Not_Registered

I see I need to be more careful about what I say. Okay, Mageth and CX, CX's statement is not illogical, but it can be said all day so I'm not going to debate it because it isn't debatable. It's an observation. Yes I see that the gospels didn't say if Jesus' denied saying He was God. That's great. If I go around and use that defense with the alien story I contrived do you see how that would become illogical. So yes the statement isn't illogical. I see the point in the statement. But using that observation as the foundation of your argument can make one appear foolish after a while. But anyway yeah the statement isn't logical. Okay, let that be done with. Mageth, if you have some quotes from the Gospel of Thomas that show Jesus' denial of claiming to be God then please share them. Magdlyn, do you believe Jesus to be insane? If so then why do you even debate about him. I wouldn't debate about the life of some mentally challenged guy. Because he's crazy. I would just say he's crazy and leave it at that. I wouldn't debate the life, decisions, and inner thoughts or whatever of Hitler. He killed millions just because of how they looked. I would say he's crazy and leave it at that. I wouldn't debate the decisions of a serial killer. I would just say he's crazy and leave it at that. So if you think Jesus is crazy Magdlyn just say He's crazy and leave it at that.

Toto

This forum is for debate and discussion on Biblical Criticism and History, not for insults and flames. Please keep the discussion on at least a semi-scholarly level.

If your opponent's arguments are wrong, it is up to you to demonstrate that with reasoned arguments, not name calling.

Toto
usually a laid-back moderator

Not_Registered

[Comments about moderation, good or bad, are always off topic.]

Mageth

Your original statement was "But he never said that, or anything like it". So, applying "you know what I mean" to that statement, any reasonable person could only conclude that you meant that Jesus "never said that, or anything like it."

Note that I understand that you've now changed your position on this (though you claim that your position hasn't changed).

In the future, then, I'd recommend that you actually say what you mean, rather than relying on people to just somehow magically "know what you mean." It's totally unreasonable to just say anything and expect readers to deduce what you really mean from it.

And I find this whole rant of yours rather odd in the light of the fact that you have consistently exhibited a tendency to read meaning into people's statements that simply aren't there.

And, BTW, if you don't "claim [you] know what Jesus said or didn't say", then your entire argument is undermined, for that (that Jesus didn't deny the charge) is what you based it on. Indeed, as Sven pointed out, you can "conclude exactly nothing from the absence of this denial from the gospels", for you do not claim to know what Jesus actually said or didn't say. Your "argument" becomes merely a big "IF" - If Jesus didn't deny that he claimed to be God[/i] - and an essentially meaningless "if", based on no knowledge or evidence, an idle speculation at best.

-DM-

You have changed your wording, many times, from the beginning post in order to overcome some of the objections to your original wording. It is here for anyone, including you, to see.

I wouldn't have bothered to prove again what you said in your first post had you not--once again in the post to which I was responding--insisted that you never made such a statement.

The fact that I have administrator privileges has nothing to do with this particular subject forum.

It is not a problem for me that you oppose my beliefs, however I do care that people say what they mean and mean what they say. If they don't, there is little discernible meaning to what they say. Thus I am nitpicking you (not "people") about it here.

We all make mistakes, of course, but then, after we have made a mistake and had that mistake pointed out to us, we don't normally go back and say that we never did make that mistake.

My original response to your poorly worded opening post was quite relevant to what you posted, assuming that you meant what you said and said what you meant.

You would make a better impression on me, and perhaps others, if you weren't quite so rude, and if you could say what you mean and mean what you say without having to deny that you said what you said, at the same time recognizing that your argument is extremely weak--as are many arguments based on an absence of contrary evidence.

-Don-

Not_Registered

All arguments are big "IF"s. Otherwise, they wouldn't be arguments. I don't think that you can argue that my font is black. It's not an if. You can only argue ifs, otherwise your wasting your time.

Mageth

I think you're referring to Sven's statement.

Well, I suppose, but that would be because you were misinterpreting and misusing the statement that Sven and I made.

I assume you meant "illogical" at the end. BTW, neither I, Sven, nor anyone else used that "statement" as the foundation of our argument.

I never claimed that the GoT included quotes that "show Jesus' denial of claiming to be God." Where do you come up with this stuff?

You can read, and read about, the GoT here:

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/thomas.html

I'd suggest that you put responses to different posters in different posts, or at a minimum start a new paragraph.

Not_Registered

Gather 'round kids. I'll keep going over this untill ya'll get it. For the umteenth time, I appologize for accidently (humans do make mistakes -- I'm not claiming to be Jesus, just arguing about him).....accidently giving ya'll the idea that I claim to know what Jesus said or didn't say. Clear enough.

Now I'm betting anything that one of you will reply back saying "well now your changing your position again." To that person(s) I give you these steps:
Step #1: Read this reply again.
Step #2: Write another reply about my inconsistency with my postion and how I claim or claimed to know what Jesus said or didn't say.
Step #3: Repeat steps 1 and 2.

Not_Registered

Mageth, just to clarify, why did you bring up the Gospel of Thomas?

Mageth

What? Methinks you have no understanding of what an "argument" is.

OK, then, I challenge you to post an actual argument (rather than this assertion) that proves "all arguments are big "IFS"."