• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged (edited) General thoughts about Christianity and the bible

Mojo said:
It's SOP: someone arguing against the current theory of evolution without having the faintest clue about it.*

It's not as if we haven't it before.


*I'm being charitable.
Click to expand...

It's heartbreaking really. We live at a time when we have access to information in a way previous generations couldn't even dream of, on these threads there's a respected college professor who's incredibly generous with his time if someone wants something explained. Yet still we have people taking pride in obstinately sticking to bronze age superstition in the face of the sum total of human knowledge since we learned to smelt iron.
 
Rusty Tyler said:
You folks do it all the time. Ignoring all unfavorable evidence.

Issues for which there exist strong arguments for both sides, yet you claim no contest.
Click to expand...
No one is ignoring your evidence. When people give you reasons why your evidence is not convincing, they are expressly not ignoring it. Much of your proffered evidence, for example, is wrapped up in circular reasoning. Circular arguments are nonprobative. Your unwillingness to avoid circularity does not mean your critics are derelict when they refuse to accept the argument.
 
Rusty Tyler said:
Just because you REFUSE to believe it doesn't mean it can't happen.
The miracles of Jesus and the Apostles are an historic fact.

The miracles of Jesus and the Apostles are widely regarded as historical events,
supported by the unanimous testimony of the four Gospels and other ancient writings.
Many scholars assert that these accounts are reliable historical documents
that describe miraculous acts beyond human capability.
fatima.org
dialoguejournal.com
Click to expand...
No, they're not. You are funny though. You go to the church to confirm that their fairy tales are real? Puhleease. Yes, almost a billion Christians believe a fairy tale. I grant you that. But that is not evidence that the miracles in the Bible actually happened. Only that people believe. Classic ad populum fallacy.

The most that actual historical scholars would say about Jesus is that there are writings about this person beginning in the first century. Not that the miracle stories are true, or not true.
 
Last edited:
Rusty Tyler said:
Why do you claim that lactose digestion is caused by evolution?

Why do we have lactose intolerance now? A step backward?
Click to expand...
This all seems wildly off base. You were asking about why claims with no evidentiary support are classified as claims with no evidentiary support.

Why you believe in such claims anyway is entirely beside the point.
 
Thermal said:
He said no such thing. The Law was not restricted to the law of Moses. Jesus was speaking from a higher perspective and had the authority to declare so (so goes the teaching of more progressive protestants, anyway).
Click to expand...
I've already gave the words of Jesus that contradicts your belief in what he actually said:

Matthew 15:3-6

Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’ But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is ‘devoted to God,’ 6 they are not to ‘honor their father or mother’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition.​
​
Mark 7:9-13

9 And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe[a] your own traditions! 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’[c] 11 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— 12 then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. 13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”​


And of course from the sermon on the mount:

Matthew 5:18

18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.​

And to tail it:

Luke 16:17

17 It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.​

Jesus couldn't have been clearer that the law still stands and will do until the Throuple returns.


Thermal said:
You might recall another story of a woman being caught in the very act of adultey, and being asked if they should follow the law and stone her? Jesus said "Nah man" (paraphrasing). You can't really laser focus on one verse and ignore the whole context of everything else he did and said.
Click to expand...
Are you aware that was added to John in the 5th century? (And I did allude to that very story earlier in the thread).

I am anything but laser focused on one verse, it's the future Christians that decided that they could ignore what Jesus said because it was easier than following the law. In all the Jesus parts of the NT he makes it clear the law stands, it was Paul that decided that the law no longer had to be followed it's a direct contradiction to what Jesus said.
 
Rusty Tyler said:
Agree.
The gospel was originally an oral tradition. Eventually it was written down based on the eye-witness accounts.

The Quran came about in a similar way. Mohammad couldn't write.
Click to expand...
No, it was written down based on oral traditions that were generations old. That's very much not eyewitness account, nor even based on eyewitness account. Any eyewitness accounts were buried under decades of retelling and embellishment. Any eyewitnesses weren't available to the various writers of the various gospels, who wrote their versions of the stories decades apart from one another. You might as well say that the Epic of Gilgamesh was written down based on eyewitness accounts.
 
Rusty Tyler said:
The new testament is mostly eye-witness accounts in the gospels (supposedly) and letter sent to the churches.
Click to expand...
LMAO. You don't know that. In fact, there is little reason to believe that. As they were written not only 35 to 75 years after Jesus was said to have been crucified. And none, absolutely zero were written in Jesus or his followers native languages which was certainly ancient Hebrew or Aramaic. They were all penned in ancient greek.

Rusty Tyler said:
Why would you question it as historic? Just to go with the popular dismissal of the Bible?
Click to expand...
A better question is why believe in fairy tales just because someone wrote them down?
 
Last edited:
Darat said:
Jesus couldn't have been clearer that all the laws are in place eternally.
Click to expand...
That's debatable.
Is that a reference to Matthew 5:17-18 ? see below.
Jesus explained what He meant in Luke 24:44 see below.
(this was after His resurrection)
It was the BOOKS of the Law, not the laws themselves.

Matthew 5:17-18 NIV
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets;
I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear,
not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means
disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Luke 24:44 NIV
He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you:
Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in
the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”
 
Mojo said:
The gospels include stuff that didn't happen, for example the census in Like 2.
Click to expand...
Yep. Mark never wrote about Jesus's early life. Matthew and Luke did, because they both came from traditions that were keen to fit Jesus into certain interpretations of prophecy. But they needed to explain why someone who was obviously said to have been from Nazareth had been born in Bethlehem. They each invented their own independent stories for that, as well as completely different lineages connecting him to David. (Patriarchal vs. matriarchal apologetics in 3... 2... 1...)
 
Rusty Tyler said:
That's debatable.
Is that a reference to Matthew 5:17-18 ? see below.
Jesus explained what He meant in Luke 24:44 see below.
(this was after His resurrection)
It was the BOOKS of the Law, not the laws themselves.

Matthew 5:17-18 NIV
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets;
I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear,
not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means
disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Luke 24:44 NIV
He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you:
Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in
the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”
Click to expand...
You're touching on one of the biggest apologetic problems. We have different versions of Jesus created by different authors. They were each embellishing stories with elements that focused on what they thought the real focus of the tales was, or should be.
 
Foster Zygote said:
You're touching on one of the biggest apologetic problems. We have different versions of Jesus created by different authors. They were each embellishing stories with elements that focused on what they thought the real focus of the tales was, or should be.
Click to expand...
Also, it's very clear that Luke and Matthew copied Mark or another source. That other source is usually referred to as Q. And then embellished them.

Even If we agree that there was a Jesus. And that just maybe this person was the son of God. What makes anyone believe that the words these people wrote were Jesus's words and teachings? Few people can remember accurately what happened yesterday. Let alone decades later. And why would Paul know a damn thing? He wasn't there.
 
Last edited:
Rusty Tyler said:
That's debatable.
Is that a reference to Matthew 5:17-18 ? see below.
Jesus explained what He meant in Luke 24:44 see below.
(this was after His resurrection)
It was the BOOKS of the Law, not the laws themselves.

Matthew 5:17-18 NIV
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets;
I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear,
not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means
disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Luke 24:44 NIV
He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you:
Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in
the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”
Click to expand...


Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra.
 
Sounds as if there's a market for fresh revelations. Who can say if The Book of sackett is authentic
or not? Or when The Newstament of AcbyTesla was composed? The Holy Flashdrive misleads us
not into temptation, and anyway what if it does? The Mishna of the Last Beachparty is consolation unto
hangover, yay even unto acid flashback!

I tell ya, fellers, thar's gold in them thar scams.
 
sackett said:
Sounds as if there's a market for fresh revelations. Who can say if The Book of sackett is authentic
or not? Or when The Newstament of AcbyTesla was composed? The Holy Flashdrive misleads us
not into temptation, and anyway what if it does? The Mishna of the Last Beachparty is consolation unto
hangover, yay even unto acid flashback!

I tell ya, fellers, thar's gold in them thar scams.
Click to expand...
Big time. And conservative Christian preachers are now lobbying Congess to establish a billion dollar "protect churches fund. " It's like the line
Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion means absolutely nothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom