Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-07-2015, 02:37 PM (This post was last modified: 15-07-2015 05:11 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(15-07-2015 10:06 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Mark,

Your "challenge" is that point by point, I labor to refute your recent points. Yet, you are rude to me and rudely dismissive of every point I've made on this thread. You've addressed none of my points using facts.

For an example, you are taking Grasshopper's point without citing the fact that Paul was not alone during his conversion but was in the presence of others. Nor do the accounts contradict one another--though I had a professor who attempted to demonstrate such in my classes back when. I don't want to belabor this point, however, as if I can prove the accounts are consistent, you would still say it wasn't possible for a resurrected Jesus to appear before Paul, since you deny the resurrection.

'Nuff said.

"Your "challenge" is that point by point, I labor to refute your recent points."

This sentence makes no sense. What are you trying to say?

"Yet, you are rude to me and rudely dismissive of every point I've made on this thread.

Get over it cupcakes. Have you ever wondered why I am rude to you? It is because I don't respect you.

You don't know the subject matter. And what is worse, you don't know that you don't know.

You very rarely demonstrate you are interested in learning. You don't press on the links we offer you.

You avoid answering real, and important, questions.

You endlessly repeat your wrong assumptions.

You don't take care when writing...your comments are full of grammatical errors, so you often don't make sense.

You proselytise...for example by telling us to be ready for Jeebus' return. That's like waving a red flag at a bull on a thinking atheist's forum.

What is more, I am rude not just to "you," but to what you represent. You put yourself here as an authority on religious matters. So you aptly represent everything that is nauseous about organised religion...the credulity, the ignorance about history, the proselytising, the reliance on faith, the unwarranted reverence of ancient texts, the attempts to control people's behaviour, the degradation of the individual, and I could go on. If you are going to put yourself up as "God's representative" you're going to cop some flak from me. I love my fellow humans too much to let you get away with anything.

Having said all that, if you were to knock on my door, you'd get a "gooday mate, care for a coffee and carrot cake?..." What we do here is in the public domain, so there are no niceties.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 10 users Like Mark Fulton's post
15-07-2015, 02:55 PM (This post was last modified: 15-07-2015 02:59 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(15-07-2015 10:06 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Mark,

Your "challenge" is that point by point, I labor to refute your recent points. Yet, you are rude to me and rudely dismissive of every point I've made on this thread. You've addressed none of my points using facts.

For an example, you are taking Grasshopper's point without citing the fact that Paul was not alone during his conversion but was in the presence of others. Nor do the accounts contradict one another--though I had a professor who attempted to demonstrate such in my classes back when. I don't want to belabor this point, however, as if I can prove the accounts are consistent, you would still say it wasn't possible for a resurrected Jesus to appear before Paul, since you deny the resurrection.

'Nuff said.

This post is a typical example of you just not getting the guts of an argument. Three of us have pointed out to you that the account of Paul's "conversion" on the road to Damascus in Acts is not believable because
- Paul, in his own writings, never once mentioned this fabulous event.
- Even if Paul did have this hallucination...it was just that...an hallucination. Your Jeebus was dead.

You, however, aptly demonstrate your credulity by saying "Paul was not alone during his conversion but was in the presence of others." The fact is, the accounts (both of them) in Acts have just been proven to be fabrications. The author of Acts was creating, not recording, history, so his (amateurish) attempts to portray that many others saw Paul's vision too is just a story.

No one knows for sure who the author of Acts was, but he was not a Jew, or a Nazarene, or a person who knew Paul, or even a person living in Jerusalem in the 50’s and 60’s. He was (probably) writing some time in the early second century, at least 50 years after the events described. He never revealed from where he sourced his information. He was most likely a spin-doctor, a rewriter of history - someone employed to create a fabricated tale about the origins of Christianity.

The undeniable truth is that there are no first hand accounts from anyone who allegedly saw the magical appearance of your Jeebus on the road to Damascus.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Mark Fulton's post
15-07-2015, 03:32 PM (This post was last modified: 15-07-2015 11:28 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
For those interested in "Acts"...

Paul had written about his Christ ( not Jeebus) in the 50's and 60's.

The gospels, which contained stories about Jeebus, had been written in the late first century after the first Jewish War of 66 to 70, so well after Paul (the person) had disappeared off the scene.

The book of Acts was early Christianity's second century attempt to make out that Paul's Christ was Jeebus. Hence the entirely fabricated story of Jeebus' ghost appearing to Paul on the road to Damascus. It was a weak attempt to create a link between Paul's Christ (as portrayed in Paul's letters) and the Jeebus of the gospels.

The book of Acts is the only attempt in the Bible to document the activities of Jesus’ followers in the years after Jesus’ death. The author of Acts claims these people were the first Christians. Yet the real Yeshua, his family and his disciples were Jews, not Christians, a fact that makes the whole premise of Acts dubious.

The author of Acts, writing for second century proto-Christians, most likely had what he thought was an important task; to build the untrue impression that Christianity, a new way of thinking quite separate from Judaism, was derived from Yeshua and his disciples.

The author failed, at least at the intellectual level, because many non-evangelical Biblical scholars regard Acts as unforgivably imaginative.

It is commonly agreed that the same Gentile author or community who wrote a version of Luke’s Gospel also wrote Acts, yet no one can be sure of that. Most modern scholars date Acts’ authorship to anywhere between 65 and 170 CE, yet there is no reference to Acts in other literature before the year 170 CE. It could be that Acts was originally written after the second Jewish war of 132 - 136 CE. What scholars do agree on is that the author(s) was not Jewish, nor was he a member of the Nazarene community, and that he was probably a Gentile writing for a Gentile audience. After one, and probably two, expensive, bloody wars, Jews were not a favored race amongst the peoples of the Empire. This shows throughout the book of Acts, as the author had a very anti-Jewish, pro-Roman bias.

Chapters 1 through 9 tell a tale about the early community after Yeshua’s death, and Chapters 9 through 28 are concerned with Paul’s conversion and ministry. The author was attempting to portray a cordial connection between the disciples and Paul, to give Paul’s Christianity a link with a once-human Jesus. Yet it is very doubtful that any such friendly connection existed, a fact that sheds a huge cloud over the historical veracity of the book of Acts.
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
15-07-2015, 04:18 PM (This post was last modified: 15-07-2015 07:11 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
Just a note for context.

There were many books of "acts" floating around in the ancient Near East, including the "Acts of Paul and Thecla":
http://sttims.net/WP/wp-content/uploads/...Thecla.pdf
The "Acts of the Apostles" was in no way a unique piece of literature. There were many "Acts of the Apostles".
Dr. Nasrallah is a Professor at Harvard Divinity School :
http://hds.harvard.edu/people/laura-s-nasrallah
Her entire course on Paul is on YouTube.








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
[+] 4 users Like Bucky Ball's post
15-07-2015, 06:13 PM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(15-07-2015 11:55 AM)Tonechaser77 Wrote:  I must say, as much as I want to get involved with this discussion, the view is just so good from here. PopcornSmile

Yup, just sit back and enjoy the beat down.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like xieulong's post
15-07-2015, 11:27 PM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(15-07-2015 04:18 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Just a note for context.

There were many books of "acts" floating around in the ancient Near East, including the "Acts of Paul and Thecla":
http://sttims.net/WP/wp-content/uploads/...Thecla.pdf
The "Acts of the Apostles" was in no way a unique piece of literature. There were many "Acts of the Apostles".
Dr. Nasrallah is a Professor at Harvard Divinity School :
http://hds.harvard.edu/people/laura-s-nasrallah
Her entire course on Paul is on YouTube.








Wow...thanks for alerting me to these. Will look at all of them.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2015, 04:37 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
Bravo Mark
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2015, 07:26 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(15-07-2015 11:42 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(15-07-2015 10:06 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  You've addressed none of my points using facts.

Yet that hardly seems to be your standard ... at all. You claim there are archaeological finds that support the OT, yet you can't even discuss them.

(15-07-2015 10:06 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Nor do the accounts contradict one another--though I had a professor who attempted to demonstrate such in my classes back when.

They obviously do, concerning where exactly it happened and what happened afterwards. You make general claims, yet are unable to discuss DETAILS. Why is that ?

(15-07-2015 10:06 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I don't want to belabor this point, however, as if I can prove the accounts are consistent, you would still say it wasn't possible for a resurrected Jesus to appear before Paul, since you deny the resurrection.

Yet as Christian scholar and seminary professor of New Testament, (which YOU are not, Q) Dr. Bernard Brandon Scott writes in his "The Trouble With Resurrection" the words used actually can be seen to mean that Paul had an "insight" and *came to understand* that Jesus (whom he HAD NEVER MET) was (for one reason or another) the "annointed one" who had been "exalted" in the VERY SAME way other Jewish apocalyptic heroes were "exalted" (and NOT physically *raised from the dead*), and as many times, the story was metaphorical, as among the literate, literature took many forms, including in the texts included in the canon. These concepts are agreed to, by Dr. Bart Ehrman in his newest book, "How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee". There's that pesky word again, .... "exaltation" (as in *raised up*) ... NOT *raised from the dead*. With any other literary work, literary genre and literary style and form would be weighed, yet Fundies won't allow it here, ... but this iS liertature. Fundies dismiss these considerations, in favor of childish simplistic literal interpretations, which virtually no mainline scholars agree with, including some of the most conservative.

(15-07-2015 10:06 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  'Nuff said.

You wish. Hardly "'nuff said". You lack ANY expertise in the fields of literary, archaeological or form criticism, Q. Just like most Fundies.

Because you are simply shifting the goal posts. A five-year-old could reconcile the differences in the accounts but you don't wish them reconciled.

I'm familiar with the history of how we have received our current Bible texts and higher criticism. But you quoting two authors to say Paul didn't see what Paul saw is hardly factual or textual criticism!

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
16-07-2015, 07:31 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(15-07-2015 02:55 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(15-07-2015 10:06 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Mark,

Your "challenge" is that point by point, I labor to refute your recent points. Yet, you are rude to me and rudely dismissive of every point I've made on this thread. You've addressed none of my points using facts.

For an example, you are taking Grasshopper's point without citing the fact that Paul was not alone during his conversion but was in the presence of others. Nor do the accounts contradict one another--though I had a professor who attempted to demonstrate such in my classes back when. I don't want to belabor this point, however, as if I can prove the accounts are consistent, you would still say it wasn't possible for a resurrected Jesus to appear before Paul, since you deny the resurrection.

'Nuff said.

This post is a typical example of you just not getting the guts of an argument. Three of us have pointed out to you that the account of Paul's "conversion" on the road to Damascus in Acts is not believable because
- Paul, in his own writings, never once mentioned this fabulous event.
- Even if Paul did have this hallucination...it was just that...an hallucination. Your Jeebus was dead.

You, however, aptly demonstrate your credulity by saying "Paul was not alone during his conversion but was in the presence of others." The fact is, the accounts (both of them) in Acts have just been proven to be fabrications. The author of Acts was creating, not recording, history, so his (amateurish) attempts to portray that many others saw Paul's vision too is just a story.

No one knows for sure who the author of Acts was, but he was not a Jew, or a Nazarene, or a person who knew Paul, or even a person living in Jerusalem in the 50’s and 60’s. He was (probably) writing some time in the early second century, at least 50 years after the events described. He never revealed from where he sourced his information. He was most likely a spin-doctor, a rewriter of history - someone employed to create a fabricated tale about the origins of Christianity.

The undeniable truth is that there are no first hand accounts from anyone who allegedly saw the magical appearance of your Jeebus on the road to Damascus.

Likewise, this post is typical...

Paul, in his own writings, never once mentioned this fabulous event.

"Paul, called to be an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and our brother Sosthenes, to the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be his holy people, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ—their Lord and ours..." - 1 Corinthians 1:1-2

"For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born. 9 For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God." - 1 Corinthians 15:3-9

Here you are claiming Paul never mentioned seeing Jesus Christ. Yet here is a letter from Paul in which he claims apostleship because he indeed saw Christ (one mark of an apostle was they had seen Christ as an eyewitness).

I hope that you will someday read the scriptures in addition to critiquing them, with an end result of salvation.

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
16-07-2015, 08:09 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(16-07-2015 07:26 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(15-07-2015 11:42 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Yet that hardly seems to be your standard ... at all. You claim there are archaeological finds that support the OT, yet you can't even discuss them.


They obviously do, concerning where exactly it happened and what happened afterwards. You make general claims, yet are unable to discuss DETAILS. Why is that ?


Yet as Christian scholar and seminary professor of New Testament, (which YOU are not, Q) Dr. Bernard Brandon Scott writes in his "The Trouble With Resurrection" the words used actually can be seen to mean that Paul had an "insight" and *came to understand* that Jesus (whom he HAD NEVER MET) was (for one reason or another) the "annointed one" who had been "exalted" in the VERY SAME way other Jewish apocalyptic heroes were "exalted" (and NOT physically *raised from the dead*), and as many times, the story was metaphorical, as among the literate, literature took many forms, including in the texts included in the canon. These concepts are agreed to, by Dr. Bart Ehrman in his newest book, "How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee". There's that pesky word again, .... "exaltation" (as in *raised up*) ... NOT *raised from the dead*. With any other literary work, literary genre and literary style and form would be weighed, yet Fundies won't allow it here, ... but this iS liertature. Fundies dismiss these considerations, in favor of childish simplistic literal interpretations, which virtually no mainline scholars agree with, including some of the most conservative.


You wish. Hardly "'nuff said". You lack ANY expertise in the fields of literary, archaeological or form criticism, Q. Just like most Fundies.

Because you are simply shifting the goal posts. A five-year-old could reconcile the differences in the accounts but you don't wish them reconciled.

I'm familiar with the history of how we have received our current Bible texts and higher criticism. But you quoting two authors to say Paul didn't see what Paul saw is hardly factual or textual criticism!

There are no "facts" involved in anything here. All the various books of "acts" were created as devotional fiction. All I pointed out was that there are serious scholars (which YOU are not) that see the possibility that there are alternate ways of seeing the translated texts.

You don't know what "Paul saw". All you know is what you *think* Paul saw, based on your (probably incorrect) reading of a book of pious fraud.

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
[+] 5 users Like Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: