Did Hitler win?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-11-2014, 10:53 AM
RE: Did Hitler win?
(21-11-2014 02:44 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(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 ?

Not snobbery. Merely that you quoted some work (it was just your bullet points in the thread you sent, perhaps from your Bachelor's level class in NT theory?) and then said you had the whole, imposing weight of universal Greek scholarship behind your odd theories and bizarre constructs even as you:

*Represent Crossan as representative of the majority of academic NT scholars - as if you are unaware he was long under criticism as a scholar for the Jesus Seminar, which had 14% of its "NT scholars" even being NT scholars (!) and did numerous disreputable practices. For example, using colored markers to vote on doctrine reliability, and then when conservatives held to their positions in equal proportions as did liberals, he would still say the voting was "grey" indicating a passage's reliability was in doubt...!

*Flipping the argument in your last post to say that I'm saying non-seminary and non-academic Christians ONLY hold to certain positions. Repeating, your "Greek understanding" of a non-bodily resurrection has not been a Greek scholarly position for millennia by liberals or conservatives. Yet you pose as if every scholar outside a seminary is concrete that the Bible presents a non-bodily resurrection. Surely we evangelical ignoramuses would have heard of such a mass abandonment of traditional renderings from the Greek on the news, or perhaps The View or Inside Edition by now... Drinking Beverage

*The rest of your current arguments defy logic or at least show your confirmatory bias, eg your insistence that Jesus Christ, who (per the scriptures) can fly without a plane, bodily resurrect, and come in and out of our dimension of existence for and from heaven could not possibly enter a room without breaking through a wall according to Bucky Ball, the authority, apparently not only on Greek but metempsychosis, quantum physics and the 11 dimensions proposed by string theory is... beyond comment.

*You are assumptive. I have only a few years of Greek and Hebrew studies, but not none at all. I know enough Greek to know when you are suggesting alternate renderings and readings of the text that are non-standard, non-suggested, and are grasping at straws, like your Matthew butchery of the plain sense reading of the text. Again, even if ALL doubted, SOME worshipped a bodily resurrected Christ. Feel free to address my point on Matthew since YOU brought it up with your "creative" translation of the text. I'll try and point out where I'm thinking of NAS, NKJV, RSV, ESB, etc. if you will please be honest where you make up your own Bible translations!

*I don't have PayPal, so if you send me your name and address via PM I can and will send you a dollar bill or a check for $1. It will be worth the $1 plus any postage to the US or UK to hear you stop whining about my money. Even Robby is over it.

Thank you.

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
24-11-2014, 10:54 AM
RE: Did Hitler win?
(21-11-2014 07:10 PM)RobbyPants 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.

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.

One of my metrics for what makes a true Christian is that they believe the Bible was written by people, not space aliens. Agree or disagree? Have I judged rightly or wrongly?

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
24-11-2014, 03:03 PM
RE: Did Hitler win?
(24-11-2014 10:54 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  One of my metrics for what makes a true Christian is that they believe the Bible was written by people, not space aliens. Agree or disagree? Have I judged rightly or wrongly?

... Let's leave the word "true" out of this. Can we agree on definition of word Christian? I'd say it's pretty much gotta be the dictionary def, right?

Once you start trying to claim the word for yourself you're in dicey logical waters - you don't get to decide the meaning of the word, it's arrived at by consensus. Those that you would exclude as not being *true* Christians I'm sure will happily extend the same courtesy to you, which is why it's a fallacy.

You're probably not gonna find a Christian who believes that the Bible is written by aliens but it's not impossible. By what right do you claim that (s)he's not a *true* Christian?

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-11-2014, 09:17 AM
RE: Did Hitler win?
(24-11-2014 03:03 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(24-11-2014 10:54 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  One of my metrics for what makes a true Christian is that they believe the Bible was written by people, not space aliens. Agree or disagree? Have I judged rightly or wrongly?

... Let's leave the word "true" out of this. Can we agree on definition of word Christian? I'd say it's pretty much gotta be the dictionary def, right?

Once you start trying to claim the word for yourself you're in dicey logical waters - you don't get to decide the meaning of the word, it's arrived at by consensus. Those that you would exclude as not being *true* Christians I'm sure will happily extend the same courtesy to you, which is why it's a fallacy.

You're probably not gonna find a Christian who believes that the Bible is written by aliens but it's not impossible. By what right do you claim that (s)he's not a *true* Christian?

Unfortunately, it cannot be the dictionary definition, at least until we pick one of these 11 choices!

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/christian

And I was NOT claiming that believing the Bible was written by humans or non-humans makes one a Christian or not a Christian. I'm stating that apart from the issue of what makes one truly a Christian, I am capable, as are you, of determining the correct Bible interpretation for a given statement (within certain limits and limitations).

The Bible was written by people. If you agree, than those who claim it was written by aliens are speaking an untruth, that is, making a false statement. And if we can set up some true and false flags, we can proceed.

If we define a Christian not just as "one who follows Jesus" but "one who is religiously motivated to follow Jesus to attempt to get to Heaven" then I have issues with people who say they are Christians but do not see the need to be born again, since Jesus said:

“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” - John 3:3

Unless you think I've made a misinterpretation by saying when you get to heaven you can see it!

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
25-11-2014, 09:33 AM (This post was last modified: 25-11-2014 09:39 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Did Hitler win?
(24-11-2014 10:53 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Not snobbery. Merely that you quoted some work (it was just your bullet points in the thread you sent, perhaps from your Bachelor's level class in NT theory?) and then said you had the whole, imposing weight of universal Greek scholarship behind your odd theories and bizarre constructs even as you:

*Represent Crossan as representative of the majority of academic NT scholars - as if you are unaware he was long under criticism as a scholar for the Jesus Seminar, which had 14% of its "NT scholars" even being NT scholars (!) and did numerous disreputable practices. For example, using colored markers to vote on doctrine reliability, and then when conservatives held to their positions in equal proportions as did liberals, he would still say the voting was "grey" indicating a passage's reliability was in doubt...!

*Flipping the argument in your last post to say that I'm saying non-seminary and non-academic Christians ONLY hold to certain positions. Repeating, your "Greek understanding" of a non-bodily resurrection has not been a Greek scholarly position for millennia by liberals or conservatives. Yet you pose as if every scholar outside a seminary is concrete that the Bible presents a non-bodily resurrection. Surely we evangelical ignoramuses would have heard of such a mass abandonment of traditional renderings from the Greek on the news, or perhaps The View or Inside Edition by now... Drinking Beverage

*The rest of your current arguments defy logic or at least show your confirmatory bias, eg your insistence that Jesus Christ, who (per the scriptures) can fly without a plane, bodily resurrect, and come in and out of our dimension of existence for and from heaven could not possibly enter a room without breaking through a wall according to Bucky Ball, the authority, apparently not only on Greek but metempsychosis, quantum physics and the 11 dimensions proposed by string theory is... beyond comment.

*You are assumptive. I have only a few years of Greek and Hebrew studies, but not none at all. I know enough Greek to know when you are suggesting alternate renderings and readings of the text that are non-standard, non-suggested, and are grasping at straws, like your Matthew butchery of the plain sense reading of the text. Again, even if ALL doubted, SOME worshipped a bodily resurrected Christ. Feel free to address my point on Matthew since YOU brought it up with your "creative" translation of the text. I'll try and point out where I'm thinking of NAS, NKJV, RSV, ESB, etc. if you will please be honest where you make up your own Bible translations!

*I don't have PayPal, so if you send me your name and address via PM I can and will send you a dollar bill or a check for $1. It will be worth the $1 plus any postage to the US or UK to hear you stop whining about my money. Even Robby is over it.

Thank you.

I said nothing about "imposing the weight of universal Greek scholarship" only that there exists out there an alternate view, and your PRESUMPTION demonstrated your complete ignorance of the field. Nice try at MIS-characterizing what I said. I never said Crossan was "representative". I pointed out that his view was out there.
The view "for millennia" is crap, as you have NOT REFUTED ONE SINGLE INDIVIDUAL POINT OR TRANSLATION. Quantum Physics does allow for a body to go through a wall. Do you know how LONG you have to wait for that to happen ? Physical bodies NEVER have been observed going through wall, and YOU cannot even define what a "resurrected body" even is.

