did oj kill nicole n ron??
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.
Does science make belief in God obsolete?
- Thread starter ShoeshineBoy
- Start date
Quote from TraderZones:
Your scholarly work is on par for a 3rd grader with crayons and those who are convinced that Area 51 still holds extraterrestrial secrets.
Re: Did a historical Jesus exist? by Jim Walker (editor)
http://nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
My scholarly work??
I wish it was because that would make me the greatest historian ever -- not just greatest historian on Christianity ever if I could have dug up that information on the historicity of Jesus.
Unfortunately, I just report the news. I don't make it, but you can kill the messenger if it makes you feel better.
While you are at it you can shake the hands of your Muslim brothers who believe in the "religion of peace,", and refuse to look at the historical record that the founder of their religion, Mohammed ibn Abdallah "PBUH" was nothing more than a mass murderer, robber, and rapist whose philosophy and preachings are akin to Nazism.
Quote from BernardRichards:
Unfortunately, I just report the news. I don't make it, but you can kill the messenger if it makes you feel better.
Quoting the work of another as if that is any kind of definitive answer does not make you a messenger; it makes you a rather poor researcher.
You get 10 people into a room, you will get 10 opinions on many issues. Ensure they are all well-educated and you may get 11 opinions. This is the domain of the person you quote as "reporting the news."
Quote from Jerry030:
But being divine, all things are know to you...so do a miracle and give me the exact opening price.
Praise the Lord!
So you want me to do your bidding too? Besides that, it would be like inside information. The nature of inside info is that it is unshared, whereas the Kingdom is the sharing of all with all. A miracle teaches about the Kingdom, so it is a lesson in sharing. If I gave it to you, I'd have to give it to everyone. Now how would that effect the market?
Miracles are not for coercing belief. They are solutions showing the Son of God that he has no problems. Finances are not a problem when the Son of God devotes himself to healing...which is his only function on earth. Healing most resembles creation in a world that lacks any real creativity. Since creating is the Son's function in heaven, healing the world awakens him to himSelf.
You could have everything if you were willing to share everything.
The market is for experiencing emotions that do not exist in heaven. So it has a function without my intervention. Feel the emotions for what they are, and let them go. Let them go as the answer to a question you wanted answered. The feelings of greed and fear are not felt by Christ. Neither does Christ strive to earn or pay for anything because he *owns* literally everything. Therefore the market is not something to "beat", but something to be experienced and then let go as valueless to yourSelf.
Jesus
Quote from BernardRichards:
The early Christians were all Jews. A Jew claiming divinity would have been burned at the steak in a manner of speaking, but in reality possibly stoned to death by some zealots 2,000 years ago or ostracized as a mad man.
That is why Judaism originated in the first place. A man claiming to be God was pure paganism. Also, based on metaphysical principles and how God defines himself in the Torah it is impossible that there is any physicality to God.
He can not be born because that would mean that he is changing states, and a Perfect Being can not move from one perfection to another. That is an impossibility. There is only one final state of perfection that defines the Divinity. Similarly, he can not die because again that would imply that He is changing states. Jesus if you believe that he existed was like any other human being. He was born and he died so there is no way that he can fulfill the characteristics of God as defined in the Torah.
All of this stuff about Jesus being divine or part of the Trinity comes from paganism, and since Christianity is in effect an amalgamation of Judaism and paganism there is nothing really surprising about that. I already explained that Paul accepted non-Jews as converts to his version of Judaism without circumcision, and as Christianity became the dominant religion it accepted many pagan customs and beliefs so it would be palatable to the many different people that it wanted to absorb.
The idea of a man god which you have with Jesus was nothing new. Again it goes way back to various forms of paganism in antiquity. There were holy virgins that were assigned or dedicated to various gods in antiquity. Now and then there were problems with these holy virgins. One of them became pregnant. How is that possible? They were holy. No man was suppossed to come near them. Well, that could mean only one thing. The god that they were dedicated to impregnated them, and their child was a god or half god. This is pure speculation, but I suspect that this idea of gods impregnating humans got started with a high priest that tried to save his daughter from certain death if it was found out that she had a secret lover.
Ok Jem, I answered some of your questions, but I am sure this is not what you wanted to hear.
You accept Jesus and the New Testament on the basis of blind faith just like a Moslem accepts the Quran and Mohammed as the greatest of prophets on the basis of blind faith. Why don't you want to take a look at the sources that question whether Jesus existed in the first place, and similarly why doesn't your Moslem friend want to question whether Mohammed was really a prophet and holy man? Because both of you have accepted your belief system on the basis of blind faith, and asking these questions would make you heretics, and that would mean based on your beliefs systems that you just bought yourself a box seat in hell for eternity.
This is a debate forum Jem. I may be good a debater, but I am not that good. I can not argue with dogmatists whether they are religious or secular or on the right or on the left. You are not searching for the truth. You and your ilk know the truth already.
What do you want from me -- to validate your belief system which you accepted on the basis of blind faith? Good luck, I'll do that when hell freezes over.
In the next post I'll list some sources for honest truth seekers as to why I believe Jesus was a figment of Paul's imagination, and point you to a treasure trove on this subject.
Agreeably, God cannot be "born" since the mind cannot make flesh real. But my truth is everyone's truth. If it is impossible for Christ [reality] to be born of flesh, so too it is impossible that anyone be born of flesh. This is a long way of saying the world does not exist! It is a figment in Christ's imagination. It means nothing, and never happened. It is utterly hypothetical and will pass away. Indeed, it already has.
Jesus
Quote from Turok:
Just a note on the above:
When Rcanfiel (Now "TraderZones", 'cause he was banned) does the whole foot-stomping, red faced, childish rant routine such as the above, it doesn't mean that you're really wrong -- if he thought that he might actually attempt to engage you with contrary factual evidence. It just means he doesn't like what you said.
There's a lot of the real world that Rcan doesn't like -- don't confuse him with facts.
JB
I appreciate the encouragement Turok, but it really isn't necessary.
What I wrote was written for you and those like you!
It wasn't written for Jem, Blackhorseshoe, Traderzones, or those like them.
Quote from BernardRichards:
I appreciate the encouragement Turok, but it really isn't necessary.
What I wrote was written for you and those like you!
It wasn't written for Jem, Blackhorseshoe, Traderzones, or those like them.
Turok is little more than an unqualified skeptic.
If you actually say something that is sound, then it might have merit.
Your offerings proved little.
Rcanfiel:
>Quoting the work of another as if that is any kind
>of definitive answer does not make you a messenger;
>it makes you a rather poor researcher.
I think I'm going to repost this quote the next time Rcan trots out his sacred scriptures to provide a "definitive answer" (it won't be long now).
Talk about saying one thing and doing another -- Rcan's in a zone on this one.
JB
>Quoting the work of another as if that is any kind
>of definitive answer does not make you a messenger;
>it makes you a rather poor researcher.
I think I'm going to repost this quote the next time Rcan trots out his sacred scriptures to provide a "definitive answer" (it won't be long now).
Talk about saying one thing and doing another -- Rcan's in a zone on this one.
JB