Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
Thread Closed 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-11-2015, 02:47 PM (This post was last modified: 19-11-2015 03:12 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
I have found more evidence that Paul was probably a government agent trying to spread propaganda that would undermine and dilute Judaism by adding gentiles to the new faith...

Ephesians 2 King James Version (KJV)

2 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;

2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,

5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are savedWink

6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;

12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:


13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.

14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;


16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:

17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.

18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.

19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:

22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.


Paul's pathetic modus operandi becomes obvious when one understands his motivation.

He was not trying to save souls, as he claimed, but to make Jews and Gentiles one big happy family, all worshipping his Christ, and all obeying the government.

His pathetic, convoluted, fabricated and inconsistent ramblings about his Christ were nothing more than invented theology designed to get Jews and gentiles to stop fighting each other.

Paul was a charlatan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Mark Fulton's post
20-11-2015, 03:24 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(17-11-2015 03:27 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(16-11-2015 11:13 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  You have a logical fallacy (again). If Paul never claimed to perform miracles in his writings, as an empiricist you have undone one of your claims to Paul being a charlatan. And I say thank you.

I say Paul never performed any miracles, and that the author of Acts, writing 50 plus years later, turned Paul into a miracle worker. I say Paul was a charlatan as he fabricated theology and promoted it as the truth.

You then claim that as Paul didn't invent stories about his own miracles, he wasn't a charlatan! Is this "christian logic?"

What is more you are indirectly admitting that
- Paul didn't perform miracles
- the author of Acts invented the miracle stories.

Wow, you are slower on the uptake then I thought.

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
20-11-2015, 03:31 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(17-11-2015 03:40 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(17-11-2015 12:19 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Yes, I'm an expert on the writings of Paul and Jesus. And if you like, comparatively with you. Which of us has studied Ancient Greek? Which of us has a Bachelor's of Religion with a Paul and the New Testament emphasis? I specifically took courses in Paul and the Acts from a secular college. Which of us has read the NT 30 times? I have thousands of words of Paul memorized, besides. I only rarely need to consult an online source to find a refutation of your silly "Pauline" doctrines.

You, sir, are no expert. Just, as you wrote, a liberal commentator.

Yes, I'm an expert on the writings of Paul and Jesus.

"X" - the great unknown

"spirt" - a drip under pressure Big Grin

Q, even you know that Jesus never wrote anything. You cannot, therefore, be an expert on the writings of Jesus.

You claim to be an expert on the writings in the New Testament. What you mean by this is that you have assumed they are the truth, and have pored over them ad nauseam, privately and with others, and discussed what they may or may not mean.

What you haven't done is investigate whether they may be authentic, whether they contain the truth, and why they were written.

You haven't made any effort to understand ancient Jewish, Roman and Christian history in the very eras in which these ramblings were produced.

That is why when you read the writings of someone like myself, who has investigated the history, you are completely out of your depth. You cannot imagine there is anything truthful in what I write because that would undermine all your presumptions.

All you can do is pretend to be greatly offended, or dismayed, or bored, because you can't retort with any facts of your own, because you don't have any.

You are no expert Q, you are just someone who has rote learned nursery rhymes.

You can't possibly be this dense regarding Christian doctrine 101. Jesus is the Word of God -- He inspired/wrote the entire Bible, both testaments.

And you remain wholly incorrect--although you are again resorting to ad homs and not facts--I HAVE investigated the history, the ancient beliefs, the councils, the languages. I'm the one with the degree in this, remember?

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
20-11-2015, 03:33 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(17-11-2015 06:25 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(17-11-2015 12:23 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  If your truth is no one can be sure who wrote which Pauline documents, how do you frequently in this debate tell me what is interpolated and what is redacted, and without any such disclaimers? Be consistent.

You keep bringing this up, so I keep having to repeat myself. Does anything I write ever sink into your thick skull? Here I go again...

No one is sure whether a character called Paul wrote the letters attributed to him. Most scholars think "he" wrote about half of them. Nearly all scholars admit the Pauline letters have been edited and interpolated. Anyone who comments on these letters is, therefore, guessing, to a degree, about their authenticity. I have a right to do that. I am offering an opinion. It has a similar value to your opinion that all the letters are Pauline and unaltered. If you wish to present a case for that opinion...feel free...if you don't then shut the fuck up about it.

Is this the language you would use in the formal debate in person I'd suggested? Would you use the STFO term in a formal debate? Again, I'd prefer strongly to debate with a gentleman who also knows the rules of gentlemanly debate.

Now, you are correct if you wish to speculate on the authorship of particular Pauline-attributed phrases or verses or even whole epistles--'tis the pastime of many an armchair academic. HOWEVER, as I pointed out you would do BEFORE the debate began, EVERY time you present scripture against Paul you are sure Paul wrote it, and EVERY time I refute your theories with scripture you INSIST that it IS ABSOLUTELY not Pauline. Be consistent.

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
20-11-2015, 03:34 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(17-11-2015 06:36 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(17-11-2015 12:19 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Yes, I'm an expert on the writings of Paul and Jesus. And if you like, comparatively with you. Which of us has studied Ancient Greek? Which of us has a Bachelor's of Religion with a Paul and the New Testament emphasis? I specifically took courses in Paul and the Acts from a secular college. Which of us has read the NT 30 times? I have thousands of words of Paul memorized, besides. I only rarely need to consult an online source to find a refutation of your silly "Pauline" doctrines.

You, sir, are no expert. Just, as you wrote, a liberal commentator.

I only rarely need to consult an online source to find a refutation of your silly "Pauline" doctrines.

Well maybe that is why you can't you post something scholarly? Where are your arguments? Where are your facts? You barely mention what Paul said or did...you are too busy telling us how you are feeling, how smart you are and how wrong I am.

doctrine |ˈdɒktrɪn|
noun
a belief or set of beliefs held and taught by a Church, political party, or other group.

I think it is glaringly obvious who believes in "silly Pauline doctrines," and it's not me.

What arguments? Paul not being a charlatan involves Paul being sincere, humble, ministering, religious, kind--no matter what arguments I use atheists insist Paul and even the Lord Jesus Christ were none of these things. What facts would you like me to present?

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
20-11-2015, 03:36 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(17-11-2015 06:53 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(17-11-2015 12:17 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  No. A good debate has both sides providing some opinion/commentary AND some facts. There is no need for me to refute your stance with facts beyond what I've presented to date, since only I presented facts. You have only conjecture and (perverted) Bible commentary.

No. A good debate has both sides providing some opinion/commentary AND some facts.

Hallelujah! Stop whinging and produce some facts!

There is no need for me to refute your stance with facts beyond what I've presented to date, since only I presented facts.

FFS! You stated some of the gospels were written before some of Paul, yet you are too lazy or too uninformed to back your statement up with facts.

You have only conjecture and (perverted) Bible commentary.

Here you go again, attaching derogatory labels to my writing, but not saying why and not refuting any of my arguments. This is pathetic. You are too frightened to step in to the argument.

Are you really unaware of the prevailing scholarly opinion that held sway for millennia that Mark was written before any NT epistle? Don't most of you atheists believe that Matthew and Luke wrote from Markan prior writings? Are you that ignorant of NT scholarship? Why am I debating someone who doesn't know what I learned in my first week of college?

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
20-11-2015, 03:38 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(18-11-2015 02:52 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(17-11-2015 12:19 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Yes, I'm an expert on the writings of Paul and Jesus. And if you like, comparatively with you. Which of us has studied Ancient Greek? Which of us has a Bachelor's of Religion with a Paul and the New Testament emphasis? I specifically took courses in Paul and the Acts from a secular college. Which of us has read the NT 30 times? I have thousands of words of Paul memorized, besides. I only rarely need to consult an online source to find a refutation of your silly "Pauline" doctrines.

You, sir, are no expert. Just, as you wrote, a liberal commentator.

Which of us has a Bachelor's of Religion with a Paul and the New Testament emphasis? I specifically took courses in Paul and the Acts from a secular college.

Well come on then, present your facts. Reply with something specific to make me think. I'm just a guy with a few medical degrees. You should be whipping my ass.

All we have had from you so far is this...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mT26AEXwBJ8

How am I to whip you or vice versa when I admitted before the boxing ring was entered that all either of us can present is scholarly opinion aka conjecture? Do you have one 1st century source proving your assertions? Of course you don't. Neither do I. Don't be (more) ridiculous.

Sorry to be so harsh with you, but you invited me to the ring and I came, albeit reluctantly.

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
20-11-2015, 03:39 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(19-11-2015 02:47 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I have found more evidence that Paul was probably a government agent trying to spread propaganda that would undermine and dilute Judaism by adding gentiles to the new faith...

Ephesians 2 King James Version (KJV)

2 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;

2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,

5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are savedWink

6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;

12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:


13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.

14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;


16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:

17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.

18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.

19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:

22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.


Paul's pathetic modus operandi becomes obvious when one understands his motivation.

He was not trying to save souls, as he claimed, but to make Jews and Gentiles one big happy family, all worshipping his Christ, and all obeying the government.

His pathetic, convoluted, fabricated and inconsistent ramblings about his Christ were nothing more than invented theology designed to get Jews and gentiles to stop fighting each other.

Paul was a charlatan.

Funny--most normal people would say religion motivated a man to bring Jews and non-Jews together in peacemaking. Not a Roman conspiracy dating to AFTER the Romans had subjugated Israel!

If your Bible passage is evidence, I'm Arnold Palmer. Have a tea and lemonade, Dr. Fulton, and chill.

Oh well, at least I got an atheist to quote lots of scripture! 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
20-11-2015, 03:59 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(20-11-2015 03:24 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(17-11-2015 03:27 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I say Paul never performed any miracles, and that the author of Acts, writing 50 plus years later, turned Paul into a miracle worker. I say Paul was a charlatan as he fabricated theology and promoted it as the truth.

You then claim that as Paul didn't invent stories about his own miracles, he wasn't a charlatan! Is this "christian logic?"

What is more you are indirectly admitting that
- Paul didn't perform miracles
- the author of Acts invented the miracle stories.

Wow, you are slower on the uptake then I thought.

Please explain yourself.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
20-11-2015, 04:04 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(20-11-2015 03:39 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(19-11-2015 02:47 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I have found more evidence that Paul was probably a government agent trying to spread propaganda that would undermine and dilute Judaism by adding gentiles to the new faith...

Ephesians 2 King James Version (KJV)

2 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;

2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,

5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are savedWink

6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;

12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:


13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.

14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;


16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:

17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.

18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.

19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:

22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.


Paul's pathetic modus operandi becomes obvious when one understands his motivation.

He was not trying to save souls, as he claimed, but to make Jews and Gentiles one big happy family, all worshipping his Christ, and all obeying the government.

His pathetic, convoluted, fabricated and inconsistent ramblings about his Christ were nothing more than invented theology designed to get Jews and gentiles to stop fighting each other.

Paul was a charlatan.

Funny--most normal people would say religion motivated a man to bring Jews and non-Jews together in peacemaking. Not a Roman conspiracy dating to AFTER the Romans had subjugated Israel!

If your Bible passage is evidence, I'm Arnold Palmer. Have a tea and lemonade, Dr. Fulton, and chill.

Oh well, at least I got an atheist to quote lots of scripture! Thanks!

Q, you wrote

"Not a Roman conspiracy dating to AFTER the Romans had subjugated Israel!"

When do you think Paul wrote his epistles?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 
Forum Jump: