Ignorance and the Bible

[Ross Dolan]

The fucking Bible SAID he was dead, pally boy. You’re the one pulling the “he’s in a coma” bullshit out of your asses.

But you failed to answer the question, if he didn’t die on the cross, when DID he die? Or are you gonna pull that one out of your heiney, too?

So, Domer...since you are into questions here and refuse to answer the ones I have previously put to you...

...how about YOU tell us whether Jesus actually lived...and whether or not he did die via crucifixion?

 

[domer76]

is intentional population reduction part of it?

the humanist moral code?

I think you mean immoral code.

Nope, I sure didn’t mean that, Festus. I would have stated it if I did.

 

[gmark77]

Thanks for coming over to my side, and conclusively proving people will not die for something they know is a lie.

You and I both know I said the exact opposite of what you said.

 

[Cypress]

You’re really not gonna pull that shit, are you? There are “multiple attestations” of the crucifixion. They are all different.

There are “multiple attestations” of his baptism. They are all different.

There are two “attestations” of the birth narrative. They are different!

The core story of the arrest, trial, and crucifixion are all there.

Virgin birth? Two attestations is a lot weaker than five in in eyes of the historian.
Also weakening these two attestations is the fact a miraculous virgin birth is never mentioned by our two earliest Christian authors, Mark and Paul.

You get really stressed out about the birth narrative, when it is not central to the core Christian beliefs in ethics, grace, and salvation.

Even the great atheist New Testament scholar and noted skeptic Bart Ehrman says there is nothing in the New Testament which requires belief in a miraculous virgin birth, and that most of his Christian friends think the story is allegorical.

NONE of them possess historical reliability.

The great atheist New Testament scholar and noted skeptic Bart Ehrman categorically disagrees with you. He unequivocally believes the New Testament can be mined for historical information than that.

Here is about as far as you get on historical reliability, if that much. Jesus was born, almost certainly not in Bethlehem. He was an apocalyptic Jew that preached the end was coming and people should prepare. He was crucified. That’s it.

All the rest you propose is theological gymnastics.

The great atheist New Testament scholar and noted skeptic Bart Ehrman categorically disagrees with you. He unequivocally believes the New Testament can be mined for more historical information than that.

Ancient writers did not have the 21st century standards of analytical history and biography that some of us naively come to expect of all authors throughout human history.

The New Testament, the Norse Icelandic Sagas, the Historia of Herodotus, the Anglo-Saxon chronicles all have historically valid information existing along side myth that the careful person can mine using the methods of literary criticism and historical context.

 

[gmark77]

The great atheist New Testament scholar and noted skeptic Bart Ehrman categorically disagrees with you.

Even the atheist New Testament scholar and noted skeptic Bart Ehrman wrote that we have to...

respected atheist New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman that the disciples 'belief in resurrection ...

Even the preeminent agnostic/atheist religious scholar Bart Ehrman considers the Jesus reference to be genuine

Appeal to authority.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

The fucking Bible SAID he was dead, pally boy. You’re the one pulling the “he’s in a coma” bullshit out of your asses.

But you failed to answer the question, if he didn’t die on the cross, when DID he die? Or are you gonna pull that one out of your heiney, too?

Says the atheist ranter about a book he believes is a fabrication. Why do you, MAGAts and others hypocrites keep insisting on having it both ways?

You're free to deny magic with one hand and support it with the other. I disagree. This is why I distrust you, your 12 year old friend and militant atheists/religious fanatics in general.

Scroll up for your answer, domer. IF you are as smart as you think you are, the answer is there.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Appeal to authority.

Poor, poor Perry PhD. How's your mommy doing?

 

[gmark77]

But you failed to answer the question, if he didn’t die on the cross, when DID he die? Or are you gonna pull that one out of your heiney, too?

That's the mystery of Cy's version of events. The hypothesis that Jesus was just "stunned" by the Crucifixion but didn't die means that he just wandered off into the mists of history.

In no small sense it kind of characterizes Jesus as some shifty fly-by-night sneak who skulked off somewhere.

 

[gmark77]

Poor, poor Perry PhD. How's your mommy doing?

Perry? Please explain.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

That's the mystery of Cy's version of events. The hypothesis that Jesus was just "stunned" by the Crucifixion but didn't die means that he just wandered off into the mists of history.

In no small sense it kind of characterizes Jesus as some shifty fly-by-night sneak who skulked off somewhere.

Does your mommy know that one of your former usernames was Perry Penis-Lover?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

The core story of the arrest, trial, and crucifixion are all there.

Virgin birth? Two attestations is a lot weaker than five in in eyes of the historian.
Also weakening these two attestations is the fact a miraculous virgin birth is never mentioned by our two earliest Christian authors, Mark and Paul.

You get really stressed out about the birth narrative, when it is not central to the core Christian beliefs in ethics, grace, and salvation.

Even the great atheist New Testament scholar and noted skeptic Bart Ehrman says there is nothing in the New Testament which requires belief in a miraculous virgin birth, and that most of his Christian friends think the story is allegorical.

The great atheist New Testament scholar and noted skeptic Bart Ehrman categorically disagrees with you. He unequivocally believes the New Testament can be mined for historical information than that.


The great atheist New Testament scholar and noted skeptic Bart Ehrman categorically disagrees with you. He unequivocally believes the New Testament can be mined for more historical information than that.

Ancient writers did not have the 21st century standards of analytical history and biography that some of us naively come to expect of all authors throughout human history.

The New Testament, the Norse Icelandic Sagas, the Historia of Herodotus, the Anglo-Saxon chronicles all have historically valid information existing along side myth that the careful person can mine using the methods of literary criticism and historical context.

Both Domer and Perry Penis-lover want to claim the Bible is a factual account of events so they can build a strawman to knock down. Weird!

 

[gmark77]

Does your mommy know that one of your former usernames was Perry Penis-Lover?

So you think I'm a sock puppet?

Based on...?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

So you think I'm a sock puppet?

Based on...?

No, Perry. I think you are a retarded liar playing a PhD on JPP.

 

[gmark77]

No, Perry. I think you are retarded liar playing a PhD on JPP.

OK, so at least I know that when you find you can't debate the point you just start attacking and leave the discussion altogether.

That's good. Saves me time. Don't have to respond to your "trash reasoning" or whatever passes for thought in your head.

Bye.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

OK, so at least I know that when you find you can't debate the point you just start attacking and leave the discussion altogether.

That's good. Saves me time. Don't have to respond to your "trash reasoning" or whatever passes for thought in your head.

Bye.

Bye, Perry Penis-Lover! Good luck with your strawmen!

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Bye.

Run, Perry, Run! LOL

Who said playing with retards isn't fun??? Now run off to Damo and whine to him that Dutch is being mean to you. That's how you roll, isn't it, kid?

 

[Cypress]

Both Domer and Perry Penis-lover want to claim the Bible is a factual account of events so they can build a strawman to knock down. Weird!

Like I said, the groups who most adamantly treat the Bible as a strictly literal, strictly factual, strictly historical collection of books are:

Atheists, Televangelists, fundamentalist Baptists, fire-and-brimstone Pentecostals

 

[domer76]

Says the atheist ranter about a book he believes is a fabrication. Why do you, MAGAts and others hypocrites keep insisting on having it both ways?

You're free to deny magic with one hand and support it with the other. I disagree. This is why I distrust you, your 12 year old friend and militant atheists/religious fanatics in general.

Scroll up for your answer, domer. IF you are as smart as you think you are, the answer is there.

I gotta hand it to you two jokers. If Christ did not die on the cross, you morons have, by yourselves, wiped out the salvation of billions of people.

No small feat, Satan! LOL

 

[domer76]

That's the mystery of Cy's version of events. The hypothesis that Jesus was just "stunned" by the Crucifixion but didn't die means that he just wandered off into the mists of history.

In no small sense it kind of characterizes Jesus as some shifty fly-by-night sneak who skulked off somewhere.

Here’s what the dimwits don’t realize. If Christ did not die on the cross, there is no salvation scenario. For billions.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Like I said, the groups who most adamantly treat the Bible as a strictly literal, strictly factual, strictly historical collection of books are:

Atheists, Televangelists, fundamentalist Baptists, fire-and-brimstone Pentecostals

Weird but true. LOL

I've noticed that the militant atheists consider anyone who isn't a militant hater of all things Christian to be an enemy. That's even weirder to me but that level of hatred is common among MAGAts, racists and other bigots.