You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
crazy christians:Interracial Couples Banned From Kentucky Church
- Thread starter Free Thinker
- Start date
Quote from stu:
Flim flamming about is no argument. Have you not heard of Google.
look troll... to not believe in God is fine for you. Not thinking there is a lot of evidence to support the existence of Jesus, is fine too.
But, I have taught you Jesus was mentioned in a virtually undisputed section of josephus.... he is mentioned in the bible he is mention in docs found at the dead sea...
that makes him a historical figure. You have to get over your zealous atheism and stop being a lying troll.
Quote from jem:
look troll... to not believe in God is fine for you. Not thinking there is a lot of evidence to support the existence of Jesus, is fine too.
But, I have taught you Jesus was mentioned in a virtually undisputed section of josephus.... he is mentioned in the bible he is mention in docs found at the dead sea...
that makes him a historical figure. You have to get over your zealous atheism and stop being a lying troll.
Why always the childlike insult? In your blind and ignorant religious arrogance, can you do no better ?
Josephus is even questioned in the Catholic Encyclopedia 'New Advent'
Flavius Josephus. :
Attempts have been made to refute the objections brought against this passage both for internal and external reasons, but the difficulty has not been definitively settled. The passage seems to suffer from repeated interpolations.
..."he is mention in docs found at the dead sea..."
LOL! Nowhere in the Dead Sea Scrolls is the name of Jesus mentioned.
You're too gullible. You'll believe anything.
Quote from stu:
Why always the childlike insult? In your blind and ignorant religious arrogance, can you do no better ?
Josephus is even questioned in the Catholic Encyclopedia 'New Advent'
Flavius Josephus. :
Attempts have been made to refute the objections brought against this passage both for internal and external reasons, but the difficulty has not been definitively settled. The passage seems to suffer from repeated interpolations.
..."he is mention in docs found at the dead sea..."
LOL! Nowhere in the Dead Sea Scrolls is the name of Jesus mentioned.
You're too gullible. You'll believe anything.
There you are pulling your atheist fraud again.
I repeatedly reference the virtually undisputed this passage in Antiquites
"so he [Ananus, son of Ananus the high priest] assembled the sanhedrin of judges, and brought before him the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and someothers (or some of his companions) and when he had formed an accusation against them, he delivered them to be stoned." (Antiquities 20.9.1)
which virtually all scholars accept as authentic.
--
you ignore the evidence which establishes Jesus' authenticity and base your misrepresentations on
Testimonium Flavianum -- which scholars agree was probably altered in the middle ages in some manuscripts.
What stirs you to be such a liar. Why lie about facts?
You are pretty funny. You think you made a point by saying I can't back up something which is not relevant to the bigger picture!? LOL, yeah that makes sense. This is just more distracting, avoiding, detracting, attacking, etc.Quote from Free Thinker:
lol. you thumpers are so funny. you are just sure everything you believe is true but you cant ever back it up with evidence.
I stated explicitly that I don't call myself Christian, that I only read the actual text, did some corroborating research and found that 99% of what atheists offer is out of context or fails most tests of logic and reason. Look in the mirror before telling other people what to do! You may start with being able to actually follow along and remember what is said.
They used texts which are not claimed to be inspired by God or anything like that. It doesn't matter which specific one it could be anything, the point was to make a statistical comparison. If you understood at all what is being said you wouldn't have asked this!so when these experts compared the bible texts with other literature which texts did they use.
Sigh. Ok. It is irrelevant all this. You don't understand clearly. The point is the result of the comparison, it doesn't matter how old the texts are or how many copies! If it gives an objective result then it gives an objective result. Period. This is what I mean about illogical and unreasonable stuff offered by athiests. They are willing to say anything. Further, there is more direct and indirect proof for what is written in scripture than there is for many commonly accepted historical texts. So you have to be intellectually dishonest hypocrite (biased) to go down this road, or just uninformed. Which one are you?hopefully you are aware that we dont have original texts and we dont know who the authors were. all we have are copies of copies. the oldest text we have of the nt is about 120-150 years after the fact and it is just a fragment the size of a credit card. educate yourself before you come here with that kind of pratt. this isnt sunday school where you will not be challenged.