Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When 'opinions' get wacky then we can expect them to get excluded. Wikipedia tries hard to be factually correct and wacky doesn't cut it.
Yes you are correct. Sure anyone can edit Wiki BUT you had better abide by the rules...meaning you can only post credible and verifiable information. The medical and science topics have even more strict rules such as you can't post original research.
Most New Testament scholars today maintain that Jesus himself was a failed apocalyptic prophet who expected an imminent end to the world (see Matthew 24:34).
That seems like a little interpretation gymnastics to make a poem say what you want it to mean. In my opinion, a bible literalist should read the bible as written. The verse mentions two lords, not the son of God or Jesus or even the son of man. I'm not accepting your interpretation that one of the lords refers to Jesus.
No, there is Yahweh and then there is David's Lord:
Psa 110:1 A Davidic Psalm The averring of Yahweh to my Lord: Sit at My right Until I should set Your enemies as a stool for Your feet.
Yahweh is Jesus' God. And Jesus was David's Lord. Therefore Jesus was existent when David was alive.
Yes you are correct. Sure anyone can edit Wiki BUT you had better abide by the rules...meaning you can only post credible and verifiable information. The medical and science topics have even more strict rules such as you can't post original research.
And more. Snowball, open your eyes and see. You make presumptions and assumptions which do not bear out, like this one. Topics in the Evangelical channel are right up your alley:
Sorry Euse this is just more evidence that you can't handle reality. Your mind goes to the "they are wrong" mode whenever you are presented with facts that fly in the face of your personal narrative.
No most modern day scholars are not wrong. It's you who is wrong...fact it.
No thank you, I don't perouse sites like "Quora", "Patheos", "Huffington Post",
"Politico", "Daily Beast" or any other commie fish wraps.
Do you realize that the writer used direct quotes from the bible that were used in this response?
On that note then yes I agree the bible is a commie fish wrap...since that is a term you are familiar with. Never heard of it but since you use it I will agree on that note.
The writer on Quora who nicely put together the clear cut case that most modern day scholars also agree with is an atheist who has studied the scholarship on the historical Jesus, his Jewish socio-religious context and the origins of Christianity for over 25 years.
Try again, he used direct bible quotes to make his case...now how are you going to ignore that? Scroll down and click the (more) link to find the biblical quotes.
Last edited by Matadora; 05-15-2016 at 02:01 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
