Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Amaleq13 · 06-07-2006, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patriarch Verlch

He repented that He had made man, because everythought of his mind was wicked, every nano second.

Right, God repented the mistake God made in creating man so your Bible, therefore, indicates God is not infallible.

Double J · 06-07-2006, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patriarch Verlch

I think you are using the inconsistencies to your own advantage, unfairly and biased.

In fact, I see you make inconsistencies when none are to be found, perhaps in your translation, etc.

If you want to read the bible in its purest form, I suggest you learn Hebrew.

AS the bible is the only book in 3,000 different languages in the world, had the most copies of it made, as well as being the most quoted book, it has a huge following.

For you to heckle from the bleachers is nothing short of amusing.

I can not sit here any longer without responding. PV, you are adding nothing to this conversation. If I'm not mistaken, you started this thread. You have not supported your assertions whatsoever.

Please offer some proof.

xaxxat · 06-07-2006, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patriarch Verlch

He repented that He had made man, because everythought of his mind was wicked, every nano second.

Yahweh's every thought was wicked? I'll buy that...

Cetainly though, you'd figure Yahweh would have used that 20-20 foresight of his before he made man in his own image...

Zucco · 06-07-2006, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Double J

I can not sit here any longer without responding. PV, you are adding nothing to this conversation. If I'm not mistaken, you started this thread. You have not supported your assertions whatsoever.

Please offer some proof.

Oh c'mon. You don't think the worldwide popularity of the bible is proof of its validity? Dude, if enough people believe something, it must be true.

And the fact that the bible has been jammed down the world's throat for 1500 years by one of the most powerful institutions in history has absolutely nothing to do with it's widespread acceptance. It's just a really neato book.

aleika · 06-07-2006, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomboyMom

You are cracking me up!!! It's different from your other answer, and quite creative, I must say. So let me get this: Judas gives the elders the money. Then he leaves and hangs himself. So now he's dead. But the elders take his money and buy a field with it. The (now dead) Judas falls down in the field and bursts asunder. That's even better than the last one!
Why don't you just admit that there are two versions of the story that differ from each other, one in which he hanged himself, and one in which he fell down in a field? It's clear that's what your bible says.

You’re not even trying to read it right.

Judas threw down the silver, went to a field, found a high tree, and hanged himself. However, the Bible does not say that he hanged himself, “and hanging, died.” Now, if you knew anything about hanging, you would know that death is rarely instantaneous. So, he’s hanging from this tree, but hasn't yet asphyxiated.

While he’s hanging, the elders take his money and buy the field over which Judas is suspended. Sort of a “by proxy” purchase. Meanwhile, back at the ranch… er, field, the branch breaks, or knot slips—either explanation is plausible—and Judas, who still has a pulse, falls. Remember, the tree is of considerable height, so Judas has a long way down, and his body rotates to the headlong position en route to the ground.

He lands, bursts, dies. Not from the noose but from the fall. Clear as crystal, and if you can’t see it, you’re just caught up in your atheistic presuppositional bias.

(Damn, this is kind of fun. Maybe I should give Christianity a try after all. :Cheeky: )

Aethernaut · 06-07-2006, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Double J

Please offer some proof.

It won't happen because as he's repeatedly demonstrated, he doesn't have any. So, the next best tactic is obfuscate, obfuscate, obfuscate, and maybe the dirty heathens will forgot that he brought this up in the first place.

PV's got his panties in a wad because every attempt to push his bullshit fairy tale about "eye witness account of the 11 disciples" or "early century writers" has been shot down by people that are far more versed in the literature than he. His attempt to witness has failed to get us to join his (as South Park so eloquently put it) fruity little club so spewing nonsense dogma is all he has left.

Anybody got any contemporary extra-biblical accounts of Jesus they'd like to share? I mean, it's only the umpteenth time it's been asked with zero results. Please? Just one contemporary eyewitness account would do...

Didn't think so. I'd say this thread is all but done.

RandomCoolzip · 06-07-2006, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patriarch Verlch

http://www.probe.org/content/view/18/77

Not only do we have the eye witness account of the 11 disciples, but we have these early century writers that bore witness to the fact.

Yes and only one disciple died a natural death, the others were all murdered. Hmmm, they died poor and now some skeptics say mislead. How is that so? Have you noticed all of the leaders of anything, sacrifice themselves, preach the word, and then die in unspeakable ways?

Getting ran through with spears, heads smashed in, Peter was hung upside down on a cross in Rome, wasn't he?

Hardly something you would expect from men that were eye witnesses of a lie.

I wouldn't have expected hundreds of people to drink cool-aid laced with cyanide at the behest of their religious leader, but that's what the followers of the Rev. Jim Jones did. Religious fervor can cause people to do some pretty strange things.

It is too bad we don't have any written accounts of Jesus' life and ministry from outside the Jesus movement. It would be really interesting to compare the Gospels with an account of Jesus' doings by, say, a Temple priest, or a Roman official, or a Greek merchant in the area, or something like that. It seems that only the people who thought Jesus was important - his followers - took the trouble to write about him.

Gallie · 06-07-2006, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandomCoolzip

It would be really interesting to compare the Gospels with an account of Jesus' doings by, say, a Temple priest, or a Roman official, or a Greek merchant in the area, or something like that. It seems that only the people who thought Jesus was important - his followers - took the trouble to write about him.

Don't bite the hand that feeds you :redface: ...this argument goes both ways. Can you imagine a pharoah or king writing about how he was overtaken by plagues and forced to let his slaves go? What humiliation.

The same can be said for Jesus...would you really expect the Jewish leaders to write about His resurrection? :Cheeky:

Toto · 06-07-2006, 02:01 PM

If the Jewish leaders had really seen a resurrection, why didn't they convert? If they thought the resurrection was a trick, why didn't they say that?

Why don't we have the Sanhedrin's version of the alleged trial? Probably because it never happened.

Gullwind · 06-07-2006, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by one allegiance

God isn't the cause of evil, it is contradicting to his nature.

Oh, really?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isaiah 45:7

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

I'm sure this is somehow taken out of context, right?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-07-2006, 02:01 PM	#329
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	If the Jewish leaders had really seen a resurrection, why didn't they convert? If they thought the resurrection was a trick, why didn't they say that? Why don't we have the Sanhedrin's version of the alleged trial? Probably because it never happened.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.