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.
You need me to provide chapter and verse so you can look them up? There's nothing other than than what's in the Bible. Apart from Jannaeus crucifying Pharisees but that's stock Christian apologetics "It wasn't only Romans did crucifixions-jews did them, too!".
Are you saying all your claims are simply your opinions and you can't reference just one authoritative source who supports any of your claims?? Really?
Hopefully one day it will dawn on you that nonbelievers have always been the ones with the most worldly power. They were the ones doing ALL of the killing.
It's clear today that they have a unquenchable thirst for blood. You try to say you are just getting "revenge" today. When in fact you are part of that same bloodthirsty group that goes back for aeons. You just refuse to admit it. You can't even look in the mirror.
Haven't heard much out of you for a little while, TroutDude. Posting the same GIF over and over, without anything of substance, paints you as a paper tiger. I see you in the Christianity forum, making growling sounds. Go get 'em tiger! Grrrrr.
Hi phetaroi. Thanks for the link. I wasn't aware the theory had a name. 303Guy described something similar, but I wasn't aware there were more people, here, who considered it as a valid consideration.
You mentioned previously that you used to believe in God. What were the key reasons you sought to find something other than Christianity?
What is it about Buddhism that leads you to conclude it is the "truth."
Are you saying all your claims are simply your opinions and you can't reference just one authoritative source who supports any of your claims?? Really?
Well, yes, effectively. I know of no other 'authority' who argues this way. And yet - you just have to set out the texts and it's absolutely obvious. I hardly need to argue. I just wonder why none of the other aothorties seem to to have done this.
i know only of One who had reasoned from the 'Passover release custom is unknown' which IS generally accepted by the 'authorities' to 'Jesus and Barabbas are the same character. But that is more speculative on my part (1) -not a matter of comparing text.
Take Matthew 13.55, Mark 6.3 (Rejection at Nazareth) and compare with Luke 4.23. which is the same as there is no other parallel to the Mark and Matthew 'rejection'. But look at where Luke puts it, and see the messianic declaration which isn't in Mark and Matthew.
I need do no more than point and say 'eyewitness slips won't account for that'. 'Not being important enough for neither to mention won't wash'. This is an invention and edit of Luke's and far from the only one. The believer can simply deny that, but what is that but denial of what is pretty evident? I just ask again - did none of all those Bible experts see that?
I mean the skeptical ones. I heard rumbles that the Bible believers see it and know it and they know it's false, but they can't say so. But that's just what I heard.
(1) I call it my 'special theory' as distinct from the rest - the 'general' theory.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 08-10-2019 at 02:29 PM..
Hi phetaroi. Yes, you did say that, with quote marks around the word 'truth'. I took the quote marks to mean you see Buddhism as the closest thing to "truth" that you know of.
I assume you've been Buddhist for many years. What is it about Buddhism that leads you to conclude it is more true* or more credible than another religion, like Christianity, for instance?
(*true defined however you want)
Haven't heard much out of you for a little while, TroutDude. Posting the same GIF over and over, without anything of substance, paints you as a paper tiger. I see you in the Christianity forum, making growling sounds. Go get 'em tiger! Grrrrr.
Other posters will wise up to you as well. I pegged you early because I've seen your kind slithering around for over 20 years. You're sly but you're not very bright.
Who are all biased, prejudiced and pushing a particular agenda.
Like this “christian” turned agnostic?
Today we feature the interesting introduction to Bart Ehrman’s best-selling book, Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth which deals with the question.
Quote:
Ehrman is a preeminent New Testament scholar, but he's not a Christian. In fact, he's one of the world's best-known skeptics of religion, regularly debating against Christian scholars and apologists. Ehrman specializes in the gospels and early Christianity and became increasingly surprised by the stream of questions he got, both after his lectures and via email, about the existence of Jesus. He admits he was largely unaware of the skeptics, mostly online, who insist Jesus is a completely fictitious person.
[Ehrman writes]:
Every week I receive two or three e-mails asking me whether Jesus existed as a human being. When I started getting these e-mails, some years ago now, I thought the question was rather peculiar and I did not take it seriously. Of course Jesus existed. Everyone knows he existed. Don’t they?
But the questions kept coming, and soon I began to wonder: Why are so many people asking? My wonder only increased when I learned that I myself was being quoted in some circles—misquoted rather—as saying that Jesus never existed. I decided to look into the matter. I discovered, to my surprise, an entire body of literature devoted to the question of whether or not there ever was a real man, Jesus.
I was surprised because I am trained as a scholar of the New Testament and early Christianity, and for thirty years I have written extensively on the historical Jesus, the Gospels, the early Christian movement, and the history of the church’s first three hundred years. Like all New Testament scholars, I have read thousands of books and articles in English and other European languages on Jesus, the New Testament, and early Christianity. But I was almost completely unaware—as are most of my colleagues in the field—of this body of skeptical literature.
I should say at the outset that none of this literature is written by scholars trained in New Testament or early Christian studies teaching at the major, or even the minor, accredited theological seminaries, divinity schools, universities, or colleges of North America or Europe (or anywhere else in the world). Of the thousands of scholars of early Christianity who do teach at such schools, none of them, to my knowledge, has any doubts that Jesus existed.
———-
Those who do not think Jesus existed are frequently militant in their views and remarkably adept at countering evidence that to the rest of the civilized world seems compelling and even unanswerable. But these writers have answers, and the smart ones among them need to be taken seriously, if for no other reason than to show why they cannot be right about their major contention. The reality is that whatever else you may think about Jesus, he certainly did exist.
Well, yes, effectively. I know of no other 'authority' who argues this way. And yet - you just have to set out the texts and it's absolutely obvious. I hardly need to argue. I just wonder why none of the other aothorties seem to to have done this.
i know only of One who had reasoned from the 'Passover release custom is unknown' which IS generally accepted by the 'authorities' to 'Jesus and Barabbas are the same character. But that is more speculative on my part (1) -not a matter of comparing text.
Take Matthew 13.55, Mark 6.3 (Rejection at Nazareth) and compare with Luke 4.23. which is the same as there is no other parallel to the Mark and Matthew 'rejection'. But look at where Luke puts it, and see the messianic declaration which isn't in Mark and Matthew.
I need do no more than point and say 'eyewitness slips won't account for that'. 'Not being important enough for neither to mention won't wash'. This is an invention and edit of Luke's and far from the only one. The believer can simply deny that, but what is that but denial of what is pretty evident? I just ask again - did none of all those Bible experts see that?
I mean the skeptical ones. I heard rumbles that the Bible believers see it and know it and they know it's false, but they can't say so. But that's just what I heard.
(1) I call it my 'special theory' as distinct from the rest - the 'general' theory.
You have a pet/special theory that, somehow, no academics have been able to discover for themselves?
I referenced the 'Why Trolls Troll' article I posted a few comments back. Your particular reasons for your behavior seem to be primarily a result of personality traits, with a little 'mob mentality' thrown into the mix. IMO, you're a "hard-core believer" with inflated (unrealistic?) confidence in your pet theory. You've come up with a theory that not one biblical scholar, either religious and atheist, has yet to discover, despite the fact they are all more qualified in this area of research than you are! Most impressive.
Quote:
7. Personality traits - tend to think that they are morally superior to others.
- some just enjoy making other people uncomfortable or angry
- Personality traits such as self-righteousness and social dominance orientation
- you think your own social groups are inherently better than others; express intolerance
- hard-core believers will express their opinions no matter what; they think their opinion is infallible.
Last edited by Iwasmadenew; 08-10-2019 at 03:11 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.
