Again, "where" assumes a location within time and space. if you are going think strictly in terms of materialism, your interpretations will be prejudiced in favor of materialism.

also care to provide some verses for the argument that the bible opposes interracial marriage?

@SheamusHow many verses would be sufficient?

As many as you can share please?

Cool. How can one observe anything that doesn't exist in time and space?

instead of seeing, you can observe, and instead of hearing, you can listen. Instead of feeling, you can think. It leads to understanding as opposed to judgement. If you going to judge, you should judge righteous judgement, not on appearances, and appearances being a reference to how something makes you feel, which tends to be pretty shallow reactions, as opposed to in depth responses.

How about those verses please? want to look into that

How do you observe without your senses???

Deut 23:2
Jos 23:7
Jos 23:12
1 Ki 11:2
Ezr 10:2-18
Ezr 10:44
Neh 13:27
Pro 5:20
Pro 7:5
Pro 22:14
Jud 1:7

Daniel also points to the strife at the end times because the nations will become mixed like iron and clay but will not cling to each other.

I mean damn the whole book is about bloodlines of Adam. It would make sense that his Creator would want to preserve it.

One can also see that when the israelites enter the promised land they are commanded to kill everything of some nations but spare the women of others... the reason should be obvious...

Edom/Esau also lost his birthright because he was a racemixer.

Yeah I am reading each verse, so far nothing pointing out specific races, but rather focused on cultures really. I can see as a materialist how one can imply it as race, but then how do you reason with verses like "And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;" or "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."....but will read through them all and see if there is anything i missed that might give legitimacy to your material basis.

Those are both quotes from Paul (whom I persobally find to be a questionable character). So you have one witness, I gave you many.

"Adam" or man as it is translated was the the father of all the nations of genesis 10. They were all of one race. Many nations. One race. Many cultures. One race.

lol of course you would find Paul questionable... His words dont jive with your feelings. Jer 17:9 “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?”

@Sheamus I find him questionable beacause his word dont jive with the rest of scripture if you interpret hom as you do.

Ditsem! @$P!KY\/!k!NG, you just advanced to level 3!

So then state your case, lets investigate it together.

I just did.

With the whole bunch of verses I gave you...

yeah no, doesnt tell me much about race, just culture, ideology... which is what the literature is founded upon.

Deut 23:2 specifically points to mongrels.

The book is called "the book of the race of Adam".

If it was about culture, why send away the children? You could just raise the children as "jews". Why kill all the people of certain nations and spare the women of others? If it was merely about religious influence, why keep the "strangers" outside of the temple?

lol like i said, you can interpret it as material, so you interpret it as inter-race but you could have inter-faith mongrels too you know. really a matter of perspective. Now the fact that you have to reject other parts of the literature just to justify you understanding kinda shows that you dont understand the whole literature, you arent very wholesome. "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;" and "For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."

Point to a single instance in scripture where a mongrel is anything but what it says in plain language- a mongrel lol. There is no such teaching anywhere in the scriptures. I can reject the testimony of a single witness by the very instruction of the scripture itself. I gove you multiple witnesses throughout the text and you reject all of them!!

We call this projection...

Oh I forgot the most important one lol the story phineas who slew the racemixer as he was banging the "ousie" 😁

Yes, it describes other ideologies, you perceive other races. You have a prejudice towards race, and so your interpretation will be tainted by the subjectivity of your prejudice.

Mamzer means a BASTERD a MONGREL. Strange FLESH not strange ideas.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?t=kjv&strongs=h4464

thanks, alienate really is a suitable enough word to support the argument.

I like mongrel 😂

The gnostic texts also had some interesting thoughts on the matter. But I'll have to go dig those out somewhere.

Jud 1:11 should rouse some thoughts on the matter as well.

“Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.” What is your understanding of those words?

Balaam taught racemixing and cain was a bastard and the progenitor of the kenites who were bastards as well.

You are just telling me what you think Balaam is, I asked for your interpretation of the whole verse. What is the way of Cain, what is it to run greedily after the error of what you think Balaam is, what is it to be perished in gainsaying of core, what is gainsaying of core even? Give me your full understanding of that verse is what i requested.

If you just read the book you would know WHO Balaam was and what he did. I you study the texts you would know WHAT Cain was, who his descendants were and why they are to be destroyed. You kind of remind me of Balaam 😂

I am not asking you because I dont know, I am asking you because I want to see how you make sense of that. So you aren't going to reason with me then?

You haven't reasoned at all. Why would I?

K, keep to your ways then