Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
Thread Closed 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-03-2016, 02:16 PM (This post was last modified: 03-03-2016 03:11 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(02-03-2016 08:18 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(01-03-2016 04:37 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Nope. You're wrong. The "Lord of Hosts" is ol' Yahweh. Google it.

Please show us where the "lord of Hosts" "comes with multitudes" in the New Testament. (this is not a rhetorical question)

Jude--"He is coming with thousands upon thousands to judge all the ungodly of all the ungodly things they've done..." and this is also Jesus, not the Father. Confer with the rest of Jude and you will also find similar statements in Revelation.

I think this debate is over since you ignored the post where I wrote, "You will probably ignore this post".

I have looked up this quote from Jude, and will do the scholarly thing for our readers' benefit by properly quoting it...

Jude, King James Version (KJV), chapter one...

"1 Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called:

2 Mercy unto you, and peace, and love, be multiplied.

3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

5 I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.

6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

10 But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.

11 Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.

12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;

13 Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.

14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."

Sorry, Q, Jude was referring to old Enoch. Enoch was rambling about his imaginary god...ol' Yahweh. Dem Jews had a habit of doing that.

Your Jeebus, or Christ, never came with 10,000 anything.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
03-03-2016, 02:55 PM (This post was last modified: 03-03-2016 03:13 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(02-03-2016 08:20 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(01-03-2016 03:06 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  "The government upon His shoulder refers to the title being passed to Him from King David."

Jesus, if he even existed, never was a king of the Jews, and is not thought of as a (dead) king now by the Jewish people. He was a failed insurrectionist.


"His very cross said as his "crime", King of the Jews."


Please correct your grammar so I can understand your point.

For another example, Jesus is called mighty God and etc. in the New Testament.


Another example of what? Please quote where "Jesus is called mighty God and etc. in the New Testament."

"I'm conversant with the Jewish anti-Christian apologetic,"

I doubt that.

"...but thank you for posting the most biased source you could find rather than addressing this prophecy using logic."

Please explain why you have the bravado to claim that an interpretation of the original hebrew made by someone intimately familiar with the language and the history of the times, written by a Jew discussing Jewish scripture, is "biased," whereas your pro Christian, overimaginative and ridiculously tenuous assertions are based on nothing scholarly and are illogical.

You can't be so dense as to not realize that Jewish apologists make impassioned statements against Christian interpretations of both testaments, though both testaments were written by Jews.

You can't be so dense as to not realize that Pilate and Jesus had a discussion re: the popular notion passed to Pilate that Jesus was the King of the Jews, and that every cross had nailed to it the perpetrator's crime, and that Jesus's crime was "Here is the King of the Jews!"

I think this debate is over since you ignored the post where I wrote, "You will probably ignore this post".

"though both testaments were written by Jews."

Are...you...trying...to...say...that because the new testament was (allegedly) "written by Jews"...that all Jews today should accept it as the truth? Huh Facepalm

The NT was, at the very most, partly written by people who were aware of Jewish beliefs and traditions, which they tried to undermine. No true Jew wrote Matthew, Mark, Luke or John... these gospels are heretical from the Jewish perspective. Paul may have been a Pharisee, but he too was a heretic...pro gentile and anti Semitic.

Nearly the whole NT is anti Jewish, pro gentile propaganda. To imply it is Jewish is like saying "Mein Kampf" was pro Jewish.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
03-03-2016, 03:25 PM
Actually is
(02-03-2016 08:18 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(01-03-2016 04:37 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Nope. You're wrong. The "Lord of Hosts" is ol' Yahweh. Google it.

Please show us where the "lord of Hosts" "comes with multitudes" in the New Testament. (this is not a rhetorical question)

Jude--"He is coming with thousands upon thousands to judge all the ungodly of all the ungodly things they've done..." and this is also Jesus, not the Father. Confer with the rest of Jude and you will also find similar statements in Revelation.

I think this debate is over since you ignored the post where I wrote, "You will probably ignore this post".

I wrote
"Please show us where the "lord of Hosts" "comes with multitudes" in the New Testament. (this is not a rhetorical question)"

You answered

"Jude--"He is coming with thousands upon thousands to judge all the ungodly of all the ungodly things they've done..." and this is also Jesus, not the Father. Confer with the rest of Jude and you will also find similar statements in Revelation."

Thanks for attempting an answer.

Yet your Jesus still doesn't "come with multitudes" anywhere in the new Testament!

All you have got is maybe, at a stretch, in Revelations, some anonymous dude who probably ate too many magic mushrooms, claiming that one day his Jesus will be in charge of an army.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
04-03-2016, 10:25 AM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
Quote: If you are genuinely interested in explaining your ideas to the forum, please rephrase your argument, as I suspect I'm not the only one who cannot understand you.

Okay. Verse 5 cannot be Israel since it is obviously from an individual, and one where God emphasizes their incarnation, at that. Why did you quote it to attack my case when it weakened your own? That is my question.

Quote: As to the New Testament writings, I think most Jews don't bother commenting...to them the new testament is not scripture, so they ignore it. How often do you read the Koran?

I’ve read about 2/3 of it (in English). I read the Book of Mormon, and believe it or not, a lot of the crap TTA’ers post, too. Wink

Quote: "You can't be so dense as to not realize that Pilate and Jesus had a discussion..."

Herein lies the essence of part of the chasm between you and me. You think all of the babble is real history...I don't. I look beyond what is written to try to understand what the authors were trying to push...you swallow the spiel without question, and assume I am "dense" because I don't agree with you. You also assume I haven't read your babble...whereas in fact I have an intimate knowledge of the gospels, and of the history of the era in which they were written.

You are shifting the goalposts. You made a claim, the narrative reproves your claim. You are in general claiming special (unique! psychic!) Bible knowledge, when you constantly claim inane ideas that are repudiated in the Bible, over and again. THAT is the point.

Quote: How ironic that you, of all people, have the audacity to write this. Anyone who has followed this debate knows that you have ignored over a hundred of my questions.

It took effort, yes, but I have ignored your rhetorical rantings that weren’t questions, and particularly where you were completely astray from YOUR debate resolution. Sometimes your “questions” were just babyish complaints about the love of Jesus and had nothing to do with Paul. You want to “debate” like Donald J. Trump, go for it. I will continue to ignore your ad homs and those “questions” that are off the debate topic.

I mean, you stray off topic so often, you post 8 or 9 responses to one of my own questions as separate posts! God forbid I answer 100 of your nonsense questions so you can make 900 ranting and raving posts! You must awake nightly several times, thinking, “I forget to accuse him and God of X and I have another put down for The Q that I forgot to post.” Perhaps take a sleeping aid instead.

Quote: Sorry, Q, Jude was referring to old Enoch. Enoch was rambling about his imaginary god...ol' Yahweh. Dem Jews had a habit of doing that.

Your Jeebus, or Christ, never came with 10,000 anything.

I also wrote to confer with Revelation, et al. Jesus’s favorite self-title was Son of Man. The Son of Man in Daniel is the fulfillment of what you see here in Jude. Even when the Pharisees were calling for His execution, and demanded to know IF HE was Messiah, He quoted the Daniel passage. Again, it’s like you never studied the Bible at all. If you don’t know what Bible quotations from the Tanakh Jesus offered to defend His Messiahship, how can you say Paul is twisting OT words or Jesus’s words? You’re really not able to debate this at all, are you?

Quote: Are...you...trying...to...say...that because the new testament was (allegedly) "written by Jews"...that all Jews today should accept it as the truth?

The NT was, at the very most, partly written by people who were aware of Jewish beliefs and traditions, which they tried to undermine. No true Jew wrote Matthew, Mark, Luke or John... these gospels are heretical from the Jewish perspective. Paul may have been a Pharisee, but he too was a heretic...pro gentile and anti Semitic.

Nearly the whole NT is anti Jewish, pro gentile propaganda. To imply it is Jewish is like saying "Mein Kampf" was pro Jewish.

That IS one of your debate ideas, that the NT is pro-Gentile propaganda. Would you links to a half-dozen other threads where I challenge you and BB:

If the NT is pro-Gentile (Roman) propaganda, why does it continue the OT lines of thought that there is only One God… only Jews are clean… only Israel is chosen, etc. etc.?

PS. Comparing the NT to Mein Kampf is disgusting and not laudable in any way. Please see my avatar signature for more.

Quote: Yet your Jesus still doesn't "come with multitudes" anywhere in the new Testament!

All you have got is maybe, at a stretch, in Revelations, some anonymous dude who probably ate too many magic mushrooms, claiming that one day his Jesus will be in charge of an army.

I already wrote that you could confer with Revelation—and here, you are attempting to undo this by saying Revelation is a drug trip. Prove it or allow the verses to come under discussion!

PS. Please stop doing mushrooms yourself when replying to my posts! I ALREADY said confer with Revelation, you ignored me, and then wrote “Don’t bother quoting Revelation”, which means logically you already KNEW the statements were to be found in Revelation (in the NT) which means your post was just lies!

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
04-03-2016, 04:53 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(04-03-2016 10:25 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
Quote: If you are genuinely interested in explaining your ideas to the forum, please rephrase your argument, as I suspect I'm not the only one who cannot understand you.

Okay. Verse 5 cannot be Israel since it is obviously from an individual, and one where God emphasizes their incarnation, at that. Why did you quote it to attack my case when it weakened your own? That is my question.

Quote: As to the New Testament writings, I think most Jews don't bother commenting...to them the new testament is not scripture, so they ignore it. How often do you read the Koran?

I’ve read about 2/3 of it (in English). I read the Book of Mormon, and believe it or not, a lot of the crap TTA’ers post, too. Wink

Quote: "You can't be so dense as to not realize that Pilate and Jesus had a discussion..."

Herein lies the essence of part of the chasm between you and me. You think all of the babble is real history...I don't. I look beyond what is written to try to understand what the authors were trying to push...you swallow the spiel without question, and assume I am "dense" because I don't agree with you. You also assume I haven't read your babble...whereas in fact I have an intimate knowledge of the gospels, and of the history of the era in which they were written.

You are shifting the goalposts. You made a claim, the narrative reproves your claim. You are in general claiming special (unique! psychic!) Bible knowledge, when you constantly claim inane ideas that are repudiated in the Bible, over and again. THAT is the point.

Quote: How ironic that you, of all people, have the audacity to write this. Anyone who has followed this debate knows that you have ignored over a hundred of my questions.

It took effort, yes, but I have ignored your rhetorical rantings that weren’t questions, and particularly where you were completely astray from YOUR debate resolution. Sometimes your “questions” were just babyish complaints about the love of Jesus and had nothing to do with Paul. You want to “debate” like Donald J. Trump, go for it. I will continue to ignore your ad homs and those “questions” that are off the debate topic.

I mean, you stray off topic so often, you post 8 or 9 responses to one of my own questions as separate posts! God forbid I answer 100 of your nonsense questions so you can make 900 ranting and raving posts! You must awake nightly several times, thinking, “I forget to accuse him and God of X and I have another put down for The Q that I forgot to post.” Perhaps take a sleeping aid instead.

Quote: Sorry, Q, Jude was referring to old Enoch. Enoch was rambling about his imaginary god...ol' Yahweh. Dem Jews had a habit of doing that.

Your Jeebus, or Christ, never came with 10,000 anything.

I also wrote to confer with Revelation, et al. Jesus’s favorite self-title was Son of Man. The Son of Man in Daniel is the fulfillment of what you see here in Jude. Even when the Pharisees were calling for His execution, and demanded to know IF HE was Messiah, He quoted the Daniel passage. Again, it’s like you never studied the Bible at all. If you don’t know what Bible quotations from the Tanakh Jesus offered to defend His Messiahship, how can you say Paul is twisting OT words or Jesus’s words? You’re really not able to debate this at all, are you?

Quote: Are...you...trying...to...say...that because the new testament was (allegedly) "written by Jews"...that all Jews today should accept it as the truth?

The NT was, at the very most, partly written by people who were aware of Jewish beliefs and traditions, which they tried to undermine. No true Jew wrote Matthew, Mark, Luke or John... these gospels are heretical from the Jewish perspective. Paul may have been a Pharisee, but he too was a heretic...pro gentile and anti Semitic.

Nearly the whole NT is anti Jewish, pro gentile propaganda. To imply it is Jewish is like saying "Mein Kampf" was pro Jewish.

That IS one of your debate ideas, that the NT is pro-Gentile propaganda. Would you links to a half-dozen other threads where I challenge you and BB:

If the NT is pro-Gentile (Roman) propaganda, why does it continue the OT lines of thought that there is only One God… only Jews are clean… only Israel is chosen, etc. etc.?

PS. Comparing the NT to Mein Kampf is disgusting and not laudable in any way. Please see my avatar signature for more.

Quote: Yet your Jesus still doesn't "come with multitudes" anywhere in the new Testament!

All you have got is maybe, at a stretch, in Revelations, some anonymous dude who probably ate too many magic mushrooms, claiming that one day his Jesus will be in charge of an army.

I already wrote that you could confer with Revelation—and here, you are attempting to undo this by saying Revelation is a drug trip. Prove it or allow the verses to come under discussion!

PS. Please stop doing mushrooms yourself when replying to my posts! I ALREADY said confer with Revelation, you ignored me, and then wrote “Don’t bother quoting Revelation”, which means logically you already KNEW the statements were to be found in Revelation (in the NT) which means your post was just lies!

Q, you wrote

"Okay. Verse 5 cannot be Israel since it is obviously from an individual, and one where God emphasizes their incarnation, at that. Why did you quote it to attack my case when it weakened your own? That is my question."

Here is the quote...


3 And said unto me, Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified.

4 Then I said, I have laboured in vain, I have spent my strength for nought, and in vain: yet surely my judgment is with the Lord, and my work with my God.

5 And now, saith the Lord that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, Though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the Lord, and my God shall be my strength.

ME=ISRAEL.

God gave birth to Israel, his servant.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
04-03-2016, 04:56 PM (This post was last modified: 04-03-2016 10:55 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(04-03-2016 10:25 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
Quote: If you are genuinely interested in explaining your ideas to the forum, please rephrase your argument, as I suspect I'm not the only one who cannot understand you.

Okay. Verse 5 cannot be Israel since it is obviously from an individual, and one where God emphasizes their incarnation, at that. Why did you quote it to attack my case when it weakened your own? That is my question.

Quote: As to the New Testament writings, I think most Jews don't bother commenting...to them the new testament is not scripture, so they ignore it. How often do you read the Koran?

I’ve read about 2/3 of it (in English). I read the Book of Mormon, and believe it or not, a lot of the crap TTA’ers post, too. Wink

Quote: "You can't be so dense as to not realize that Pilate and Jesus had a discussion..."

Herein lies the essence of part of the chasm between you and me. You think all of the babble is real history...I don't. I look beyond what is written to try to understand what the authors were trying to push...you swallow the spiel without question, and assume I am "dense" because I don't agree with you. You also assume I haven't read your babble...whereas in fact I have an intimate knowledge of the gospels, and of the history of the era in which they were written.

You are shifting the goalposts. You made a claim, the narrative reproves your claim. You are in general claiming special (unique! psychic!) Bible knowledge, when you constantly claim inane ideas that are repudiated in the Bible, over and again. THAT is the point.

Quote: How ironic that you, of all people, have the audacity to write this. Anyone who has followed this debate knows that you have ignored over a hundred of my questions.

It took effort, yes, but I have ignored your rhetorical rantings that weren’t questions, and particularly where you were completely astray from YOUR debate resolution. Sometimes your “questions” were just babyish complaints about the love of Jesus and had nothing to do with Paul. You want to “debate” like Donald J. Trump, go for it. I will continue to ignore your ad homs and those “questions” that are off the debate topic.

I mean, you stray off topic so often, you post 8 or 9 responses to one of my own questions as separate posts! God forbid I answer 100 of your nonsense questions so you can make 900 ranting and raving posts! You must awake nightly several times, thinking, “I forget to accuse him and God of X and I have another put down for The Q that I forgot to post.” Perhaps take a sleeping aid instead.

Quote: Sorry, Q, Jude was referring to old Enoch. Enoch was rambling about his imaginary god...ol' Yahweh. Dem Jews had a habit of doing that.

Your Jeebus, or Christ, never came with 10,000 anything.

I also wrote to confer with Revelation, et al. Jesus’s favorite self-title was Son of Man. The Son of Man in Daniel is the fulfillment of what you see here in Jude. Even when the Pharisees were calling for His execution, and demanded to know IF HE was Messiah, He quoted the Daniel passage. Again, it’s like you never studied the Bible at all. If you don’t know what Bible quotations from the Tanakh Jesus offered to defend His Messiahship, how can you say Paul is twisting OT words or Jesus’s words? You’re really not able to debate this at all, are you?

Quote: Are...you...trying...to...say...that because the new testament was (allegedly) "written by Jews"...that all Jews today should accept it as the truth?

The NT was, at the very most, partly written by people who were aware of Jewish beliefs and traditions, which they tried to undermine. No true Jew wrote Matthew, Mark, Luke or John... these gospels are heretical from the Jewish perspective. Paul may have been a Pharisee, but he too was a heretic...pro gentile and anti Semitic.

Nearly the whole NT is anti Jewish, pro gentile propaganda. To imply it is Jewish is like saying "Mein Kampf" was pro Jewish.

That IS one of your debate ideas, that the NT is pro-Gentile propaganda. Would you links to a half-dozen other threads where I challenge you and BB:

If the NT is pro-Gentile (Roman) propaganda, why does it continue the OT lines of thought that there is only One God… only Jews are clean… only Israel is chosen, etc. etc.?

PS. Comparing the NT to Mein Kampf is disgusting and not laudable in any way. Please see my avatar signature for more.

Quote: Yet your Jesus still doesn't "come with multitudes" anywhere in the new Testament!

All you have got is maybe, at a stretch, in Revelations, some anonymous dude who probably ate too many magic mushrooms, claiming that one day his Jesus will be in charge of an army.

I already wrote that you could confer with Revelation—and here, you are attempting to undo this by saying Revelation is a drug trip. Prove it or allow the verses to come under discussion!

PS. Please stop doing mushrooms yourself when replying to my posts! I ALREADY said confer with Revelation, you ignored me, and then wrote “Don’t bother quoting Revelation”, which means logically you already KNEW the statements were to be found in Revelation (in the NT) which means your post was just lies!

"You are shifting the goalposts. You made a claim, the narrative reproves your claim."

I have no idea what you are referring to. What claim that I made ? Why do you assume that the narrative provides the goalposts? Why are you, again, assuming the babble (ie the narrative) records historical truth? We all know John has visions of Jeebus with an army...which is not the same thing as "Jeebus had an army."
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
04-03-2016, 05:01 PM (This post was last modified: 04-03-2016 09:55 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(04-03-2016 10:25 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
Quote: If you are genuinely interested in explaining your ideas to the forum, please rephrase your argument, as I suspect I'm not the only one who cannot understand you.

Okay. Verse 5 cannot be Israel since it is obviously from an individual, and one where God emphasizes their incarnation, at that. Why did you quote it to attack my case when it weakened your own? That is my question.

Quote: As to the New Testament writings, I think most Jews don't bother commenting...to them the new testament is not scripture, so they ignore it. How often do you read the Koran?

I’ve read about 2/3 of it (in English). I read the Book of Mormon, and believe it or not, a lot of the crap TTA’ers post, too. Wink

Quote: "You can't be so dense as to not realize that Pilate and Jesus had a discussion..."

Herein lies the essence of part of the chasm between you and me. You think all of the babble is real history...I don't. I look beyond what is written to try to understand what the authors were trying to push...you swallow the spiel without question, and assume I am "dense" because I don't agree with you. You also assume I haven't read your babble...whereas in fact I have an intimate knowledge of the gospels, and of the history of the era in which they were written.

You are shifting the goalposts. You made a claim, the narrative reproves your claim. You are in general claiming special (unique! psychic!) Bible knowledge, when you constantly claim inane ideas that are repudiated in the Bible, over and again. THAT is the point.

Quote: How ironic that you, of all people, have the audacity to write this. Anyone who has followed this debate knows that you have ignored over a hundred of my questions.

It took effort, yes, but I have ignored your rhetorical rantings that weren’t questions, and particularly where you were completely astray from YOUR debate resolution. Sometimes your “questions” were just babyish complaints about the love of Jesus and had nothing to do with Paul. You want to “debate” like Donald J. Trump, go for it. I will continue to ignore your ad homs and those “questions” that are off the debate topic.

I mean, you stray off topic so often, you post 8 or 9 responses to one of my own questions as separate posts! God forbid I answer 100 of your nonsense questions so you can make 900 ranting and raving posts! You must awake nightly several times, thinking, “I forget to accuse him and God of X and I have another put down for The Q that I forgot to post.” Perhaps take a sleeping aid instead.

Quote: Sorry, Q, Jude was referring to old Enoch. Enoch was rambling about his imaginary god...ol' Yahweh. Dem Jews had a habit of doing that.

Your Jeebus, or Christ, never came with 10,000 anything.

I also wrote to confer with Revelation, et al. Jesus’s favorite self-title was Son of Man. The Son of Man in Daniel is the fulfillment of what you see here in Jude. Even when the Pharisees were calling for His execution, and demanded to know IF HE was Messiah, He quoted the Daniel passage. Again, it’s like you never studied the Bible at all. If you don’t know what Bible quotations from the Tanakh Jesus offered to defend His Messiahship, how can you say Paul is twisting OT words or Jesus’s words? You’re really not able to debate this at all, are you?

Quote: Are...you...trying...to...say...that because the new testament was (allegedly) "written by Jews"...that all Jews today should accept it as the truth?

The NT was, at the very most, partly written by people who were aware of Jewish beliefs and traditions, which they tried to undermine. No true Jew wrote Matthew, Mark, Luke or John... these gospels are heretical from the Jewish perspective. Paul may have been a Pharisee, but he too was a heretic...pro gentile and anti Semitic.

Nearly the whole NT is anti Jewish, pro gentile propaganda. To imply it is Jewish is like saying "Mein Kampf" was pro Jewish.

That IS one of your debate ideas, that the NT is pro-Gentile propaganda. Would you links to a half-dozen other threads where I challenge you and BB:

If the NT is pro-Gentile (Roman) propaganda, why does it continue the OT lines of thought that there is only One God… only Jews are clean… only Israel is chosen, etc. etc.?

PS. Comparing the NT to Mein Kampf is disgusting and not laudable in any way. Please see my avatar signature for more.

Quote: Yet your Jesus still doesn't "come with multitudes" anywhere in the new Testament!

All you have got is maybe, at a stretch, in Revelations, some anonymous dude who probably ate too many magic mushrooms, claiming that one day his Jesus will be in charge of an army.

I already wrote that you could confer with Revelation—and here, you are attempting to undo this by saying Revelation is a drug trip. Prove it or allow the verses to come under discussion!

PS. Please stop doing mushrooms yourself when replying to my posts! I ALREADY said confer with Revelation, you ignored me, and then wrote “Don’t bother quoting Revelation”, which means logically you already KNEW the statements were to be found in Revelation (in the NT) which means your post was just lies!

You are in general claiming special (unique! psychic!) Bible knowledge, when you constantly claim inane ideas that are repudiated in the Bible, over and again. THAT is the point.

Your comment proves my point that you always simply accept that everything you read in the babble is the truth. I don't. So there is no point in you stating that I disagree with the babble...everyone reading this already knows that...the concept that the babble is flawed has yet to sink into your thick skull, which is why you call my ideas "inane."
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
04-03-2016, 05:07 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(04-03-2016 10:25 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
Quote: If you are genuinely interested in explaining your ideas to the forum, please rephrase your argument, as I suspect I'm not the only one who cannot understand you.

Okay. Verse 5 cannot be Israel since it is obviously from an individual, and one where God emphasizes their incarnation, at that. Why did you quote it to attack my case when it weakened your own? That is my question.

Quote: As to the New Testament writings, I think most Jews don't bother commenting...to them the new testament is not scripture, so they ignore it. How often do you read the Koran?

I’ve read about 2/3 of it (in English). I read the Book of Mormon, and believe it or not, a lot of the crap TTA’ers post, too. Wink

Quote: "You can't be so dense as to not realize that Pilate and Jesus had a discussion..."

Herein lies the essence of part of the chasm between you and me. You think all of the babble is real history...I don't. I look beyond what is written to try to understand what the authors were trying to push...you swallow the spiel without question, and assume I am "dense" because I don't agree with you. You also assume I haven't read your babble...whereas in fact I have an intimate knowledge of the gospels, and of the history of the era in which they were written.

You are shifting the goalposts. You made a claim, the narrative reproves your claim. You are in general claiming special (unique! psychic!) Bible knowledge, when you constantly claim inane ideas that are repudiated in the Bible, over and again. THAT is the point.

Quote: How ironic that you, of all people, have the audacity to write this. Anyone who has followed this debate knows that you have ignored over a hundred of my questions.

It took effort, yes, but I have ignored your rhetorical rantings that weren’t questions, and particularly where you were completely astray from YOUR debate resolution. Sometimes your “questions” were just babyish complaints about the love of Jesus and had nothing to do with Paul. You want to “debate” like Donald J. Trump, go for it. I will continue to ignore your ad homs and those “questions” that are off the debate topic.

I mean, you stray off topic so often, you post 8 or 9 responses to one of my own questions as separate posts! God forbid I answer 100 of your nonsense questions so you can make 900 ranting and raving posts! You must awake nightly several times, thinking, “I forget to accuse him and God of X and I have another put down for The Q that I forgot to post.” Perhaps take a sleeping aid instead.

Quote: Sorry, Q, Jude was referring to old Enoch. Enoch was rambling about his imaginary god...ol' Yahweh. Dem Jews had a habit of doing that.

Your Jeebus, or Christ, never came with 10,000 anything.

I also wrote to confer with Revelation, et al. Jesus’s favorite self-title was Son of Man. The Son of Man in Daniel is the fulfillment of what you see here in Jude. Even when the Pharisees were calling for His execution, and demanded to know IF HE was Messiah, He quoted the Daniel passage. Again, it’s like you never studied the Bible at all. If you don’t know what Bible quotations from the Tanakh Jesus offered to defend His Messiahship, how can you say Paul is twisting OT words or Jesus’s words? You’re really not able to debate this at all, are you?

Quote: Are...you...trying...to...say...that because the new testament was (allegedly) "written by Jews"...that all Jews today should accept it as the truth?

The NT was, at the very most, partly written by people who were aware of Jewish beliefs and traditions, which they tried to undermine. No true Jew wrote Matthew, Mark, Luke or John... these gospels are heretical from the Jewish perspective. Paul may have been a Pharisee, but he too was a heretic...pro gentile and anti Semitic.

Nearly the whole NT is anti Jewish, pro gentile propaganda. To imply it is Jewish is like saying "Mein Kampf" was pro Jewish.

That IS one of your debate ideas, that the NT is pro-Gentile propaganda. Would you links to a half-dozen other threads where I challenge you and BB:

If the NT is pro-Gentile (Roman) propaganda, why does it continue the OT lines of thought that there is only One God… only Jews are clean… only Israel is chosen, etc. etc.?

PS. Comparing the NT to Mein Kampf is disgusting and not laudable in any way. Please see my avatar signature for more.

Quote: Yet your Jesus still doesn't "come with multitudes" anywhere in the new Testament!

All you have got is maybe, at a stretch, in Revelations, some anonymous dude who probably ate too many magic mushrooms, claiming that one day his Jesus will be in charge of an army.

I already wrote that you could confer with Revelation—and here, you are attempting to undo this by saying Revelation is a drug trip. Prove it or allow the verses to come under discussion!

PS. Please stop doing mushrooms yourself when replying to my posts! I ALREADY said confer with Revelation, you ignored me, and then wrote “Don’t bother quoting Revelation”, which means logically you already KNEW the statements were to be found in Revelation (in the NT) which means your post was just lies!

"Would you links to a half-dozen other threads where I challenge you and BB:"

Only if went goes on six bentleys race. Big Grin
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
04-03-2016, 05:11 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(04-03-2016 10:25 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
Quote: If you are genuinely interested in explaining your ideas to the forum, please rephrase your argument, as I suspect I'm not the only one who cannot understand you.

Okay. Verse 5 cannot be Israel since it is obviously from an individual, and one where God emphasizes their incarnation, at that. Why did you quote it to attack my case when it weakened your own? That is my question.

Quote: As to the New Testament writings, I think most Jews don't bother commenting...to them the new testament is not scripture, so they ignore it. How often do you read the Koran?

I’ve read about 2/3 of it (in English). I read the Book of Mormon, and believe it or not, a lot of the crap TTA’ers post, too. Wink

Quote: "You can't be so dense as to not realize that Pilate and Jesus had a discussion..."

Herein lies the essence of part of the chasm between you and me. You think all of the babble is real history...I don't. I look beyond what is written to try to understand what the authors were trying to push...you swallow the spiel without question, and assume I am "dense" because I don't agree with you. You also assume I haven't read your babble...whereas in fact I have an intimate knowledge of the gospels, and of the history of the era in which they were written.

You are shifting the goalposts. You made a claim, the narrative reproves your claim. You are in general claiming special (unique! psychic!) Bible knowledge, when you constantly claim inane ideas that are repudiated in the Bible, over and again. THAT is the point.

Quote: How ironic that you, of all people, have the audacity to write this. Anyone who has followed this debate knows that you have ignored over a hundred of my questions.

It took effort, yes, but I have ignored your rhetorical rantings that weren’t questions, and particularly where you were completely astray from YOUR debate resolution. Sometimes your “questions” were just babyish complaints about the love of Jesus and had nothing to do with Paul. You want to “debate” like Donald J. Trump, go for it. I will continue to ignore your ad homs and those “questions” that are off the debate topic.

I mean, you stray off topic so often, you post 8 or 9 responses to one of my own questions as separate posts! God forbid I answer 100 of your nonsense questions so you can make 900 ranting and raving posts! You must awake nightly several times, thinking, “I forget to accuse him and God of X and I have another put down for The Q that I forgot to post.” Perhaps take a sleeping aid instead.

Quote: Sorry, Q, Jude was referring to old Enoch. Enoch was rambling about his imaginary god...ol' Yahweh. Dem Jews had a habit of doing that.

Your Jeebus, or Christ, never came with 10,000 anything.

I also wrote to confer with Revelation, et al. Jesus’s favorite self-title was Son of Man. The Son of Man in Daniel is the fulfillment of what you see here in Jude. Even when the Pharisees were calling for His execution, and demanded to know IF HE was Messiah, He quoted the Daniel passage. Again, it’s like you never studied the Bible at all. If you don’t know what Bible quotations from the Tanakh Jesus offered to defend His Messiahship, how can you say Paul is twisting OT words or Jesus’s words? You’re really not able to debate this at all, are you?

Quote: Are...you...trying...to...say...that because the new testament was (allegedly) "written by Jews"...that all Jews today should accept it as the truth?

The NT was, at the very most, partly written by people who were aware of Jewish beliefs and traditions, which they tried to undermine. No true Jew wrote Matthew, Mark, Luke or John... these gospels are heretical from the Jewish perspective. Paul may have been a Pharisee, but he too was a heretic...pro gentile and anti Semitic.

Nearly the whole NT is anti Jewish, pro gentile propaganda. To imply it is Jewish is like saying "Mein Kampf" was pro Jewish.

That IS one of your debate ideas, that the NT is pro-Gentile propaganda. Would you links to a half-dozen other threads where I challenge you and BB:

If the NT is pro-Gentile (Roman) propaganda, why does it continue the OT lines of thought that there is only One God… only Jews are clean… only Israel is chosen, etc. etc.?

PS. Comparing the NT to Mein Kampf is disgusting and not laudable in any way. Please see my avatar signature for more.

Quote: Yet your Jesus still doesn't "come with multitudes" anywhere in the new Testament!

All you have got is maybe, at a stretch, in Revelations, some anonymous dude who probably ate too many magic mushrooms, claiming that one day his Jesus will be in charge of an army.

I already wrote that you could confer with Revelation—and here, you are attempting to undo this by saying Revelation is a drug trip. Prove it or allow the verses to come under discussion!

PS. Please stop doing mushrooms yourself when replying to my posts! I ALREADY said confer with Revelation, you ignored me, and then wrote “Don’t bother quoting Revelation”, which means logically you already KNEW the statements were to be found in Revelation (in the NT) which means your post was just lies!

"If the NT is pro-Gentile (Roman) propaganda, why does it continue the OT lines of thought that there is only One God… only Jews are clean… only Israel is chosen, etc. etc.?"

Because it is pro-Gentile (Roman) propaganda. The Roman government was a lot smarter than you, and a lot more subtle and nuanced.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
04-03-2016, 05:17 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(04-03-2016 10:25 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
Quote: If you are genuinely interested in explaining your ideas to the forum, please rephrase your argument, as I suspect I'm not the only one who cannot understand you.

Okay. Verse 5 cannot be Israel since it is obviously from an individual, and one where God emphasizes their incarnation, at that. Why did you quote it to attack my case when it weakened your own? That is my question.

Quote: As to the New Testament writings, I think most Jews don't bother commenting...to them the new testament is not scripture, so they ignore it. How often do you read the Koran?

I’ve read about 2/3 of it (in English). I read the Book of Mormon, and believe it or not, a lot of the crap TTA’ers post, too. Wink

Quote: "You can't be so dense as to not realize that Pilate and Jesus had a discussion..."

Herein lies the essence of part of the chasm between you and me. You think all of the babble is real history...I don't. I look beyond what is written to try to understand what the authors were trying to push...you swallow the spiel without question, and assume I am "dense" because I don't agree with you. You also assume I haven't read your babble...whereas in fact I have an intimate knowledge of the gospels, and of the history of the era in which they were written.

You are shifting the goalposts. You made a claim, the narrative reproves your claim. You are in general claiming special (unique! psychic!) Bible knowledge, when you constantly claim inane ideas that are repudiated in the Bible, over and again. THAT is the point.

Quote: How ironic that you, of all people, have the audacity to write this. Anyone who has followed this debate knows that you have ignored over a hundred of my questions.

It took effort, yes, but I have ignored your rhetorical rantings that weren’t questions, and particularly where you were completely astray from YOUR debate resolution. Sometimes your “questions” were just babyish complaints about the love of Jesus and had nothing to do with Paul. You want to “debate” like Donald J. Trump, go for it. I will continue to ignore your ad homs and those “questions” that are off the debate topic.

I mean, you stray off topic so often, you post 8 or 9 responses to one of my own questions as separate posts! God forbid I answer 100 of your nonsense questions so you can make 900 ranting and raving posts! You must awake nightly several times, thinking, “I forget to accuse him and God of X and I have another put down for The Q that I forgot to post.” Perhaps take a sleeping aid instead.

Quote: Sorry, Q, Jude was referring to old Enoch. Enoch was rambling about his imaginary god...ol' Yahweh. Dem Jews had a habit of doing that.

Your Jeebus, or Christ, never came with 10,000 anything.

I also wrote to confer with Revelation, et al. Jesus’s favorite self-title was Son of Man. The Son of Man in Daniel is the fulfillment of what you see here in Jude. Even when the Pharisees were calling for His execution, and demanded to know IF HE was Messiah, He quoted the Daniel passage. Again, it’s like you never studied the Bible at all. If you don’t know what Bible quotations from the Tanakh Jesus offered to defend His Messiahship, how can you say Paul is twisting OT words or Jesus’s words? You’re really not able to debate this at all, are you?

Quote: Are...you...trying...to...say...that because the new testament was (allegedly) "written by Jews"...that all Jews today should accept it as the truth?

The NT was, at the very most, partly written by people who were aware of Jewish beliefs and traditions, which they tried to undermine. No true Jew wrote Matthew, Mark, Luke or John... these gospels are heretical from the Jewish perspective. Paul may have been a Pharisee, but he too was a heretic...pro gentile and anti Semitic.

Nearly the whole NT is anti Jewish, pro gentile propaganda. To imply it is Jewish is like saying "Mein Kampf" was pro Jewish.

That IS one of your debate ideas, that the NT is pro-Gentile propaganda. Would you links to a half-dozen other threads where I challenge you and BB:

If the NT is pro-Gentile (Roman) propaganda, why does it continue the OT lines of thought that there is only One God… only Jews are clean… only Israel is chosen, etc. etc.?

PS. Comparing the NT to Mein Kampf is disgusting and not laudable in any way. Please see my avatar signature for more.

Quote: Yet your Jesus still doesn't "come with multitudes" anywhere in the new Testament!

All you have got is maybe, at a stretch, in Revelations, some anonymous dude who probably ate too many magic mushrooms, claiming that one day his Jesus will be in charge of an army.

I already wrote that you could confer with Revelation—and here, you are attempting to undo this by saying Revelation is a drug trip. Prove it or allow the verses to come under discussion!

PS. Please stop doing mushrooms yourself when replying to my posts! I ALREADY said confer with Revelation, you ignored me, and then wrote “Don’t bother quoting Revelation”, which means logically you already KNEW the statements were to be found in Revelation (in the NT) which means your post was just lies!

PS. Comparing the NT to Mein Kampf is disgusting and not laudable in any way.

Oh dear, you've missed the point again. An analogy is not a comparison.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 
Forum Jump: