+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 33 to 42 of 42

Thread: Real debate?

  1. #33

    Re: Real debate?

    Quote Originally Posted by ohein56 View Post
    Do you consider yourself a "deist"...? Just wondering...
    I really don't like to label myself as my "journey" has evolved over the years. Certainly the concepts of deism and gnosticism are parallel to my current thinking. I have moved away from a strict standard of Christianity, as I love the story of Christ, I just can't accept such a narrow path. The idea of grace and the acceptance that we all sin rings true but to have to believe in him to move forward seems so limiting. It doesn't muster with my own truth meter. God has manifested himself through mankind in many ways and there have been civilizations who had no knowledge of Christ. Oh well we'll see when we get there.

  2. #34
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    3,324

    Re: Real debate?

    Quote Originally Posted by noagenda View Post
    I really don't like to label myself as my "journey" has evolved over the years. Certainly the concepts of deism and gnosticism are parallel to my current thinking. I have moved away from a strict standard of Christianity, as I love the story of Christ, I just can't accept such a narrow path. The idea of grace and the acceptance that we all sin rings true but to have to believe in him to move forward seems so limiting. It doesn't muster with my own truth meter. God has manifested himself through mankind in many ways and there have been civilizations who had no knowledge of Christ. Oh well we'll see when we get there.

    A concept I was recently told about, talks about forgiveness in a much different way. I should be able to give credit, but for the life of me I can't remember what church this comes from.

    Forgiveness is not something you accept or deny. If you wrong me (or i think you did) I can forgive you without you knowing I did it, caring that I did it, or even knowing I was pissed to begin with. So if you are forgiven, by god, allah, buddha, zeus, your descendants or anyone else, then you are forgiven. Case closed.

  3. #35
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    3,324

    Re: Real debate?

    Quote Originally Posted by conserv4ever View Post
    who the hell is kerry?
    I see you picked the one thing out of the post that you could talk about without getting owned.

    PS... good job ignoring and not reading my posts.

    Did you hear that Constipated 4Ever ignores my posts?


  4. #36
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    3,324

    Re: Real debate?

    Quote Originally Posted by ohein56 View Post
    That'd be Me....
    That's right you damn Zeus hater!

  5. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    21,809

    Re: Real debate?

    Originally Posted by Joecool44
    You forgot the part where he said it was a personal experience.
    Quote Originally Posted by ohein56 View Post
    As do you...so...?! As do other apologists, as there's ZERO evidence otherwise....
    There is enough evidence for me and apparently for many many others. For all we know, you've experienced it yourself but your hatred has blinded you.
    Originally Posted by nomaxim
    Sorry there ''ohein56', but it appears that 'Joecool44' does not have the position that you envision on this topic.

    'Joecool44' has, as a matter of routine, refuted most of your accusations
    Quote Originally Posted by Jax74 View Post
    Some people have the ability to think critically, some do not. ohein obviously doesn't.

  6. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Real debate?

    Quote Originally Posted by tomInAustin View Post
    Good answer. Very well thought out.

    Based on that. How do you know that all the fakers that were around were any different than Jesus? I am referring to NoAgenda's link.
    I have researched it as well and have found no good historical evidence for Jesus, just statements made by historians about rumors. Apparently, back then facts about historical events were easily distorted due to human tendencies to embellish. When record-keeping became more sophisticated about the time of the printing press, facts had more validity.

    I've researched gnostic gospels and other gospels related to Jesus. What I found are a lot of gospels about sayings of Jesus, almost no narratives. Without narratives, the NT gospels are uninteresting or without context. Evidently, the NT gospel authors were all on the same page with similar narratives. However, if you research those narratives by cross referencing gospel stories in parallel order, you find many discrepancies. Also, NT gospels were written by Creeks, in Creek not Arabic (language of Jesus), by men who had never visited places where Jesus had been. They would have made good Hollywood writers.

    One thing of importance from all of those other gospels is they popped up about the same time. The question is, why did that happen? What motivated all of those gospel writers to write similar books about Jesus. It's interesting, Jesus sayings from The Gospel of Thomas dominate NT gospels. Apparently, gospel authors plagiarized from other gospels. Being good forgers, they never mention sources. So much for Christian honesty!

    I believe Jesus existed, but I don't believe he was ever understood. The OT Lord came into the world as a man (Jesus). Because God (OT Lord) is a duality, he was misunderstood. God revealed his dual nature, but unwilling or unable to understand, NT gospels authors interpreted Jesus as both father and son, mostly the son of God in order to create famous sacrifice stories.

    I also believe the Jews did not turn on Jesus. They may have not believed him, but they did not have him executed. Toward the end of Jesus's ministry Roman authorities became concerned because Jesus kept saying he was God. It is easy to assume stories of Jesus came to Rome. Certainly, the Emperor would be concerned. So Jesus was murdered.

    I believe the real story about Jesus is Revelation 11 about the two witnesses (God). If you notice in that story, Jesus is killed by the beast from the Abyss (Satan) and his body was tossed on a road. Isn't it interesting, his body lies on the ground for 31/2 days. Then, the two witnesses descend to heaven. Also, in Rev. 11 the period for the two witnesses giving testimony is 1,260 days or 31/2 years, about the same time period as the ministry of Jesus in the NT gospels.
    Last edited by Cnance; 10-14-2014 at 01:06 PM.

  7. #39
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northern, California
    Posts
    16,985

    Re: Real debate?

    Quote Originally Posted by Joecool44 View Post
    There is enough evidence for me and apparently for many many others. For all we know, you've experienced it yourself but your hatred has blinded you.
    oooooh, man o man o man...ya certainly showed me!!!

    What a LAUGH!

    rofl
    As long as it is acceptable for a person to beLIEve that he knows how god wants everyone on Earth to live, we will continue to murder one another on account of our myths. ~ Sam Harris, 'The End Of Faith'
    ~~~~~
    Christianity demands the crucifixion of the intellect.
    ~ Susan Kierkegaard

  8. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    21,809

    Re: Real debate?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I've researched gnostic gospels and other gospels related to Jesus. What I found are a lot of gospels about sayings of Jesus, almost no narratives. Without narratives, the NT gospels are uninteresting or without context. Evidently, the NT gospel authors were all on the same page with similar narratives. However, if you research those narratives by cross referencing gospel stories in parallel order, you find many discrepancies. Also, NT gospels were written by Creeks, in Creek not Arabic (language of Jesus), by men who had never visited places where Jesus had been. They would have made good Hollywood writers.
    Here's a fairly good summary:

    http://carm.org/when-were-gospels-written-and-by-whom

    Dating the gospels is very important. If it can be established that the gospels were written early, say before the year A.D. 70, then we would have good reason for believing that they were written by the disciples of Jesus himself. If they were written by the disciples, then their reliability, authenticity, and accuracy are better substantiated. Also, if they were written early, this would mean that there would not have been enough time for myth to creep into the gospel accounts since it was the eyewitnesses to Christ's life that wrote them. Furthermore, those who were alive at the time of the events could have countered the gospel accounts; and since we have no contradictory writings to the gospels, their early authorship as well as apostolic authorship becomes even more critical.

    Destruction of the temple in A.D. 70, Luke and Acts

    None of the gospels mention the destruction of the Jewish temple in A.D. 70. This is significant because Jesus had prophesied concerning the temple when He said "As for these things which you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down." (Luke 21:6, see also Matt. 24:1; Mark 13:1). This prophecy was fulfilled in A.D. 70 when the Romans sacked Jerusalem and burned the temple. The gold in the temple melted down between the stone walls; and the Romans took the walls apart, stone by stone, to get the gold. Such an obvious fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy most likely would have been recorded as such by the gospel writers who were fond of mentioning fulfillment of prophecy if they had been written after A.D. 70. Also, if the gospels were fabrications of mythical events, then anything to bolster the Messianic claims--such as the destruction of the temple as Jesus said--would surely have been included. But, it was not included suggesting that the gospels (at least Matthew, Mark, and Luke) were written before A.D. 70.

    Similarly, this argument is important when we consider the dating of the book of Acts which was written after the gospel of Luke and by Luke himself. Acts is a history of the Christian church right after Jesus' ascension. Acts also fails to mention the incredibly significant events of A.D. 70, which would have been extremely relevant and prophetically important and would require inclusion into Acts had it occurred before Acts was written. Remember, Acts is a book of history concerning the Christians and the Jews. The fact that the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple is not recorded is very strong evidence that Acts was written before A.D. 70. We add to this the fact that Acts does not include the accounts of "Nero's persecution of the Christians in A.D. 64 or the deaths of [the apostle] James (A.D. 62), Paul (A.D. 64), and Peter (A.D. 65),"1 and we have further evidence that it was written early.

    If we look at Acts 1:1-2 it says, "The first account I composed, Theophilus, about all that Jesus began to do and teach, until the day when He was taken up, after He had by the Holy Spirit given orders to the apostles whom He had chosen." Most scholars affirm that Acts was written by Luke and that Theophilus (Grk. "lover of God") "may have been Luke's patron who financed the writing of Luke and Acts."2 This means that the gospel of Luke was written before Acts.

    •"At the earliest, Acts cannot have been written prior to the latest firm chronological marker recorded in the book - Festus's appointment as procurator (24:27), which, on the basis of independent sources, appears to have occurred between A.D. 55 and 59."3
    •"It is increasingly admitted that the Logia [Q] was very early, before A.D.50, and Mark likewise if Luke wrote the Acts while Paul was still alive. Luke's Gospel comes (Acts 1:1) before the Acts. The date of Acts is still in dispute, but the early date (about A.D. 63) is gaining support constantly."4

    For clarity, Q is supposedly one of the source documents used by both Matthew and Luke in writing their gospels. If Q actually existed, then that would push the first writings of Christ's words and deeds back even further lessening the available time for myth to creep in and adding to the validity and accuracy of the gospel accounts. If what is said of Acts is true, this would mean that Luke was written at least before A.D. 63 and possibly before 55 - 59 since Acts is the second in the series of writings by Luke. This means that the gospel of Luke was written within 30 years of Jesus' death.
    Originally Posted by nomaxim
    Sorry there ''ohein56', but it appears that 'Joecool44' does not have the position that you envision on this topic.

    'Joecool44' has, as a matter of routine, refuted most of your accusations
    Quote Originally Posted by Jax74 View Post
    Some people have the ability to think critically, some do not. ohein obviously doesn't.

  9. #41
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    3,324

    Re: Real debate?

    Quote Originally Posted by ohein56 View Post
    oooooh, man o man o man...ya certainly showed me!!!

    What a LAUGH!

    rofl
    We've already established you hate Zeus. Old news.

  10. #42
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northern, California
    Posts
    16,985

    Re: Real debate?

    Quote Originally Posted by tomInAustin View Post
    We've already established you hate Zeus. Old news.
    ...not too crazy about horus either....jbh
    As long as it is acceptable for a person to beLIEve that he knows how god wants everyone on Earth to live, we will continue to murder one another on account of our myths. ~ Sam Harris, 'The End Of Faith'
    ~~~~~
    Christianity demands the crucifixion of the intellect.
    ~ Susan Kierkegaard

Similar Threads

  1. Who is going to win the debate ?
    By Administrator in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 10-04-2012, 07:33 PM
  2. 911 the debate is over!!!
    By dawny22 in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-19-2011, 10:39 PM
  3. Who won the VP debate?
    By Grim17 in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 10-06-2008, 10:38 AM
  4. Who won the first debate?
    By Grim17 in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 09-29-2008, 03:47 PM
  5. Debate
    By mumbles in forum Science Scams
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-19-2008, 11:36 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •