The 25 fulfilled prophecies of Isaiah chapter 53

[zooterkin]

Here's a tip, DOC, that you will likely ignore. You know nothing about archaeology; this much is obvious. Don't try to discuss a topic you know nothing about. You will only look foolish as a result.

What do you suggest he does discuss?

 

[joobz]

I think most scholars believe Jesus actually existed.

I think most biblical scholars believe that a person(or persons) lived whom the bible story was based upon.

We have more non-Christian written sources for Christ and/or Christians (10) than we have written sources for Tiberius Caessar(9). And we have the following facts all from non-Christian sources:

1) Jesus lived during time of Tiberius Caesar.

source

2) He lived a virtuous life.

Even the bible discredits this one...
Jesus condoned slavery.

3) He was a wonder worker.

Source?

4) He had a brother {some say cousin} named James.

Source?

5) He was acclaimed to be the Messiah.

this is true. People do claim he was the Messiah. But that claim came from the bible decades later. Unless you have another source???

6) He was crucified under Pontius Pilate.

Source?

7) He was crucified on the eve of the Jewish Passover.

Source?

8) Darkness and an earthquake occurred when he died.

Source?

9) His disciples believe he rose from the dead.

And people believed elvis was still alive in the 90s.

10) His disciples were willing to die for their belief.

Many people are willing to die for false/wrong reasons.

11) Christianity spread as far as Rome.

And Scientology spread arround the world...

12) His disciples denied the Roman gods and worshiped Jesus as God.

Heaven's gate cultists cult off their junk and killed themselves to go to the spaceship behind a comet.



ETA: Please everyone treat that post as 1 drink and not 12..... for the sake of your health....it's just 1 drink!!!!!

 

[zooterkin]

I think most scholars believe Jesus actually existed. We have more non-Christian written sources for Christ and/or Christians (10) than we have written sources for Tiberius Caessar(9). And we have the following facts all from non-Christian sources:

1) Jesus lived during time of Tiberius Caesar.

2) He lived a virtuous life.

3) He was a wonder worker.

4) He had a brother {some say cousin} named James.

5) He was acclaimed to be the Messiah.

6) He was crucified under Pontius Pilate.

7) He was crucified on the eve of the Jewish Passover.

8) Darkness and an earthquake occurred when he died.

9) His disciples believe he rose from the dead.

10) His disciples were willing to die for their belief.

11) Christianity spread as far as Rome.

12) His disciples denied the Roman gods and worshiped Jesus as God.


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4633677#post4633677

Did you miss where this was discredited last time? How many of those are independent reports, and how many are reports of what Christians believed?

 

[joobz]

Did you miss where this was discredited last time? How many of those are independent reports, and how many are reports of what Christians believed?

And last but not least, how many reports didn't contain forgeries?

 

[Cleon]

What do you suggest he does discuss?

Fair point. I got nothin'.

 

[I Ratant]

What do you suggest he does discuss?

.
What he is truly knowledgeable about.
It will be a short thread, with no OP.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

I think most scholars believe Jesus actually existed. We have more non-Christian written sources for Christ and/or Christians (10) than we have written sources for Tiberius Caessar(9).

Eyewash. You only get so many non-Christian references for JC if you count even the most obscure. What is more, there are patently untrue facts about Jesus from those references.

For instance, counting Suetonis' as a reference to JC gives "fact" number

13. Jesus instigated the Jews in Rome.

From the Talmud we get

14. Jesus was stoned.


And much, much more garbage.

 

[paximperium]

The all knowing, all powerful, eternal, living God that both Jews and Christians believe created the universe. So could you answer my above question.

I can't answer the question yet.
Which version of god, the Jewish version or the Christian version?

 

[paximperium]

The claim, as I recall (I have no intention of sifting through your thread), is that Luke was a "great historian" based on the fact that the Bible mentions places that were real.

The claim is a quote mine. He decided to leave out the part where the author mentions that Luke's writings was great Christian propaganda.

 

[Foster Zygote]

I'm known for making short succinct posts. Jew is easier to write than Jewish.

If you'd just said something like "I wasn't aware of the pejorative nature of such usage of the word 'Jew'. It was not my intent to offend anyone", then I'm sure that anyone reasonable would have accepted that explanation. But instead, you came up with an excuse involving your need to shorten your posts by leaving out the last three letters of the word "Jewish". This excuse looks highly unlikely given that you are not known for frequently truncating words in your post.

 

[DOC]

I'm known for making short succinct posts..

no, you're not.

Doc, your clear logical arguments are breath of fresh air. The succinct yet complete answers you consistently provide are an example to all...

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4142359#post4142359

 

[Cleon]

The claim is a quote mine. He decided to leave out the part where the author mentions that Luke's writings was great Christian propaganda.

DOC's being dishonest, then? No surprise there.

Just like his going on about Jefferson - he intentionally omits the parts where Jefferson explicitly distances himself from Christianity, in order to give a mistaken impression of Jefferson's views.

 

[Cleon]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4142359#post4142359

Once again, you show your dishonesty by omitting a very significant part of Lothian's post:

Now, let us see how much you care about lies. The report button is the triangular one on the left of this post.

IOW, Lothian was intentionally lying when he said "your clear logical arguments are breath of fresh air."

More accurately, he was being sarcastic. And you are now being dishonest. Which seems to be your only course of action.

Seriously. Did you really think you weren't going to get caught?

 

[CORed]

Christians don't like to talk about it, but baby Jesus was none too photogenic.

I guess that's why there are no photographs of him.

 

[paximperium]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4142359#post4142359

Well, DOC is a complete liar again.
Here is the full quote that the liar left out:

Doc, your clear logical arguments are breath of fresh air. The succinct yet complete answers you consistently provide are an example to all.

Now, let us see how much you care about lies. The report button is the triangular one on the left of this post.

Nothing beats leaving out context and the obvious dripping sarcasm.

 

[zooterkin]

Once again, you show your dishonesty by omitting a very significant part of Lothian's post:

IOW, Lothian was intentionally lying when he said "your clear logical arguments are breath of fresh air."

More accurately, he was being sarcastic. And you are now being dishonest. Which seems to be your only course of action.

Seriously. Did you really think you weren't going to get caught?

Perhaps he can't keep up the pretense any longer...

 

[joobz]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4142359#post4142359

DOC, this is a quote mine and one of the most dishonest ones you've done.

But, Since we have the author of that quote in this very forum, how about I ask him/her to confirm the nature of that post?

If Lothian agrees that your posts are indeed clear and succint, I'll admit I'm wrong and change my Avatar to anything you wish.

If Lothian states that his post was mocking you and your posts and that he doesn't believe you are clear and succint, than you must admit you are wrong.
I won't even hold you to an avatar challenge. All you need to do is admit you were wrong.

Do you agree to these terms?

 

[DOC]

Once again, you show your dishonesty by omitting a very significant part of Lothian's post:

IOW, Lothian was intentionally lying when he said "your clear logical arguments are breath of fresh air."

More accurately, he was being sarcastic. And you are now being dishonest. Which seems to be your only course of action.

Seriously. Did you really think you weren't going to get caught?

I thought he was sincere when he said that, why would I give the link if I didn't believe that. I'm not that stupid to give a pack of wolves that I know would give their wisdom teeth to find anything on me something to ad hom about.

But now after reading it over I see he probably was being sarcastic. Sometimes I'm too focused on the subject matter to perceive any dry and sly attack the messenger comments.

Joobz is always saying how I dislike long posts of others and that is true. That's why I try to keep mine as short and succint as possible.

 

[Fireshadow]

If there's anything I've learned from reading these threads, it's that DOC is incapable of admitting he's wrong, even when there are mountains of evidence showing that. At best he'll claim that the evidence is being unfairly misinterpreted.

 

[paximperium]

But now after reading it over I see he probably was being sarcastic. Sometimes I'm too focused on the subject matter to perceive any dry and sly attack the messenger comments.

So you have NO EVIDENCE that you are known for making short and succint post. So why did you use the term "Jew Website" again?

Joobz is always saying how I dislike long posts of others and that is true.

Joobz, is DOC lying again or is this true?

That's why I try to keep mine as short as possible.

This claim has long been falsified by your long meandering posts.