Is a literal reading of the Bible an insult to its authors?

No, not at all. He was referring to something that he was going to do, and it was like the fish story in that it took 3 days. Him referencing it doesn't mean that he was saying that it really did happen, and him knowing that it really didn't happen doesn't mean that he is saying that what he is going to do isn't really going to happen either. That's rally a stretch.He could have been saying the same thing with "Just like Superman hid in his ice cave for 3 days, so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."That doesn't mean that the reference to Superman is saying that Superman really does exist. Its just a reference. But that is not true, as I've just explained. He could have reference the fish story all the while knowing it didn't really happen and still not be lying.

On the issue of potentially embaressing and/or counter productive facts recorded by the Gospel Writers:Brian, haven't we been through this before ?1.) John in his prologue declares that Jesus Christ is God:"And the Word was God ... And the Word became flesh" (John 1:1,14)How potentially confusing and troubling to his cause to then record that Jesus said the following:"And this is eternal life, that they may know You the only true God, and Him .." (John 17:3).John could have easily excluded this to protect his central thesis.2.) Luke records that on the cross Jesus said "My God, My God, Why have you forsaken Me?" This cry of dispair could be evidence that Jesus was deluded and not sent by God at all. Luke could have excluded it to protect his theme of Jesus being the faithful Son of God.3.) John's prologue declares that the Word was God. Yet John records Jesus saying "The Father is greater than I" (John 14:28). He could have easily eliminated problematic statements of Jesus to protect the thesis of his propoganda, mainly that Christ was God.4.) Mark indicates that Jesus was not able to do miracles in His own hometown except to heal a few sick people. (Mark 6:5)This could be potentially embaressing that Jesus in His own home town could not display works of power.5.) Matthew 21:18 records Jesus cursing a fig tree because it would not bear fruit. And it was not even the season for it to do so.This has the potential of showing Jesus as ignorant and fickle.6.) Luke records Jesus saying that no one is good except God alone ( Luke 18:19) - Why do you call Me good? ... No one is good except God alone."This could be counter productive to Luke's propoganda to portray Jesus as a thoroughly good man.7.) Potential confusion over the time of the Second Coming as tought by Jesus could have been eliminated for smoother propoganda. The contraversy about what is meant by "generation" still puzzles some people today. See Matt. 24:34.8.) It coulds have been counter productive for Mark to record that Jesus was thought to be "out of His mind" by His own family (Mark 3:21).How potentially damning that skeptics could say "His own family knew Him best. And they thought He was crazy in the mind !"Mark does not eliminate the family opinion to protect his propoganda.9.) Jesus called the leading disciple "Satan" (Mark 8:33).How potentially incriminating to anyone wanting to fault Peter as a faithful disciple of Jesus.Tradition holds that Mark was assistant to Peter and probably compiled Peter's sermons into his gospel. Peter could well have told him "Do NOT put that in there. It put me in a very bad light. "Peter must have faithfully preached about the embaressing incident in his sermons.10.) The discples are portrayed as cowards who fled Jesus in His hour of greatest need. It is recorded without mercy.11.) The disciples were not even brave enough to ask for the dead body of their beloved Master. Why didn't they realize that the inclusion of this information casts dubious inferences on their veracity.12.) Jesus was accused of being a drunkard.13.) Jesus was accused of having a demon.14.) The weak women were the first to witness the resurrected Jesus and not the men folks of the dicsiples.In those days women's word was not accepted in court for testimony. Why didn't the Gospel writers spin the story to make the males look like the first to witness the resurrection? That is what we would expect from false propoganda.15.) The disciples are seen as doubters even after the resurrection. Not terribly flattering of those trying to pass themselves off as faithful witnesses.16.) Many difficult sayings of Jesus which had the potential to turn everybody off to His teaching, were faithfully included.They could have eliminated sayings over which people still vehmently argue until this day. That is statements on divorce, marriage, leaving all to be a disciple, bearing one's own cross, hating mother and father in order to be a disciple.Many difficult sayings of Jesus could have been left OUT for much smoother propoganda.There is more. You asked for a couple of examples.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Check your story's plotline, ICANT. I don't think you can get 72 hours between Friday at midday and dawn on Sunday. 42 hours, maybe....

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

You are confusing the RCC plot line with the facts.Buried sometime between 3 PM and 6 PM Wednesday and resurrected at the same identical time Saturday afternoon. Exactly 72 hrs.Maybe we can go into detail one of these days in a thread.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Bring your scripture citations.

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

Since you are in the explaining business please explain to me why Jesus would use a lie to portray what he was going to do.Why did He have to use a reference?Why use the fish story if it was false?Why not just make the statement:The Son of man shall be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.Instead of: There would be no confusion and as far as He was concerned it would not make any difference.But He said He was going to be in the earth three days and three nights.He also said as Jonas was three days and three nights in the Kh'to belly.Kh'to transliterated ketos = Sea monster, huge fish, whale.The word as = ‘ adverb transliterated hsper = just as, even as.Jesus said: even as or just as Jonas was three days and three nights in the Kh'to belly.If one was a lie they both were a lie.That would make Jesus a liar.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

From 70 to 3 million in 430 years is not that much, honestly. Just multiplying 430 by 70 gives you a figure of 301,000 people. That means for 430 years, 70 new members were born. That, obviously, is a very low figure. Their numbers would have been much higher.100 years ago in the United States, there were 88,710,000. 100 years later in 2008, there are 304,679,081. That is a difference of 215,969,062. That means more people have been born in that 100 year period than it took every subsequent generation 200 years before. That is because population compounds exponentially.Every 13 seconds, an American dies. But every 7 seconds, an American is born. Every 30 seconds, a migrant enters the United States. That is a net gain of 1 new American every 10 seconds. So the 3 million figure in over 430 years is not out of the question mathematically.However, you do raise a good question concerning the evidence. If 3 million people were traipsing around the Saharan desert, there should be evidence of this. As far as I know, evidence is scant for the exodus. But even that is not impossible, as this desert is large and presumably undergoes more topographical changes than most anywhere else in the world due to sandstorms. Shifting sands are notorious for swallowing even the largest of structures whole. Heck, archaeologists are still finding Egyptian tombs.So while I understand your reticence in assuming it is true, I would say that it is not an impossibility.

---

“I know where I am and who I am. I'm on the brink of disillusionment, on the eve of bitter sweet. I'm perpetually one step away from either collapse or rebirth. I am exactly where I need to be. Either way I go towards rebirth, for a total collapse often brings a rebirth." -Andrew Jaramillo

It was the capital, up until it was destroyed in 612 BCE. However, his title would be King of Assyria, not king of one of its cities. Elizabeth II lives in London, but she doesn't get referred to as the Queen of London.It is also interesting that the authors fail to name this king, something we would expect in an historical document. Cramming them in doesn't help at all, people need space to live in. Why would it be?Also, why 60 miles in the one direction, is it because you assume that 60 miles is a reasonable distance to walk in 3 days and Asshur just happens to be 60 miles away to the South of Nineveh?Why did the city only extend 60 miles to the south and not for 60 miles all around it?Chapter 4 hits this particular apologetic on the head, we are told that: So Jonah went out of the city, and sat on the east side of the city, and there made him a booth, and sat under it in the shadow, till he might see what would become of the city. So, ”Jonah went out of the city’, which must mean he was in the city; it is obvious what he author meant here.If we take your angle then where did Jonah go?The text says he sat down within eyesight of the city to watch what was going to happen to it,If God wanted Jonah to cover all the distance between Nineveh and Asshur (which the text doesn’t mention), then why are the other cities that lie between Nineveh and Asshur not mentioned?What about the cities that were a lot closer to Nineveh than Asshur was?Genesis 10:11-12 From that land he went to Assyria, where he built Nineveh, Rehoboth Ir, Calah and Resen, which is between Nineveh and Calah; that is the great city. From this map we see that Calah is a lot closer the Nineveh than Asshur, and Resen is between Nineveh and Calah. So I am unconvinced that when God said to Jonah ” "Go to the great city of Nineveh and preach against it, because its wickedness has come up before me." and “"Go to the great city of Nineveh and proclaim to it the message I give you.", that God actually meant for Jonah not to go to the city of Nineveh at all but he was to go to the surrounding area. Jonah was specifically told to preach in the city.But, thanks for supporting my point that we cannot take the Bible at face value, for if we do we make a fool of its authors. Nineveh was a walled city, and we are told that Jonah went into the city, and came out of it again. “Persons who cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand” are children.This is the point of the conversation between God and Jonah in chapter 4. The city of Nineveh had 120,000 small children who could not tell the difference between their right hand and their left hand. By extrapolating 120,000 very small children, we must conclude that there were between 600,000 and a million people in the city. That is a lot of people about which to be callous.

​

God’s point about children is something like this: “Jonah, if you don’t care about adults, maybe you care about children? Do you even have any compassion for them?” Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary that cannot discern between their right hand and their left-children under three of four years old (De 1:39). Six score thousand of these, allowing them to be a fifth of the whole, would give a total population of six hundred thousand. They are beyond the realms of historical research. The text does not record anything concerning Jonah’s health, but it does say he just got on with the job at hand. And even more convincing if he was tartan. Why would it explain why the city repented? They repented because they believed Yahweh was going to overthrow the city. Lot of ”ifs’ there bud, and no reason at all to assume that the sailors would be anywhere near Nineveh since their journey’s destination just happened to be Tarshish. But Jonah ran away from the LORD and headed for Tarshish. He went down to Joppa, where he found a ship bound for that port. Jonah headed for Tarshish because it was in the opposite direction of Nineveh, it gives the story a bit more strength. God wants Jonah to go to city X, but Jonah is so against God’s plan he heads for city Y, which is in the opposite direction of city X, a clear literary device to give the tale more impact. So they believed Yahweh’s prophet yet did not then convert to Yahwism, what then exactly was it Yahweh wanted them to do in order to avoid destruction?Is there any evidence that the Ninevites entirely abandoned their faith at anytime near when Jonah’s book was said to be set? Did Assyrians insist that all of their subjects spoke Assyrian? I don’t recall this being a law of any power in the Ancient Near East. Jonah chap. 2 is a psalm, which the majority of scholars say was written in the mid 2nd century BCE.You can see that the ”prayer’ is written in the form of a psalm. The Psalm of the Prodigal Prophet So you are not in the slightest bit curious as to why the authors decided to call their hero Jonah? Yes, the evidence that proves that Jonah’s story is fictional, plus it means that we don’t make a mockery of the Bible or the people who wrote it. No it doesn’t. It only calls Him a liar if He is claiming that Jonah’s adventures really happened, but he doesn’t need to be a liar, He could be genuinely mistaken, or more likely using Jonah’s tale as a parable. As I have said before, and I will no doubt say many more times in my life, if Jesus said exactly what the NT authors claim He did then He was most certainly a liar, or perhaps mentally ill. Well, if you are happy to accept that Jesus was alive for three days and nights in His tomb that’s up to you. It does go very much against Christian beliefs though.But why does this verse mean that Jonah’s story has to be 100% accurate? Why couldn’t Jesus use Jonah as a parable like He did with many other of His teachings?The Jonah tale would be well known to Jesus’ audience, so it makes perfect sense for Jesus to use this story. Does there really need to be a ”Good Samaritan’ for Jesus’ point to be valid?

It is an enourmous amount for the ancient Near East, if these figures were even plausible the who area would be teeming with people, which it wasn't. And we have no one dying during this 430 years?Remember the time and place though NJ, even the Bible talks about disease and famine being rife, how many famines does the Bible record? It was the reason why the clan of 70 went to Egypt to settle. Well Livi-bacci's research claims that:In the 10,000 years prior to the birth of Christ, during which Neolithic civilisation spread from the Near East and Upper Egypt, the rate increased to 0.4 per 1,000 (which implies a doubling in less than 2,000 years) A doubling of less than 2000 years, yet the Hebrews, according to your idea, doubled in one year, almost 2000 times faster than every other nation! You are comparing apples and oranges though NJ.The population of the Earth has went throught the roof since the industrial revolution, and with advances in medicine, sanitation, and urbanisation. This is a completely different situation to 4000-3500 years ago. You are staring with a massively different amount of people though NJ. Starting with nearly 90 million people is a lot different than starting with 70. Plus, there's no immigrants in the Jacob clan, and hardly anything is out of the question mathematically, but the mathematics doesn't take in to consideration the historical contexts. It was the Sinai desert NJ, which is not that large a desert. Archaeologists have found only two sites from the Exodus itinerary that can be identified with any confidence, Kadesh-Barnea and Ezion-Geber, so you think we would find some evidence at these sites, especially at Kadesh-Barnea since the Israelites camped there for 38 years!Kadesh-Barnea is the modern Ein el Quiderat and was discovered by Moshe Dothan in 1956, and has since been excavated to virgin soil by Rudolph Cohen. Cohen did not discover any evidence of occupation there before the tenth century BCE, and only found evidence of three successive forts (which he identified as Israelite) dating from the 10th century to the 6th century BCE (Dever. W. Is there any archaeoligcal evidence for the Exodus? in Frerich and Lesko Exodus the Egytptian Evidence Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, 1997, pp 72-73). As Ned points out we should (or I should) avoid using the word 'impossible' when referring to the past, as we never know what could be uncovered in the future.But how many things do we need to discover about an historical account before we have to conclude that it didn't happen as written?How plausible is it to you that only 1 in 15 Hebrew women got pregnant and had an average of 50 children consistently for 430 years?Does this really sound historically possible?Remember as well that some Bibles give the time as being 215 years, which is even more difficult to swallow.Imagine if there were no multiple births in a particular family And the numbers here are even more implausible if we consider that there was only four generations in this 430 years.All refs are from the Book of ExodusMoses' birth is recorded in 6:20 Amram married his father's sister Jochebed, who bore him Aaron and Moses. So, Moses' father is Amram.Amram's father was Kohath.6:18 The sons of Kohath were Amram, Izhar, Hebron and Uzziel.Kohath's father was Levi.6:16These were the names of the sons of Levi according to their records: Gershon, Kohath and Merari. Levi is Jacobs third son.Genesis 29:34 Again she conceived, and when she gave birth to a son she said, "Now at last my husband will become attached to me, because I have borne him three sons." So he was named Levi.Four generations spanning 430 years can we really take this at face value?What all these things tell us about the numbers involved in the Exodus is that we really should been looking to reinterpret the text, we should try as many angles as we can to see if we can have a better idea of what was really going on with the authors.Taking these numbers at face value makes the Bible look silly, and none of us want that.

In the Exodus the Bible says they went out a "mixed multitude."Some Egyptians got the idea to throw their lot in with the Hebrews and leave Egypt with them.All of the travelers need not have been Jews by birth.

Exodus 12:37 And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children. The numbers of Israelites is based on this Jay, Bright et al estimate anything from 2-3 million Israelites.This is generally meant to be men of fighting age, so doesn't include male children or old men.

It wasn't a lie. Do you consider the other parables that Jesus used to be lies as well? He didn't have to, but he used references all the time so why not this time too? It wasn't "false", it was just a story. You wouldn't say that "Jack and Jill went up the hill" is false. Its just a story. Jesus' parables suggest that he wasn't interested in avoiding confusion. A lot of his teachings were parables that didn't necessarily really happen. That doens't make them "false" and it doesn't make him a liar. Again, that is just not true.Had Jesus said: "Just as Jack and Jill went up the hill, I too will rise up to heaven"....He wouldn't have been lying. He was just referencing a common story that people were aware of. That doesn't mean the story had to actually have happened.But you are avoiding this point. You keep repeating your original assertion in the face of refutation. Is this going to be the same as usual where you can't admit that you were wrong?

Sure, but with famines, natural disasters, wars, etc, the aggregate population always increases in a society. Like I said in my figure, every 13 seconds an American dies. But every 7 seconds one is born. The mean average is always increasing.Since you live in Scotland, you may not have heard it before. But an economic question asked is if you had the choice to take a million dollars in one lump sum, or take a penny a day and have it double every following day, which would you rather choose? 1 cent is a 100th of a dollar. It's nothing. But compounding it will make a millionaire multiple times. It is therefore more lucrative to take the penny than the lump sum. A similar principle applies here. Which is all fine and good. I'm not going to sit here and tell you that the Exodus took place, because I honestly don't know. All I am saying is that it is not physically impossible.But we can think of this in another way. If you are going to criticize aspects of the Bible that lends it credence, why not dismiss everything, including famine and disease? By not doing so it would appear as if you are biased towards it. Doubled in a year? I said nothing of the sort. I gave a 430 year span. Perhaps it has as far as the time in which it takes. But population always increases. That trend has never been broken. I had to go with the earliest census I could find. Unfortunately Americans were very bad at censuses, because of how many unaccounted for people started moving to the untamed western states. Yes, I misspoke. Be that as it may, there is nothing small about 60,000 kilometers. That is only inclusive of the Sinai desert, and not also the Negev desert which some archaelogists have included. That is plenty of habitation for a population that size. People in India, Japan, and China live in far more cramped spaces. Jacob's clan could have migrated that expanse. I agree that the evidence is scant, but there is evidence that lends it credulity. I don't know. That is one of those things that keep some people searching for Shangri-La, Atlantis, or El Dorado. With the Exodus, they aren't looking for a place so much as they are looking for artifacts scattered throughout the desert. With the ever-shifting sands, I'm sure it is like finding a needle in a haystack. 50 children? How have you deduced this figure? No, but the 2-3 million is a speculative figure to begin with. I've never come across a Bible that gave that figure. Which one are you referring to? But you are not accounting for the reputation of living upwards of 140 years, and that it does not account for daughters. Four generations back then was not the same as four generations now. Again, I'm not here to put the story on trial. It may be totally ludicrous, and it may be completely factual. The most reasonable answer is that the story is probably true, but with embellishment. Even its strongest critics would concede that the Bible is generally trustworthy when it comes to its historicity. And when there is looming doubt, something ends up corroborating it.For instance, it was believed for many, many years that the Hittite civilization was a complete fabrication. They deduced this because there was no evidence for it. That, of course, is a reasonable assumption, especially given how the Bible described the Hittite civilization as a dominating world power back then. That is, until their capital and records were discovered in Bogazkoy, Turkey.Other things like the Deluge seems to be a mixture of truth interlaced with embellishment. From what I have seen, there is no evidence to assume that the entire world was flooded. I don't completely discount it, but as of late, there is no evidence to suggest that it is as pervasive as most creationists would have us believe. However, the area known as the "whole world" during the time when Moses wrote Genesis, is highly suspected to have suffered a large inundation. Though it was not entirely of "Biblical proportions," it certainly would have killed nearly every inhabitant from Mesopotamia to the Black Sea.

---

“I know where I am and who I am. I'm on the brink of disillusionment, on the eve of bitter sweet. I'm perpetually one step away from either collapse or rebirth. I am exactly where I need to be. Either way I go towards rebirth, for a total collapse often brings a rebirth." -Andrew Jaramillo

Is she the Queen of London?I have heard Elizabeth II referred to as the Queen of Georgetown. Which is the capital of Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands.So if Tiglath-Pilser III was king of Assyria, would he be king of Nineveh? Good question. I am glad you asked because I would have assumed to begin with that the city was probably spread out around the capital building's and palaces and army headquarters that was behind the walled enclosure. But I would rather it be your suggestion.Nineveh was a very important city between the Mediterranean Sea and the Indian Ocean. On the Tigris River near the Khosr River junction. This made it a place where wealth flowed into from many sources.It became one of the greatest of all the region's ancient cities. Well we know he got a day's journey in before he began to deliver his message. Assuming he went another 1/2 day's journey he would have been in the heart of the city.If he went out of the city he had to make a 1 and 1/2 day's journey to get outside the city. The text actually says "till he might see what would become of the city".It does not say he sat down within eyesight of the city. But if he was at the city limits sign it is possible it was only a foot or less away. And he did. He went at least a day's journey into the city. And I suppose you can prove that there was nothing outside of those walls, that would be part of the city.I live in a small city in Florida and it has 4.2 sq. miles of land in the city limits. If we walled part of it to have less than eight miles of walled city you would have to go outside the wall to get to the Walmart and Holiday Inn and several other large businesses. We have people living 10 to 15 miles from downtown. They have been talking of annexing much of that area for tax purposes.As I pointed out in Message 4 Jacksonville, Florida has already done that. Do you have any idea what this phrase is talking about?'Hint' It has nothing to do with children.I will wait for your answer before I comment.But it would really make no difference if there was a million or more people in Nineveh. That would be a moot point as all would not have to live where the king and his army was housed. That is good. Reading God's mind when you don't think it exists. What makes you think that?I believe in miracles. I am one. Jonah hated the Assyrians and wanted God to destroy them. He also knew if he went and preached they would repent and God would not destroy them. So he went the other way so God would have to destroy them. You are quite right, when in Joppa they were some 500 miles down river in a vessel built for open water not a river.Lets see if I can address a couple of those ifs.Lets see now this boat Jonah got on in Joppa headed to Tarshish was a merchant ship carrying goods.1:4 There was a mighty tempest in the sea.
1:5 The mariners were afraid. Every man cried to his own god. Then they cast forth the wares that were in the ship into the sea.
1:6 All this time Jonah was asleep.
1:8 Then said they unto him, Tell us, we pray thee, for whose cause this evil is upon us; What is thine occupation? and whence comest thou? what is thy country? and of what people art thou?
1:9 Jonah's answer was he was a Hebrew and served the God of heaven.
They knew who he was talking about.
1:10 1:10 Then were the men exceedingly afraid. (I wonder why)
1:12 Jonah told them to cast him in the sea.
That would solve all his problems he would not have to warn Nineveh
and God would destroy them.
1:13 The men were afraid to throw Jonah overboard and rowed hard to
bring it to land. But could not.
1:14 They asked the Lord not to blame them.
1:15 They cast Jonah in the sea. The sea ceased from her raging.
1:16 Then the men feared the LORD exceedingly, and offered a sacrifice unto the LORD, and made vows.These guys made a sacrifice to Jonah's God.
They made vows to Jonah's God.They could have continued their journey. But they had no cargo. The only way to get cargo was to return to Joppa and reload.Three days later a fish deposits the man they had thrown overboard on dry land.I don't know for sure but I think that would cause quite a stir.
Especially if they had not reloaded and left again. First a psalm is written to be sung or chanted. This chapter does not fit a psalm.Second Jonah's prayer is not recorded anywhere.Third 2:2 through 2:10 is Jonah's telling what happened. I would assume his father Amittai gave it to him like your father/mother gave you your name. I see a lot of smoke screen, twisting of God's Word, suppositions and opinions. But what evidence? I don't think you want to get into a discussion of parable's but I don't remember a parable Jesus used where He used a man's name. You might know one. But He said He was going to be in the earth three days and three nights.He also said as Jonas was three days and three nights in the Kh'to belly.Kh'to transliterated ketos = Sea monster, huge fish, whale.The word as = ‘ adverb transliterated hosper = just as, even as.Jesus said: even as or just as Jonas was three days and three nights in the Kh'to belly.If the statement Jesus made concerning Jonah was anything other than a fact that would make Jesus a liar.I have been asked many times by children, "is there a Santa Clause"?
If I say yes that is a lie because there is no Santa Clause.The same goes for Jesus saying He would in the earth for 3 days and 3 nights ‘ just as Jonas was 3 days and 3 nights in the fish.There is no wiggle room. Jesus was not in the tomb only the physical body He had used here on earth. But he was alive.He met the thief that had died on the cross beside him like He said He would in paradise. He delivered the message to all the OT saints that victory was at hand. When He came forth from the grave He set those captives free and they went to the third heaven and are there praising God today. Because it was not a parable. If it was well known why didn't the disciples get it."Does there really need to be a 'Good Samaritan'"?There does if Jesus had given the Good Samaritan a name.As the Good Samaritan story goes there has been thousands of them. But there has only been one Jonah.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Did Jack and Jill physically go up a hill? NoDid Jesus physically rise up to heaven? Yes.So it would be a lie to say: "Just as Jack and Jill went up the hill, I too will rise up to heaven".The only way it could be like what Jack and Jill did would be if He never did it physicaly.Is that what you are saying happened?God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."