You are pathetic, and not worth anyone's time. How typical. You know nothing about your own cult. You made a bet, assuming no one could point out your bullshit position. Keep your fucking money. Maybe buy some psychiatric help with it, or go BEGIN to get an education in your cult.

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
25-11-2014, 09:40 AM
RE: Did Hitler win?
(25-11-2014 09:33 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(24-11-2014 10:53 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Not snobbery. Merely that you quoted some work (it was just your bullet points in the thread you sent, perhaps from your Bachelor's level class in NT theory?) and then said you had the whole, imposing weight of universal Greek scholarship behind your odd theories and bizarre constructs even as you:

*Represent Crossan as representative of the majority of academic NT scholars - as if you are unaware he was long under criticism as a scholar for the Jesus Seminar, which had 14% of its "NT scholars" even being NT scholars (!) and did numerous disreputable practices. For example, using colored markers to vote on doctrine reliability, and then when conservatives held to their positions in equal proportions as did liberals, he would still say the voting was "grey" indicating a passage's reliability was in doubt...!

*Flipping the argument in your last post to say that I'm saying non-seminary and non-academic Christians ONLY hold to certain positions. Repeating, your "Greek understanding" of a non-bodily resurrection has not been a Greek scholarly position for millennia by liberals or conservatives. Yet you pose as if every scholar outside a seminary is concrete that the Bible presents a non-bodily resurrection. Surely we evangelical ignoramuses would have heard of such a mass abandonment of traditional renderings from the Greek on the news, or perhaps The View or Inside Edition by now... Drinking Beverage

*The rest of your current arguments defy logic or at least show your confirmatory bias, eg your insistence that Jesus Christ, who (per the scriptures) can fly without a plane, bodily resurrect, and come in and out of our dimension of existence for and from heaven could not possibly enter a room without breaking through a wall according to Bucky Ball, the authority, apparently not only on Greek but metempsychosis, quantum physics and the 11 dimensions proposed by string theory is... beyond comment.

*You are assumptive. I have only a few years of Greek and Hebrew studies, but not none at all. I know enough Greek to know when you are suggesting alternate renderings and readings of the text that are non-standard, non-suggested, and are grasping at straws, like your Matthew butchery of the plain sense reading of the text. Again, even if ALL doubted, SOME worshipped a bodily resurrected Christ. Feel free to address my point on Matthew since YOU brought it up with your "creative" translation of the text. I'll try and point out where I'm thinking of NAS, NKJV, RSV, ESB, etc. if you will please be honest where you make up your own Bible translations!

*I don't have PayPal, so if you send me your name and address via PM I can and will send you a dollar bill or a check for $1. It will be worth the $1 plus any postage to the US or UK to hear you stop whining about my money. Even Robby is over it.

Thank you.

I said nothing about "imposing the weight of universal Greek scholarship" only that there exists out there an alternate view, and your PRESUMPTION demonstrated you complete ignorance of the field. Nice try at MIS-characterizing what I said. UI never said Crossan was "representative". I pointed out that his view was out there.
The view "for millennia" is crap, as you have NOT REFUTED ONE SINGLE INDIVIDUAL POINT OR TRANSLATION. Quantum Physics does allow for a body to go through a wall. Do you know how LONG you have to wait. Physical bodies NEVER have been observed going through wall, and YOU cannot even define what a "resurrected body" even is.

You are pathetic, and not worth anyone's time. How typical. You know nothing about your own cult. You made a bet, assuming no one could point out your bullshit position. Keep your fucking money. Maybe buy some psychiatric help with it, or go BEGIN to get an education in your cult.

No, I assumed Robby could not. You, however, are welcomed to my dollar or (What's a Christian way to say "STFU" about it as you atheists are fond of saying to other atheists and Christians? How about, stop beating a dead horse for a dollar, Bucky?)

Yes, you are right, Bucky, Crossan's view is "out there" as you put it. Way out there. You should at least let people know when you are 1) pushing your own theories and/or 2) representing fringe viewpoints. And I'm correct, representing a fringe means you are against the majority viewpoint of Greek scholars, historically, and now.

Repeating, I could take apart of all your arguments. I began with Matthew 28 and your accidental or (perhaps deliberate?) mistranslation there. That was your first or second bullet point and I began there.

Further, I claim Jesus can do some things you are unfamiliar with at quantum levels as in "supernatural" things. I know that you are shocked that as an evangelical Christian I say God can do miracles, but you'll get over it, I'm sure.

Finally, I'd be happy to define what a "resurrected body" is. It's a body, in this case, a person, that was dead and is alive again. This differs from a hope or ideal or a religious martyr.

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
25-11-2014, 09:42 AM
RE: Did Hitler win?
(25-11-2014 09:17 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  If we define a Christian not just as "one who follows Jesus" but "one who is religiously motivated to follow Jesus to attempt to get to Heaven" then I have issues with people who say they are Christians but do not see the need to be born again, since Jesus said:

“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” - John 3:3

Unless you think I've made a misinterpretation by saying when you get to heaven you can see it!

But he also said (Parable of the sheep and goats, somewhere in Matthew) that if you "fed me when I was hungry, etc.", you were going to Heaven, and if you didn't you weren't -- with no mention at all of what you believed or whether or not you were born again. It depended entirely on how you treated other people. That makes a whole lot more sense than the "born again" stuff, and it comes straight from your Bible. Seems Jesus couldn't quite make up his mind what you had to do to get to Heaven -- or the Gospel writers a generation or two after him couldn't quite remember what he had to say on that topic. But if I had to decide who is or isn't a True Christian ™, I'm going with Matthew over John (although Matthew was a bit looney about some other stuff).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-11-2014, 09:49 AM
RE: Did Hitler win?
(25-11-2014 09:40 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I could take apart of all your arguments.

Sure you could. And I am Spiderman. Thumbsup

(25-11-2014 09:40 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Further, I claim Jesus can do some things you are unfamiliar with at quantum levels as in "supernatural" things. I know that you are shocked that as an evangelical Christian I say God can do miracles, but you'll get over it, I'm sure.


1. Yet you provide no PROOF of the claim. And I am Little Orphan Annie.
2. BTW the "Biblical" definition of "miracle" (which you would know IF you had ever even taken ONE course in Biblical Studies from a non-Fundie), is not "doing supernatural things" It's an "ENTIRELY natural event" in which a believer sees the hand of their god operating".

You are pathetic. But by all means keep up your good work. As usual you Fundie Fools do atheism more good than anyone else could possibly imagine.

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
25-11-2014, 09:57 AM
RE: Did Hitler win?
(25-11-2014 09:49 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(25-11-2014 09:40 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I could take apart of all your arguments.

Sure you could. And I am Spiderman. Thumbsup

(25-11-2014 09:40 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Further, I claim Jesus can do some things you are unfamiliar with at quantum levels as in "supernatural" things. I know that you are shocked that as an evangelical Christian I say God can do miracles, but you'll get over it, I'm sure.


1. Yet you provide no PROOF of the claim. And I am Little Orphan Annie.
2. BTW the "Biblical" definition of "miracle" (which you would know IF you had ever even taken ONE course in Biblical Studies from a non-Fundie), is not "doing supernatural things" It's an "ENTIRELY natural event" in which a believer sees the hand of their god operating".

You are pathetic. But by all means keep up your good work. As usual you Fundie Fools do atheism more good than anyone else could possibly imagine.

Well, I COULD argue the Greek with you. But Bucky, your Greek skills are so rudimentary that unlike thousands upon thousands of Greek scholars, [read: NEARLY ALL] many of whom were born and raised in Greece and write Greek like natives (!), you don’t understand that the Bible states that Jesus rose from the grave to live again. Why would I want to debate the Greek with you?! Next you’ll tell me the Greek says John was exiled to Arkham Asylum and the Greek says Gandalf, Saruman and Rudolph were three of Jesus’s disciples! I would never waste time arguing from the Greek with someone who butchers it that badly. So let’s try and make sense of your “ideas” in English, first, please… perhaps we can begin with your promotion of someone who IS a Greek scholar but isn’t from the lunatic fringe of “scholarship”.

OR, if you wish, you can attempt to address either 1) why you deliberately mistranslated Matthew 28 or 2) respond to my logical refutation of your point regarding it (which I've done now several times without response).

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
25-11-2014, 10:12 AM (This post was last modified: 25-11-2014 10:36 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Did Hitler win?
Nice try. Fail Again. You know no Greek and you know it.
That's YOUR INTERPRETATION of the human texts that came to be eventually non-unanimously VOTED by humans into your Bible. There are many Christians and non-Chritians who do not think that it meant a "bodily resurrection". I merely pointed out there are good reason to question that's what it meant in the first place, and there are CHRISTIANS who agree with that position.
First you attempt to say it's "about the dollar", when it was about your Fundie ignorance of the FIELD, which you demonstrated. That was the ONLY reason I engaged with you at all. My POINT was, (and every Greek translation I referenced was also agreed with by CHRISTIAN seminary professor, Dr. B. B. Scott. So take it up with him.) Your knowledge (and virtually every Fundie's knowledge) of the milieu (the Hebrew Apocalyptic period) from which Paulianity (Christianity) developed is nil. Zip. Nada. Zero.

From:
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...other-Look

"In 1952, a team was set in place by the world-famous, preeminent scholar, archaeologist and pioneer discoverer of Holy Land historical sites and documents, Dr. William Foxwell Albright, the professor of Semitic languages at the Johns Hopkins University. Their job was to write criticisms and scholarly work concerning all biblical texts. The team was composed of the most respected biblical scholars in the US and Europe, including Dr. John W. Bailey, Professor Emeritus, New Testament, Berkley Baptist Divinity School, Dr Albert E. Barnett, Professor Candler School of Theology, Emory University, Dr. Walter Russell Bowel, Professor, The Protestant Episcopal Seminary, Virginia, Dr. John Bright, Professor, Union Seminary and many others.

The team of 124 clergymen and scholars came mostly from conservative, mainline universities and churches for the most part, the likes of whom will never be seen again in one place, whose names evoke the utmost and deepest respect, even if one completely disagrees with their religious views. They wrote the huge 13 volume set, now considered a valuable rare book, called "The Interpreters Bible". Today it is usually kept under lock and key in seminaries and libraries. This set includes an introduction to scholarship and looks at every single verse and word in the Bible, discusses their origins and possible meanings from various points of view. It has been updated in the 1990's, but the original scholarship is still the central fundamental summary of knowledge, which summarized scholarship from the Medieval period (1850's -1950's) and is therefore considered to be an interesting historical snapshot. It is also an assurance that these absolutely respected leading intellectuals from the 20th Century scholarship, of whom most were religious, have agreed to have each other's names associated with their own and that they felt comfortable with what each other were saying in an academic setting and commanded world-wide respect as conservative, careful, and sincere, life-long teachers, academics and scholars.

On page 15 of "The Interpreters Bible", Dr. Herbert F. Farmer, Professor of Divinity at Cambridge University wrote about the indispensability of the texts, their importance and how the "truth" of them should be approached, after an exposition of the traditional conservative Christian view of person-hood, sin and the salvific actions of Jesus (aka Yeshua ben Josef), known as "the Christ" in human history.

'The reason has to do with the evidence afforded by the texts themselves, and calls for fuller treatment. Scholarly research into the texts themselves, has convincingly shown that they cannot be accepted in detail as they stand.' "


And now I suppose you're going to tell me you know more than these people ?

If ALL DOUBTED, then they didn't know what they were seeing, and in the context of Hebrew shades, and Jewish Apocalypticism, that makes a lot more sense than a "bodily resurrection" in light of the FACT, that THE FIRST gospel had no resurrection. IF the real first followers HAD seen and experienced what people LATER claimed they did, why would they omit putting it in the FIRST telling of the story ? It doesn't matter if "some worshipped". If it was a REAL PHYSICAL body, ALL would have recognized what they were looking at, and there would be nothing to doubt, by anyone.

The fact is, the Fundie literalist position on this question, as well as many others, are not the ONLY Christian position, which in fact vary quite widely.

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: