The bible

ExpressLane said:
Sad that you continue to use profanity.
Click to expand...

"Fuck you" is NOT profanity, Moron. It is a vulgarity.


It is probably because you know you are wrong again.
Click to expand...

What makes you suppose I was wrong?

I was not.

While there is debate on how many Jews were alive during the first certainly more than 100K :laugh:
Click to expand...

However many there were, it is VERY doubtful there were enough for over a million to have been killed and enslaved by the Romans.

You are a fool. Stop being so proud of it.
 
Cypress said:
Not just Wikipedia. I have listened to reputable PhD -level biblical scholars from Bart Ehrman to Luke Timothy Johnson state that the consensus is that the Gospels were written between 70 to 100 AD, late first century.
Click to expand...
Explain the absence of mention of the biggest calamity to fall on the Jewish people in over 500 years. Your suggestion that it would not be mentioned is laughable. :laugh: Just as many if not more creditable theologians place the writing of the gospels prior to 70 AD. And until you give a reason the gospel writers "forgot" to mention the slaughter and enslavement of hundreds of thousands of Jews and destruction of the center of the Jewish religion I remain unconvinced. I mean Bible writers discus the circumcision controversy but not the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. Preposterous. :oprah:
 
ExpressLane said:
Explain the absence of mention of the biggest calamity to fall on the Jewish people in over 500 years. Your suggestion that it would not be mentioned is laughable. :laugh: Just as many if not more creditable theologians place the writing of the gospels prior to 70 AD. And until you give a reason the gospel writers "forgot" to mention the slaughter and enslavement of hundreds of thousands of Jews and destruction of the center of the Jewish religion I remain unconvinced. I mean Bible writers discus the circumcision controversy but not the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. Preposterous. :oprah:
Click to expand...

Yeah, you've gone from over a million to hundreds of thousands. Good move...and in the right direction. You've still got a LONG, LONG way to go. Keep truckin'!

(Hint: If you just remove the "hundred of"...at least it will not be laughable.)
 
ExpressLane said:
Explain the absence of mention of the biggest calamity to fall on the Jewish people in over 500 years. Your suggestion that it would not be mentioned is laughable. :laugh: Just as many if not more creditable theologians place the writing of the gospels prior to 70 AD. And until you give a reason the gospel writers "forgot" to mention the slaughter and enslavement of hundreds of thousands of Jews and destruction of the center of the Jewish religion I remain unconvinced. I mean Bible writers discus the circumcision controversy but not the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. Preposterous. :oprah:
Click to expand...

Post the passages you are talking about
 
ExpressLane said:
Josephus gave a very specific number of 97K enslaved, Most historians accept that number. Considering the fact that the siege kill many from starvation and epidemic and they killed all that were sick or old it is reasonable to think that only one in ten survived the siege to become a slave.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histo... million,accepted, including by Louis Feldman .
Click to expand...

You just told me you wouldn't accept my Wikipedia source, but here you are giving me a Wikipedia Link.

The only part of the New Testament unequivocally written before the destruction of the second temple are the epistles genuinely attributed to Paul. Surely some of these Jesus predictions you refer to are referenced by Paul??
 
Frank Apisa said:
"Fuck you" is NOT profanity, Moron. It is a vulgarity.




What makes you suppose I was wrong?

I was not.



However many there were, it is VERY doubtful there were enough for over a million to have been killed and enslaved by the Romans.

You are a fool. Stop being so proud of it.
Click to expand...

Frank just so you know. Profanity is defined as :

pro·fan·i·ty
/prəˈfanədē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
blasphemous or obscene language.
"an outburst of profanity"

OK what does obscene ?

(of the portrayal or description of sexual matters) offensive or disgusting by accepted standards of morality and decency.
"obscene jokes"


OK but what does Fuck mean?

fuck
/fək/
VULGAR SLANG
verb
1.
have sex with (someone).
2.
ruin or damage (something).
noun
an act or instance of having sex.


So Fuck is a vulgarity that deals with sex. That makes it obscene which into makes it a profanity. Now does anyone agree with me and the Dictionary? Why yes they do . "Fuck is considered profanity and therefore unsuitable for use in normal public discourse."

Does the FCC define Fuck as profane? "Profane content includes "grossly offensive" language that is considered a public nuisance." So what are the & words you can't say because they are profane ? Just so you know Frank they are "Shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits."


So stop being a (insert a word I can't say on TV) moron.
 
Cypress said:
You just told me you wouldn't accept my Wikipedia source, but here you are giving me a Wikipedia Link.

The only part of the New Testament unequivocally written before the destruction of the second temple are the epistles genuinely attributed to Paul. Surely some of these Jesus predictions you refer to are referenced by Paul??
Click to expand...
My SOURCE was Josephus. (which was correctly quoted in Wikipedia) Remind me did Paul witness Christ's prophesy? No he didn't and he did write about it. . You also should also note Paul was silent on the destruction of the Temple because it had not occurred in his time and he didn't witness it. It's inconceivable to think that if the Temple had been destroyed that Paul would have failed to mention it. Thanks for helping me make my point.


(420) Now the number of those that were carried captive during this whole war was collected to be ninety-seven thousand, as was the number of those that perished during the whole siege eleven hundred thousand, (421) the greater part of whom were indeed of the same nation [with the citizens of Jerusalem], but not belonging to the city itself; for they were come up from all the country to the feast of unleavened bread, and were on a sudden shut up by an army, which, at the very first, occasioned so great a traitness among them that there came a pestilential destruction upon them, and soon afterward such a famine, as destroyed them more suddenly.
Click to expand...
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/maps/primary/josephussack.html
 
Last edited:
ExpressLane said:
My SOURCE was Josephus. (which was correctly quoted in Wikipedia) Remind me did Paul witness Christ's prophesy? No he didn't and he did write about it. . You also should also note Paul was silent on the destruction of the Temple because it had not occurred in his time and he didn't witness it. It's inconceivable to think that if the Temple had been destroyed that Paul would have failed to mention it. Thanks for helping me make my point.


https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/maps/primary/josephussack.html
Click to expand...

If Jesus predicted it, surely Paul would have heard about it because Paul intimately knew the apostles Peter and James.
 
Cypress said:
Post the passages you are talking about
Click to expand...

Gal 4:21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
Gal 4: 22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
Gal 4:23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
Gal 5:2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.
Gal 5:3..For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.
Gal 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.


The early church thought people in it should be circumcised. Paul explained to them they were no longer under the Ceremonial law which includes circumcision they were under the promise. Mark 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
 
Last edited:
Cypress said:
If Jesus predicted it, surely Paul would have heard about it because Paul intimately knew the apostles Peter and James.
Click to expand...
And if it had already recorded by them why would Paul felt the need to record it again since he knew them well? Thanks for helping me prove my point.
 
Frank Apisa said:
Yeah, you've gone from over a million to hundreds of thousands. Good move...and in the right direction. You've still got a LONG, LONG way to go. Keep truckin'!

(Hint: If you just remove the "hundred of"...at least it will not be laughable.)
Click to expand...
Isn't a million also hundreds of thousands????
 
Frank Apisa said:
Fuck you. Religion is a greater danger to humanity than politics ever will be.
Click to expand...
patently absurd.....the deaths caused by Stalin alone likely exceed all deaths in all circumstances brought about over religious issues.....then you have Hitler, Pol Pot, Ghenghis Khan........
 
ExpressLane said:
And if it had already recorded by them why would Paul felt the need to record it again since he knew them well? Thanks for helping me prove my point.
Click to expand...

Paul's letters were written years before the gospels. Even decades.

The gospels were prophecies after the fact.

Prophecies before the fact would be in Paul's epistles if they were so important to know of

Paul intimately knew Jesus' brother James and the apostle Peter, but Paul doesn't seem to be aware of the fantastical predictions you are presenting.
 
Cypress said:
Paul's letters were written years before the gospels. Even decades.

The gospels were prophecies after the fact.

Prophecies before the fact would be in Paul's epistles if they were so important to know of

Paul intimately knew Jesus' brother James and the apostle Peter, but Paul doesn't seem to be aware of the fantastical predictions you are presenting.
Click to expand...
WHY DIDN'T gospel mention the destruction of Jerusalem or of the Temple. :laugh: There was no reason for Paul to rehash Christ's prophecy. He didn't hear Christ give it . You are just proving Paul writings and the Gospels were written BEFORE the destruction of Jerusalem . You are just wakening you own argument. :rofl2:
 
ExpressLane said:
WHY DIDN'T gospel mention the destruction of Jerusalem or of the Temple. :laugh: There was no reason for Paul to rehash Christ's prophecy. He didn't hear Christ give it . You are just proving Paul writings and the Gospels were written BEFORE the destruction of Jerusalem . You are just wakening you own argument. :rofl2:
Click to expand...

Your timeline is all screwed up.

Paul was writing decades before the gospels, so it wouldn't have been rehashing. The gospels were written in late first century. Paul was writing mid first century

Paul's epistles would constitute the only proof these prophesies actually came before the fact. But despite knowing Jesus'own brother James, Paul strangely says nothing about these prophesies.

I'll tell you one prophecy Paul did write about. Paul said Jesus predicted the end of times and the Kingdom of God would arises within the lifetime of the apostles. But Paul and the other apostles died without ever seeing the kingdom of God come to pass.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
patently absurd.....the deaths caused by Stalin alone likely exceed all deaths in all circumstances brought about over religious issues.....then you have Hitler, Pol Pot, Ghenghis Khan........
Click to expand...

I'd say in the past 500 years nationalism, colonialism, capitalism, communism, and fascism have caused more death and devastation than Christianity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top