Christians must follow the old testament.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-03-2014, 02:06 PM
RE: Christians must follow the old testament.
(24-03-2014 01:38 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(24-03-2014 01:32 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  To answer our last question, it's [reasons]. Some might call it Special Pleading, but rest assured: it's [reasons].

Yeah, I really should have known.

[reasons] explain everything. How? [reasons]. NEVER YOU MIND.

[Reasons] are self-evident. You don't hafta 'splain shit!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RobbyPants's post
24-03-2014, 02:09 PM
RE: Christians must follow the old testament.
(24-03-2014 02:06 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  [Reasons] are self-evident. You don't hafta 'splain shit!

YOU CAN'T PROVE I DON'T HAVE [REASONS]!!
Angry Angry Angry

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
24-03-2014, 02:11 PM
RE: Christians must follow the old testament.
(24-03-2014 08:33 AM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  Grimm's Fairy Tales is a Primary Sorce proving the existence of giants and giant beanstalks.

-- And DRAGONZES!!!


[Image: 278234.jpg]

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Taqiyya Mockingbird's post
24-03-2014, 02:17 PM
RE: Christians must follow the old testament.
BEST. DRAGON PIC. EVAR.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Charis's post
24-03-2014, 06:55 PM
RE: Christians must follow the old testament.
Quote:Which again makes whatever we do have a primary source.


I find it hard to believe that you are that fucking stupid, drippy....but you do keep proving it over and over again.

[Image: reality.jpg?imgmax=800]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Minimalist's post
24-03-2014, 07:03 PM
RE: Christians must follow the old testament.
(24-03-2014 12:39 PM)Drich Wrote:  
(24-03-2014 10:37 AM)Minimalist Wrote:  You have no original sources, Drippy. You have copies of copies of copies and copies and all subject to accidental or deliberate editing.

You holy books are crap.

Which again makes whatever we do have a primary source. To quote anything other than primary source material in a situation that you just described is even more foolish than to quote what is known.

Your obstinacy in the face of what everyone is telling you is amazing.
You have absolutely no ability to digest anything that anyone else says.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Mark Fulton's post
24-03-2014, 07:07 PM
RE: Christians must follow the old testament.
Drippy redefines the word "asshole," Mark.


Quote:Primary sources are original materials that have not been altered or distorted in any way.[1] Information for which the writer has no personal knowledge is not primary, although it may be used by historians in the absence of a primary source. In the study of history as an academic discipline, a primary source (also called original source or evidence) is an artifact, a document, a recording, or other source of information that was created at the time under study. It serves as an original source of information about the topic. Similar definitions are used in library science, and other areas of scholarship, although different fields have somewhat different definitions.[2] In journalism, a primary source can be a person with direct knowledge of a situation, or a document written by such a person.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_source

[Image: reality.jpg?imgmax=800]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Minimalist's post
24-03-2014, 07:18 PM
RE: Christians must follow the old testament.
(24-03-2014 07:07 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  Drippy redefines the word "asshole," Mark.


Quote:Primary sources are original materials that have not been altered or distorted in any way.[1] Information for which the writer has no personal knowledge is not primary, although it may be used by historians in the absence of a primary source. In the study of history as an academic discipline, a primary source (also called original source or evidence) is an artifact, a document, a recording, or other source of information that was created at the time under study. It serves as an original source of information about the topic. Similar definitions are used in library science, and other areas of scholarship, although different fields have somewhat different definitions.[2] In journalism, a primary source can be a person with direct knowledge of a situation, or a document written by such a person.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_source

Yes.
I always try to have a good look at myself when I'm criticised. This guy is being told how blatantly wrong he is by 6 or 7 people, smart people, all at once , and he just doesn't get it. He's a bigot.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mark Fulton's post
24-03-2014, 08:00 PM (This post was last modified: 25-03-2014 01:42 AM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Christians must follow the old testament.
Drich has put a link to wikipedia on "primary sources"

here is the first paragraph of the article...

"Primary sources are original materials that have not been altered or distorted in any way.[1] Information for which the writer has no personal knowledge is not primary, although it may be used by historians in the absence of a primary source. In the study of history as an academic discipline, a primary source (also called original source or evidence) is an artifact, a document, a recording, or other source of information that was created at the time under study. It serves as an original source of information about the topic. Similar definitions are used in library science, and other areas of scholarship, although different fields have somewhat different definitions.[2] In journalism, a primary source can be a person with direct knowledge of a situation, or a document written by such a person."

Now, concerning the gospels...

-they have been altered and distorted
-the (unknown) authors almost certainly had no personal knowledge of a real (or fictional) Jesus
-the gospels were not originally created at the time under study

Hence they undoubtedly fail all the criteria mentioned for a primary source.

Let's move on, because this topic has now been done to death.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Mark Fulton's post
24-03-2014, 08:03 PM
RE: Christians must follow the old testament.
(24-03-2014 08:26 AM)Drich Wrote:  In a sense those who aregue tertiary material against primary source material are those of great faith. For they believe that their speculation and commentaries some how trump known fact (in this case) about Paul.

Incoherent crap. Tell us EXACTLY what facts are known about Saul of Tarsus, and what the "primary sources" are for these "facts".
Please also look up the word "aregue" and tell us what it means.
BTW I never said anything about Paul. YOU failed to answer the point about "Q" and the gospels, and the Documentary Hypothesis. You never heard about either have you ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: