Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
Thread Closed 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-03-2016, 03:48 PM (This post was last modified: 22-03-2016 10:20 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
"1. If we accept all Moss has to say, Paul is still not a charlatan, since Paul discusses Roman persecutions in the NT, but lived through some of the “maybe 10 or 12 scattered years during which Christians were singled out for supression by Rome’s imperial authorities” as Moss puts it."

Gosh, you pressed on a link! Congratulations. I mean it.

"Paul is still not a charlatan, since Paul discusses Roman persecutions in the NT,..."


Unfortunately, this is a massive non sequitur.

but lived through some of the “maybe 10 or 12 scattered years during which Christians were singled out for supression by Rome’s imperial authorities” as Moss puts it."

Dr Moss is not referring to the Pauline era.

There was no suppression of "Christians" while Paul was around. If you disagree, please present your evidence.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
22-03-2016, 09:26 PM (This post was last modified: 22-03-2016 09:48 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
"You’ve called Paul not just a charlatan but a nasty, spiteful, vicious, disgusting piece of work"

Yep. He most certainly was that, and I've given you pages of reasons why I am of that opinion. Feel free to discuss the specifics with me if you disagree.

This assertion of yours flies in the face of 1 Cor 13 not being called “nice prose” but the most definitive piece of literature on love in history! 3. I conclude that you have no choice other than to say 1 Cor 13 is “nice prose” to cover your tracks here. Shame on you. Recant your position!

This is the last time I'll respond to this same comment. You obviously didn't read my last 5 replies to this. Yes, Paul wrote a few nice lines. As to him writing "a definitive piece of literature on love"...nope. The passage in question is too short and too simplistic to be called that. And, in any case, any scoundrel or charlatan can write nice poetry. Now...please move the conversation on about this, or shut the fuck up about it.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
22-03-2016, 09:35 PM (This post was last modified: 22-03-2016 09:49 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
"Please bullet point below every fact you have in evidence that Paul was a charlatan—and I will gladly address them all, and immediately!"

Ah...no.

I have written most of the last 40 pages of this debate, and my writing is littered with evidence that Paul was a charlatan. You have been too lazy and too uninformed to put up any reasoned counter arguments. I have no evidence you are capable of mounting such a response.

If you are genuinely interested (which I seriously doubt), go back and read and start replying to specifics. Then we can have a real debate.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
22-03-2016, 09:43 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
"For some reason, rather than presenting new lines of argumentation, you simply repeat your questions to me as if I’ve haven’t answered you already, multiple times. Your latest example: “Evidence please, Q, that Christians worked anti-Roman agendas”, when I’ve already mentioned statements like “Behind every [Roman] idol is a demon… Paul and his followers are in our city to overthrow our pantheon of gods, anti-gladitorial sentiment and protests among Christians, etc. Clearly you enjoy going back to read your posts but not mine!"

How is anyone to understand this?

You quote someone, yet you don't say who, and you don't indicate where the quote ends. This is sloppy and lazy. I have no idea what your "evidence" is, and neither do our readers.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
22-03-2016, 09:56 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
Now, I CAN give good evidence that Paul is not a charlatan APART from the Bible, such as fulfilled prophecies of Paul!

The stage is yours. Please go ahead. Please don't tell us
-you have already done it, or
-everyone knows there are fulfiilled Pauline prophesies,
but actually, genuinely, present the evidence.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Mark Fulton's post
23-03-2016, 10:22 AM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
Quote: Look at the facts. Paul, or someone writing in his name, wrote some nice prose. Some people of your ilk wax lyrical about it. That does not mean everything Paul wrote was the truth, and it does not mean anything he wrote was inspired by a hypothetical God. You are somehow trying to claim that because he wrote a few nice lines he was honest, and didn't have an underlying agenda. That makes no sense.

You have cherry picked a small part of Paul's opus. I, and the scholars I have quoted, have demonstrated that Paul was a liar and a charlatan. You haven't responded in a specific way to any of this commentary.

1. I didn’t cherry pick. Rather, each time you actually quoted the scriptures, I responded with other scriptures showing your fallibility. I’m the one who believes the whole NT as truth while you certainly cherry pick based on your bias.

2. I don’t need to respond to your commentary. I need to (again) ask you if all you have is commentary, or if you have any facts in evidence that Paul is a charlatan, so I can safely reject his writings.

Dr. Fulton, here is the heart of your argument, revealed, emphasis mine:

Quote:
I will admit my bias.

If someone is a "religious leader," yes, I immediately suspect they are insincere.

Having said that there's no doubt there are some sincere religious leaders... They are just naive, but not necessarily insincere. Paul was not in this category. He had a secondary agenda that he never revealed.

The sincerity of a religious leader is not the real question at hand. It is the truth or otherwise of what they are preaching that is the real issue. No religious leader has any proof for the existence of their hypothetical god.

Are you REALLY debating a “hidden agenda” that Paul never actually shared? That’s… somewhere between losing the debate and being a lunatic!

Quote: Dr Moss is not referring to the Pauline era.

There was no suppression of "Christians" while Paul was around. If you disagree, please present your evidence.

It is generally agreed that from Nero's reign until Decius's widespread measures in 250, the Anti-Christian policies by Romans were limited to isolated, local incidents.[

In 64, a great fire broke out in Rome, destroying portions of the city and economically devastating the Roman population. Tacitus records (Annals 15.44) that Nero was rumored to have ordered the fire himself, and in order to dispel the accusations, accused and savagely punished the already-detested Christians. Suetonius mentions that Christians were killed under Nero's reign, but does not mention anything about the fire (Nero 16.2)[36] Scholars disagree about whether Christians were persecuted solely under the charge of organized arson or for other general crimes associated with Christianity.[

Source: Wikipedia

Quote: This is the last time I'll respond to this same comment. You obviously didn't read my last 5 replies to this. Yes, Paul wrote a few nice lines. As to him writing "a definitive piece of literature on love"...nope. The passage in question is too short and too simplistic to be called that. And, in any case, any scoundrel or charlatan can write nice poetry. Now...please move the conversation on about this, or shut the fuck up about it.

You might want to see my signature about this, Dr. Fulton. Clearly, YOU are not a loving person. May I recommend that you read 1 Corinthians 13 several times today, and meditate on it’s extolling of love, real love?

Further, here’s an example of what you might call a practical application of “some nice lines”:

In political terms, 1 Corinthians 13 is believed to have influenced Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Christian reverend and American hero, in his peaceful, yet persevering protests to segregation. Many believe that Dr. King's powerful leadership and his enduring love for his people and for all Americans propelled the Civil Rights Movement to gain equality for all people.[9] As Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., writes: "Uncle M.L. wrote in Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community?, "The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral." But inspired by 1 Corinthians 13 and believing that love never fails, he also wrote that "darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." – source Wikipedia

Quote: Ah...no.

I have written most of the last 40 pages of this debate, and my writing is littered with evidence that Paul was a charlatan. You have been too lazy and too uninformed to put up any reasoned counter arguments. I have no evidence you are capable of mounting such a response.

If you are genuinely interested (which I seriously doubt), go back and read and start replying to specifics. Then we can have a real debate.

Well, I’m tempted to call you a liar here, but I’ll say in the last 40 pages, you have presented ONLY commentary and NO facts. I’ll settle for your top three facts that PROVE Paul was a charlatan, that will save you time:

Fact 1:

Fact 2:

Fact 3:

Quote: Now, I CAN give good evidence that Paul is not a charlatan APART from the Bible, such as fulfilled prophecies of Paul!

The stage is yours. Please go ahead. Please don't tell us
-you have already done it, or
-everyone knows there are fulfiilled Pauline prophesies,
but actually, genuinely, present the evidence.

Sure! Let’s clarify. When someone writes a text that includes statements such as “I’m telling the truth in Christ, I’m not lying, my conscience bearing me witness…” and submits documents with EVERY one of them in evidence containing the record of the WITNESS of the document, “Paul and Silas to…” or “Paul and Timothy to…” or “I, Tertius, who wrote down this letter, greet you in the Lord. Gaius, whose hospitality I and the whole church here enjoy, sends you his greetings. Erastus, who is the city’s director of public works, and our brother Quartus send you their greetings…” and then a slanderer like yourself opposes them in court, without any supporting facts, what evidence should I give that the writer—who is dead and is unable to appear in court to defend himself—told the truth when he wrote repeatedly in his documents and testimonies that he is known to the communities to which he wrote, including founding some of the communities themselves, and tells the truth? What more could I add/need to add before you are tossed out of the court for your slander?

I also wrote:

Quote:If you have no new arguments to make, or facts to present (still!) let’s shut this one down. Sound good?”

And you have presented zero new arguments here and zero facts, indeed, reread your most recent posts. You have more commentary, including commentary about Paul and about me! So I offer you a truce, thusly:

I will end this debate in the boxing ring and say you WON the debate if you will admit that you have NO facts against Paul, only commentary. OR, again, present your top facts PROVING Paul was a charlatan, not including “He’s religious so he must be lying”:

FACT 1:

FACT 2:

FACT 3:

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
23-03-2016, 04:43 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
(23-03-2016 10:22 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
Quote: Look at the facts. Paul, or someone writing in his name, wrote some nice prose. Some people of your ilk wax lyrical about it. That does not mean everything Paul wrote was the truth, and it does not mean anything he wrote was inspired by a hypothetical God. You are somehow trying to claim that because he wrote a few nice lines he was honest, and didn't have an underlying agenda. That makes no sense.

You have cherry picked a small part of Paul's opus. I, and the scholars I have quoted, have demonstrated that Paul was a liar and a charlatan. You haven't responded in a specific way to any of this commentary.

1. I didn’t cherry pick. Rather, each time you actually quoted the scriptures, I responded with other scriptures showing your fallibility. I’m the one who believes the whole NT as truth while you certainly cherry pick based on your bias.

2. I don’t need to respond to your commentary. I need to (again) ask you if all you have is commentary, or if you have any facts in evidence that Paul is a charlatan, so I can safely reject his writings.

Dr. Fulton, here is the heart of your argument, revealed, emphasis mine:

Quote:
I will admit my bias.

If someone is a "religious leader," yes, I immediately suspect they are insincere.

Having said that there's no doubt there are some sincere religious leaders... They are just naive, but not necessarily insincere. Paul was not in this category. He had a secondary agenda that he never revealed.

The sincerity of a religious leader is not the real question at hand. It is the truth or otherwise of what they are preaching that is the real issue. No religious leader has any proof for the existence of their hypothetical god.

Are you REALLY debating a “hidden agenda” that Paul never actually shared? That’s… somewhere between losing the debate and being a lunatic!

Quote: Dr Moss is not referring to the Pauline era.

There was no suppression of "Christians" while Paul was around. If you disagree, please present your evidence.

It is generally agreed that from Nero's reign until Decius's widespread measures in 250, the Anti-Christian policies by Romans were limited to isolated, local incidents.[

In 64, a great fire broke out in Rome, destroying portions of the city and economically devastating the Roman population. Tacitus records (Annals 15.44) that Nero was rumored to have ordered the fire himself, and in order to dispel the accusations, accused and savagely punished the already-detested Christians. Suetonius mentions that Christians were killed under Nero's reign, but does not mention anything about the fire (Nero 16.2)[36] Scholars disagree about whether Christians were persecuted solely under the charge of organized arson or for other general crimes associated with Christianity.[

Source: Wikipedia

Quote: This is the last time I'll respond to this same comment. You obviously didn't read my last 5 replies to this. Yes, Paul wrote a few nice lines. As to him writing "a definitive piece of literature on love"...nope. The passage in question is too short and too simplistic to be called that. And, in any case, any scoundrel or charlatan can write nice poetry. Now...please move the conversation on about this, or shut the fuck up about it.

You might want to see my signature about this, Dr. Fulton. Clearly, YOU are not a loving person. May I recommend that you read 1 Corinthians 13 several times today, and meditate on it’s extolling of love, real love?

Further, here’s an example of what you might call a practical application of “some nice lines”:

In political terms, 1 Corinthians 13 is believed to have influenced Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Christian reverend and American hero, in his peaceful, yet persevering protests to segregation. Many believe that Dr. King's powerful leadership and his enduring love for his people and for all Americans propelled the Civil Rights Movement to gain equality for all people.[9] As Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., writes: "Uncle M.L. wrote in Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community?, "The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral." But inspired by 1 Corinthians 13 and believing that love never fails, he also wrote that "darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." – source Wikipedia

Quote: Ah...no.

I have written most of the last 40 pages of this debate, and my writing is littered with evidence that Paul was a charlatan. You have been too lazy and too uninformed to put up any reasoned counter arguments. I have no evidence you are capable of mounting such a response.

If you are genuinely interested (which I seriously doubt), go back and read and start replying to specifics. Then we can have a real debate.

Well, I’m tempted to call you a liar here, but I’ll say in the last 40 pages, you have presented ONLY commentary and NO facts. I’ll settle for your top three facts that PROVE Paul was a charlatan, that will save you time:

Fact 1:

Fact 2:

Fact 3:

Quote: Now, I CAN give good evidence that Paul is not a charlatan APART from the Bible, such as fulfilled prophecies of Paul!

The stage is yours. Please go ahead. Please don't tell us
-you have already done it, or
-everyone knows there are fulfiilled Pauline prophesies,
but actually, genuinely, present the evidence.

Sure! Let’s clarify. When someone writes a text that includes statements such as “I’m telling the truth in Christ, I’m not lying, my conscience bearing me witness…” and submits documents with EVERY one of them in evidence containing the record of the WITNESS of the document, “Paul and Silas to…” or “Paul and Timothy to…” or “I, Tertius, who wrote down this letter, greet you in the Lord. Gaius, whose hospitality I and the whole church here enjoy, sends you his greetings. Erastus, who is the city’s director of public works, and our brother Quartus send you their greetings…” and then a slanderer like yourself opposes them in court, without any supporting facts, what evidence should I give that the writer—who is dead and is unable to appear in court to defend himself—told the truth when he wrote repeatedly in his documents and testimonies that he is known to the communities to which he wrote, including founding some of the communities themselves, and tells the truth? What more could I add/need to add before you are tossed out of the court for your slander?

I also wrote:

Quote:If you have no new arguments to make, or facts to present (still!) let’s shut this one down. Sound good?”

And you have presented zero new arguments here and zero facts, indeed, reread your most recent posts. You have more commentary, including commentary about Paul and about me! So I offer you a truce, thusly:

I will end this debate in the boxing ring and say you WON the debate if you will admit that you have NO facts against Paul, only commentary. OR, again, present your top facts PROVING Paul was a charlatan, not including “He’s religious so he must be lying”:

FACT 1:

FACT 2:

FACT 3:

May I recommend that you read 1 Corinthians 13 several times today, and meditate on it’s extolling of love, real love?

Sure, I'll read it again.

In the meantime, perhaps you could read this love letter...

"Mein Liebes Tschapperl,

Don't worry about me. I'm fine though perhaps a little tired. I hope to come home soon and then I can rest in your arms. I have a great longing for rest, but my duty to the German people comes before everything else. Don't forget that the dangers I encounter don't compare with those of our soldiers at the Front. I thank you for the proof of your affection and ask you also to thank your esteemed father and your most gracious mother for their greetings and good wishes. I am very proud of the honor - please tell them that - to possess the love of girl who comes from such a distinguished family. I have sent to you the uniform I was wearing during the unfortunate day. It is proof that Providence has protected me and that we have nothing more to fear from our enemies.

From my whole heart, your A.H."

Nice letter, isn't it? You can probably guess who wrote it to the woman who would become his wife, Eva Braun. Please meditate on the love these two people shared despite all their adversaries, even an assassination attempt on his life. Love conquers all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Mark Fulton's post
23-03-2016, 09:28 PM (This post was last modified: 24-03-2016 03:23 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
[i]In 64, a great fire broke out in Rome, destroying portions of the city and economically devastating the Roman population. Tacitus records (Annals 15.44) that Nero was rumored to have ordered the fire himself, and in order to dispel the accusations, accused and savagely punished the already-detested Christians. Suetonius mentions that Christians were killed under Nero's reign, but does not mention anything about the fire (Nero 16.2)[36] Scholars disagree about whether Christians were persecuted solely under the charge of organized arson or for other general crimes associated with Christianity.[/i]

Wow...you actually looked something up and have contributed to the discussion! Well done! Thankyou for pointing this out.

My opinion on this, and it is just an opinion, is that it never happened to "Christians."
I think the evidence is weak. All sorts of nonsense, such as Peter and Paul lost their lives at this time, was made up by church fathers, many decades after the event. This has been discussed ad nauseum on this forum and elsewhere. If you choose to believe Christians were martyred at this time, that's your right, but we will have to agree to disagree.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
23-03-2016, 09:40 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
[i]"the writer—who is dead and is unable to appear in court to defend himself—told the truth when he wrote repeatedly in his documents and testimonies that he is known to the communities to which he wrote," [/i]

This is another big non sequitur. (if you don't know what that means please look it up.)

I could write a hundred letters full of lies to my mother, who knows me well.

Paul was writing about what appears to be his own delusions and hallucinations, that only he experienced, so he could quite easily have been lying. In fact, given that he was not overtly psychotic, the most likely explanation is that he was lying.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
23-03-2016, 09:45 PM
RE: Mark Fulton vs Q..."Was Paul a Charlatan"
"I will end this debate in the boxing ring and say you WON the debate..."

Ha ha. I have no desire to "win" this debate. I do, however, want to tell the world about Paul. There are people reading this who are interested. Some of those people are being fed bullshit in churches, schools and homes. I want to give them the facts to free themselves from this nonsense.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Mark Fulton's post
Thread Closed 
Forum Jump: