Search Results
7/20/2025, 6:07:34 PM
>>510894316
>Goes right over his head
Should of done your research One of the greatest deceptions of modern history is Jews purporting to be biblical Hebrews or Yahudaye. Edom’s religion was practiced throughout the Caanan region, which worshipped deities such as El, Baal and Asherah. This religion was characterised by practices such as human sacrifice, cannibalism. Indeed, the root of the word ”cannibal” is a conjunction of the words “Canaanite” and “Baal”.
An example of the behaviour of the Edomite Jews is to be found in Dio's Rome, Volume 5, Book 68 at Paragraph 32: “ "Meanwhile the Jews in the region of Cyrene… were destroying both the Romans and the Greeks. They would cook their flesh, make belts for themselves of their entrails, anoint themselves with their blood, and wear their skins for clothing. Many they sawed in two, from the head downwards. Others they would give to wild beasts and force still others to fight as gladiators. In all, consequently, two hundred and twenty thousand perished. In Egypt, also, they performed many similar deeds, and in Cyprus under the leadership of Artemio. There, likewise, two hundred and forty thousand perished.” The Jewish Encyclopedia confirms generally the accuracy of Dio’s account at p. 608.
>Goes right over his head
Should of done your research One of the greatest deceptions of modern history is Jews purporting to be biblical Hebrews or Yahudaye. Edom’s religion was practiced throughout the Caanan region, which worshipped deities such as El, Baal and Asherah. This religion was characterised by practices such as human sacrifice, cannibalism. Indeed, the root of the word ”cannibal” is a conjunction of the words “Canaanite” and “Baal”.
An example of the behaviour of the Edomite Jews is to be found in Dio's Rome, Volume 5, Book 68 at Paragraph 32: “ "Meanwhile the Jews in the region of Cyrene… were destroying both the Romans and the Greeks. They would cook their flesh, make belts for themselves of their entrails, anoint themselves with their blood, and wear their skins for clothing. Many they sawed in two, from the head downwards. Others they would give to wild beasts and force still others to fight as gladiators. In all, consequently, two hundred and twenty thousand perished. In Egypt, also, they performed many similar deeds, and in Cyprus under the leadership of Artemio. There, likewise, two hundred and forty thousand perished.” The Jewish Encyclopedia confirms generally the accuracy of Dio’s account at p. 608.
7/19/2025, 5:54:44 PM
>>510811840
He has nothing, he will shit up entire thread without ever making a single point
He has nothing, he will shit up entire thread without ever making a single point
7/10/2025, 9:57:12 PM
>>510034900
>Why should I pick this "specific" truth?
this is a great question, and it shows you haven't fallen into the intellectually lazy position of doxastic involuntarism (the idea that we can't choose what we believe), which many internet atheists seem to adopt without realizing.
you should approach the Christian claim like you would any other, weigh the evidence.
if it's a live hypothesis (meaning it's not obviously false or incoherent) and you find no defeaters, then yes, you can choose to believe it.
but to do that honestly you need to investigate your own epistemology (how we come to truth)
basically answer these questions (for yourself, not me):
>what do you count as evidence
>what makes a belief justified?
>do you assume naturalism by default, and if so, why?
>are your standards of proof consistent across claims, or selectively applied?
if you're serious about truth, you owe it to yourself to examine not just what you believe, but why you believe anything at all.
>Why should I pick this "specific" truth?
this is a great question, and it shows you haven't fallen into the intellectually lazy position of doxastic involuntarism (the idea that we can't choose what we believe), which many internet atheists seem to adopt without realizing.
you should approach the Christian claim like you would any other, weigh the evidence.
if it's a live hypothesis (meaning it's not obviously false or incoherent) and you find no defeaters, then yes, you can choose to believe it.
but to do that honestly you need to investigate your own epistemology (how we come to truth)
basically answer these questions (for yourself, not me):
>what do you count as evidence
>what makes a belief justified?
>do you assume naturalism by default, and if so, why?
>are your standards of proof consistent across claims, or selectively applied?
if you're serious about truth, you owe it to yourself to examine not just what you believe, but why you believe anything at all.
Page 1