
You see, the jury of authors were sequestered for almost 250 years so as not to induce any bias into their writings. This is what the court did with the OJ Simpson jury in '94. As you can see, the jury wasn't biased in BOTH situations, and their conclusions were TRUTH.
So, I'm gonna have to agree with aqua's assumptions on this one - sorry you evil atheists
If the Old Testament didn't mention a Messiah (Jesus) then the Jews would not be still looking for Him.
Great then, show us the verse in OT with the name "Jesus". Then you can claim a SEAMLESS transition into the NT.
But you say you HAVE Jesus. Why would the Jews be looking for Jesus when he is already there? How can you be so blind to your contradictions?
You should speak to the Jews about this. Some of them are starting to see that Jesus is the promised Messiah from the Old Testament.
Oh make, I did speak to the Jews about the Messiah. And they were quite happy to speak to me. But as soon as I mentioned the name "Jesus" to them, they tried to crucify me. Luckily I was able to escape. I guess my story is proof of the crucifixion; again, according to church logic.
I'm not mentioning Jesus to the Jews again.
Thanks. Without humor, these threads are boring
Most Jews I know don't even believe in Judaism, never mind Christianity.
sounds like the name jesus must be covert...why is that?...cus it sure ain't mentioned in your so called evidence.
Okay here's another verse from the Old Testament that foresees Jesus Christ. The whole chapter of Isaias 53 is a prophecy of the passion of Christ but I'll just post verse 5. You can read the whole chapter to verify it if you want.
Isaias 53:5 "But he was wounded for our iniquities, he was bruised for our sins: the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and by his bruises we are healed."
Do you think the Romans or Jews of 2,000 years ago realized they were crucifying Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of the world's sins? No. But the New Testament was written after it took place.
It's believed that Isaias' prophecies began in Judah around 755 BC.
Tanakh (you call it Old Testament) says
"Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and you shall call his name All~Mighty God...Everlasting Father..."
Messiah is know by these same titles.
He said "if you have seen Me, you have seen the Father"
Moses asked to know the name of GOD...he was told
"My Name is I AM" י ה ו ה
Yahshua (Jesus) said He is the I AM. י ה ו ה
They reason they gave for wanting Him dead is that He being a man, said He is GOD ALL~Mighty.
He is also known as Emmanuel (GOD with us)
Being a Jew...I could go on and on about this...
But what for?
To us, there is no such thing as an Old Testament or New Testament...
only The Testament
My grandmother is Jewish, and to her there is *definitely* a difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament!
Some of my people still do not as of yet walk in the light.
THE KING OF THE JEWS...is just that. KING.
Do you not have any comment on the rest of what is posted here?
My comment was made above on this, in reference to another post -- I wouldn't take the Old Testament as an authority on much, to be honest; too much weird stuff in it.
As to the King of The Jews business, better not let my grandfather hear you say that, with his shotgun (just kidding, your safe, he's Canadian... )
That is cool. I like that quietnessandtrust.
We see it as a continuous and ongoing adding to an original testament...added to by an ongoing revelation...it comes in parts.
Just like the new heaven and new earth...an unfolding of a plan already made.
It is only new from a perspective of time.
by Mark Knowles5 years ago
Some one just accused me of making a personal attack on them because I said they are ignorant of certain facts. Any one who has interacted with me here will know I try not to make personal attacks, other than to make...
by thetruthhurts20098 years ago
Rules of this forum, no swearing, no straw men arguments and no FSM nonsense. Most importantly remember, Ridicule is not an argument. Enjoy. If want to continue to believe you come from a rocky soup. You...
by A Troubled Man5 years ago
If Jesus were to read the book, "On The Origin of Species", do you think He would understand it and support it or reject it?If the mountains of evidence for evolution were presented to Him, would He accept the...
by thetruthhurts20098 years ago
If evolution were true how do you explain homosexuality? If we are just here to past on our genes, doesn't homosexuality seem like a defect? If you're a evolutionist it does. You see what kind of problems the...
by Alexander A. Villarasa3 years ago
The human brain in all its complexities is now just being unraveled, however slowly, via various research modalities at various/multiple research centers across the country. The team of Ed Lein (a...
by kirstenblog11 months ago
Darwin acknowledged from the start that the eye would be a difficult case for his new theory to explain. Difficult, but not impossible. Scientists have come up with scenarios through which the first eye-like structure,...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.