Started By
Message
re: Does anyone actually believe this
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:27 pm to Lordofwrath88
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:27 pm to Lordofwrath88
quote:
I thought... "In the Beginnning" God created like earth and the Universe and shite.... and then created light and the first day.
As in he made space and time and the rock we live on and some time later decided to actually get back to it and then the 7 days stuff happens.
It's all confusing, like trying to keep Dr. Who facts straight.
Confusing indeed. Welcome to the thread.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:28 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
If I feel something powerful, you will be the first to know, I promise. At this moment I can't bring myself to believe, but will remain with open mind and heart.
Sounds good.

I may have misunderstood the context of the other evidence you were asking for. I thought you were looking for other writers who talked about Jesus, whether contemporaries or not.
Taticus wrote: Nero fastened the guilt . . . on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of . . . Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome.
Pliny wrote: They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food--but food of an ordinary and innocent kind
Josephus wrote: About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he . . . wrought surprising feats. . . . He was the Christ. When Pilate . . .condemned him to be crucified, those who had . . . come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared . . . restored to life. . . . And the tribe of Christians . . . has . . . not disappeared
Babylonian Talmud:
On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald . . . cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy.
Let's examine this passage. You may have noticed that it refers to someone named "Yeshu." So why do we think this is Jesus? Actually, "Yeshu" (or "Yeshua") is how Jesus' name is pronounced in Hebrew. But what does the passage mean by saying that Jesus "was hanged"? Doesn't the New Testament say he was crucified? Indeed it does. But the term "hanged" can function as a synonym for "crucified." For instance, Galatians 3:13 declares that Christ was "hanged", and Luke 23:39 applies this term to the criminals who were crucified with Jesus.
Lucian wrote: The Christians . . . worship a man to this day--the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. . . . [It] was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:30 pm to kywildcatfanone
The problem with all of those accounts is: Which of them was contemporary? As in: Which of them was in the time of Jesus, and not just a reference to his followers and what they said?
This is referred to Hearsay, not to be confused with Heresy.
This is referred to Hearsay, not to be confused with Heresy.

Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:33 pm to Stacked
I thought y'all agreed to disagree a long time ago
Stacked I'm pretty impressed with how knowledgable you are on the subject especially for a guy who I thought spent 99% of his time on ebaumsworld.
Stacked I'm pretty impressed with how knowledgable you are on the subject especially for a guy who I thought spent 99% of his time on ebaumsworld.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:34 pm to JustinBieberFan
quote:
Stacked I'm pretty impressed with how knowledgable you are on the subject


Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:40 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
This is referred to Hearsay, not to be confused with Heresy

Religious discussions rarely end well for anyone, and they are even harder on a message board, where you are typing and not discussing across a cup of coffee.


Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:40 pm to JustinBieberFan
quote:
You mad?
No, I'm appreciating your attempt, though. If I hadn't been on the internet for such a long time, I might have fallen for it.

Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:41 pm to JustinBieberFan
Anyone in here enjoy crying with their Daddy?
My Daddy was also a fundamentalist of atheism, who also taught English in Mexico City.
My Daddy was also a fundamentalist of atheism, who also taught English in Mexico City.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:42 pm to kywildcatfanone
quote:
Religious discussions rarely end well for anyone, and they are even harder on a message board, where you are typing and not discussing across a cup of coffee.
Those are where the best discussions take place. I was never a big fan of coffee until recently, but I make sure to drink it in moderation.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:48 pm to scrooster
quote:
Science is a religion, so is Atheism.
It annoys me when people say this.
Religion, by definition, requires the worship of a deity. Worshipping idols or an idea (not that scientists worship science, but we'll just go with it here) is not religion.
quote:
re·li·gion noun \ri-'li-j?n\
: the belief in a god or in a group of gods
: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods
This post was edited on 7/6/14 at 8:49 pm
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:51 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Science is a religion, so is Atheism.
It annoys me when people say this.
Be careful when touching on this one, that's almost ubiquitously recited by trolls and people who are usually pulling a Poe.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:51 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
You have an affinity for stating "some scholars believe" and then claiming it as fact. No matter the case, you can't say that all other writers other that Paul are anonymous.
What do you mean Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are "just the, you know. The Gospels which talk about Jesus"? They are books of the New Testament not written by Paul that were written by identified writers.
The consensus? Care to identify this consensus? The only consensus I've ever heard is that Luke is the author of both.
Mathew wrote Matthew and it isn't disputed.
Mark wrote Mark.
John wrote John, 1st, 2nd, 3rd John and Revelation.
James wrote the book of James. It starts with "Greeting - James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes in the Dispersion." Sue me for believing the book is written by James. (And for the record, I do believe it's authored by the half brother of Jesus, making it even more important that he identifies himself as a servant of the Lord Jesus Christ.)
Peter wrote 1st and 2nd Peter.
Jude wrote Jude and I've never heard it remotely questioned.
quote:
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are just the, you know. The Gospels. Which talk about Jesus
What do you mean Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are "just the, you know. The Gospels which talk about Jesus"? They are books of the New Testament not written by Paul that were written by identified writers.
quote:
the consensus is that [luke and acts] was composed by a (Koine)
The consensus? Care to identify this consensus? The only consensus I've ever heard is that Luke is the author of both.
Mathew wrote Matthew and it isn't disputed.
Mark wrote Mark.
John wrote John, 1st, 2nd, 3rd John and Revelation.
James wrote the book of James. It starts with "Greeting - James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes in the Dispersion." Sue me for believing the book is written by James. (And for the record, I do believe it's authored by the half brother of Jesus, making it even more important that he identifies himself as a servant of the Lord Jesus Christ.)
Peter wrote 1st and 2nd Peter.
Jude wrote Jude and I've never heard it remotely questioned.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:53 pm to Agforlife
quote:
I believe what I believe and you can't change my mind nor I yours.
While this may be true for you, the fact is that intelligent discussion and research has led millions of people throughout history to change their views on religion one way or the other.
It is a worthwhile discussion if everyone involved can be civil about it. If there is a God and he can be known, it is worthwhile to discover him. If there is no God and someone is wasting their time, money and energy worshipping one that is worth discovering as well.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:56 pm to Stacked
quote:
Mathew wrote Matthew and it isn't disputed.
Not that it really matters, but it is disputed...heavily in fact. All four gospels were written by unknown authors and the names ascribed to them are only what they are because of church tradition. Nobody referred to Matthew as "The Gospel of Matthew" until at least 150 AD.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 9:00 pm to Stacked
Stacked, where is your evidence?
Mine is: www.earlychristianwritings.com
I've given you the text here in the forum, it's now time for you to do some research for yourself.
I really can't give this any more on a silver platter to you. If you're not keeping up to date with contemporary criticism, you can't keep up with the conversation and it's just that simple.
Mine is: www.earlychristianwritings.com
I've given you the text here in the forum, it's now time for you to do some research for yourself.
I really can't give this any more on a silver platter to you. If you're not keeping up to date with contemporary criticism, you can't keep up with the conversation and it's just that simple.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 9:00 pm to JustinBieberFan
quote:
Stacked I'm pretty impressed with how knowledgable you are on the subject especially for a guy who I thought spent 99% of his time on ebaumsworld.

Posted on 7/6/14 at 9:02 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Not that it really matters, but it is disputed...heavily in fact. All four gospels were written by unknown authors and the names ascribed to them are only what they are because of church tradition. Nobody referred to Matthew as "The Gospel of Matthew" until at least 150 AD.
I really don't know where Stacked is getting his information.
Kent Hovind, maybe?
Popular
Back to top
