At What Point?

[Ross Dolan]

@Ross Dolan Notice how Perry never takes responsibility for his actions while claiming the fault belongs to others.

I do...which is the reason I ask that question in my last post.

 

[Kafka]

I Irony

You are a grown fucking man. What kind of adult man posts this kind of shit all.the.fucking.time?

You're one sick fuck.

 

[Kafka]

QED. It's all my fault, Cypress's fault and anyone else's fault but never Perry's fault.

Perry's behavior is childish and often irrational. I suspect some sort of brain damage or genetic anomaly which leaves him with the mind of a teenager regardless of his chronological age, which I suspect is in the 40s-50s.

You attack. I never attack first. EVERY SINGLE TIME I have attacked you on this forum it was because you attacked first.

TRUTH.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

You actually cannot see yourself for what you are.

Okay. Common enough among people who play in the forums.

When, may I ask, was the last time you acknowledged a mistake...and apologized for it.

Or...do you suppose you do not make mistakes?

Agreed. That lack of introspection, maturity, is a significant sign, IMO.

 

[Kafka]

Perry's behavior is childish and often irrational.

Says the guy who LITERALLY all.the.time posts pictures mocking the disabled so he can attack other posters.

Wow.

Irony much?

 

[Kafka]

Agreed. That lack of introspection, maturity, is a significant sign, IMO.

Says the man who once screamed at me in ALL CAPS SEVERAL TIMES: "PUSSY".

 

[Dutch Uncle]

You are a grown fucking man. What kind of adult man posts this kind of shit all.the.fucking.time?

You're one sick fuck.

You attack. I never attack first. EVERY SINGLE TIME I have attacked you on this forum it was because you attacked first.

TRUTH.

Says the guy who LITERALLY all.the.time posts pictures mocking the disabled so he can attack other posters.

Wow.

Irony much?

QED. Are you disabled, Perry?

Says the man who once screamed at me in ALL CAPS SEVERAL TIMES: "PUSSY".

Really, Perry? While I admit Perry the Pussy has a certain ring to it, I don't recall the circumstances. Do you?

 

[Cypress]

Mormonism is an EXCELLENT thing to study in terms of how religious ideas get propagated and picked up by people.

I knew you had an ulterior motive.

You claim that Joeseph Smith - a financial fraudster, a bar room brawler, a self-serving polygamist - is the model for religious inspiration, and he should be compared and equated to the gospels of Jesus, the Apostle Paul, the Apostle James, the Evangelist Luke, The Buddha, the Dali Lama.

That is preposterous to insist Joesph Smith is the model we must look to.

At the world scale, Mormonism is a fringe religious cult that is only 150 years old and has not stood the test of time yet.

 

[Kafka]

QED. Are you disabled, Perry?


Really, Perry? While I admit Perry the Pussy has a certain ring to it, I don't recall the circumstances. Do you?

Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you?

 

[Damocles]

None of the disciples were literate. There’s a good chance that they didn’t know anybody literate, either. As far as a conspiracy, I’ve never heard that Mark, Matthew or Luke knew each other. Nor that they had ever met or talked with any of the disciples.

As far as the near death experience scenario, it’s absurd beyond description.

The tax collectors of the time were not illiterate, at the very least Matthew was literate and capable of "mathing" with the best of them. Saying they were aggramatos does not always equate to illiterate, it means ignorant of Jewish law specifically so when the Pharisee stated they were "unschooled" (aggramatos is the word used) it was not what you think it was and has nothing to do with whether they could read and write. It is likely far more than just Matthew were literate though they clearly had help writing their gospels. Scholars guess that the average literacy rate at the time was around 10%, this would mean that it is likely more than one of the disciples were capable of reading even if they were within the average and that average is currently questioned by current scholars. Jews specifically were usually schooled and many were capable of reading the Torah.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you?

Translation: No, Dutch, I have no facts nor context to add to my lies about you.

Got it. Thanks, Perry, but I had to ask so others can see for themselves your behavior.

 

[Kafka]

I knew you had an ulterior motive.

Then you were, as usual, wrong. You can't debate someone on the merits so you resort to making shit up and argumentum ad hominem.

You claim that Joeseph Smith - a financial fraudster, a bar room brawler, a self-serving polygamist - is the model for religious inspiration, and he should be compared and equated to the gospels of Jesus, the Apostle Paul, the Apostle James, the Evangelist Luke, The Buddha, the Dali Lama.

Jesus didn't write the Gospels. I'm surprised you didn't know that.

That preposterous to claim Joesph Smith is the model we must look to.

Joseph Smith DID write the founding faith documents.

At the world scale, Mormonism is a fringe religious cult that is only 150 years old and has not stood the test of time yet.

you are incapable of generalizing points and when you are faced with an inconvenient point you invariably mischaracterize it or outright lie about the point

You don't seem able to process subtlety or detail. This is why all you ever do is come on here and quote other people as if that makes the point true QED. Because you can't generalize or synthesize information.

Stop lying about my points and we can have a conversation.

Keep lying about my points and I will keep up against you.

 

[Litmus]

I knew you had an ulterior motive.

You claim that Joeseph Smith - a financial fraudster, a bar room brawler, a self-serving polygamist - is the model for religious inspiration, and he should be compared and equated to the gospels of Jesus, the Apostle Paul, the Apostle James, the Evangelist Luke, The Buddha, the Dali Lama.

That is preposterous to insist Joesph Smith is the model we must look to.

At the world scale, Mormonism is a fringe religious cult that is only 150 years old and has not stood the test of time yet.

all the ot people had several wives and slaves.

 

[Litmus]

cypress is actually a Catholic zealot.

 

[domer76]

What are the limitations on the rights of others you seek to limit, aside from the obvious of not hurting each other?

Podcasts. Got it. Yes, I've listened to several history podcasts. Which ones do you listen to in order to educate yourself on religion?

The Biblical scholars on all sides. The historians, the textual critics and the apologists. The apologists are pathetic in the mental gymnastics they need to defend their view. I prefer those with no theological agenda and merely wish to seek the truth.

 

[Cypress]

all the ot people had several wives and slaves.

Judaism didn't exist in the 10th century BC, when the unified Davidic monarchy existed. The religion practiced by the ancient Israelites bears no resemblance to Rabbinic Judaism.

The Hebrew bible wasn't even compiled and edited until hundreds of years after the Davidic monarchy, around the time of the Babylonian captivity.

Christianity came a thousand years after King David and King Solomon. No one points to King David as a model for a Christian life

Harems and polygamy hadn't existed for centuries by the time of Rabbinic Judaism.

Jesus and the apostle Paul preached a program of sexual modesty, temperance, and even celibacy. Enslaving oneself to passions and vices would prevent true moral freedom in their view.


It takes a certain kind of stupidity and ignorance to attempt to equate the convicted fraudster, plagiarizer, bar room brawler, and self-serving polygamist Joeseph Smith to the Buddha, Jesus, the Apostle Paul

 

[domer76]

The tax collectors of the time were not illiterate, at the very least Matthew was literate and capable of "mathing" with the best of them. Saying they were aggramatos does not always equate to illiterate, it means ignorant of Jewish law specifically so when the Pharisee stated they were "unschooled" (aggramatos is the word used) it was not what you think it was and has nothing to do with whether they could read and write. It is likely far more than just Matthew were literate though they clearly had help writing their gospels. Scholars guess that the average literacy rate at the time was around 10%, this would mean that it is likely more than one of the disciples were capable of reading even if they were within the average and that average is currently questioned by current scholars. Jews specifically were usually schooled and many were capable of reading the Torah.

Matthew in the gospels was not one of the disciples. The literacy rate was probably closer to 1%. And the gospels were written in Greek, not Hebrew or Aramaic.

None of the disciples wrote any gospel.

 

[Kafka]

It takes a certain kind of stupidity and ignorance to attempt to equate the convicted fraudster, plagiarizer, bar room brawler, and self-serving polygamist Joeseph Smith to the Buddha, Jesus, the Apostle Paul

If you fail to understand the underlying point even after it has been explained to you on several occasions, it doesn't mean other people are "stupid".

 

[Kafka]

Matthew in the gospels was not one of the disciples. The literacy rate was probably closer to 1%. And the gospels were written in Greek, not Hebrew or Aramaic.

None of the disciples wrote any gospel.

We certainly don't know who wrote the Gospels. But given that they were all written decades after the fact would certainly suggest they were not written by the Disciples.

There is the possibility of an earlier "source" document ("Q" as I recall) but beyond that it is difficult to tell where the Gospel stories came from.

Personally my assumption is that the Gospel stories were a mix of stories that had been going around at the time (probably mainly verbally) and getting changed and altered by the needs of the teller. Either innocently or maybe with some degree of dishonesty. I don't know. My assumption would be innocently.

I don't have ANYTHING against Cypress's hypothesis of a "near death experience" where Jesus was just stunned by the Crucifixion and his "rising from the dead" was merely a misinterpretation by the observers. But it doesn't really have a solid answer to what happened AFTER the resurrection. By this rubric we presume Jesus just wandered off (whether it was Cypress' strange theory that he'd run away from the Romans...which doesn't make a lot of sense given that he accepted his fate at the hands of the Romans just a few days before) or it means he died from his injuries and no one bothered to note it.

But Cypress demands his hypothesis be correct because Paul spoke with the Disciples and no one disabused him of the idea of the Resurrection. Ironically at that same meeting Paul fought with the Jerusalem Church over matters of doctrine....and WON. I'm not sure how that works, but clearly it wasn't as if Paul saw eye to eye with the Jerusalem Church at the time.

The real problem is that Paul clearly was never told "Oh yeah, Jesus didn't just disappear from in front of our eyes or flew up into the sky". Instead we are left with a story that ends quite inconveniently for the Cypress Hypothesis.

But it ends quite rationally for the "Made up by later authors" hypothesis. (Even innocently written by people who actually believed the supernatural things happened).

None of this makes the Disciples or Paul into "Liars" except the Cypress hypothesis. That most definitely does paint either Jesus as a "fly by night" guy or the Disciples as liars by omission.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

cypress is actually a Catholic zealot.

Translation: Cypress is a secret agent for the Illuminati. Don't trust him!!!

Or maybe he's a Templer Knight like me?