Devils' Advocate
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 2,086
- Reaction score
- 392
- Points
- 83
You're really Donald Trump aren't you. You have fallen out of twitter and ended up here.
You're really Donald Trump aren't you. You have fallen out of twitter and ended up here.
C
Composer
Guest
With inept faith like yours & Co. I could be whatever your fanciful imaginations fabricate!
Meanwhile I gave you pretend believers every opportunity to provide your supposed evidence for the literal, Historical Miracle working narcissist you claim to follow!
The whole lot of you have shown exactly what you do have = nothing of value for your cause.
Meanwhile I have already proved this Historical MYTH found in a Story book is a narcissistic murderer! (e.g. Luke 19:27) your story book
Proving the claim of " We have a God of Love " farcical!
I have lots more fatal to your pretend cause and you are ALL pretenders & frauds as exposed again by your own propaganda -
Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. . . . . . 8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. (1 John 3:6,8) KJV Story book
Hence your own propaganda exposes you ALL as frauds, jebus rejects & your true Master = your Devil!
Aussie Thoughts
Just my 2 cents
Do you only hate Christians or are you an equal opportunity bigot and despise Hindus, Muslims and Jews as well?
C
Composer
Guest
IF I hated those calling themselves xtians etc. I wouldn't be here benevolently & legitimately correcting them & instead leave them to wallow in their ineptitude!
Your typical " Hate ' Card in lieu of credible evidence for your cause is a common failed methodology you pretenders throw out!
You are so predictable as well as phoneys
Last edited by a moderator:
O
omega2xx
Guest
With inept faith like yours & Co. I could be whatever your fanciful imaginations fabricate!
Meanwhile I gave you pretend believers every opportunity to provide your supposed evidence for the literal, Historical Miracle working narcissist you claim to follow!
The whole lot of you have shown exactly what you do have = nothing of value for your cause.
Meanwhile I have already proved this Historical MYTH found in a Story book is a narcissistic murderer! (e.g. Luke 19:27) your story book
Proving the claim of " We have a God of Love " farcical!
I have lots more fatal to your pretend cause and you are ALL pretenders & frauds as exposed again by your own propaganda -
Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. . . . . . 8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. (1 John 3:6,8) KJV Story book
Hence your own propaganda exposes you ALL as frauds, jebus rejects & your true Master = your Devil!
It is impossible to explain anything to a narcissistic know-it-all. Especially whey they are ignorant of the subject of the discussion. If you understood the Bible, you would KNOW your OPINION are worthless. IOW you have not proved anything. For one who does not even understand bigotry, they are not qualified to interpret something much harder than a simple word. It is more than amusing that you think your preconceived OPINIONS make what you say true.
We have a written record by 4 different men of Jesus performing miracles. You have only your personal, biased, preconceived, unprovable OPINIONS.
You don't even understand that parables are not to be taken literally. In fact it seems you don't recognize that the passages you referenced is a parable. I would suggest you get another web-site, but all atheists sites are as ignorant as the one you are using.
When you can PROVE the gospel writers lied, get back to me.
O
omega2xx
Guest
IF I hated those calling themselves xtians etc. I wouldn't be here benevolently & legitimately correcting them & instead leave them to wallow in their ineptitude!
Your typical " Hate ' Card in lieu of credible evidence for your cause is a common failed methodology you pretenders throw out!
You are so predictable as well as phoneys
It is more than amusing that you demand us to provide evidence for what we say, but your double standard does not require you to provided the evidence for what you say.
Hypocrites are so predictable and phony. -
C
Composer
Guest
Last edited by a moderator:
O
omega2xx
Guest
The "12 Apostles" –
Fabricated followers of a fabricated Saviour
Don't give me a site that is as ignorant of the Bible as you are. If you want to babble what they say, fine. Give me their best example or 2 or 3 and I will be glad to show you their Biblical ignorance.
Last edited by a moderator:
C
Composer
Guest
You hav
You continually attack what others say but can't support your claims with anything outside of the bible!
You don't seem to comprehend the fact that a book supporting itself in some ways isn't evidence of anything but circular reasoning!
Apart from the bible itself, by all means show me what you have?
You & Co. also keep repeating the same lie that I don't support my arguments!
As you & Co can't support your claims then here's even more from Moi! fatal to your pretend cause -
Jesus is an unknown historical figure. It is possible that he may have lived, since millions of people have lived without leaving a trace. It is not enough to declare 'We know nothing about Jesus, except that he existed'. On the contrary, we must boldly assert that 'We do not know anything about him, not even whether he existed'. In historical research, only the strictest accuracy permits us to say anything more. However, the very document which would positively prove the existence of Jesus is missing...Jesus belongs to history thanks to his name and the cult built around him, but he is not a historical figure. He is a divine being, whose knowledge was slowly developed by Christian minds. He was begotten in faith, in hope and in love. He was shaped by emotional fervor. He has been given changing figures by various forms of worship. He was born the moment he got his first believer... His only reality is spiritual. Everything else is phantasmagoria. -- "L'énigme de Jésus", In Mercure de France, (March 1, 1923), pp. 377, and 398-399. (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul-L...us.2C_and_the_German_.22Christ_myth.22_thesis)
Those like you babblers & drivellers are yet to legitimately demonstrate I am e.g. ignorant of the bible!
You continually attack what others say but can't support your claims with anything outside of the bible!
You don't seem to comprehend the fact that a book supporting itself in some ways isn't evidence of anything but circular reasoning!
Apart from the bible itself, by all means show me what you have?
You & Co. also keep repeating the same lie that I don't support my arguments!
As you & Co can't support your claims then here's even more from Moi! fatal to your pretend cause -
Jesus is an unknown historical figure. It is possible that he may have lived, since millions of people have lived without leaving a trace. It is not enough to declare 'We know nothing about Jesus, except that he existed'. On the contrary, we must boldly assert that 'We do not know anything about him, not even whether he existed'. In historical research, only the strictest accuracy permits us to say anything more. However, the very document which would positively prove the existence of Jesus is missing...Jesus belongs to history thanks to his name and the cult built around him, but he is not a historical figure. He is a divine being, whose knowledge was slowly developed by Christian minds. He was begotten in faith, in hope and in love. He was shaped by emotional fervor. He has been given changing figures by various forms of worship. He was born the moment he got his first believer... His only reality is spiritual. Everything else is phantasmagoria. -- "L'énigme de Jésus", In Mercure de France, (March 1, 1923), pp. 377, and 398-399. (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul-L...us.2C_and_the_German_.22Christ_myth.22_thesis)
O
omega2xx
Guest
I certainly have. You used a parable to try and make your point. Evidently you do not understand BIBLICAL parables are not to be taken literally. Parables hid truth from skeptics and reveal it to believers(Mt 13:13). If you understood that fact, you would not have used a parable.
Evidently you also don't understand that asking for evidence is not attacking. It only seems that way to those who have no evidence for what they say.
The book is not supporting itself It making statements that one can accept or reject, but that is irrelevant. You keep making statements for which you offer no evidence. That is worse than circular reasoning.
I have a record written by some who were eyewitness. Prove them wrong or admit you can't. That is the honest things to do. It is also childish to insult the deity of someone religion. Is that really the extent of you intellect?
You keep repeating the same lie by saying you have presented the evidence. Where is your evidence that Jesus did not perform miracles? Where is you evidence that gospel writers lied?
Where is you evidence that ours is a pretend cause? I support my cause by showing that you are ignorant of the subject and that opinions are not evidence, especially preconceived ones.
He is not. He is mentioned by all the writers of the NT and by some secular historians.
He left a trace. Do you think Christianity just popped out of thin air. The religion was carried on by eyewitness of Jesus, teaching what He taught.
It is not enough to declare Jesus never existed without some evidence. Especially evidence that shows the gospel writers lied.
The historical record, which is accepted by theologians and most historians and even by very liberal so called theologians accept, that Jesus was a literal, historical person. They are only divided on whether He was divine. So you are going against the grain of the majority.
No true. There are more mss of the NT, than there are historical record for the existence of Nero, Homer, Aristootle and many other historical figures, which you probably accept without question.
First of all when one feels the need to embellish their remarks with a word like "cult," which you also do not understand, it is because they recognize their argument is weak and they think that will give it more credibility. Even the secular historians say He was an historical figure. Prove them wrong or admit you can't. That is the honest thing to do.
Then prove it. I have already proved that opinions are not evidence of anything. Your link is not evidence. It is only the same thing you have---the personal OPINION of another skeptic.
O
omega2xx
Guest
Isn't it amusing when skeptics have to resort to cartoon characters to insult. It seems they do not have the intellect to be original.
C
Composer
Guest
You are likely a Johnny Come Lately trinitarian!
IF you are then you are preaching a false ideology that Historians admit the Earliest & Original believers NEVER taught NOR believed!
*** "At first the Christian faith was not Trinitarian…It was not so in the apostolic and sub-apostolic ages, as reflected in the New Testament and other early Christian writings" (Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, ed. James Hastings, 1922, Vol. 12, p. 461).
&
**** "The propositions constitutive of the dogma of the Trinity were not drawn from the New Testament and could not be expressed in New Testament terms. They were the products of reason speculating on a revelation to faith. . . they were only formed through centuries of effort, only elaborated by the aid of the conceptions and formulated in the terms of Greek and Roman metaphysics." (Source: Encyclopedia Britannica)
NT writers = 100% hearsay
Secular such as whom?
If you mention say Josephus, I understand your desperation! LOL!
No, xtianity developed corruptly as shown above! *** & ****
There were NO eye-witnesses apart from those claiming to be in your Story Book!
The facts remain there were NO ex-biblical witnesses, so whatever they say is at best 100% hearsay!
I don't mind going against the majority, even your own propaganda supports me again on that whilst refuting you -
e.g. Matt. 7:13
Your inability to provide ex-biblical evidence for this jebus is manifest!
Your ability to throw in BS pretend comparisons also manifest!
I ask again, Secular such as whom?
I have also your inability to sustain your claims as proof of the weakness of your ideology!
+
Last edited by a moderator:
O
omega2xx
Guest
You are likely a Johnny Come Lately trinitarian!
That is because the early theologians did not understand the Scriptures as well as they did later. Historians ae not theologians, so it is natural they would not accept the Trinity. The doctrine of the Trinity is accepted by all conservative theologians today, because it is supported in the Bible.
Irrelevant. It is accepted today. You have no way of knowing if the original apostles taught the Trinity or not. I agre it wa snot accepted in the early church. As the theologians got smarter, they saw it.
As usual you only pontificate and offer no evidence. The doctrine of the Trinity starts with the first verse in the Bible. God in Hebrew is Elohim. Elohim is a singular noun with a plural ending. Then when you read and understand Gen 1:26, since ther wa no other Gods at that time, in the "us" and "our" you can see the Trinity.
No evidence = blather
You not accepting him points to your desperation.
No evidence = blather.
Unless you can prove them wrong, and you would if you could, but you can't, your statement = blather.
The facts remain there were NO ex-biblical witnesses, so whatever they say is at best 100% hearsay!<<
There are secular historians who mention Jesus. However, it is irrelevant unless you have evidence the gospel writers were lying.
I don't mind going against the majority, even your own propaganda supports me again on that whilst refuting you -
e.g. Matt. 7:13
Thank your for confirming the accuracy of I Cor 2:14.
Your continuing to make false statements point to you lack of interest in an honest discussion. You continuing to use and insulting term for the deity of a religion makes your bigotry manifest.
Your inability to provide evidence for your personal, biased OPINIONS manifest what you say as secular BS.
Tell you what I will do. You google "historical evidence for Jesus" and tell me what you find. Then tell me why you still say their is no outside evidece for Jesus' being an historical figure. You see I did that years ago and i KNOW WHAT IT SAYS.
I have also seen your inability to understand what I say as proof of the weakness of your ideology. I don't have an ideology, I have a theology. Something else you don't understand.
+
Irrelevant. We have the written record of eyewitnesses. Prove them wrong or admit you can't.
IF you are then you are preaching a false ideology that Historians admit the Earliest & Original believers NEVER taught NOR believed!
*** "At first the Christian faith was not Trinitarian…It was not so in the apostolic and sub-apostolic ages, as reflected in the New Testament and other early Christian writings" (Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, ed. James Hastings, 1922, Vol. 12, p. 461).
&
**** "The propositions constitutive of the dogma of the Trinity were not drawn from the New Testament and could not be expressed in New Testament terms. They were the products of reason speculating on a revelation to faith. . . they were only formed through centuries of effort, only elaborated by the aid of the conceptions and formulated in the terms of Greek and Roman metaphysics." (Source: Encyclopedia Britannica)
NT writers = 100% hearsay
Secular such as whom?
If you mention say Josephus, I understand your desperation! LOL!
No, xtianity developed corruptly as shown above! *** & ****
There were NO eye-witnesses apart from those claiming to be in your Story Book!
The facts remain there were NO ex-biblical witnesses, so whatever they say is at best 100% hearsay!
I don't mind going against the majority, even your own propaganda supports me again on that whilst refuting you -
e.g. Matt. 7:13
Your inability to provide ex-biblical evidence for this jebus is manifest!
Your ability to throw in BS pretend comparisons also manifest!
I ask again, Secular such as whom?
I have also your inability to sustain your claims as proof of the weakness of your ideology!
+
ALL CLAIMS OF JESUS DERIVE FROM HEARSAY ACCOUNTS
No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus came well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, I will use the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources about Jesus derive from hearsay accounts. (Source: http://nobeliefs.com/exist.htm)
You are likely a Johnny Come Lately trinitarian!
IF you are then you are preaching a false ideology that Historians admit the Earliest & Original believers NEVER taught NOR believed!
*** "At first the Christian faith was not Trinitarian…It was not so in the apostolic and sub-apostolic ages, as reflected in the New Testament and other early Christian writings" (Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, ed. James Hastings, 1922, Vol. 12, p. 461).
&
**** "The propositions constitutive of the dogma of the Trinity were not drawn from the New Testament and could not be expressed in New Testament terms. They were the products of reason speculating on a revelation to faith. . . they were only formed through centuries of effort, only elaborated by the aid of the conceptions and formulated in the terms of Greek and Roman metaphysics." (Source: Encyclopedia Britannica)
NT writers = 100% hearsay
Secular such as whom?
If you mention say Josephus, I understand your desperation! LOL!
No, xtianity developed corruptly as shown above! *** & ****
There were NO eye-witnesses apart from those claiming to be in your Story Book!
The facts remain there were NO ex-biblical witnesses, so whatever they say is at best 100% hearsay!
I don't mind going against the majority, even your own propaganda supports me again on that whilst refuting you -
e.g. Matt. 7:13
Your inability to provide ex-biblical evidence for this jebus is manifest!
Your ability to throw in BS pretend comparisons also manifest!
I ask again, Secular such as whom?
I have also your inability to sustain your claims as proof of the weakness of your ideology!
+
ALL CLAIMS OF JESUS DERIVE FROM HEARSAY ACCOUNTS
No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus came well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, I will use the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources about Jesus derive from hearsay accounts. (Source: http://nobeliefs.com/exist.htm)You are likely a Johnny Come Lately trinitarian!
IF you are then you are preaching a false ideology that Historians admit the Earliest & Original believers NEVER taught NOR believed!
*** "At first the Christian faith was not Trinitarian…It was not so in the apostolic and sub-apostolic ages, as reflected in the New Testament and other early Christian writings" (Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, ed. James Hastings, 1922, Vol. 12, p. 461).
&
**** "The propositions constitutive of the dogma of the Trinity were not drawn from the New Testament and could not be expressed in New Testament terms. They were the products of reason speculating on a revelation to faith. . . they were only formed through centuries of effort, only elaborated by the aid of the conceptions and formulated in the terms of Greek and Roman metaphysics." (Source: Encyclopedia Britannica)
NT writers = 100% hearsay
Secular such as whom?
If you mention say Josephus, I understand your desperation! LOL!
No, xtianity developed corruptly as shown above! *** & ****
There were NO eye-witnesses apart from those claiming to be in your Story Book!
The facts remain there were NO ex-biblical witnesses, so whatever they say is at best 100% hearsay!
I don't mind going against the majority, even your own propaganda supports me again on that whilst refuting you -
e.g. Matt. 7:13
Your inability to provide ex-biblical evidence for this jebus is manifest!
Your ability to throw in BS pretend comparisons also manifest!
I ask again, Secular such as whom?
I have also your inability to sustain your claims as proof of the weakness of your ideology!
+
ALL CLAIMS OF JESUS DERIVE FROM HEARSAY ACCOUNTS
No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus came well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, I will use the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources about Jesus derive from hearsay accounts. (Source: http://nobeliefs.com/exist.htm)
I wonder if Steve can remove the "com" from his login name... as human discourse does not seem his forte.
Devils' Advocate
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 2,086
- Reaction score
- 392
- Points
- 83
I notice you didn't deny it.
Brilliant Wil. lol. Or perhaps change the M for an N?
As to those of you who continue to argue with this, ah, person, why are you wasting your time? Don't feed the trolls!
As for you Donald. Yes I mock you. Not because of your message, but because of your attitude. I wonder if you have any concept of civil discourse. You exemplify everything that is wrong with atheists. Smug, arrogant, superior, condescending and most of all ignorant. In point of fact, you act exactly like a lot of Christians I happen to know.
Of course you will not understand what I am telling you and will rant on about faith like mine. Which will be enormously amusing to people on this forum who know me and know what I believe.
And I know your type just has to have the last word, so feel free to give me another blast of your ignorance. This is my final post on this thread.
Bye. Bye.
Funny thing is... contemporary non biblical references to Jesus are few and specious...
So historically his existence IS in question... however poser's lack of decorum and insulting language doesn't lend to any actual discussion.... shame.
So historically his existence IS in question... however poser's lack of decorum and insulting language doesn't lend to any actual discussion.... shame.
O
omega2xx
Guest
I certainly have. I pointed where you used a parable as if it was literal. Also, you do use a website, which shows you don't know the Bible well enough to present your own ideas.
Asking for evidence is not attacking. I don't have to unless you can show me where the Bible is wrong.
If yo uwant to make your point, show me where the Bible is wrong.
Be specific. My crystal ball is being re-calibrated.
You haven't supported that the Bible is a lie. You haven't supported that Jesus was not an historical figure.
You haven't supported that my cause is a pretend one. Tell me one thing I have not supported.
You haven't supported that.
You haven't supported that.
You haven't supported that.
- Messages
- 1,149
- Reaction score
- 287
- Points
- 83
Or look at my profile picture.