dr lazer blast

every time you mention that pastor I am just going to refer you to the link.
which is why I called you out on your fallacious reasoning in the first place. You don't have a good argument, you're just flailing and grasping for points because its too difficult for you to accept that you can't prove a theist wrong.
I don't use experts opinions, because....que up the link!
I use evidence, something you really can't do.


Que up the posts made by this guy.
so according to your logic it is possible since the 2 forms are incompatible, since she had fear after joy (contrary to your claims), so if we go by your 'expert opinion', the joy must disappear.

Amaleq13

Not really since, given the nature of the reassurance of the angel(s), knowledge of the resurrection was not dependent upon the women relating the message. Jesus had risen and would meet the disciples in Galilee regardless of whether they were reminded beforehand. How did Mark know what transpired between the angels/Jesus and the women if they didn't tell anyone? Jesus told the disciples.

"What up, dogs?"

"Dude! We thought you were dead!"

"Didst not you idiots recall the numerous times whenst I did telleth you I would rise again?"

"Our bad. You know we have memory problems, man. Cut us some slack. And knock off the King James talk. It giveth us headaches."

"Didn't the chiquitas remind you?"

"What chiquitas?"

"Good help is so hard to find. I'm starting to wonder if you dolts are worth saving. Let me explain it for the millionth time. Try to keep it straight."

Easy peasy.

Amaleq13

Feel free. Repeating your error certainly doesn't bother me.

The article, properly understood, establishes that my reasoning is sound.

According to the article, I don't have an "exceptionally strong argument" and I don't disagree. One cited expert does not an exceptionally strong argument make. But I made that clear from the beginning when I indicated how easily you might counter it. What I do have, however, is a stronger argument that you since I have a Christian clergyman who has published numerous commentaries agreeing with my reading of John 20:2 and you have nothing but your amateur, uninformed opinion. That isn't even an argument, amigo. I'm not sure that even qualifies as bringing a knife to a gunfight. More like bringing a picture of a knife.

I'm here all week, folks. Remember, there is a two drink minimum. Please don't forget to tip your waitress. The Chuckle Hut doesn't pay them much.

Clearly. That you don't realize you need to do so is rather depressing. The internet tubes are ruining the minds of the next generation.

Your amateur, uninformed opinion certainly does not constitute evidence. The opinion of an expert, OTOH, most certainly does. So, once again, you've stated the exact opposite of reality. :thumbs:

Repeating your circular reasoning does not reduce its fallacious nature.

She went from being joyful at hearing Jesus was alive to being concerned about the location of his dead body therefore she was concerned about the disposition of his dead body after being joyful at hearing he was alive. Round and round she goes without regard to logic or reason.

Kharakov

Finally an explanation that fits reality. See how hard it was for Jesus to teach Christians the truth? And now his disciples, the atheists, hahaha.... have to go through the same shit he did.

ChristMyth

Well, guys, I believe I'm out of this one from here on out. It has become quite clear that talking to the good Dr. is much akin to talking to a brick wall. I think that I have figured out his strategy to winning this little argument: Deny everything that shows where he is incorrect and continue posting the same drivel until everybody give in, then declare victory.

Despite this, however, I wish him the best of luck.

Christmyth

Sheshbazzar

Why? Ask of YHWH, If He was strong enough to kill the serpent, Why then did He not kill him and take him out of the way, but settled for only permanently cursing him and his seed?

My father taught me about "snakes-in-the-grass", how that it never suffices to kill but one, because that his spawn will quickly multiply and prosper in his absence.
Far better to let the old serpent live on, that he might spend most of his days and nights in the pursuit of his own children, consuming and being most well fed upon the flesh of his own offspring.
So let false preachers live, and let them preach on that same old lie of their father saying; "You shall not surely die".
The days of this brood of liars and vipers are numbered.

dr lazer blast

The irony!

the only reason you believe it to be the proper understanding is because of an argument from authority.



your self admitted weak arguments prove nothing, considering your clergyman is not even involved in this challenge, and that when presented with the POSSIBILITY of mary talking about the live body of Christ, any pastor would agree with me that its a possibility that mary could be talking about the live body of Christ, not to mention that you have failed utterly considering that the pastor has nothing to do with this challenge, and you using his opinion as evidence for this challenge is like saying 'shaq's way of shooting 3 pointers is better than your way of shooting 3 pointers because hes a basket ball player' but when one realizes that shaq rarely EVER shoots 3 pointers, one would see how weak and irrelevent their argument from authority is. Thus we have you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_homeniem

ad hominem fallacy.

whether my opinion is ametuer or not has nothing to do with the possibility that mary is talking about the live body of Christ. Furthermore one pastors opinion is not an authority on how the the scriptures are to be interpreted, because if that was the case, then why are there so many interpretations? of the scripture? once again you fallacious logic surfaces.

.


total disregard for the new evidence that has surfaced.

Fear after joy (contrary to what you've been asserting, so you're wrong) now according to you
So contrary to what you were stating earlier, fear DOES follow the joy, so according to you, it is analogous. Once again direct proof you are ignoring the evidence. This is all according to you and your logic. What do you have to refute that?

thentian

So that is all I'm doing is it? Did you remember to request moderator action when I made my nasty ad hominem attacks? Please do that whenever such things happen!

The question I have been trying to answer umpteen times now is: "is your narrative leaving out something?" And my claim is that it does; it leaves out (Mark 16:8) ... told nobody."

Mary told Peter: False! This statement is in direct contradiction of Mark!

There is a difference between explaining something and contradicting something! Can you give me an example of you truthfully saying "I told nobody", where in fact you told somebody? The rule was: "...you may not leave anything out." It was NOT: "...you may not leave anything out, but you may twist it around to say the opposite."

ETA: Furthermore, while it is allowed for you to add explanations within parentheses, that does not mean you are allowed to add story elements that have no warrant in the texts. Adding explanations is one thing, adding persons that aren't in the original cast is another.

Amaleq13

No, it is because, unlike yourself, I've actually taken a college course in logic.

Still not reading carefully or at all? To acknowledge that an argument is not "exceptionally strong" is not the same as admitting it is weak. A reading supported by even a single professional scholar continues to be stronger than one that is not.

Please support this empty rhetoric by contacting Pastor Guzik. If he accepts your reading as a "possibility", I will happily withdraw him as support.

It does absolutely nothing to suggest the "possibility" is reasonable.

We've seen no other informed reading of the passage.

Repeating your assertions doesn't constitute evidence, let alone "new".

Do you think nobody notices the shell game you are playing by identifying different passages as "fear" and then treating them as though they were the same passage?

Mary is initially joyful because she hears that Jesus is alive.

Soon after, she is concerned about the location of his dead body and says nothing to Peter about even the possibility he might actually be alive.

These are plainly incompatible depictions whether you characterize her concerns as "fear" or not.

thentian

It is too bad we don't know how Mark's story continues, of course. (I'm not with those who claim that Mark's story ends at 16:8) Possibly the ladies lost their fear after a while and went and told Peter after all. Or maybe J had to go and show himself to Peter on his own? Or could it be that Mark's ending is completely different, so much so that it was deliberately cut away by someone who felt it didn't match the church' doctrines?