Did Hitler win?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-11-2014, 12:49 PM
RE: Did Hitler win?
(21-11-2014 12:18 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  
(21-11-2014 10:18 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I understand. Would it be a metaphor that God did or did not create or is or is not a creator? Do you see my point regarding how I have the right to say whether an interpretation is true or false even if it is not definitive regarding being literal or a metaphorical or even poetic verse in question?

Yeah, as your opinion. It's not like you can actually prove that nonfalsifiable notion true or false. So, this gets down to you using your opinion to figure out what the scripture really means, and using your opinion to decide who is and isn't a True Christian.

That's why you're getting called on NTS. Because it's what you're doing.

Okay,

I will make some statements and let's see if they are falsifiable and if we agree:

1) In the NT, Paul writes that Jesus is risen from the dead bodily, not merely metaphorically or "spiritually".

2) The Bible is a collection of documents written more than a millennia ago.

3) The Bible was written by people and not space aliens.

I have a dollar that says we answer all these same, and would find that anyone else who claims any different isn't a TRUE interpreter. Do you agree or disagree?

Thanks.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-11-2014, 01:00 PM (This post was last modified: 21-11-2014 07:31 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Did Hitler win?
(21-11-2014 12:49 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(21-11-2014 12:18 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Yeah, as your opinion. It's not like you can actually prove that nonfalsifiable notion true or false. So, this gets down to you using your opinion to figure out what the scripture really means, and using your opinion to decide who is and isn't a True Christian.

That's why you're getting called on NTS. Because it's what you're doing.

Okay,

I will make some statements and let's see if they are falsifiable and if we agree:

1) In the NT, Paul writes that Jesus is risen from the dead bodily, not merely metaphorically or "spiritually".

2) The Bible is a collection of documents written more than a millennia ago.

3) The Bible was written by people and not space aliens.

I have a dollar that says we answer all these same, and would find that anyone else who claims any different isn't a TRUE interpreter. Do you agree or disagree?

Thanks.

#1. Completely false.
References :
1. CHRISTIAN NT Seminary Professor, (Dr. Bernard Brandon Scott), (well known Christian NT scholar of the resurrection and author of "The Trouble with Resurrection")
2. Dr. J.D. Crossan, member of the Jesus Seminar : http://www.cnn.com/2011/LIVING/02/27/Jesus.scholar/
3. Dr. Bart D. Ehrman : "How Jesus Became a God, The EXALTATION, (NOT RESURRECTION) of a Jewish Preacher From Galilee" (emphasis mine).
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...other-look

Gimme my dolla.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
21-11-2014, 01:39 PM
RE: Did Hitler win?
(21-11-2014 01:00 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(21-11-2014 12:49 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Okay,

I will make some statements and let's see if they are falsifiable and if we agree:

1) In the NT, Paul writes that Jesus is risen from the dead bodily, not merely metaphorically or "spiritually".

2) The Bible is a collection of documents written more than a millennia ago.

3) The Bible was written by people and not space aliens.

I have a dollar that says we answer all these same, and would find that anyone else who claims any different isn't a TRUE interpreter. Do you agree or disagree?

Thanks.

#1. Completely false.
References ; A CHRISTIAN NT Seminary Professor, (Dr. Bernard Brandon Scott), AND Dr. J.D. Crossan.
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...other-look
http://www.cnn.com/2011/LIVING/02/27/Jesus.scholar/

Gimme my dolla.

I was asking Robby, not you, so you can be contrary yet without a dollar. Which is good when one is making no cents.

"And according to Paul’s custom, he went to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and giving evidence that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus whom I am proclaiming to you is the Christ.” ... Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent, because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead.” Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some began to sneer, but others said, “We shall hear you again concerning this.” -- Acts 17

20 But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. 21 For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, 24 then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death. 27 For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. 28 When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.

You will need to be creative about what death, life and dying are to interpret the opposite of these verses.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-11-2014, 01:43 PM (This post was last modified: 21-11-2014 05:29 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Did Hitler win?
(21-11-2014 01:39 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(21-11-2014 01:00 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  #1. Completely false.
References ; A CHRISTIAN NT Seminary Professor, (Dr. Bernard Brandon Scott), AND Dr. J.D. Crossan.
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...other-look
http://www.cnn.com/2011/LIVING/02/27/Jesus.scholar/

Gimme my dolla.

I was asking Robby, not you, so you can be contrary yet without a dollar. Which is good when one is making no cents.

"And according to Paul’s custom, he went to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and giving evidence that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus whom I am proclaiming to you is the Christ.” ... Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent, because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead.” Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some began to sneer, but others said, “We shall hear you again concerning this.” -- Acts 17

20 But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. 21 For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, 24 then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death. 27 For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. 28 When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.

You will need to be creative about what death, life and dying are to interpret the opposite of these verses.

You read NOT one of the references. Your problem, (well one anyway) is that YOU do not know any Greek, or how to correctly translate it. Now read the damn references I provided above, and THEN refute the translation of the Greek words.
Take your time.
And BTW, it is not ME that "needs to be creative". There is NO CONSENSUS among Christian scholars today what the words written with Paul's name attached, mean or meant.
ALL the highly thought of, academic references, I provided, (even while YOU provided not one), agree with me, and NOT YOU.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-11-2014, 02:16 PM (This post was last modified: 21-11-2014 02:24 PM by The Q Continuum.)
RE: Did Hitler win?
Hmm... there is ZERO Greek in the Crossan reference, and the second reference is your own castle of assumptions and not a scholarly reference, so you expect me to give credence to your theory (ego?) when millions of believers and skeptics alike have interpreted the scriptures the same for millennia... not that I want to presume a fallacy majority error just because 99% of ATHEIST and SKEPTICAL religious scholars understand Greek differently than you and Crossan, and 99% is likely not a big enough number, but...

1. You start with nonsense like an alternate rendering of Matthew 28 where ALL, not SOME, doubt (while ignoring that even if ALL doubted, SOME worshipped...)! How convenient for your theory to ignore that plain context.

2. You excerpt very important concepts, such as Paul comparing bodily resurrection to a seed:
a. the seed literally dies
b. the seed literally grows to be a greater thing than itself
c. the seed literally rises out of the ground as a tree

3. You choose to ignore the fact that the scripture passages I chose have to do with doubting and proof. The Greeks in Athens were skeptical. Why? They totally understood Paul was speaking of a literal, not allegorical or even metaphysical resurrection. A living, breathing body that:

4. In the gospels, eats fish and asks people to touch him to verify He has a resurrected BODY.

Sorry, but your position paper, although very well thought out, is simply looking for non-majority readings of verses and possible alternate renderings of Greek, which while possible, are implausible because they defy common sense reading of the text, whether in English or Greek.

Yes, you'd also have something there with your (and oh, atheists do this a lot) appeal to "Joe Xian doesn't get it, but we deep Greek scholars get it", a sort of intellectual snobbery that says you understand Greek better than average Christians, but you and Crossan are going to be onions in the onion field for the foreseeable future, since your interpretations have been fringe ones for millennia, AMONG GREEK SCHOLARS, Christian, Muslim and skeptical alike!

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-11-2014, 02:44 PM (This post was last modified: 21-11-2014 08:41 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Did Hitler win?
(21-11-2014 02:16 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  ntly than you and Crossan, and 99% is likely not a big enough number, but...

1. You start with nonsense like an alternate rendering of Matthew 28 where ALL, not SOME, doubt (while ignoring that even if ALL doubted, SOME worshipped...)! How convenient for your theory to ignore that plain context.

2. You excerpt very important concepts, such as Paul comparing bodily resurrection to a seed:
a. the seed literally dies
b. the seed literally grows to be a greater thing than itself
c. the seed literally rises out of the ground as a tree

3. You choose to ignore the fact that the scripture passages I chose have to do with doubting and proof. The Greeks in Athens were skeptical. Why? They totally understood Paul was speaking of a literal, not allegorical or even metaphysical resurrection. A living, breathing body that:

4. In the gospels, eats fish and asks people to touch him to verify He has a resurrected BODY.

Sorry, but your position paper, although very well thought out, is simply looking for non-majority readings of verses and possible alternate renderings of Greek, which while possible, are implausible because they defy common sense reading of the text, whether in English or Greek.

Yes, you'd also have something there with your (and oh, atheists do this a lot) appeal to "Joe Xian doesn't get it, but we deep Greek scholars get it", a sort of intellectual snobbery that says you understand Greek better than average Christians, but you and Crossan are going to be onions in the onion field for the foreseeable future, since your interpretations have been fringe ones for millennia, AMONG GREEK SCHOLARS, Christian, Muslim and skeptical alike!

LMAO. So now "correct translation" is now "snobbery". The CHRISTIAN seminary professor, (whom you obviously never even heard of, as you are no scholar) holds your "snobbish" position. "Average Christians" not only know NO GREEK AT ALL, as you don't,. they also know no Hebrew AT ALL. "Average Christians" don't know the first thing about the Bible. YOU have not yet named EVEN ONE scholar, of Greek or anything else.

The "scriptures" you chose were part of the purposeful myth that was concocted about a mythical dude, who was created to be at the center of a new sub-sect of Judaism, called the "Way" in Acts. There is not one reason on Earth any of your "scriptures" should hold even a shred of credibility, apart from things that can be verified externally.

I am a grad student in the field, so there's that, and the fact is I DID provide a scholarly reference for what I wrote. For millennia, "scholars" and believers have interpreted the Bible in certain ways, only to find out in the last 100 years, much of it was impossible, and totally made up, and false.

There's a shitload of Greek in the CHRISTIAN book by the Christian seminary professor I gave you, whose education on the subject FAR exceeds yours.
You didn't read the Crossan BOOK. His education FAR exceeds yours. You have refuted NOT ONE translation.
Your attempt at the "argumentum ad populum" (fallacy) falls flat on it's ass.
What I wrote makes perfect sense also to Dr. Bart Ehrman, whose book you never read.

Paul's (or whoever cooked up) the ideas about "seeds" are not changed in any fundamental way with the Jewish Apocalyptic concept of "exaltation" replacing "bodily" resurrection", and in fact makes a lot more sense in context of that period of history. Fail again.

You have no idea what the Greeks thought or how they understood what Paul said, and you have no proof of anything you claim you think you know. The first Gospel, Mark, (written AFTER Paul's 1st writings), had no resurrection, and ended with the empty tomb. Therefore in THAT context, this position makes perfect sense.
And furthermore, it's not an "atheist" position, despite your weak attempt to try to marginalize it as such. It's a CHRISTIAN referenced position, by a CHRISTIAN seminary professor who agrees entirely with my position. You have not named EVEN ONE scholar who addresses the issues at hand. The only reason it's not "common sense" to you is that you know NOTHING about the period of Jewish Apocalyptic history, in which what I wrote makes perfect sense, and does so also to Scott and Ehrman.

I still want my dollar. YOU assumed there was general agreement by scholars by what is meant by the resurrection. I provided 3 scholars that destroyed your position, and demonstrated you are totally UNAWARE of the current state of scholarship, (of your own cult). Pay up, or shut up.

There never once has been a "resurrected body". The term has no real meaning In light of the Hebrew beliefs concerning "shades" (and "exalted heroes") and the fact that the apostles were afraid of what they saw, and didn't recognize it, as well as many others, it makes more sense that HEBREWS would be writing about Hebrew "shades". The body in the gospels is said to "go through walls". That is no "physical body". No physical body has ever gone through a wall, and you can provide no evidence one ever has. There is no "physical anything" that goes through anything. You cannot possibly mean a "physical body". Therefore, you must define and explain and provide evidence that there exists such a thing as a "physical resurrected body", and tell us what EXACTLY that even means, and how it conforms to what is currently known about the physical world, and provide evidence for it. The gospels also said there was a zombie invasion of Jerusalem. What happened to all those others that rose with Jebus ? Where are the empty graves, and the split rocks ? Why did NOT ONE Jewish historian write about the fact that the temple curtain was spontaneously torn from top to bottom. In light of the fact many Christians say THOSE are metaphor, why shouldn't the body in the same myth be metaphorical also ? Why when the authorities went to all the trouble to arrest and supposedly execute him, was no attempt made to locate him after there were supposedly reports about his sightings ?

For thousands of years Christians and Muslims and Jews have been going on about all sorts of things which have been proven by Archaeology, recently, to be totally false in the last 100 years, (the Flood myth, the Exodus, Moses, Joshua, Abraham, Yahweh as a "monotheist" god, most of the "history" of Israel as written in the Bible). There is no reason the "resurrection" as an "event" should not be re-examined, in light of all the other claims and myths that have been proven recently to be completely false. In fact almost all the "historical facts" that your entire cult is built on, have bee proven to be completely false. The (claimed) "resurrection" is just another one.

You do know about the Pauli Exclusion Principle ? If the resurrection had happened, not only would one body have to be "resurrected" but the entire universe's structure would have had to be altered.

Seriously ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
21-11-2014, 02:56 PM
RE: Did Hitler win?
(21-11-2014 12:49 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Okay,

I will make some statements and let's see if they are falsifiable and if we agree:

1) In the NT, Paul writes that Jesus is risen from the dead bodily, not merely metaphorically or "spiritually".

2) The Bible is a collection of documents written more than a millennia ago.

3) The Bible was written by people and not space aliens.

I have a dollar that says we answer all these same, and would find that anyone else who claims any different isn't a TRUE interpreter. Do you agree or disagree?

Thanks.

Are any of the above statements "falsifiable" ...?

falsify |ˈfôlsəˌfī|
verb ( -fies, -fied) [ trans. ]
1 alter (information or evidence) so as to mislead.
• forge or alter (a document) fraudulently : [as adj. ] ( falsified) falsified documents.
2 prove (a statement or theory) to be false : the hypothesis is falsified by the evidence.
• fail to fulfill (a hope, fear, or expectation); remove the justification for : changes falsify individual expectations.

Well, you have a point. Maybe not "falsifiable" but not entirely truthful, either.

I will agree with numbers 2 & 3 but number 1 ... Consider ...needs a little qualification.
Here: 1) In the NT, Paul writes that Jesus is risen from the dead bodily, not merely metaphorically or "spiritually". Paul was tripping.

Now we are most certainly in agreement.

You're welcome. Shy

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-11-2014, 02:57 PM (This post was last modified: 21-11-2014 03:23 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Did Hitler win?
duplicate post

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-11-2014, 07:10 PM
RE: Did Hitler win?
(21-11-2014 12:49 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Okay,

I will make some statements and let's see if they are falsifiable and if we agree:

1) In the NT, Paul writes that Jesus is risen from the dead bodily, not merely metaphorically or "spiritually".

2) The Bible is a collection of documents written more than a millennia ago.

3) The Bible was written by people and not space aliens.

I have a dollar that says we answer all these same, and would find that anyone else who claims any different isn't a TRUE interpreter. Do you agree or disagree?

Thanks.

It doesn't matter, because that's not what I'm talking about. The nonfalsifiable part is if any of it is true and whether or not your particular metric for True Christian is correct. Different people have different opinions on both of those, and so far, no one has definitively proven either.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2014, 06:59 AM
RE: Did Hitler win?
(18-11-2014 02:05 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Indeed. The problem being that you have no ability to judge others' beliefs.

"In all cases where others' interpretation of scripture differs from mine, I am always correct" is about as vacuously terrible an argument I've ever heard, but if you're well and truly doubling down on it, knock yourself out.


According to you they aren't acting like True Christians™.

According to them, they may be - or may have been.

At which point it is a matter of your special subjective feels against theirs. To an outside observer neither set of feels is or can possibly be more compelling than the other.

Your persistent and troublesome inability to understand this point can only, I feel, be deliberate fatuity on your part. I suppose I can grudgingly credit the overwhelming commitment to disingenuousness you exhibit, but I don't particularly appreciate the trait itself.

Or perhaps we should just posit "playing dumb for Jesus" to go alongside "lying for Jesus?" Two of a perfect pair, to be sure...

You summed up Q's problems quite succintly, but that's why he's a believer, he has interminable logical disconnects. His whole interpretation shell game is as dishonest as it is trite.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like TheInquisition's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: