The God of John's gospel, the God of the Old Testament

a reply to: Akragon

Future? That's a construct of man. Einstein said "the distinction between past, present and future is a stubbornly persistent illusion." It's not reality, it only seems as such while viewed from within the domain of the 4th dimension. God isn't bound by the 4 spacial dimensions as we are, He inhabits eternity. The current understanding is we are in 10 dimensions, 4 spacial and 6 curled in superstrings that are smaller than a particle of light.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

LOL

Neither the past or the future exist... regardless theres no cross in that religion or in said wilderness

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: NOTurTypical

LOL

Neither the past or the future exist... regardless theres no cross in that religion or in said wilderness

The only way for you to make it not a cross shape is to not follow the directions in Numbers 2.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

Your version of their placement makes little sense...

only 4 tribes would be able to see whats going on, and those in the back probably couldn't see or hear

the jewish version is logical at least...

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: NOTurTypical

Your version of their placement makes little sense...

only 4 tribes would be able to see whats going on, and those in the back probably couldn't see or hear

the jewish version is logical at least...

You couldn't see what was going on anyways, a fence surrounded the tabernacle. You had to enter the court.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

perhaps... im still not buyin it brother

theres absolutely no reason for said encampment to be in the shape of a cross

it adds up to Christian dogma... nothing else

just my opinion of course... You're reading into something that isn't there as i've said many times

a reply to: Akragon

Why do you keep saying there is "no reason"?

I've been pointing out that if you follow the directions laid out in the text of Numbers 2 it will form a cross, because of the population sizes of the 4 groups. The eastern group is the largest of the four, the western group is the smallest. The northern and southern groups are smaller than the eastern, and roughly the same size.

All this takes is following the directions explicitly as stated in the text, what makes it a cross and not a + symbol is only due to the population sizes.

a reply to: Akragon

Let's get this first so we can move on to the next, which is that the tabernacle itself is a representation of the human body and the Holy of Holies like a human heart. Even wilder how it's situated right in the center of the cross formed by the encampments.

You need to get this.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

Well for one, there is no cross in that religion...

Moses would have known of the symbol, and that is was one from the Egyptian religion not of his own or of his god

Apparently they also traveled in this formation... and it would make no sense to travel as such... it would leave some tribes vulnerable if they were attacked.

a more compact placement of the tribes is logical where as camping and traveling in this cross formation would be pointless all things considered.

Now to a christian who is looking for these allusions to Jesus... sure it makes sense, but again, that is just dogma... not reality

regardless of population sizes, they wouldn't have stretched their tribes out as you believe... they would have been close to each other not only for protection but also to be close to their tabernacle

I get it my friend... you're totally looking for something that isn't there... and you're free to do so

a reply to: Akragon

Then your reasoning is that they violated the commands of God in Numbers 2? Example, the eastern group went also to the north and south of the tabernacle? Sorry, I don't believe that. Moses was extremely strict with his commands from the Lord.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

not at all... they just were not told to set up in the shape of a cross

maybe you should actually read over the chapter yourself...

It does not say for the tribes to camp next to each other in lines...

they set up on the sides of the tabernacle... the picture i gave is not only from a jewish site, but its perfectly logical all things considered

Theres no cross... its as simple as that

a reply to: Akragon


But did I ever say "they were told to set up in the shape of a cross"? Does that appear in the text of Numbers 2? They weren't told anything about the cross, just as Moses wasn't told anything about the crucifixion of Christ when he was given the absurd command to raise a brazen snake on a pole to cure venomous snake bites for anyone who looked at it, nor was he given an understanding about the significance of him striking a rock and living water flowing out. They're all types and shadows, he might not have even been aware.

God was.

a reply to: Akragon

Look at the graphic on this webpage, I'm not sure how to upload just a photo, but this one actually shows you what it looks like if the 186,000 man group is actually depicted as the largest group and not equal size of the others.

thevoiceofone.org...

a reply to: NOTurTypical

Why would this god knowingly put his people in danger?

For myself, i have little issue believing that this is not beyond the mentality of this entity...

though for a tribe full of women and children, not to mention armies of warriors... the setup you're pushing is not only impractical but dangerous.

this...


IS a defensive setup...where all the tribes are protected by each other... whereas said cross formation just doesn't work... neither for travel or defense

the tribes of each of the ends of this formation would be left vulnerable to attack

it just makes no sense to the logical mind

OF course a Christian site is going to push the cross formation...

a reply to: Akragon

I don't think they moved every day. They encamped, then moved along. All I can tell you, is that's what God said to do in Numbers 2. There are TONS of things He commanded to do in the OT that don't make sense with a casual reading.

a reply to: Akragon

But that graphic is horribly not to scale. The tabernacle on it is the same size as the camps! But you can see that the camps aren't of equal size, and the tabernacle is HUGE comparatively. It was only 150' x 75'.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

There are TONS of things He commanded to do in the OT that don't make sense with a casual reading.

This is true... also one of the many reasons i don't believe said entity was God

regardless i think we've taken up enough space on this thread with this subject

a reply to: Akragon

You know how to post pics, find one from Google images that actually has the eastern group as the largest. Post it here, I don't know how. I saw several.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

sure...



I'll show ya how to post a pic too just for future reference

Find the image and save it to your Cpu... then come back here and click the little v arrow on the top menu beside the "log out" button and the speedometer that takes you to your profile.

the drop down menu has an "upload" button... click that... then click upload (top left corner)

click select files...

Find the image you saved on your Cpu, select it and open...

then click the little cloud with the arrow to upload... once its there click the image

It gives you three or so tag lines.... use the first one

copy and paste it to your reply...

Tadaa!!

a reply to: Akragon

That's a lot of work!

Thanks Aaron.