The Atheist's Conversation at the Great White Throne
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-08-2014, 07:02 AM
RE: The Atheist's Conversation at the Great White Throne
(16-08-2014 11:24 PM)hbl Wrote:  
(16-08-2014 11:21 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  You were corrected on this today.

Were you asking me for the verse?

Psalms 82.1 (KJV) God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.

it says gods....plural...as in more than one.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
17-08-2014, 07:06 AM
RE: The Atheist's Conversation at the Great White Throne
(17-08-2014 12:35 AM)hbl Wrote:  If a person believes it is necessary for the Apostles or Jesus to be recorded by someone outside the writers of the 27 books then all you can do is kick the dust under your feet.

jesus never wrote a single word down, all the epistles are written by others under the names of more recognizable people in a sad attempt to give them validity, Pseudepigrapha at it finest.

If, indeed, the Gospels portray a historical look at the life of Jesus, then the one feature that stands out prominently within the stories shows that people claimed to know Jesus far and wide, not only by a great multitude of followers but by the great priests, the Roman governor Pilate, and Herod who claims that he had heard "of the fame of Jesus" (Matt 14:1)". One need only read Matt: 4:25 where it claims that "there followed him [Jesus] great multitudes of people from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judea, and from beyond Jordan." The gospels mention, countless times, the great multitude that followed Jesus and crowds of people who congregated to hear him. So crowded had some of these gatherings grown, that Luke 12:1 alleges that an "innumerable multitude of people... trode one upon another." Luke 5:15 says that there grew "a fame abroad of him: and great multitudes came together to hear..." The persecution of Jesus in Jerusalem drew so much attention that all the chief priests and scribes, including the high priest Caiaphas, not only knew about him but helped in his alleged crucifixion. (see Matt 21:15-23, 26:3, Luke 19:47, 23:13). The multitude of people thought of Jesus, not only as a teacher and a miracle healer, but a prophet (see Matt:14:5).

So here we have the gospels portraying Jesus as famous far and wide, a prophet and healer, with great multitudes of people who knew about him, including the greatest Jewish high priests and the Roman authorities of the area, and not one person records his existence during his lifetime? If the poor, the rich, the rulers, the highest priests, and the scribes knew about Jesus, who would not have heard of him?

FAIRY TALE

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
17-08-2014, 07:35 AM
RE: The Atheist's Conversation at the Great White Throne
(14-08-2014 04:42 PM)Shadow Fox Wrote:  
(14-08-2014 04:38 PM)Chas Wrote:  Oh, goody! We get to play "Blame the victim". Thumbsup

Yeah, you shouldn't always judge someone based on their "internet rep" alone.
Although, it does not take long for anyone to see why so many people do not like him.

I believe you misunderstood me.

The forum is the victim. He's blaming us for this asshole's behavior.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
17-08-2014, 12:56 PM
RE: The Atheist's Conversation at the Great White Throne
(17-08-2014 07:06 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  jesus never wrote a single word down, all the epistles are written by others under the names of more recognizable people in a sad attempt to give them validity, Pseudepigrapha at it finest.

Actually Jesus wrote in the sand. But why would Jesus need to write anything down? Who are these more recognizable people you speak of that you claim wrote Paul's epistles? Critics need evidence for their claims but you provide none so you are disregarded.

Who better to write these books than those closest to their events and their own experiences. We can be confident Matthew wrote Matthew, Luke wrote Luke and Acts, Mark wrote Mark, John wrote John, 1,2,3 John and Revelation, Peter wrote 1,2 Peter, James wrote James, Jude wrote Jude, and Paul wrote his epistles. They were all in the know. Scholars and historians prefer these sources closest to their events and by those closest to the events. Of all the chapters of the NT scholars are unified the surest pieces they are sure of are 1 Cor. 15, Gal. 1 & 2. In these 3 chapters Paul said he spent 15 days with Peter, and with John and James. They gave Paul the gospel derived from their eyewitness testimony of Jesus risen from the dead. This agreed with Paul's own seeing Jesus alive from the dead.

Praise the Lord!
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2014, 03:43 PM
RE: The Atheist's Conversation at the Great White Throne
(17-08-2014 12:56 PM)hbl Wrote:  
(17-08-2014 07:06 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  jesus never wrote a single word down, all the epistles are written by others under the names of more recognizable people in a sad attempt to give them validity, Pseudepigrapha at it finest.

Actually Jesus wrote in the sand. But why would Jesus need to write anything down? Who are these more recognizable people you speak of that you claim wrote Paul's epistles? Critics need evidence for their claims but you provide none so you are disregarded.

Who better to write these books than those closest to their events and their own experiences. We can be confident Matthew wrote Matthew, Luke wrote Luke and Acts, Mark wrote Mark, John wrote John, 1,2,3 John and Revelation, Peter wrote 1,2 Peter, James wrote James, Jude wrote Jude, and Paul wrote his epistles. They were all in the know. Scholars and historians prefer these sources closest to their events and by those closest to the events. Of all the chapters of the NT scholars are unified the surest pieces they are sure of are 1 Cor. 15, Gal. 1 & 2. In these 3 chapters Paul said he spent 15 days with Peter, and with John and James. They gave Paul the gospel derived from their eyewitness testimony of Jesus risen from the dead. This agreed with Paul's own seeing Jesus alive from the dead.

Praise the Lord!

Jesus wrote in the sand? Did he really? and you know this because??? Now don't point to fiction as proof, that is argument from authority and is the weakest way to debate and/or learn something. Haven't I schooled you enough?

Let me try it again, I will say it slooooower this time.

Matthew: The Gospel of Matthew is generally believed to have been composed between 70 and 110, with most scholars preferring the period 80–90; a pre-70 date remains a minority view, but has been strongly supported. The anonymous author was probably a highly educated Jew, intimately familiar with the technical aspects of Jewish law, and the disciple Matthew was probably honored within his circle. The author drew on three main sources to compose his gospel: the Gospel of Mark; the hypothetical collection of sayings known as the Q source; and material unique to his own community, called "Special Matthew", or the M source. Note the part where I said...disciple matthew honored...and anonymous writer...do some research. Knowledge is power, and quite liberating.

Luke/Acts: Luke: Tradition holds that the text was written by Luke the companion of Paul (named in Colossians 4:14). Many modern scholars reject this view.

Mark: Most modern scholars reject the tradition which ascribes it to Mark the Evangelist, the companion of Peter, and regard it as the work of an unknown author working with various sources including collections of miracle stories, controversy stories, parables, and a passion narrative.

John: The gospel identifies its author as "the disciple whom Jesus loved." Although the text does not name this disciple, by the beginning of the 2nd century, a tradition had begun to form which identified him with John the Apostle, one of the Twelve (Jesus' innermost circle). Although some notable New Testament scholars affirm traditional Johannine scholarship, the majority do not believe that John or one of the Apostles wrote it, and trace it instead to a "Johannine community" which traced its traditions to John.

Peter - Many scholars question the authorship of Peter of the epistles. Even within the first epistle, it says in 5:12 that Silvanus wrote it. Most scholars consider the second epistle as unreliable or an outright forgery. The unknown authors of the epistles of Peter wrote long after the life of the traditional Peter. Moreover, Peter lived (if he ever lived at all) as an ignorant and illiterate peasant (even Acts 4:13 attests to this). In short, no one has any way of determining whether the epistles of Peter come from fraud, an author claiming himself to know what Peter said (hearsay), or from someone trying to further the aims of the Church. Encyclopedias usually describe a tradition that Saint Peter wrote them. However, whenever you see the word "tradition" it refers to a belief passed down within a society. In other words: hearsay. This the definition of Pseudepigrapha; a book written in a biblical style and ascribed to an author who did not write it...otherwise known as a FORGERY.

James - Epistle of James mentions Jesus only once as an introduction to his belief. Nowhere does the epistle reference a historical Jesus and this alone eliminates it from an historical account.

Jude - Even early Christians argued about its authenticity. It quotes an apocryphal book called Enoch as if it represented authorized Scripture. Biblical scholars do not think it possible for the alleged disciple Jude to have written it because whoever wrote it had to have written it during a period when the churches had long existed. Like the other alleged disciples, Jude would have lived as an illiterate peasant and unable to write (much less in Greek) but the author of Jude wrote in fluent high quality Greek..more forgery.

paul - written about 60 C.E., of the 13, he actually wrote 8. Not a single instance in any of Paul's writings claims that he ever meets or sees an earthly Jesus, nor does Paul give any reference to Jesus' life on earth (except for a few well known interpolations - Bible interpolation, or Bible redaction, is the art of adding stuff to the Bible). Therefore, all accounts about a Jesus could only have come from other believers or his imagination. Hearsay.

There’s no indication from Scripture that Paul and Jesus ever met before the Damascus Road incident. And Acts 9:4-7 doesn’t specify whether the Lord’s encounter with Paul was physical or not. It only says Paul saw a bright light and heard a voice. (hallucination/lie)The men with him heard a loud sound but didn’t see anything. In subsequent re-tellings of the encounter Paul never indicated that He had actually seen Jesus at that time.

and the truth, shall set you free...

[Image: 2h6xedh.jpg]

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
17-08-2014, 03:52 PM (This post was last modified: 17-08-2014 03:55 PM by hbl.)
RE: The Atheist's Conversation at the Great White Throne
(17-08-2014 03:43 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Jesus wrote in the sand? Did he really? and you know this

How else would you know Jesus wrote in the sand other than those who were with Jesus multiply attested that it was true?

I love the fact that Luke wrote Acts but made no mention of Paul's death which tells us Acts was written before Paul was martyred 65 AD. Therefore, Acts was written around 50 AD. Since Luke was his former work, this puts Luke around 40 AD. But since Luke took in part from Mark that places Mark around 35 AD just 2 years after the cross. And since Mark worked with Peter that places 1 & 2 Peter right after the cross. People don't write their testimony after they died. In fact Paul said in 1 Cor. 15, Gal. 1 & 2 he spent 15 days with Peter, and with James and John and received from the resurrection appearances of Jesus. So that places his experience with them just a few years after the cross as Paul was converted 2 years after the cross. Since John in his epistles and Peter in his testify to seeing Jesus alive from the dead and the gospels confer upon that message of various eyewitness group settings we can believe it is true, because people don't willingly die for what they know is a lie and group hallucinations are impossible. You can't ask for better multiply corroborated data points. Consider asking yourself the question what better proof could God provide? Since the NT could not have been written in the 2nd century because the church fathers were already quoting it by then and there is nobody we know of who could have written it after the Apostles were martyred around 65 AD there is no reason to think these sources don't originate from the eyewitness Apostles who had spent 3 years with Jesus and 40 days after His resurrection. Paul said multiple times not in his own writing only but also in Acts and the epistles of Peter he saw Jesus resurrected.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2014, 04:21 PM
RE: The Atheist's Conversation at the Great White Throne
(17-08-2014 12:56 PM)hbl Wrote:  Actually Jesus wrote in the sand.
I believe that's the very same sand that you have your head in.

I am not accountable to any God. I am accountable to myself - and not because I think I am God as some theists would try to assert - but because, no matter what actions I take, thoughts I think, or words I utter, I have to be able to live with myself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2014, 04:25 PM
RE: The Atheist's Conversation at the Great White Throne
.....
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2014, 06:20 PM
RE: The Atheist's Conversation at the Great White Throne
(17-08-2014 04:21 PM)Impulse Wrote:  
(17-08-2014 12:56 PM)hbl Wrote:  Actually Jesus wrote in the sand.
I believe that's the very same sand that you have your head in.

Yes

[Image: ml7ckp.jpg]

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2014, 06:26 PM
RE: The Atheist's Conversation at the Great White Throne
(17-08-2014 03:52 PM)hbl Wrote:  
(17-08-2014 03:43 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Jesus wrote in the sand? Did he really? and you know this

How else would you know Jesus wrote in the sand other than those who were with Jesus multiply attested that it was true?

I love the fact that Luke wrote Acts but made no mention of Paul's death which tells us Acts was written before Paul was martyred 65 AD. Therefore, Acts was written around 50 AD. Since Luke was his former work, this puts Luke around 40 AD. But since Luke took in part from Mark that places Mark around 35 AD just 2 years after the cross. And since Mark worked with Peter that places 1 & 2 Peter right after the cross. People don't write their testimony after they died. In fact Paul said in 1 Cor. 15, Gal. 1 & 2 he spent 15 days with Peter, and with James and John and received from the resurrection appearances of Jesus. So that places his experience with them just a few years after the cross as Paul was converted 2 years after the cross. Since John in his epistles and Peter in his testify to seeing Jesus alive from the dead and the gospels confer upon that message of various eyewitness group settings we can believe it is true, because people don't willingly die for what they know is a lie and group hallucinations are impossible. You can't ask for better multiply corroborated data points. Consider asking yourself the question what better proof could God provide? Since the NT could not have been written in the 2nd century because the church fathers were already quoting it by then and there is nobody we know of who could have written it after the Apostles were martyred around 65 AD there is no reason to think these sources don't originate from the eyewitness Apostles who had spent 3 years with Jesus and 40 days after His resurrection. Paul said multiple times not in his own writing only but also in Acts and the epistles of Peter he saw Jesus resurrected.

You making shit up as you go doesn't refute the sheer tonnage of empirical evidence to the contrary. No religious scholar thinks the way you do, and they have studied this, like I have. You are clearly out of your mind. You must be a Ken Ham fan. I didn't pull that info out of the thin air oh delusional one, that comes straight out of christian theology text books. You see, I have taken EVERY theology class saint Leo University has as it is my personal passion to dismantle the delusion, to know ones enemy is to defeat them. I have successfully deconverted, and unbrainwashed many people over the years. You can stomp your feet and claim that water is purple all you want, but it doesn't change the facts. You must be in one of those pentecostal cults, or some such nonsense that don't even follow christian doctrine, yet call themselves "christians"....give it up dude, you are washed up, barely articulate and wholly uneducated on theology.

[Image: 4hxpoz.jpg]

[Image: 11l3142.gif]

yup, that ass beating was done publicly.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: