Total posts: 8,861
Posted in:
-->
@Timid8967
- I am not going to tell you how it is flawed. I am sure you must know already.
Sorry no. I don't. So I would be grateful if you would just point out what it is that you consider to be "fundamentally flawed" with Presuppostionalism.
Given that you say you agree with me.
And you are confusing what it is that I do agree with you on. I explained exactly what it is that I agree with you on and those agreements have nothing to do with what you are now calling the " fundamentally flawed" Presuppostionalism.
Perhaps it was premature again for me to decide to take them on.
Not at all. I urge you to. I am curious to see the responses you receive once you expose these flaws.
There seems to be no point to ignoring them.
I agree.
There seems to be no point to trying to destroy them.
Destroy? I have no problem destroying their arguments, the bible does that for me quite nicely most of the time.
But to talk of destroying Christians!? No I am not a fkn savage and I do respect the fact that they have a belief and are entitled to it.
All talk of "destruction" has came from YOU and ONLY YOU, destruction is all you , you want to eradicate religion and destroy the bible. You will never hear of me saying anything so vile and intolerant and destructive as YOU have said!!! I can promise you that !!!!
There seems to be no point in trying to reason with them.
There is but if your intention is to get them to rethink any single part of their beliefs, then you are up against it and it should never be your intention anyway. It has and never will be my own.
Aha - ok. What is left? Just to ridicule them.
Stop making wild assumptions about me.
AND No. Not at all. I don't know why that should be your first and or last resort. Besides, they do often invite ridicule without realising it.
And now that I see this, I can see what you and the Brother do and what SecMerlin does and what all of the others do. Ok. That makes sense. .
Well only to you , not me. And I won't speak for the others you mention. So stop making assumptions about me.
So is that what you do?
No. And I certainly would not intentionally. But as I have said, they do invite ridicule often, ESPECIALLY when they claim one thing on one hand then go as far as to deny what they have said on the other.
I have found that among their worst faults is their claims to be above others and qualified above others to speak about these unreliable ambiguous half stories that make up the bible only to discover that they know absolutely nothing at all about what it is that they claim to be qualified to talk , teach and preach about!!! I have found the worst culprits to be Chaplains and Pastors.
Is that the purpose behind your questions.
You just love piling up all your assumptions about people don't you? Have you considered your own reasons for believing the bible should be put to the flames? Are those reasons justified in your mind?
The purpose of my scrutinizing and questioning the scriptures is certainly not to ridicule anyone for having belief. But you know, these Christians can never explain anything without invoking the supernatural when stuck for a commonsense answer.
To make a mockery out of Christianity.
FFS , stop making assumptions about me and my intentions.
[A] Christianity AND Christians make a mockery of their own beliefs and faith, without any help from me. Take the belief in Baalams talking donkey,Numbers 22:21-39.
(1) Now anyone that believes this talking donkey shite is deserving of ridicule if you ask me, (2) but more so if they try to convince others that it is all true!!
They mostly start telling lies once they are stuck answers after often painting themselves into a corner. This is not to mention their own complete denial of what it is that is ACTUALLY written in the scriptures. They make things up on the hoof and lie about it later. But their biggest mistake in my opinion, is trying to bullshite anyone that has actually read and studied these scriptures for themselves.
To belittle it and to show the foolishness of what they do.
More assumptions.See [A] above.
It is not to convince them.
That is such a stupid and retarded thing to say in my opinion. I have no intention of convincing anyone of anything... at all. I just simply ask questions ,and give my opinions on these unreliable and what you refer to as "contradictory and confusing" scriptures.
It is not to change their perspective. It is to baffle them and make a buffoon out of them.
No, of course not. And they make themselves buffoons at every turn from my stand point and without any encouragement from me.
Let me sleep on that.
Do what you like. I don't care what you believe or don't believe. I don't care if you listen to me or don't. It is of no interest to me
It surely is an interesting perspective. Perhaps a paradigm moment.
Well what is interesting to ME, is that YOU find interesting ALL the assumptions that YOU have made about ME above without even waiting for a single reply in agreement or denial, to be an "interesting perspective"!!! It is not my perspective you fool, it is an invented assumed perspective about ME that was invented by only YOU.
AND that is how stupid you ALWAYS come across, to me. You really think you are clever don't you. But you'er not
So now, let us see these "fundamental flaws" that you mention, and get this thread truly underway.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Timid8967
What part are you missing?I changed my mind about - not wanting to engage with religious folk. I changed my mind about it giving the air time.I haven't changed my mind in respect of what I think about christianity or the bible or Jesus. It almost sounds like you are scared I might become a christian.
I just wanted to be clear. I wouldn't want you to accuse me of quoting something that you once believed but have now changed your mind about.
It was you and others on that thread which persuaded me that my view about not giving them oxygen
Yes I understood that at the time and I praised your common sense. It was your other beliefs that I was referring to.
I recently came across this on a webpage.And you have avoided giving us the link. Is there a reason for that?I found this on one of those sites - which I won't link because it is a private page.
Absolute bollocks. Of course you did. Was it Wikipedia? .https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presuppositional_apologetics
But it made me think - these people really believe it.
Well of course they do. Why else would thy stoop to denying that which is clearly written in the bible and to rewriting scripture, and putting words into the mouths of biblical characters and its authors when caught on the backfoot.
But as I said above - it is fundamentally flawed.
How is it flawed?
This is why I wanted to find out if there were people who believed it [ Presuppositional apologetics] - and then made my challenge.
Well, it is all to do with CHRISTIAN apologetics, isn't it. And the arrogant and haughty christian belief that believes that ONLY the Christian faith is the only basis for rational thought. So what kind of argument are you expecting?
They won't recognise any of those "flaws" that you are about to highlight and knock them dead with.
But for now I am more prepared to just sit back and listen to your argument with whoever may wish to see and discuss these "flaws" in the Christian apologetic argument.
Good luck, dimtim,
Created:
Posted in:
I told you that I had had my mind changed.
And in such a short time too!!!! Miraculous!!!
I did prophesy that you would become a believer of sorts. So where is it that you actually stand now?
Do you still believe that the Jesus story that has come down to us is a "myth"?
Do you still believe that Christianity is the "most dangerous religion in particular"?
Do you still believe that the "bible belongs on a fire"?
Is Christianity no longer a "threat to our children and our very existence"?
Should religion simply be "cancelled"?
You were one of the ones who did this.
Did what? I have done nothing but agree with you on everything you have to say concerning religion, the bible and god and Jesus, with just two exceptions; of your idea that the Christian " holy scriptures belong on a book burning fire". And that " Christianity is a threat to our children and our future existence".
Surely, you expect some people to agree with you when you make some of your grandiose arguments?
Its nice if they do. But I don't expect anything at all, princess. The only thing I do expect is the freedom to say what I want even at the cost of offending someone.
For instance, I know that it may well offend someone when I say that I believe that John the Baptist and Jesus were rivals. And that John was forced to baptise Jesus . But you see, I didn't just go to bed one night and wake up next morning with this idea in my head. NO, I got the idea from the scriptures themselves .
Or do you think that everyone just ignores your point of view?
I wouldn't know?
piqued my mind about presuppositionalism again
"again"? That would be Christian apologetics I take it?
I recently came across this on a webpage.
And you have avoided giving us the link. Is there a reason for that?
Created:
Posted in:
I recently came across this on a webpage.
I see. And which web page? Lets have the link.
Does it start by saying this >> ` Presuppositionalism is a school of Christian apologetics that believes the Christian faith is the only basis for rational thought` ?
Firstly, are there any Christians who hold to this view and who would be prepared to discuss it further?
What an odd request for one that believes Christianity to be the most dangerous in the world and should be "cancelled"?#18
Secondly, would you consider a debate on the subject?
Well you have had a complete transformation haven't you? In just a few weeks you have gone from the most vehement and vociferous anti Christ,anti god, and anti religion person to have ever graced this forum and that also once believed non of the above should even be discussed, to this 'new' tolerant you, that is now begging for costumers to engage you and talk about everything that you oppose and disbelieve in.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
What Jesus is saying is[ .................................. .......] People like you, Stephen.....
So says you, yet not the bible.
You Christians are always telling us what it is that Jesus ' really ` means, aren't you?
Why is it that YOU believe that it is ONLY the followers of Christ that can interpret these unreliable , ambiguous half stories that go to make up these bible stories?
I shall tell you why, it is because when these scriptures are accepted as they are at face value, they make no fkn sense whatsoever, but scratch the surface then they tell a completely different story to the one that "PEOPLE LIKE YOU" have been force feeding us for over 2,000 years. And this is why you can never , EVER, support a single claim made by these biblical authors and "PEOPLE LIKE YOU".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Because Bishop Hugh Montefiore, an English Anglican bishop and academic, said that he thought he was.
I see. That will be Hugh William Montefiore the English Anglican bishop and academic and author of more than 20 books, who served as Bishop of Kingston from 1970 to 1978 and Bishop of Birmingham from 1978 to 1987.
Oh well then, if it was a 4th from the top ranking Bishop C of E that has said Jesus was a homosexual , then who is to argue with any church leader? SURLEY he knows his subject better than any - know nothing - make it up as you go - pass it on - bible ignorant - Pastor or Priest here, and he must be an authority in all matters biblical.
Created:
Posted in:
@ RationalMadman,
probably fought against his homosexuality but if he were active, he surely wouldn't tell what he did.
So if Jesus is not admitting anything and his disciples and the biblical authors don't appear to be saying anything, where do you get the notion that Jesus was a homosexual?
Created:
-->
@Timid8967
Well what else can I say except I agree with you - at least in respect of the gospels.Good then there simply is no need for you to be on this thread a second longer is there.Unless of course you can add to this list on contradiction concerning the crucifixion of a man that you believe to be a "mythical Jesus".You'd love me to me wouldn't you?
I have said, NOT Unless of course you can add to this list on contradiction concerning the story of the crucifixion of a man that you believe to be a "mythical Jesus", anyway .
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
@TheUnderdog
Fauxlaw wrote:Since what immediately follows "if" is typically not true, whatever may follow as a then-statement starts out on the wrong foot; a not-true statement, making what follows the proposition a mere wish, and that may also fail to offer any solution out of the dilemma presented by the contradiction of the proposition and the wish.#39If wishes were fishes...If Democrats and Republicans could cooperate...If everyone could agree to be kind to one another....#37
But then he totally disregards his own lesson and belief concerning the word "IF" that he has rendered totally "useless"and redundant#30 in any argument or discussion and proceeds to use the word " IF" in his own argument. !!!!!!! You couldn't make it up!!!!!
Here>> One just cannot beat the double standards of the Christians!!
Fauxlaw wrote:What if:1. The Christians who advocate having replaced the Old Testament are wrong? After all, Christ did not say he replaced the O.T; he said he fulfilled it. One may think that's saying the same thing. No. When the Pharisees ask him what the great commandment is, Jesus replies, "Love your father which is in heaven..." Is that not exactly the same sense as the first 5 commandments from Exodus given to Moses? And Jesus continues: "The second is like unto it, Love your neighbor as yourself." That settles the last 5 in a single phrase. Jesus said much more than just those 2 simple phrases, for example, the Sermon on the Mount, the best political platform I ever heard, by the way. If we all followed that, every single social ill we suffer today would be solved overnight. And that covers every example your "Why I left Christianity" offers for all the alleged bad God is alleged to have caused, and mostly to people who did deserve the action for their actions. They were not all stand-by innocents.What if:2. As above, the N.T. fulfills, it does not destroy the O.T. Christians who claim otherwise have read neither one completely, so, what do they know?So, what if:The "Why I left Christianity" guy is wrong? #10
WHAT IF ........ fauxlaw started behaving by his own standards instead of laying down rules and laws that he has based on nothing more than his own inflated ego and opinion that he presents as fact?.
What if , indeed!!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
The daughter of a synagogue leader, raised from the dead.That would be the daughter of Jarius, I take it.No she was not raised from the "dead" in my opinion. She was never "dead" in the first place.Try reading the THE BIBLE!“behold,there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live. And when Jesus came into the ruler's house, and saw the minstrels and the people making a noise. He said unto them, Give place: for the maid is not dead, but sleepeth. And they laughed him to scorn. But when the people were put forth, he went in, and took her by the hand, and the maid arose”.Matthew9: 18-25.KJVSo we see, if the “certain” ruler’s daughter is dead has her father believes she is, then Jesus lied exactly as he did to those disciples who were with him in the case of Lazarus where he first told them Lazarus was not dead but asleep. And if she (the daughter) was not dead, then there was no miracle performed but a ritualistic “raising” into the Jesus circle of followers As usual it seems, Christians AND YOU want it both ways.Bible is important, but understanding is vital. Read with that intent, my friend.
You need to "UNDERSTAND" what these people were talking about when they talk of people falling or being "dead".
It's always the other person that lacks understanding isn't is according you you lot. And never yourselves.
You ignore the custom of the day of grown children taking in their aged parents for their continued care. Normally, Jesus would have performed that service for his beloved mother,
And you ignore the fact the Jesus ignored and disowned his own mother , aren't you?
SEE>>>“Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?”Matthew 12:46-50
In fact he said that we are to hate our mothers and fathers, didn't he?
SEE>>>> "If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters--yes, even their own life--such a person cannot be my disciple.Luke 14:26
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Timid8967
I just don't want lies to be said - saying Jesus is a gay man is a bit like saying Adolph was a gay man. It is not true and is designed in some ways to garner sympathy for Jesus - after all if he is gay, then perhaps he is ok. He must be enlightened. He must be someone we champion. And to be honest - I dislike Hitler - and Jesus. ?????
That will be honesty about Jesus being only a "myth" will it?
It is not true and is designed in some ways to garner sympathy for Jesus
Homosexual or not, Jesus isn't rue either is he? According to you the is only a myth? How do you know Jesus wasn't homosexual?
He must be someone we champion.
"We"? Who is the "we"?
Created:
Posted in:
@ RationalMadman,
Magdalene is the only time he directly helps a woman without it being as a favour to a male,
Not true. You are wrong, AGAIN!!!
There are a few including the " Adulteress" he saves from being stoned to death John 8:1-11.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
The daughter of a synagogue leader, raised from the dead.
That would be the daughter of Jarius, I take it.
No she was not raised from the "dead" in my opinion. She was never "dead" in the first place.
Try reading the THE BIBLE!
“behold,there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live. And when Jesus came into the ruler's house, and saw the minstrels and the people making a noise. He said unto them, Give place: for the maid is not dead, but sleepeth. And they laughed him to scorn. But when the people were put forth, he went in, and took her by the hand, and the maid arose”.Matthew9: 18-25.KJV
So we see, if the “certain” ruler’s daughter is dead has her father believes she is, then Jesus lied exactly as he did to those disciples who were with him in the case of Lazarus where he first told them Lazarus was not dead but asleep. And if she (the daughter) was not dead, then there was no miracle performed but a ritualistic “raising” into the Jesus circle of followers As usual it seems, Christians AND YOU want it both ways.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
@TheUnderdog
fauxlaw wrote: #10What if:
Christ did not say he replaced the O.T; he said he fulfilled it.
No he does not! That is a little disingenuous to say the least, isn't it? Lets look at what THE BIBLE says Jesus actually said:
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil" . Matthew 5:17
So we can clearly read, that Jesus says nothing at all about him actually fulfilling anything... at all - as you are so slyly are trying to crowbar into the narrative.
So then we are told by the unknown author of Matthew's gospel that Jesus said he hadn't come to destroy or abolish the law , but he doesn't - as you say above - mention the laws of Old Testament at all . Are we to amuse Jesus means the laws of the OT, or some other law? And to which "prophets" is Jesus said to be referring to?
Further THE BIBLE says :
"Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven": Matthew 5:17-19 . So is Jesus referring to just the first law Or the second law? Or both?
fauxlaw wrote: #10 When the Pharisees ask him what the great commandment is, Jesus replies, "Love your father which is in heaven..."
And no one else, including ourselves, it seems:
"If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters--yes, even their own life--such a person cannot be my disciple.Luke 14:26
fauxlaw wrote: #10 And Jesus continues: "The second is like unto it, Love your neighbor as yourself."
Which is contradicted by the verse that I have quoted from Jesus above. Which incidentally, also clearly contradicts another of the saying attributed to Jesus to " Love thine enemies", doesn't it. Matthew 5:44
Tell me, why should we "hate" our relations but love our enemies?
fauxlaw wrote: #10the Sermon on the Mount, the best political platform I ever heard, by the way.
The Sermon On The Mount is completely made up of one liners said to have been spoken by many from many philosophies and philosophers including Confucius and from before the time of Jesus. In other words, they are not exclusive to Jesus as the New Testament authors AND YOU ,will have us believe.
And the way that these beatitudes are presented to us in THE BIBLE , shows Jesus prioritising one kind of person over another and rewarding one type of person over another?
Why do some get to "see god" while others do not? Why is it that "the peacemakers" are called "the children of god" but don't get to actually see god? <<< This is the nonsense that is the Sermon on the Mount!
fauxlaw wrote: #10What if: So, what if:
And wasn't it you that said words to the effect that word - IF - is the most useless and redundant word in the dictionary? Rather a silly retarded comment for an alleged 'author' and a man of alleged multiple languages,to make, in my opinion.
Absolutely precious!!!!! Hahahahhahahahhahahahhahhahahhahahhahahhahahahhahhahah
I agree, the logic that you attempt to use by first devaluing words and language and calling it "useless" just has to be the most brainless way of attempting to prove a point or to win any argument.
All of the alleged academic credentials that you claim to have and can't wait to brag about in your forum profile are in serious doubt, I can tell you that for nothing. hahahhahahhah My ribs are killing me, hahahhahahahhahahhahahhahahhahahhahah
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Paul is a liar and corruptor of the messages of Jesus Christ you are either a Christian or Pauline.
Indeed he was and he admitted he was. , Witch.
“If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?”Romans 3:7
So there it is. Paul claiming to do what ever it takes including telling bare faced lies.
Paul also doctors Old Testament verses to further his own Christian agenda . .... just as many Christians do to this day. A lesson they learned from ' St' Paul no doubt.
Ex:
Isaiah 28:16 King James Version
" Therefore thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste".
Now see what crafty ole' Paul did with that , Witch
Romans 9:33 King James Version
As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
Would you like another?
Deuteronomy 30:14 King James Version
" But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it".
PAUL:
Romans 10:8 King James Version
But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;".
Would you like another?
Jeremiah 31:32 King James Version
" Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord":
PAUL:
Hebrews 8:9 King James Version
"Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
couldn't stay away.
From you? Easy
And I will respond to others.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Many Christians say, “The New Testament erases the Old Testament”.https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lQfy1PQl2STiQ69vFs_ZJrR9gCW82WD3_I8qKCZohrA/edit.
Well this is just another - get out - excuse for the now educated 21century Christian , isn't it? And the author of this thread, YOU, TheUnderdog deserve congratulating .
Somewhere along the line it has dawned on Christians that by adopting a god from a time they never knew and could never understand, and from a culture that they never knew or could ever understand, that their early Christian ancestors had damned future generations of Christians to having to forever defend the indefensible and have left the now educated believer to reconcile all of the biblical contradictions between the Old Testament god and the New Testament god. Indeed, they had certainly painted future generations of Christians into a nice tight corner. And with the help of liars such as Paul.
As the author TheUnderdog ( not to mention the scriptures themselves) quite clearly show, that there are obvious differences between the god that the 21st century Christian says `loves and died for us ` and will have us believe and the barbaric, brutal, jealous god of war that the Jews knew of, understood and worshipped, and usually out of sheer fear..
For proof of the nature of the barbaric and jealous warmongering god of the Jews that shows that, to their god, humans were insignificant, irrelevant and replaceable at ten a penny any day of the week, one only has to read the very short and extremely sad BIBLICAL story of Job.
Job it is said was 'blameless" in the eyes of god and walked in the ways of god all his days. But non of this mattered or counted for anything when it came to Job's gods' ego.
I urge all those reading here to read this 5 minute story for themselves.
Nearly every Christian that I have ever met have attempted to explain the barbaric story away by simply saying that " god replaced everything, that included 10 dead children that he had killed and destroyed of Job".!!!!!! Of well, that ok then, isn't it?
Jesus over 2000 years ago, himself said that he hadn't come to change the law? Which law?
The gospels and Mathew in particular, are always harking back to the Old Testament and its god. So the 21st century Christian has a uphill struggle on his hands when it comes to trying to convince anyone that their god loves us all.
Congratulations TheUnderdog. A+1
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
Can you show Paul is talking about a real thing? If not, you're skipping a step in asking for refutation.
He is skipping around questions that would put his bs to bed, too.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
Also, the Bible is the claim. Using it for claim AND evidence would be circular.
A+1
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
Did Jesus walk in to a closed locked room? If your answer is yes then simply tell us how he did it?
I will come back when you have the bollocks to address the above question. Meanwhile, I just have you down as yet another typical bible basher that cannot explain his own Bullshite.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
So in typical style of the christian on the backfoot, - you are now at the answering questions with questions of your own , stage.
So, you don't want to answer this question then;
Did Jesus walk in to a closed locked room? If your answer is yes then simply tell us how he did it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
You don't strike my as an honest person ........................If you won't tell me your point..................
it is Irrelevant what your opinion of me is. You missed this too..
Did Jesus walk in to a closed locked room? If your answer is yes then simply tell us how he did it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
So in the end you have nothing at all . And amounts to four consecutive no's.
You are just another 'fundie' that cannot explain himself once when just slightly probed.
And using my own words or phrases don't excuse all of your none answers, besides it not being very clever.
Did Jesus walk in to a closed room? If your answer is yes then simply tell us how did he did it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
You missed this>.
Paul is explicitly clear elsewhere in Scripture that the resurrection is a physical bodily resurrection and not just spiritual.
Is this word play? And can you pinpoint to us where it is that Paul speaks of both, or both at the same time. Or are you trying to tell us that we resurrect in the flesh and blood and spiritually?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
Quoted from Acts 17:31 and from my original post: "and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead."Can you provide some meaningful argument to show that Paul was not referring to a physical resurrection in Acts 17:31?Can you prove otherwise.That is a nice try but the words themselves make the point.Quoted from Acts 17:31 and from my original post: "and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead."So that is a no then.Does Paul say physically or spiritually?He doesn't use either of those words (physical/spiritual) as a modifier for the term 'resurrection' in this specific passage.So that is another NO then.Does Paul make a distinction between a physical and a spiritual resurrection?In Acts 17:24-31, I've already said Paul does not use the specific words "physical" or "spiritual" as a modifier for the term "resurrection" in this particular passage. However, Paul is explicitly clear elsewhere in Scripture that the resurrection is a physical bodily resurrection and not just spiritual.
So that is still a NO then.
Paul is explicitly clear elsewhere in Scripture that the resurrection is a physical bodily resurrection and not just spiritual.
Is this word play? And can you pinpoint to us where it is that Paul speaks of both, or both at the same time. Or are you trying to tell us that we resurrect in the flesh and blood and spiritually?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Timid8967
Christians too believe in some kind of mythical afterlife judgement , if I remember correctly.Not sure I see the relevance. Every religion in the world since time began believes in some kind of after life.
I wouldn't expect you to see the relevance. But, the relevance IS, is that IN THE Christian and Egyptian AFTERLIFE ones sins/ deeds are weighed and or judged.
I should imagine that even some serial killers loved their mothers.I suppose I would not rule it out though. Surely even Adolph Hitler's mother had some kind of feeling for him?
You misunderstood. I said the serial killer loving his mother not the mother loving the serial killer. ie. that EVEN a very bad person is capable of loving someone.
That they will be taken into the presence of God and they will be judged for the deeds they have done or failed to do during their lifetime?This does seem to be the prevailing view.
Christians believe it to be fact.
Quite amazing I think, how Christians have managed to wrap so much Egyptian imagery around the story of Jesus the man, isn't it?This does strike me as odd - given that there was never any evidence that the Jews got to Egypt.
Well I was speaking the Jesus "myth" in particular. ie. a miracle working dying and rising god of which, as you suggested above, there have been ten a penny.
Wasn't the Jesus family told to "escape" to Egypt?
Why do they seem to gravitate towards the Egyptian religions when they clearly had nothing to do with them?
Good question, why indeed. But they clearly do don't they. And when there were many places that the Jesus family could have hidden nearer home? All that way on a donkey (some 500 miles approx) and just after giving birth when they could have simply hid out in the north of their own country. Abram// Abraham was told to go to Egypt too wasn't he?
Maybe the Jesus family had relatives in Egypt?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Timid8967
I reckon that every person has the ability to be good sometimes.
They do. And maybe this is why we read in the Egyptian epics that it is said they weighed the "soul " or the heart of the dead ? i.e. Did ones good outweigh their bad?
I should imagine that even some serial killers loved their mothers.
Christians too believe in some kind of mythical afterlife judgement , if I remember correctly.
That they will be taken into the presence of God and they will be judged for the deeds they have done or failed to do during their lifetime?
Quite amazing I think, how Christians have managed to wrap so much Egyptian imagery around the story of Jesus the man, isn't it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
Quoted from Acts 17:31 and from my original post: "and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead."Can you provide some meaningful argument to show that Paul was not referring to a physical resurrection in Acts 17:31?Can you prove otherwise.That is a nice try but the words themselves make the point.Quoted from Acts 17:31 and from my original post: "and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead."So that is a no then.Does Paul say physically or spiritually?He doesn't use either of those words (physical/spiritual) as a modifier for the term 'resurrection' in this specific passage.
So that is another NO then.
Does Paul make a distinction between a physical and a spiritual resurrection?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
Quoted from Acts 17:31 and from my original post: "and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead."Can you provide some meaningful argument to show that Paul was not referring to a physical resurrection in Acts 17:31?Can you prove otherwise.That is a nice try but the words themselves make the point.Quoted from Acts 17:31 and from my original post: "and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead."
So that is a no then.
Does Paul say physically or spiritually?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
Quoted from Acts 17:31 and from my original post: "and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead."Can you provide some meaningful argument to show that Paul was not referring to a physical resurrection in Acts 17:31?
Can you prove otherwise.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
YES, JESUS WAS A HOMOSEXUAL, DUH!Alright, this is a hard one, no pun intended again, whereas I shudder to do the visual upon this following passage in relation to Jesus being GAY:“Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands, and that He had come forth from Father and was going back to Father, got up from supper, and laid aside His garments; and taking a towel, He girded Himself. Then He poured water into the basin, and began to wash the disciples' feet and to wipe them with the towel with which He was girded” (John 13: 3-5)OMG, if we do the simple math in this ever so revealing scenario, then when Jesus laid aside his garments and took a towel to wrap himself, then when he used said towel to wipe his disciples feet, with which he was girded, JESUS HAD TO BE NUDE IN FRONT OF HIS DISCIPLES!!! Was Jesus teasing his disciples with his outright nudity, and did Jesus have a Gay foot fetish? With Jesus’ “Gaydar” on, YES!Did Jesus forget about what is to be done to homosexuals as His inspired writings said herewith: "If a man also lie with mankind, As he lieth with a woman, Both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death: their blood shall be upon them." (Leviticus 20:13)Unfortunately, I have many other examples of Jesus being a "Fairy," but one at a time is enough to handle, again, no pun intended.
All very revealing, Brother. Not to mention explosive. And of course there is the story of the male youth seen running from a house in the middle of the night that Jesus was said to also be staying at, they say as he was naked as the day he was born.Mark 14:51-52. Was he too having his ' feet washed' or was this some other kind of `raising ` ritual that got interrupted?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
In the Gospel of Philip, Jesus loves Mary Magdalene more than anyone else, and the disciples ask Jesus, "Why do you love her more than us?"
And it appears also that Jesus would like us to hate everyone else except him and that includes ourselves .
"If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters--yes, even their own life--such a person cannot be my disciple.Luke 14:26
But then he also says love your neighbour as yourself? The contradictions just pile themselves up at every turn of the page
Created:
-->
@Timid8967
Well what else can I say except I agree with you - at least in respect of the gospels.
Good then there simply is no need for you to be on this thread a second longer is there.
Unless of course you can add to this list on contradiction concerning the crucifixion of a man that you believe to be a "mythical Jesus".
Prejudice only persuades the believers.
Again, for someone that considers " Christianity in particular" to be the most dangerous religion on the planet#153, and Christians to be " weird", you appear very concerned that what I have to highlight and have to say is "persuading believers in a myth" away from the planets most "dangerous religion in particular" don't you?
Is all you have to do if you feel that strongly about the fact that I maybe persuading believers to look closely and question for themselves these unreliable scripture about a god you don't believe in#11 and what YOU call the "myth"that is Jesus#18, is simply counter what it is I have to say and what it is I have highlighted, but with facts and not inventions.
But while you do this, you must keep in mind that YOU wish the whole christian religion to be " cancelled" don't you? #18
And given my position - I too see the error in it.
What errors do you see?
Errors are errors.
They are, "God breathed" errors too aren't they? 2 Timothy 3:16 But you are failing to (or simply do not want to) recognise that these bible errors as you have called them, render the whole of the scriptures unreliable in the least.
.
I don't however like you continuing your harassment of me and trolling over my past comments.
This is not "harassment", so as you often tell me "Suck it up princess" . But you see your past comments make your stance more than clear and your past comment show you to be inconsistent and contradictory to what your present comments clearly suggest. It is not harassment if they are your own words.
If you don't like your past vehement anti bible , anti god, anti Jesus, anti Christian and your anti religion comments to be brought into this or any other thread of mine or anyone else's', then simply don't involve yourself. You came here, I don't want you here on my thread, and I didn't drag you here under protest or duress. So simply leave MY thread.
Please stop referring to comments I have made previously.
No. I will continue to remind you and members here what your anti religious bible burning stance is if and when I read of you contradicting your self and being - as you are repeatedly - inconsistent.
And please keep your posts to a shorter length.
I will keep my post as long as they need to be. If you don't like it don't join a thread that often causes me to remind you of your previous contradictory and inconsistent comments or statements. It really is that simple.
For the record I simply now only scan over your comments - and don't read the lot. So I am sure I miss much of what you say and of questions you ask.
How you read anything is of no concern to me. But I feel this to be pure ignorance to comment on something you admit to only " scanning over".
Needling me
Well again as I recall it, it is you that admitted to setting out to "needle me" . Have you forgotten already? HERE you are>>>
This is not to mention trying to "needle me" with this vulgar absolutely uncalled for filth from you
HERE>>>
It appears to me that it is you and not me that likes the sound of your own voice and his keyboard tapping and far too much...... for your own good.
So I can say you won't be missed by me as there is absolutely no reason for you to be on this thread at all now, is there , dimtim8967
Created:
Posted in:
There is no mention from Paul of the "miraculous"ascending into heaven event either, no empty tombs, no disappearance from the grave of the physical body,no physical resurrection, no physical appearances of a Christ that would talk,walk ,eat, and have the physical wounds on his physical body poked and prodded physically
or that Jesus was elevated physically into heaven after agiven time. To Paul the body of Jesus who died was degradable,weak, and physical.
Created:
-->
@Timid8967
Anyone that has taken the time to read these scriptures will know that they ever hardly agree on anything at all.Well that all depends doesn't?
No. The gospel writers hardly agree. That is a biblical fact.
You have clearly indicated you choose to find error and so you do.
Did I call them "errors"? No. What happens is I clearly see the contradictory inconsistencies (as you do) written in front of my eyes. They are not my inventions and they certainly do not come from my own imagination. And I recall you agreeing with me . HERE>>
You are welcome to attempt to straighten out and explain away these inconsistencies should you choose to do so. But it takes years and years of practice to find excuses for the inexcusable and reasons for the unreasonable, defence for the indefensible and more than one single bible reading to explain away inconsistent and contradictor things such:
“… I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.” — Genesis 32:30
“No man hath seen God at any time…”– John 1:18
so when you are ready dimtim start with that^^^^^^^^
But as I recall, you have already made your opinion extremely clear to us many many times now concerning these unreliable ambiguous scriptures, haven't you? And it appears that you are in total agreement with me, doesn't it? HERE you are:
Except that I don't agree with you that these scriptures that Christianity hold holy should be cast onto a fire.
And how is that you have forgotten this so soon?
And given my position - I too see the error in it.
What errors do you see?
Errors are errors.
They are, "God breathed" errors too aren't they? 2 Timothy 3:16 But you are failing to (or simply do not want to) recognise that these bible errors as you have called them, render the whole of the scriptures unreliable in the least.
I could jump in and assist you
No thanks. I do ok all on my own. I have created 90+ threads in the religion forum and all without your help and all before you appeared.
Yet I am at least cognizant enough to realize that this is not rational - simply prejudice.
Maybe from your standpoint. But again, rather than simply seeing these repeated inconsistencies for what they are, you are coming across as defending and promoting these scriptures rather than highlighting what it is that YOU have found to be "in error" about them. Or why YOU find then confusing. OR why YOU believe them to be contradictory.
SO, why don't you highlight what it is that you consider to be errors in the scriptures and we can all discuss them on a thread of your own?
Prejudice only persuades the believers.
Again, for someone that considers " Christianity in particular" to be the most dangerous religion on the planet#153, you appear very concerned that what I have to highlight and have to say is "persuading believers in a myth" away from the planets most "dangerous religion in particular" don't you?
Is all you have to do if you feel that strongly about the fact that I maybe persuading believers to look closely and question for themselves these unreliable scripture about a god you don't believe in#11 and what YOU call the "myth"that is Jesus#18, is simply counter what it is I have to say and what it is I have highlighted, but with facts and not inventions.
But while you do this, you must keep in mind that YOU wish the whole christian religion to be " cancelled" don't you? #18
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Timid8967
So baptism / Christening plays no part in becoming a Christian at all then?I asked my sister in law - she is pretty clear about this. Baptism / christening - is only seeking to identify with the local church. it has nothing to do with "becoming a Christian".
So your answer is NO, then.
And so this is not an initiation into the Christian fold then.. Well I find that really interesting.
Well In her opinion - water baptism is an outside ceremony or ritual with symbolic significance - but with no power itself to make someone a CHRISTIAN.
Yes its a total nonsense really isn't it.
I was christened, but like you, I believe that the "mythical" story that CHRISTIANS have wrapped around a Jew man that believed himself to be King of the JEWS and heir to the throne of David is total and utter nonsense.
Why is it I wonder that Christians believe that a Jew man had come to earth to unite and save them, when the scriptures make it perfectly clear this wasn't ever the case?
What does your sister- in- law say when you tell her that she is following one of the most "dangerous religions" on the planet?
Do you have discussions with her about the "myth" of Christ? What was her reaction when you told her that you believe the bible belongs on the fire?
Created:
Posted in:
@ RationalMadman,
I've already discussed other matters with you before where you ask for direct quotations that explicitly state what I say is implied.
I have simply asked you on this occasion to show us what it is in the bible that causes you to believe that Jesus was homosexual. You must remember it was for the best part a male dominated time that Jesus lived in. As many places around the world still are .
Even if I take you to sections that imply he had homosexual attraction to John and Peter,
Then please do, lets see them. And have you forgotten already that it was I that mentioned the naked youth story to you? HERE>>> #11
you won't care to notice the alternate interpretation.
You don't know that. And I am forever suggesting an alternate story to the Jesus story that we have had force fed to us for over 2000 years, so I can hardly hold your version of events or your own belief and interpretation of the scriptures against you, even if I don't agree with you and believe you to be wrong.
Created:
Posted in:
@ rational madman
I said Jesus was homosexual, not all of his disciples who may have been bi or hetero.
You haven't told us why you believe Jesus was a homosexual. Do the scriptures indicate this? Then how do they?
Created:
Posted in:
t's both. You just want boring, done and dusted topics in the Religion forums to do your done and dusted responses with.
I don't agree with that at all. You have had good responses plus more.
This thread and all the threads I make are meant to ask mind-probing questions that encourage people to think creatively to support or oppose it.
Good. And I and others have given you just that. Most seem to oppose what you are saying, others have given you something to think about. What more do you want?
You are just being an emotionally blind robot here and that's your issue.
I hold no "emotion" whatsoever for those unreliable ambiguous scriptures, and you can take that to the bank , sunshine.
I have read some of the bible yes, not all of it in depth.
You should try it in depth, it may cause you to think before you post about something you know nothing about.
It's a nice enough story for a skimread.
Torturing a man to near to death and nailing him to a cross to die as a blood sacrifice for something that I have apparently done is NOT "a nice fkn story"!
And you missed my question , you know , one of the "MIND PROBING questions" that you tell us you hoped would be raised by your thread.
HERE>>
You haven't told us why you believe Jesus was a homosexual. Do the scriptures indicate this? Then how do they?
Created:
Posted in:
I said Jesus was homosexual, not all of his disciples who may have been bi or hetero.
Yes, so? And your title is a question and not a statement, isn't it?
You haven't told us why you believe Jesus was a homosexual. Do the scriptures indicate this? Then how do they?
Created:
Posted in:
@ RationalMadman,
No,not correct. His alleged ` powers ` the gospels say were used in aid of women too.such as?
Well that is probably not true either. Jesus had women followers that he seemed to love above the men in his outfit or so the men believed. And the bible states that Jesus and other the male followers of his, lived off and sponged off the women of substance in his circle.Which female followers were believed to be loved above the men in his outfit?
Have you ever read the scriptures for yourself?
Living off and sponging off isn't at all the same as attraction.
Well living off and sponging off are my words. But the bible makes it clear that it was the women that had supported them "of their substance".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Timid8967
Jesus died for our sins -
And I wouldn't want anyone to take responsibility for "sins" that I have committed and certainly not pay for what I did via a blood sacrifice. How barbaric!!!
my brother was before he passed away during the first part of this year. He was a pretty switched on fundy. After reading your post - I thought I would talk to his wife and see what she thought.
Don't you mean "his widow", your sister in-law?
that is how people become christians -
So baptism / Christening plays no part in becoming a Christian at all then?
I thought I would talk to his[my brothers widow] wife and see what she thought.she thought that she would think that someone who did not believe Jesus was god - was not a christian.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Timid8967
I don't know much
I agree.
And after just one single reading you would like bible condemned to the flames.
I find it miraculous that you , after just one single reading have managed to point to three separate occasions where Jesus is said to have came to the aid of women. But then equally miraculous that you didn't mention that Jesus also saved the "adulteress from being stoned to death". But you did well I must say, and after just one reading. 10/10
Created:
Posted in:
@ Rational Madman
Every single disciple and person Jesus used his power on to cure was male, correct?
No,not correct. His alleged ` powers ` the gospels say were used in aid of women too.
It's as if female attention and loyalty meant absolutely nothing to him.
Well that is probably not true either. Jesus had women followers that he seemed to love above the men in his outfit or so the men believed. And the bible states that Jesus and other the male followers of his, lived off and sponged off the women of substance in his circle.
But we also know that the attitude towards women by some characters in the bible and other Apocrypha is nothing short of diabolical. Peter for instance, telling Jesus that Mary Magdalene "wasn't worthy of life"!
That said there is biblical story of a ` male youth `caught running naked from a house where Jesus was staying. So who knows what was going on there?
Jesus could well have been married too. I am not sure but if he indeed was a " Rabbi" then Marriage may have been a requirement of the times?
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Stephen,Holy Jesus Christ! Referring to your revealing post #13, okay, I am not going to mention anything more that disturbs me about Jesus' birth, whereas you may bring forth more embarrassing images again!
Well I have a little more disappointing information to put your way , Brother. The myth that Christianity has wrapped around Jesus the man that believed himself to be King Of the Jews and heir to the throne of David is indeed the Osiris and Horus legend. And I am pretty sure that Jesus would have been appalled that a whole new religion had sprang up in his name. But that is something yourself and other Christians have to live with and not me.
And I believe it was Jew/Roman historian Flavius Josephus that mentions a certain Egyptian "leading the Jews astray". And don't the gospels mention the Jesus family being instructed to flee to Egypt? Maybe this is where the idea to wrap the Osiris /Horus myth around a Jew man , came from?
Created:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Yes Friday is the generally accepted day.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
or sucking upon Mary's teats?BLASPHEME!
Well considering that I am only and always do quote the scriptures , I am struggling to see who it is that is the blasphemer, Brother?
And that image you presented right there, to me is right out of the Egyptian legends of Osiris suckling Horus.
Mary suckling Jesus.
There is quite a lot of Egyptian imagery in the gospels , Brother. But I would hate it that you lost sleep over my pointing it all out to you. So I will leave it at just those two images of Mary mirroring the Osiris mysteries .
Sleep tight Brother.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Mary and Joseph were NOT married yet, WTF!
"WTF " indeed Brother!!! And if we are to believe ALL of these gospels then we have to believe that Mary's pregnancy lasted for somewhere in the region of TEN YEARS!!!!
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Stephen,DAMN YOU! Here you go again in the weakening of my faith!
That is not my intention Brother, but I won't be apologising anytime soon, you understand.
Barring the embarrassing inconsistencies of the Resurrection,
Of which there are many.
how can a God die in the first place if He is not weak to begin with?
Indeed Brother.
As an example, look at Zeus, who is the king of all Gods, including Jesus, as it is written in HIs Greek writings equal to Christian writings of Jesus, where do you think Zeus would allow himself to be murdered? NO WAY!
I agree.
Another disturbing fact is that if Jesus returned to life 3 days subsequent to His murder, then He really didn't die to save our sins since He returned to life!
Indeed. A valid point that I have covered a few times in the past. AND no one has ever been able to explain why a barbaric ` blood ` sacrifice anyway? What is it with this god that he demands blood over and over and over again?
As we know, a TRUE sacrifice is that you REMAIN DEAD like our soldiers in war fighting for our country that would have loved this option of them returning to life!
Indeed Brother, that truly is a valiant blood sacrifice. Yet Jesus knew all along that he would be coming back din't he? He had told his followers as such if my memory serves me correctly? so I struggle to see the sacrifice or indeed the need for a sacrifice to " save us from our sins". One has to remember, we are talking god here aren't we. he could have just said, - your sins are forgiven - without the need for scourging and beating and crucifying. Why is that Christians can NEVER explain this vile torturous and pointless "prophesised" murder?
At all irrational thought that we Christians have to accept with our faith, as shown in your posts, I still have to believe in Christianity because it shows that there will be NO WOMEN in heaven, where we had to put up with these disgruntled Sisters of Eve upon Earth, and the prize of heaven for men, is that the female gender is non-existent, praise the seemingly Zombie Jesus upon being risen!
Well these men of the gospels weren't too pleased about having women around at all where they? But Jesus didn't mind mooching and sponging off of these "women of substance" when it suited him,did he?
.
Created:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Don't forget what the scripture actually states , Witch. Three days AND three nights.
The truth is that the gospel writers simply cannot even get it together when it comes to the day of Jesus' death. Of all the dates they had to remember and should agree on, they couldn't even decide what the actual day was that their lord and master ' son of god' actually died?
I have found that when this particular questionable day is up for discussion the actual day of the Christs death can and does vary . There seems to be a choice!
such as;
There is a choice of two different Mondays. Two different Tuesdays. One Wednesday. Two different Fridays and One Saturday. I seem to recall a belief that a Thursday too was a possibility and all regardless how how long Jesus was said to have been in the tomb, Witch.
And it is this uncertainty and this unreliability that the christian faith stands on.
Created: