The "Moon God" conspiracy

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


Ah, Atheist and the Christian bible. Always a fun event to watch Atheist and Christians to duke it out. Sorry I just so much fun seeing these two groups at each others throats over this issue. Now since I'm Jewish this would probably come out different from the other answers you have received in the past. In Leviticus 4:1-2: The Lord said to Moses, "say to the Israelites: When anyone sins unintentionally and does what is forbidden in any of the Lord's commandments. In both these verses the sacrifice of certain animals is for unintentional sins. There is no human sacrifice. In Psalms 40:7-51:16-19 and 2 Samuel 12:13 the passages mention G-d forgiving sins through prayer alone. Also charity is a way to atone for sins and commandment by G-d. This is what I can say of the top of my head. I will have dig for more information later.

reply to post by ManOfGod267


Im not an atheist.

Hope that is clear to you.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


Sorry. I thought you were from seeing many people who identify as Atheist discuss con traditions in the bible.

Originally posted by KJV1611
reply to post by My.mind.is.mine

 

awww, you poor ignorant folks, if you refuse to do your own research I will enlighten you:

Will ye cry unto Baal and forsake the Best of creators, ... ? -- Sura 37:125

Then fashioned We the drop a clot, then fashioned We the clot a little lump, then fashioned We the little lump bones, then clothed the bones with flesh, and then produced it as another creation. So blessed be Allah, the Best of creators! -- Sura 23:14

Of course these sura's seem to contradict Sura 39:62, Sura 40:62, Sura 6:102, and Sura 13:16 but what else is new?

Hey, maybe these suras are referring to the 360 idols stored inside the black cube at Mecca? Since Allah was just one of these 360 gods. (moooohammads favorite I guess).



Source

edit on 16-8-2011 by KJV1611 because: bold

Nothing contradict in those ayat. Creator mean creator. There are someone who create tv, phone, book, songs etc. These guys called creator too.

Originally posted by KJV1611
reply to post by My.mind.is.mine

 

awww, you poor ignorant folks, if you refuse to do your own research I will enlighten you:

Will ye cry unto Baal and forsake the Best of creators, ... ? -- Sura 37:125

Then fashioned We the drop a clot, then fashioned We the clot a little lump, then fashioned We the little lump bones, then clothed the bones with flesh, and then produced it as another creation. So blessed be Allah, the Best of creators! -- Sura 23:14

Of course these sura's seem to contradict Sura 39:62, Sura 40:62, Sura 6:102, and Sura 13:16 but what else is new?

Hey, maybe these suras are referring to the 360 idols stored inside the black cube at Mecca? Since Allah was just one of these 360 gods. (moooohammads favorite I guess).



Source

edit on 16-8-2011 by KJV1611 because: bold

i'm a muslim, and have actually read the qur'an in its entirety with understanding. so who the hell are you enlightening on your empty lunchbox of a theory again?

See folks ....you are the dead.
The history that pre dated the Roman ?Judaen collaboration ie Christian Colonisation....is forgotten.....dead.
You are the dead.
You/me/ I no memory of the love, the hate, the laws, the ecstasy. the fear, that we now would have known ....for we are the dead.
And I would say there are one in 100 reading this(OK a 100 souls is optimistic) would even begin to know what this post is about....we are the dead.
We are the dead......we are the dead.......truth is dead.....truth is dead.
No its buried beneath lies and lies...and distorted lies....we are the dead.
This is a conspiracy site...yet 99% have no idea what this is about....you are the dead.

reply to post by ManOfGod267



My point is, there are places in the bible where God says he never asked for sacrifices. Which clearly shows that there exists a contradiction.

That is just one of the many instances where one thing is said in one chapter and later, the exact opposite is said... thereby forming a contradiction.

Take another example...
God rewards Jehu for a mass slaughter in Jezreel.

So Jehu put to death all who were left of the house of Ahab in Jezreel, as well as all of his close friends and priests, until he had left not one single survivor."
-2 Kings 10:11

The LORD said to Jehu, “Because you have done well in accomplishing what is right in my eyes and have done to the house of Ahab all I had in mind to do, your descendants will sit on the throne of Israel to the fourth generation.”
-2 Kings 1:30


God punishes Jehu for the massacre Jezreel.
I will soon punish the house of Jehu for the massacre at Jezreel, and I will put an end to the kingdom of Israel.
-Hosea 1:4

Im still waiting for Mr. KJV1611, who thinks only the Koran has a contradiction, to address the contradictions in the bible.

reply to post by My.mind.is.mine

i'm a muslim, and have actually read the qur'an in its entirety with understanding. so who the hell are you enlightening on your empty lunchbox of a theory again?

Who am I? Well I am a Christian that HAS read your Koran through as well....Not only that but I have read the Holy Bible through over 10 times as well, plus I DON'T have the weight of divinity college or any type of "advanced education" in religious matters to cast bias and muddy the texts of both these books.

Therefor I am free to form my own opinion and interpretation of the texts in question with the TEXTS them-self being the final authority. But you are entitled to your own opinion based on free will. You however did not answer the question of Islam being a polytheistic religion based on your own scriptures....

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

So Jehu slew all that remained of the house of Ahab in Jezreel, and all his great men, and his kinsfolks, and his priests, until he left him none remaining.
-2 Kings 10:11

(your quote) The LORD said to Jehu, “Because you have done well in accomplishing what is right in my eyes and have done to the house of Ahab all I had in mind to do, your descendants will sit on the throne of Israel to the fourth generation.”
-2 Kings 1:30

(The correct quote)
30 And the LORD said unto Jehu, Because thou hast done well in executing that which is right in mine eyes, and hast done unto the house of Ahab according to all that was in mine heart, thy children of the fourth generation shall sit on the throne of Israel.
- 2 KINGS 10:30

And the LORD said unto him, Call his name Jezreel; for yet a little while, and I will avenge the blood of Jezreel upon the house of Jehu, and will cause to cease the kingdom of the house of Israel.
-Hosea 1:4

---I will take the liberty and replace the verses you used from a corrupt English translation of the bible and replace them with the correct Authorized Version of the Holy Scriptures.
---Also, 2 Kings 1:30 does not exist but 2 KINGS 10:30 does, so I took the liberty of finding the correct verse your were attempting to quote.

Im still waiting for Mr. KJV1611, who thinks only the Koran has a contradiction, to address the contradictions in the bible.

The verse as it stands in Hosea is completely accurate. After 4 generations Jehu's sons would stop ruling in Israel just as God said in 2 KINGS 10:30. It was only 4 generations because Jehu screwed up "royally" as found in the very next verse, 31: "But Jehu took no heed to walk in the law of the LORD God of Israel with all his heart: for he departed not from the sins of Jeroboam, which made Israel to sin."

The avenging takes place in the below verse as the fourth son of Jehu is "assassinated":

2 Kings 15:8-12
8 In the thirty and eighth year of Azariah king of Judah did Zachariah the son of Jeroboam reign over Israel in Samaria six months.
9 And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD, as his fathers had done: he departed not from the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin.
10 And Shallum the son of Jabesh conspired against him, and smote him before the people, and slew him, and reigned in his stead.
11 And the rest of the acts of Zachariah, behold, they are written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel.
12 This was the word of the LORD which he spake unto Jehu, saying, Thy sons shall sit on the throne of Israel unto the fourth generation. And so it came to pass.

(IMPORTANT)Now if Jehu would have CONTINUED to do right in the LORD'S eyes and not fall into the VERY same sin he was killing off then he wouldn't have had to have his sons blood shed. But in order to fulfill other scriptures such as:

GENESIS 9:6
"Whoso sheddeth man's blood, BY MAN shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man."

and

Matthew 26:52 "Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword."

So what Jehu did in killing off Jezreel was right, but what he did afterward was wrong and eventually cost him and his family the throne of Israel, which in anyones eyes would appear to be: " I will avenge the blood of Jezreel upon the house of Jehu" just as Hosea 1:4 says.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

Before you point out "contradictions" in the Koran, you might want to first demonstrate how your own faith is free of contradictions.

I don't really have too as this thread is about Islam...but if you want to bring up Christianity..sure, why not. Just another one to bite the dust.

Im getting mixed messages from that book you have as your avtar

Explain? I would like to know...anyway.

If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD.
-Leviticus 1:3

....and just one of many verses in the same OT which show that God never asked for such sacrifices...

For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices:
-Jeremiah 7:22

--Once again I will replace your texts with the correct Text.

Now, which is it?
Did God want them or not? Why is God saying He never commanded anyone concerning sacrifices? When there are several verses that lay down specific rules concerning animal sacrifice.
Can you please sort this out for us?

uuuhhhgggh....ok, I will help you out since a forth grade reading level is too hard for most to grasp.

1. Read the rest of Jeremiah verses 23-24:
23 But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you.
24 But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in the counsels and in the imagination of their evil heart, and went backward, and not forward.

As you can see verse 22 is perfectly correct. God only wanted the Hebrews to "obey my voice"....they failed miserably! Even Moses failed big later on in Exodus (hitting the rock twice for water....). Sooo...God gave them the laws such as sacrifice later on down the "wilderness road".

2. "nor commanded them IN THE DAY THAT I brought them out of the land of Egypt" is your stumbling block. God didn't give them any laws regarding sacrifice IN THE DAY that he brought them out of Egypt...he gave them these laws many weeks down the road AFTER they crossed the red sea and once they reached the Mountain of Sinai.

As you can see, simple reading can clear up all doubt and confusion in the most Holy Bible if you don't approach the BOOK with the intentions of finding errors (there are none).

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
Before you point out "contradictions" in the Koran, you might want to first demonstrate how your own faith is free of contradictions.

Captain Obvious would like to point out that "obviously" no one can discuss The "Moon God" conspiracy, i.e. Islam and their fascination with the crescent moon, without slamming Christianity. Obviously some people are just here to criticize Christianity and they feel the need to do so in every topic no matter what the subject might be. Let's get this over with and end the duel. Okay, Christianity is a sham and a fake. You win.

Now let's consider how Islam loves to focus on the moon. It's like an obsession with them eh? I must say I've never encountered a mosque without a moon symbol popping up to show it's head. I remember sitting outside in Riyadh smoking tombeik in a hookah with some Muslim friends one hot Arabian night (the hookah produces a cool, soothing smoke) and they remarked, "Look at the moon. It is nearly Ramadhan." Even their most holy month is decided by the moon cycle. Their entire religion is focused on and celebrates the moon.

reply to post by Captain Obvious

Now let's consider how Islam loves to focus on the moon. It's like an obsession with them eh? I must say I've never encountered a mosque without a moon symbol popping up to show it's head.

The moon is merely a symbol. Much like how the 6 pointed star and the cross are symbols of judaism and christianity respectively. I thought I conveyed this point to you in a previous post.
By your logic, even I can say "Ive never encountered a church without a cross - a roman torture instrument, so I guess christians are obsessed with torture instruments".

I remember sitting outside in Riyadh smoking tombeik in a hookah with some Muslim friends one hot Arabian night (the hookah produces a cool, soothing smoke) and they remarked, "Look at the moon. It is nearly Ramadhan." Even their most holy month is decided by the moon cycle. Their entire religion is focused on and celebrates the moon.

"Their entire religion is focused on and celebrates the moon."
And yet, the religon instructs its followers NOT to worship the moon? Now, thats some lousy focus and celebration of the moon.

Islam is not pagan. It is Abrahamic. It has the same evil elitist, "I'm holier than you," bull# feel to it as Judaism and Christianty does."Islam is a pagan religion," pfffft, whatever.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


Still waiting on sk0rpi0n to refute my two replies to him. Waiting for an honest discussion but I'm not holding my breath either, since the Holy Bible is infallible there will not be much to discus.

reply to post by KJV1611

Still waiting on sk0rpi0n to refute my two replies to him. Waiting for an honest discussion but I'm not holding my breath either, since the Holy Bible is infallible there will not be much to discus.

Well, Im all up for an honest discussion as well... as long as we stick to meanings of words in the bible and not deploy personal interpretations of verses to explain things.

Here we go...

ON JEHU...

Now if Jehu would have CONTINUED to do right in the LORD'S eyes and not fall into the VERY same sin he was killing off then he wouldn't have had to have his sons blood shed. But in order to fulfill other scriptures such as:
GENESIS 9:6 and Matthew 26:52

So what Jehu did in killing off Jezreel was right, but what he did afterward was wrong and eventually cost him and his family the throne of Israel, which in anyones eyes would appear to be: " I will avenge the blood of Jezreel upon the house of Jehu" just as Hosea 1:4 says.

Honestly, I'd be inclined to accept your explanation that Jehu was punished for what he did afterwards IF the text in Hosea 1:4 indicated so, but that is not the case. Hosea 1:4 makes it clear as daylight that the punishment was for the massacre at Jezreel and nothing else.

The texts (in 2 kings and Hosea) are pretty clear that God was- at one point pleased with Jehu for the massacre at Jezreel...and later on was angry at Jehu for the same massacre.



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


ON SACRIFICES...

As you can see verse 22 is perfectly correct. God only wanted the Hebrews to "obey my voice"....they failed miserably! Even Moses failed big later on in Exodus (hitting the rock twice for water....). Sooo...God gave them the laws such as sacrifice later on down the "wilderness road".

Im sorry, but you are drawing a co-relation between Moses hitting the rock twice with the giving of the sacrificial laws. Moses, one who would "obey Gods voice" was punished for hitting the rock twice by not being allowed to enter the promised land. Moses would have still been given the laws anyway... even if he had not made the mistake with the rock.

"nor commanded them IN THE DAY THAT I brought them out of the land of Egypt" is your stumbling block. God didn't give them any laws regarding sacrifice IN THE DAY that he brought them out of Egypt...

The matter in dispute is whether or not God ever gave laws concerning sacrifice...at any point in time. Because there are many places where God makes it clear that he does NOT want sacrifices.

I'll play along and take for granted that Jeremiah 7:22 is actually talking about commandments given in that day.... but the bible still teaches that at some point in time, God did command sacrifices... AND YET there are many places where God clearly says He does NOT want animal sacrifices. Period. Which is it?

Lets go over a few more verses where God shows that he does not want animal sacrifices...

Isaiah 66:3 - Now, why would God, who supposedly commanded sacrifice (after THAT DAY, of course), liken animal sacrifice with killing men and cutting off dogs necks?

Psalms 51:16 -Does it get any clearer than this?? God did not desire sacrifice. God does not delight in burnt offerings.

So to conclude, even if God did not demand sacrifices "in that day" (which was your point)...
a) The bible teaches God did command sacrifices at some point in time
b) and the same Bible in some places clearly shows that God did NOT want the sacrifices.

The Bible infallible? Not with such blatant contradictions.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


First of all thanks for a intelligent reply that managed to keep my attention and demand a reply in return.

But to start off I want to bring up the point about you continuiously saying God does not want sacrfices. Here's you a verse:

1 Samuel 15:22
"And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams."

Couple this with the rest of the verses and you quoted and you can clearly see, GOD does not need sacrifice.
The sacrifices were not for God...they were for the people. I don't know if you know this or not, but....

Romans 6:23
"For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

Did you catch it? Sin...causes death. Whenever someone sins....something has to die. This is the law of the universe. Its called reaping what you sow, yin and yang, karma, you name it, the concept is the same.

So the sacrifices were for the people when they sinned! Either the people would have to die then and there, or an animal could TAKE THE PLACE of the sinner and die in place of him.

This of course brings up Jesus Christ....he was the one time sacrifice for all of man kind for their sins. That sacrifice is received by faith. The Lamb of God.

Genesis 22:8 "And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering:
John 1:29 "The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world."

As for Jehu, it you looked up the verse I posted in Gen 9 and Matthew you would have seen, if you live by the sword, you will have to die by the sword. Even if God told him to do it. David told his son to kill his own general for the very same thing.

reply to post by KJV1611


I know you are a Christian and sacrifice is big part of your faith. Especially human sacrifice. Seeing your post has made me want to change your outlook on atonement of sin and why G-d doesn't want sacrifices or human sacrifices. Now in Psalms 40:7(6) G-d favors prayer of animal sacrifices and in Hebrews (Christian bible book) is the same. 1st Samuel 15:22 and Micah 6:6-8 mention devotion to G-d is better than a sacrifice. 2nd Samuel 12:13 and Psalms 51: 16-19 go through repentance. In Hosea 14: 2-3 Prayer replaces the sacrificial system.

honestly, AL'LAH is JEHOVAH.

however, JEHOVAH is at least 3 different gods all combined under the same title.
the name jehovah is from the sumerian EN.LIL and the sumerian EA. sumerian AN or ANU is also
in there.

AN was the supreme god of the heavens, the father god. (his name eventually resolved into the egyptian AMEN (not to be confused with AMEN-RA).

EN.LIL and EA were his sons.

EN.LIL was in charge of the Earth, assigned here by AN.

EA was in charge of creation. He created humans and defended them repeatedly, against the ire of EN.LIL, who doesn't like humans and doesn't want them procreating to create more humans.

this is why the biblical text seems to contradict itself at times because EN.LIL doesn't like
human beings and tends to want to destroy them for infractions of his law (most of which centers around not creating more humans (et.al procreation activity)),

whereas EA does like human beings because he created us and tends to want to forgive us/rescue us from EN.LIL's harsh approach to his creation.

as far as the etymology of AL'LAH, it goes like this

EN.LIL became the premiere god word, just as we use the word "god" generically today. how this happened was,

EN.LIL=LIL
LIL=IL
IL=ILAH/ILU
IL=EL
IL=AL
For example BAB-EL = BAB-ILU

Ba'al was the generic word for god in phoenicia and it stemmed originally from EN.LIL.
all this confusion is due to translators not realizing that the term LIL and all its derivatives were used generically, just as we do with the word god.

reply to post by KJV1611

But to start off I want to bring up the point about you continuiously saying God does not want sacrfices...

Actually, I am not continuiously saying God does not want sacrfices... because the bible is not clear on as to whether or not God wants sacrifices.

Going strictly by the words written in the Bible, my stance is that the bible contains conflicting statements regarding Gods requirements of animal sacrifices... God wants it in some places...and God is opposed to it in others.

To give you an idea of what Im talking about, its like reading someones biography... where in one chapter, he is described to enjoy beef steaks and in another chapter, he is recorded as a vegetarian from childhood, opposed to eating meats. And then in the next chapter, he is again shown to enjoy beef steaks.
Such inconsistencies in a biography, would definitely leave anyone suspecting that something was off... either with the writer/s or the person the biography is about. .


To further illustrate the bibles inconsistencies regarding animal sacrifices, compare it to another biblical matter that is absolutely clear - the "law".
Unlike animal sacrifices, there are absolutely no inconsistencies in the bible regarding God and the law. God repeatedly equates righteousness with keeping the law. Unlike animal sacrifices, there is NOT a single place in the bible where God ever spoke against the law... so there is no contradiction.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


Did you even read my post explaining why there "appears" to be contradictions regarding sacrifice? Did you not see the dead animals were not for God....they were for man's sins?!?!

As for the Law, God did away with the law in the New Testament with the death of Jesus Christ.

GALATIANS 3:24-25
24 Wherefore the law was our SCHOOLMASTER to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a SCHOOLMASTER.

The law "taught" us that we are sinners, but it can never save us as NO ONE can keep the whole law. Only Jesus Christ kept it, now no one has to anymore.

If you trust in Jesus Christs sinless life (sinless because he never broke the law) his sacrficial death (in your place John - 3:16) and miriculus return from the dead (showing you can have eternal life) then you too can be just like Jesus in God's eyes. Perfect, sinless and bound for heaven. If you try to keep the law yourself, you will fail every time and since Jesus was the last sacrifce, you have no payment for your sin in this world (Hebrews 6:1-8). Which means you will have to pay for your own sins buring in hell.

Didn't you ever wonder why animal sacrifices were burnt, in fire....on an alter...? Its either that animal burning in "your place" in the old testament, or its Jesus suffering (Isa 53) and going to hell for you in "your place" in the New testament.

You can't pay for your own sins.....in the physical world. Someone else had too. Sacrifices in the old testament were nothing more than pure unwarranted MERCY that God did not have to show us. Look at the first sacrifice ever as found with Adam and Eve. God killed an animal in place of the sins they committed so they did not have to die immediately. Why? Because the wages of sin is death! Do you think God took joy in killing that animal because of His stupid creations' mistake?

That clear it up for you yet? And please read all of this post and the verses cited, it is your question after all. There are not contradictions in the Bible, trust me, I have seen EVER single one that people bring up.