Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Fastfalcon · 05-16-2002, 05:31 AM

1. No
2. Yes

BibleBelted · 05-16-2002, 05:43 AM

FF,

I wasn't asking you; however, since you've seen fit to weigh in, perhaps you would care to comment on the validity of aza's original post?

NOGO · 05-16-2002, 06:08 AM

Quote:

aza wood
All that is needed, to have a kingdom is to have a king, and subjects. ... This happened in the apostle's life time, as predicted by "Jesus".

As for your Bible verse, Mark 9:1. Don, all that needs to be done, to disprove your statement, is to read the very next few verses. Here they are, from Webster's Bible.

The first statement above may be true but Jesus said a lot more than that about his Kingdom and his return. In Mt 24 he says
THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, AND THE STARS WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

Jesus had something much more in mind than just a king and subjects.

Mark 9:1 - "Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power."

The implication is that the others will have to wait till after their death at the end of the world to see it.

One way or another Matthew 24 says that Jesus predicted the end of the world within the his generation right after the destruction of the temple. It did not happen and therefore Jesus was a false prophet (according to the Bible).

[ May 16, 2002: Message edited by: NOGO ]</p>

NOGO · 05-16-2002, 06:19 AM

Quote:

aza wood
What I'm saying is that, Mr. Morgan can not use a flawed book to prove anything, and sense that is all that he has tried to do. He has said/proven nothing of any importance to anyone. "Jesus" is unscaved by his post! That is unless, Mr. Morgon is just joking around. Which must be the case.

If you are talking about some idealized person that exists only in your mind than Jesus is unscathed by his post. If you are talking about the Jesus of the Gospels then there is truly a problem here.

NOGO · 05-16-2002, 06:28 AM

Quote:

aza wood
Let me try, to clarify. I appreciate how you can say that the Bible has errors. It plainly does.
What I do not understand is how you can then take an erroneous book, and use it for your only source of reference and expect any kind of credibility.
You'll are so occupied with patting each other on the butts, that you can not see how foolish your arguments sound to outsiders.

If there were no believers out there then I would not waste my time discussing the bible. However, the fact is that many people believe and many also say that the bible is perfect and without error.

So perhaps these arguements are unnecessary for you but then you are perhaps not the target.
Are you?

aza wood · 05-16-2002, 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by NOGO:
<strong>

If there were no believers out there then I would not waste my time discussing the bible. However, the fact is that many people believe and many also say that the bible is perfect and without error.

So perhaps these arguements are unnecessary for you but then you are perhaps not the target.
Are you?</strong>

I think that it is great that you are discussing the bible, but you can not say, the bible is incorrect and then, use it as your only model of documentation. This is done in the same post by Morgan. If you do this, at least expect to be called out for your duplicity, which would be called hypocrisy, if you were a believer. Unless, as I have said, Morgan is just making a joke, because that is all that it is.

BibleBelted · 05-16-2002, 07:12 AM

aza wood,

You neglected to answer my questions to you.

I shall repeat them:

So you agree that the bible is full of lies? (Y/N)

Yet you still maintain Jebus is the son of gawd? (Y/N)

I just want to be sure I'm grasping your position correctly.

NOGO · 05-16-2002, 07:30 AM

Quote:

BibleBelted
You neglected to answer my questions to you.

The wonderful thing about these forums is that people don't need to answer anything. For example aza wood replied to only one of my three posts and then not completely. One must draw the conclusions that one must draw, even if it's from silence.

NOGO · 05-16-2002, 07:38 AM

Quote:

aza wood
Morgan is just making a joke, because that is all that it is.

I have not read this text but based on what you say of it I can only say that Jesus prophesied the destruction of the temple and the end of the world and it did not happen. That makes him a false prophet.

So at least in the main arguement Morgan is correct.

If there is a joke here it is a very sad one. For 2000 years people have believed that Jesus would return and clearly that is not going to happen.

beachbum · 05-16-2002, 10:41 AM

What does unscaved mean?

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

05-16-2002, 05:31 AM	#21
Fastfalcon Regular Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Bermuda Posts: 114	1. No 2. Yes

05-16-2002, 05:43 AM	#22
BibleBelted Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Oklahoma, USA Posts: 891	FF, I wasn't asking you; however, since you've seen fit to weigh in, perhaps you would care to comment on the validity of aza's original post?

05-16-2002, 07:12 AM	#27
BibleBelted Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Oklahoma, USA Posts: 891	aza wood, You neglected to answer my questions to you. I shall repeat them: So you agree that the bible is full of lies? (Y/N) Yet you still maintain Jebus is the son of gawd? (Y/N) I just want to be sure I'm grasping your position correctly.

05-16-2002, 10:41 AM	#30
beachbum Beloved Deceased Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cocoa Beach, FL Posts: 864	What does unscaved mean?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.