At What Point?

[Into the Night]

Then clearly you don't know how Paul "met" Jesus.

Perhaps you should read Acts.

 

[Into the Night]

Militant atheists believe the NT is a pack of lies and deceptions.

There is no such thing as a 'militant atheist'. Atheists don't care whether a god or gods exist or not.
You are describing the Church of No God, a fundamentalist style religion.

I am in the middle between unyielding fundamentalism and strident atheism. I don't think semitic people of the ancient Near East even knew how to write analytical history, biography, journalism. Those are inventions of the Greeks, Romans, and Enlightenment era Europeans. I think NT is a mixture of parable, allegory, embellishments, myth, and events, sermons, and activities some of which are based on real people and events.

It is YOU being the fundamentalist here, Sybil. You cannot blame your problem on anybody else.

 

[Kafka]

Perhaps you should read Acts.

Then you'll show me where Paul physically met Jesus in Acts.

Go ahead. Just show me the verse.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I didn't run from it. It still stands.



Indeed. Believers dying for a fiction they truly believe. Tale as old as time.



Nothing ever is for you guys.



Martyrs are martyrs.

I'm content to let others decide for themselves, Perry.

 

[Into the Night]

^^^
Claims to be a Christian.

That's right, Sybil. I claim to be a Christian. What was your first clue?

 

[Kamala Trump]

I never said there was a coordinated conspiracy. Those are your words.

The NT are stories. Nothing more. Nothing less. In those stories are additions and subtractions. One could call the additions embellishments or fabrications is your choice. At the tomb, was it an angel or a young man?

I also never said all the disciples were dead. And yeah, Paul HEARD the stories. So, which of the several renditions is correct?

masons always have to be the experts on religion, so they can lie about it.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

That's right, Sybil. I claim to be a Christian. What was your first clue?

Your posts claiming to be a Christian, but your behavior never matches your claims.

 

[Kafka]

I'm content to let others decide for themselves, Perry.

As you should. My original critique of "but they died for the stories!" still stands.

 

[Into the Night]

Then you'll show me where Paul physically met Jesus in Acts.

Go ahead. Just show me the verse.

Go read Acts. RQAA.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

As you should. My original critique of "but they died for the stories!" still stands.

You're free to claim all the fantasies you like, Perry. Are you still standing by your claim to have a PhD in GeoChem?

 

[Kafka]

Go read Acts. RQAA.

So you can't. Got it.

BTW: I've read Acts. Do you want to know which verse Paul meets Jesus in?

Acts 9 1-19.

It's a vision on the road to Damascus.

A vision. Not the real person.

QED.

Maybe YOU should read Acts?

 

[Kafka]

You're free to claim all the fantasies you like, Perry. Are you still standing by your claim to have a PhD in GeoChem?

Stick to the topic if possible.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Go read Acts. RQAA.

^^^
Can't cite the scripture. Sad.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Stick to the topic if possible.

^^^
Demands others to stick to the topic but doesn't hold himself to the same standard. Since you ran from the question, the answer is obvious.

This is Cypress standard "strawman". He will continue to lie about your position and mischaracterize it.

He is incapable of discussing a topic without attacking the other poster. (Unless it's Doc Douche....then he will trade stories about how smart he is)

 

[Kafka]

^^^
Demands others to stick to the topic but doesn't hold himself to the same standard. Since you ran from the question, the answer is obvious.

Didn't run from the question. My point still stands.

 

[Cypress]

The question is, why do people need to believe someone can die and come back to life.

I never really fundamentally understood that whole redemptive aspect of his death the theology claims, but I also think it is nearly impossible to put my 21st century mind in the shoes of first century Jews.

 

[Hume]

I never really fundamentally understood that whole redemptive aspect of his death theology claims, but I also think it is nearly impossible to put my 21st century mind in the shoes of first century Jews.

Easy. They lied. And they thought others were stupid.

 

[Kafka]

I never really fundamentally understood that whole redemptive aspect of his death the theology claims, but I also think it is nearly impossible to put my 21st century mind in the shoes of first century Jews.

WHere did Jesus go after the Resurrection? (you seem to be really avoiding this question since I've asked it a couple times now)

The Apostles whose story you insist on maintaining at least the rough outlines of would indicate you must explain how he could "vanish" before their eyes or ascend into heaven.

Obviously neither of us thinks he necessarily ascended into heaven, it is kind of jarring that he simply seems to disappear from the narrative. If he were mere 'stunned' by the Roman crucifixion then where did he go after that?

And why wouldn't the disciples say "Yeah he went on preaching and going around for many more years" instead of saying he went up to heaven?

 

[Cypress]

Easy. They lied. And they thought others were stupid.

that's how atheists are almost exactly like holy rollers in some ways. They have absolute certainty in their truth claims.

Possibly there was a coordinated conspiracy to produce writings that were nothing but lies and deceptions.

I don't claim it as a fact. There is always a possibility of rational alternative explanations

 

[Hume]

that's how atheists are almost exactly like holy rollers in some ways. They have absolute certainty in their truth claims.

Possibly there was a coordinated conspiracy to produce writings that were nothing but lies and deceptions.

I don't claim it as a fact. There is always a possibility of rational alternative explanations

Cut the holy rollers shit. It's childish and tiresome.

You do not have a rational position. You are just indecisive.