Funny thing, it sounds like you think your nameless data-free god "thing" is older and bigger ("more powerful, longer lived, more capable") than this pitiful Yahweh character.
Sounds like this doesn't call for data but for a contest of deity. Shall we call fire from heaven via tattooed gematria, or see whose relic smashes whose? I would be happy to serve any god that could lick Yahweh in a fair fight.
Because whenever I test narrative memory and cosmic consciousness I keep bumping into him where no other can fit. I was asked here because I've hung with the real Inanna and Dumuzid long before the First Dynasty and have looked into all the forbidden texts I can find. And the guy that keeps quietly asserting himself keeps calling himself Yahweh (Being).
Ah, but see, u/factdigger is making himself a subject of ridicule because he demonstrates that he knows not whereof he speaks, he deletes a comment, he appears to rely on UFO/AI as the likeliest gods he refers to. The bluster comes from nowhere personal, but from someone he's attached to, thus some of my strategy. He can't recall consistently if you mean NASB or NSAB!
On the net there's no point in replying to a list of 20 books with summaries that say they prove various crazy stuff because the writer is indicating he's not listening. But what he said about truth was very good and would upend his own whole satire persona if pursued. So every word of mine is chosen and heartfelt.
If u/user20461 doesn't mind us getting offtrack, I'd be happy to shore up any questions you have about textual criticism. Everything he said was so generic and unsourced as to need no real reply. I've noted before that every time I check I find evidence that the copying was by others, not the Bible. The original higher critics, and even more so Hort and Westcott, made clear that they were not searching for truth but were trying to dethrone the Bible, and so when evidence is sifted by minds (especially working together) that seek the truth whatever it is, as factdigger claims, it yields sensible answers not connected to any extreme.
Forgot to add: You, Guy, are already taking up my mantle (if any) by posting excellent bullet-point defenses already, so I don't need to help on that front unless he actually returns with a tactical warhead instead of an AI picture of one.
Funny thing, it sounds like you think your nameless data-free god "thing" is older and bigger ("more powerful, longer lived, more capable") than this pitiful Yahweh character.
Sounds like this doesn't call for data but for a contest of deity. Shall we call fire from heaven via tattooed gematria, or see whose relic smashes whose? I would be happy to serve any god that could lick Yahweh in a fair fight.
Because whenever I test narrative memory and cosmic consciousness I keep bumping into him where no other can fit. I was asked here because I've hung with the real Inanna and Dumuzid long before the First Dynasty and have looked into all the forbidden texts I can find. And the guy that keeps quietly asserting himself keeps calling himself Yahweh (Being).
Name the time, place, and referee, and it's on.
u/guywholikesDjtof2024
Oh all right. All right! A man with nine legs.
He ran away.
24-hour rule, I win!
u/guywholikesDjtof2024 has roundly dismembered you. In before you threaten to bite my kneecaps off.
All that was was some worthless "challenge". Lots of satire, but little argument. Please retry with a better one.
24 hr rule doesn't apply to unserious/satire-laden comments.
Ah, but see, u/factdigger is making himself a subject of ridicule because he demonstrates that he knows not whereof he speaks, he deletes a comment, he appears to rely on UFO/AI as the likeliest gods he refers to. The bluster comes from nowhere personal, but from someone he's attached to, thus some of my strategy. He can't recall consistently if you mean NASB or NSAB!
On the net there's no point in replying to a list of 20 books with summaries that say they prove various crazy stuff because the writer is indicating he's not listening. But what he said about truth was very good and would upend his own whole satire persona if pursued. So every word of mine is chosen and heartfelt.
If u/user20461 doesn't mind us getting offtrack, I'd be happy to shore up any questions you have about textual criticism. Everything he said was so generic and unsourced as to need no real reply. I've noted before that every time I check I find evidence that the copying was by others, not the Bible. The original higher critics, and even more so Hort and Westcott, made clear that they were not searching for truth but were trying to dethrone the Bible, and so when evidence is sifted by minds (especially working together) that seek the truth whatever it is, as factdigger claims, it yields sensible answers not connected to any extreme.
Forgot to add: You, Guy, are already taking up my mantle (if any) by posting excellent bullet-point defenses already, so I don't need to help on that front unless he actually returns with a tactical warhead instead of an AI picture of one.