At What Point?

Cypress said:
It really wasn't a big deal at all to be wrong about it. I bet even many church going Christians don't know Paul was writing the epistles decades before the gospels were written, and he was in direct contact with eyewitnesses to Jesus' ministry in the apostolic Jerusalem church.

It's certainly not something to stew in resentment and grievance about.
Click to expand...
Joseph Smith had 11 witnesses signing affidavits that they saw and handled the golden tablets. They also had an agenda.
 
Obtenebrator said:
If you actually were honest you would see that I am FINE with Cypress's hypothesis about the Resurrection. (I disagree with him about the Disciples lying about the ascension and I disagree with him about Jesus slinking off in the dark of night to avoid capture).

What I get bent about is Cypress continually mischaracterizing my position as one in which the Gospels were written to be a lie. I never said that, in fact I said the EXACT OPPOSITE.

Presumably you know why someone might get annoyed when they are lied about repeatedly.
Click to expand...
I think I wrote that strident or militant atheists believe the NT is an unredeemable pack of lies.

You routinely call yourself a 'soft atheist' and lapse into the language of agnosticism.

Assuming you were telling the truth about yourself, you shouldn't have seen a reflection of yourself in a comment about militant atheists.

On the other hand, I don't recall you ever making a habit defending the historicity of the parts of the bible most scholars deem historical.

As for your slinking comment, since you claim to have read the bible cover to cover, surely you are aware that Mark is peppered with comments from Jesus telling the disciples not to tell anyone who he is or where they are going. There is a distinctly secretive Jesus in Mark that I presume is a reflection of living under the totalitarian regimes of the Herodic monarchy and the Roman military occupation
 
Obtenebrator said:
Just curious what kind of psychologically damaged individual you are.

Why do you bathe in this hatred so much and so often? Why is it so much fun for you?
Click to expand...
What kind of psychologically damaged individual do you think I am, Perry? I'm genuinely curious about the assessment of a GeoChem Phd. TIA.

You're projecting your own hate onto me, Perry. I don't hate silly people on the Internet. It's interesting to meet and discuss issues with people outside of my own experience such as emotional trainwrecks, mentally ill recluses and angry atheist incels.
 
domer76 said:
Obviously, you are confusing fairy tales with reality.

Do you think Israeli atrocities should be included? We can go back before Hamas ever came on the scene. Why stop there? Photos of lynchings are easy to find, as well.
Click to expand...
^^^
Takes this discussion seriously.

Thanks for proving you hate Jews as much as Christians. How far back do you want to go to prove that mankind's history is written in blood? The millions Stalin and Mao killed to stamp out religion? The thousands Xi is killing to kill the Falun Gong?
 
domer76 said:
Joseph Smith had 11 witnesses signing affidavits that they saw and handled the golden tablets. They also had an agenda.
Click to expand...
It's possible the 12 disciples and the evangalists were liars inflicting a coordinated conspiracy of deception.

I don't generally compare writing and testimony from the 19th century to the ancient Near East. We have 21st standards and biases about legal standards of proof, historicity, empirical confirmation, biography.

All of which were largely alien concepts to first century Galilean fishermen. Historians will tell us we have to try to understand them from the world they live in, not from the standards of the 21st century.


I've also never been a big fan of equating Joseph Smith to Jesus, Socrates, and The Buddha. Wasn't Joseph Smith a convicted fraudster, or something?
 
Commander Dutch said:
^^^
Takes this discussion seriously.

Thanks for proving you hate Jews as much as Christians. How far back do you want to go to prove that mankind's history is written in blood? The millions Stalin and Mao killed to stamp out religion? The thousands Xi is killing to kill the Falun Gong?
Click to expand...
What did you say that degree was in?
Commander Dutch said:
^^^
Takes this discussion seriously.

Thanks for proving you hate Jews as much as Christians. How far back do you want to go to prove that mankind's history is written in blood? The millions Stalin and Mao killed to stamp out religion? The thousands Xi is killing to kill the Falun Gong?
Click to expand...
Commander Dutch said:
^^^
Takes this discussion seriously.

Thanks for proving you hate Jews as much as Christians. How far back do you want to go to prove that mankind's history is written in blood? The millions Stalin and Mao killed to stamp out religion? The thousands Xi is killing to kill the Falun Gong?
Click to expand...
What did you say your degree and experience was in? Something about observing and identifying people?

Fuck o’dear, dude. Someone got screwed along the way. Either your school for giving you that degree or your clients along the way.

You brought up Hamas, pally boy. Not me. You merely don’t like the reality of the Palestinian mess.
 
Cypress said:
It's possible the 12 disciples and the evangalists were liars inflicting a coordinated conspiracy of deception.

I don't generally compare writing and testimony from the 19th century to the ancient Near East. We have 21st standards and biases about legal standards of proof, historicity, empirical confirmation, biography.

All of which were largely alien concepts to first century Galilean fishermen. Historians will tell us we have to try to understand them from the world they live in, not from the standards of the 21st century.


I've also never been a big fan of equating Joseph Smith to Jesus, Socrates, and The Buddha. Wasn't Joseph Smith a convicted fraudster, or something?
Click to expand...
Yep, he was a conman, for sure.

I didn’t compare Smith to Jesus. I was referring to the credibility of “witnesses”.

Was the person at the tomb a young man or angels bathed in light? Did the women witnesses tell no one (Mark), or not?
 
Christians are like someone who lives in Paris. "You either live in Paris or are against people who live there"
No, I just don't live in Paris.
 
Cypress said:
As for your slinking comment, since you claim to have read the bible cover to cover, surely you are aware that Mark is peppered with comments from Jesus telling the disciples not to tell anyone who he is or where they are going. There is a distinctly secretive Jesus in Mark that I presume is a reflection of living under the totalitarian regimes of the Herodic monarchy and the Roman military occupation
Click to expand...

So if I understand you correctly:

The followers of Jesus saw him come back from the Tomb and everyone thought he rose from the dead but was just wounded by the Crucifixion. That much is required to be true because no one disabused Paul of the notion of the Resurrection when he met with the Jerusalem Church. BUT some stories like what happened AFTER the Resurrection COULD be made up?

However the Disciples were "sworn to secrecy" by Jesus who then simply "slipped away"? Letting Paul think that Jesus ascended into heaven? Or do you think no one among the Jerusalem Church talked about where Jesus went after the Resurrection?

Unfortunately that seems very easy to characterize as "Jesus-as-ConMan". I don't find that particularly compelling given that Jesus surely knew the danger he was in when he went to Jerusalem. And he even prayed to God to be relieved of the burden. Yet he didn't. Now you are saying that same being decided to run for the hills to hide from the Romans?

I would think quite differently based on what we are told about Jesus. And rising from the dead after a Roman Crucifixion would seem to me to be a pretty important thing to wave in the Roman's noses.
 
domer76 said:
Yep, he was a conman, for sure.

I didn’t compare Smith to Jesus. I was referring to the credibility of “witnesses”.

Was the person at the tomb a young man or angels bathed in light? Did the women witnesses tell no one (Mark), or not?
Click to expand...
Mormons are no different from Christians. When you look at the doctrines, they don't make sense to a rational person.
 
Cypress said:
Assuming you were telling the truth about yourself, you shouldn't have seen a reflection of yourself in a comment about militant atheists.
Click to expand...

Please don't play coy. It comes across as dishonesty. EVERY single time you talk to me about atheism or Christianity you INVARIABLY start addressing "the room" about "Militant atheists" and then you compare my points to those points.

It has been abundantly clear from the first time you heard I was an atheist that you have consistently suggested I am that thing.

Run from it as you like, but you and I both know the truth.
 
Obtenebrator said:
Please don't play coy. It comes across as dishonesty. EVERY single time you talk to me about atheism or Christianity you INVARIABLY start addressing "the room" about "Militant atheists" and then you compare my points to those points.

It has been abundantly clear from the first time you heard I was an atheist that you have consistently suggested I am that thing.

Run from it as you like, but you and I both know the truth.
Click to expand...
I'll be looking for you to give a fair and balanced view of the bible: defending it's historicity where scholarship warrants it, and recognizing allegory, myth, and embellishment where it occurs.
 
Cypress said:
It's possible the 12 disciples and the evangalists were liars inflicting a coordinated conspiracy of deception.

I don't generally compare writing and testimony from the 19th century to the ancient Near East. We have 21st standards and biases about legal standards of proof, historicity, empirical confirmation, biography.

All of which were largely alien concepts to first century Galilean fishermen. Historians will tell us we have to try to understand them from the world they live in, not from the standards of the 21st century.


I've also never been a big fan of equating Joseph Smith to Jesus, Socrates, and The Buddha. Wasn't Joseph Smith a convicted fraudster, or something?
Click to expand...
Ardent atheists, like MAGAts, Bible thumpers and other extremists, will use every means possible to push their agenda. Conflating disparate stories is the least of their tricks.

Agreed on modern vs. ancient means of communication and standards.

The ardent atheists like to erode belief in a Christianity by tying it to smaller religions such as Mormonism and previously mentioned Branch Davidians. What I find most fascinating is that they rarely attack Jews or, God forbid, Muslims. Three guesses why. LOL
 
domer76 said:
There was no doubt that you’d fail, Rufus.
Click to expand...
If true, then why do my posts bother you so much? The fact you are angry at me is telling, Domer.

It tells me you are a habitually angry person which indicates a general unhappiness in your life. Perhaps you should spend less time on the Internet and more time talking with a good friend? Do you have any good friends, Domer?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top