Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below I was going easy on people by saing latin, but if you want to learn hebrew, I'm all for that.
lol or ancient greek (not the one spoken today)
lets go back and take the bible out of the common man's hands while we are at it
Top Ten Creationist Arguments Part 1 and 2
- Thread starter javaguru
- Start date
lol or ancient greek (not the one spoken today)
lets go back and take the bible out of the common man's hands while we are at it
PICK3
New member
I was going easy on people by saing latin, but if you want to learn hebrew, I'm all for that.
Learn Farsi - Speak Farsi - Learn Farsi Software - Rosetta Stone
lol or ancient greek (not the one spoken today)
lets go back and take the bible out of the common man's hands while we are at it
No, I just mean go back to closer to the source, that's all.
(I'm intrigued by languages.)
Wow Cindy! you have like a cult following, should I be jealous?? I been spending too much time in the aas forums, I did not know you're being trolled like this.
Marines know how to use their bayonets. Army bayonets may as well be paper-weights.
Navy Times; November 1994
Marines know how to use their bayonets. Army bayonets may as well be paper-weights.
Navy Times; November 1994
Dude, go plat and get a real sig. Otherwise, get the fuck back to the ass forums.
Or else what, you going to fuck me up? You have awful smart mouth on you dude... Why dont you go to the aas forums, afterall this is a steroid site...
javaguru
Banned
Ummm..bayonet drills are only used for aggression training...they haven't been an effective weapon on the battlefield since the "plug bayonet" that was used by early musketeers to deter horse cavalry.
In 1908 after the Russo-Japanese war analysts walked through the battlefields counting bayonet wounds....During WWI my grandfather ditched his rifle for his civilian revolver and a satchel of grenades when he went "over the top" to assault an enemy trench; The idea of the bayonet charge is a Hollywood fantasy. If I was ordered to fix bayonets I would look at the officer like WTF? Why do you want me to shoot less accurately because the balance of my weapon is fucked? Marksmanship is about consistency.
Shoving the muzzle of my M4 into the face/throat to create the space to shoot my opponent in the face is more effective than having to shove a bayonet in them and withdraw it before facing the next person I have to kill; Coming from the person with the best time in his company for the bayonet assault course and pugil sticks champion in BCT.
Historical note: It was called a plug bayonet because it plugged the muzzle of the weapon and turned it into a spear incapable of being used for its designed purpose.
javaguru
Banned
Nope, "Honor Graduate" in BCT, PLDC and "Fast Tracker" in AIT.
Historical note: "Fast Tracker" was a term used in the 1990's Field Artillery to describe the accelerated education of promising recruits into the E-5 position of gunner which they would undertake during field trials to graduate.
P.S. I also had high PT score.
I like to put terms in quotes that are subjective; I was lucky enough to have a coach that was new to the school with a tradition of winning state championships and therefore focused on by the media. My nephew still holds all the rushing records for my high school and was never given the honor of "All State" but if you are in the market for a house he's your huckleberry.
Honorifics are pointless, results matter....I make ironic points...
Last edited:
Thanks, but I'm not interested in whatever product you're pushing that can't even make it onto the shelf of a GNC store.
Why don't you join me in a pharma R&D lab; after all, this is a drug site.
Yeah, it is/was a machine gun with a silencer. I think it was made in 1994, and was not issued until 1997. The army issues that weapon to their best rifleman. We used the M16A2. The marines don't have a best rifleman, they are all equally great. No need for a silencer, we wanted them to know we were coming.M4?
I can't say enough about the two Marine divisions. If I use words like 'brilliant,' it would really be an under description of the absolutely superb job that they did in breaching the so-called 'impenetrable barrier.' It was a classic- absolutely classic- military breaching of a very very tough minefield, barbed wire, fire trenches-type barrier.
Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, U. S. Army
Commander, Operation Desert Storm, February 1991
I don't know why I never clicked this thread...but if you're saying the Bible is not in fact inerrant, I totally agree.
I don't know why I never clicked this thread...but if you're saying the Bible is not in fact inerrant, I totally agree.
Well, sorta and not really
stfu!!!!
Don't bring that to a real debate. That's a very poor argument. That position is informed more by an emotional commitment to a oppositional stance than reason.
I argue that it's quite relvant. Just because something is difficult and time consuming doesn't negate its relevance.
In past days, people would devote their entire lives to their religion, transcribing and reading the scriptures, landing on new continents in the name of their religion, even warring and killing others who were different. Now they buy a book from Wal-Mart and listen to pastor billy a few times a year, then claim themselves as knowlegable followers of their faith. I know standards change, but c'mon.
It's perfectly resonable to contend that words, meanings, and interpretations of a single book will change over 2,000 years. There have been many, many different versions of the english bible over the centuries, especially in the days before the printing press.
Aren't you the least bit curious if and how they differ, by whom and under what circumstances they were wrote/published, different interpretations from hebrew to latin, latin to english, english to english?
Perhaps such things fall under the pure faith category that is so difficult for me to understand, especially in the modern age where so much is readily accessable by all... and where we have learned many hard lessons from deafly listening to the words of others without examining the source...
Yeah, it's definitely a difficult subject to debate with others, but I haven't done so in a while, so meh.
I argue that it's quite relvant. Just because something is difficult and time consuming doesn't negate its relevance.
In past days, people would devote their entire lives to their religion, transcribing and reading the scriptures, landing on new continents in the name of their religion, even warring and killing others who were different. Now they buy a book from Wal-Mart and listen to pastor billy a few times a year, then claim themselves as knowlegable followers of their faith. I know standards change, but c'mon.
It's perfectly resonable to contend that words, meanings, and interpretations of a single book will change over 2,000 years. There have been many, many different versions of the english bible over the centuries, especially in the days before the printing press.
Aren't you the least bit curious if and how they differ, by whom and under what circumstances they were wrote/published, different interpretations from hebrew to latin, latin to english, english to english?
Perhaps such things fall under the pure faith category that is so difficult for me to understand, especially in the modern age where so much is readily accessable by all... and where we have learned many hard lessons from deafly listening to the words of others without examining the source...
Some Muslim kids memorize the entire Koran in Arabic by the time they're ten years old, even ones who are not Arabic speakers.
HBO Film Follows Muslim Children In Quran Memorization Contest
All of those translations come from three different manuscripts. Three. There might be 400+ translations but you can only go back to three manuscripts. Two of those are as rotten as garbage left out in the sun. Anyone who has read and understands the book of Acts and understands church history isn't left in the dark. I personally think it is insanity to seriously think that it is reasonable for people to learn two ancient languages (a lifetime pursuit for each one) to think that the Greek and Hebrew are necessary to understand the mind of God or that you need a knowledge of those two languages to have a relationship with God. You know what that would make the rest of the world that couldn't learn those languages? Dependent on those small percentage of people that could.
Jesus talked about the originals like he did about his own mother. LOL think about that for a minute. I wonder why he spoke about his mother that way...but that's a different direction...lol... In the OT when Moses was speaking with Pharaoh they were speaking Egyptian but it was recorded in Hebrew. Either you think that God is able to inspire and preserve his word or you really have nothing. If you think the originals are all that is inspired then you've got a big problem you have to deal with eventually. I don't think that the bible has errors, no. That is a deep belief and conviction. I think people have errors, it is a user error. I don't care if people think I'm crazy, and I already know that people think I'm a fool. If someone wants to believe my philosophy or not is up to them. I won't berate anyone for thinking different. What other people choose to believe and think is their business.
I didn't think anyone was trolling me really... and Annie
I know you wouldn't troll me. People assume I've been a Christian for many years, I have not. My initial assumptions didn't include an infallible bible but that is where I'm at right now. I'm going to try my best to stop writing these long posts explaining my faith because I can't seem to find the words that give a clear, precise description to get my point across.
Anyone who has read and understands the book of Acts and understands church history isn't left in the dark. I personally think it is insanity to seriously think that it is reasonable for people to learn two ancient languages (a lifetime pursuit for each one) to think that the Greek and Hebrew are necessary to understand the mind of God or that you need a knowledge of those two languages to have a relationship with God. You know what that would make the rest of the world that couldn't learn those languages? Dependent on those small percentage of people that could. Jesus talked about the originals like he did about his own mother. LOL think about that for a minute.
I wonder why he spoke about his mother that way...but that's a different direction...lol... In the OT when Moses was speaking with Pharaoh they were speaking Egyptian but it was recorded in Hebrew. Either you think that God is able to inspire and preserve his word or you really have nothing. If you think the originals are all that is inspired then you've got a big problem you have to deal with eventually. I don't think that the bible has errors, no. That is a deep belief and conviction. I think people have errors, it is a user error. I don't care if people think I'm crazy, and I already know that people think I'm a fool. If someone wants to believe my philosophy or not is up to them. I won't berate anyone for thinking different. What other people choose to believe and think is their business. I didn't think anyone was trolling me really... and Annie
I know you wouldn't troll me. People assume I've been a Christian for many years, I have not. My initial assumptions didn't include an infallible bible but that is where I'm at right now. I'm going to try my best to stop writing these long posts explaining my faith because I can't seem to find the words that give a clear, precise description to get my point across.
Last edited:
javaguru
Banned
Histories are recorded in the language of the person recording it and they insert their biases and beliefs....All of those translations come from three different manuscripts. Three. There might be 400+ translations but you can only go back to three manuscripts. Two of those are as rotten as garbage left out in the sun.
Jesus talked about the originals like he did about his own mother. LOL think about that for a minute.
I didn't think anyone was trolling me really... and Annie
I've read multiple accounts of dog green sector of Omaha beach and they differ but not only can I trace every account to every person that wrote it but I can trace them to their birthplace with government records. I can also compare the accounts and find where they agree on almost everything when it comes to the facts of the battle to a certainty. The Bible should be considered no more historically accurate than the Iliad or the Odyssey.
You can not be serious. You have to be bullshitting me right now... do you take the time to sit down and think about what you say/believe...critique your own beliefs? Horrible comparison btw… you are taking something 65 years ago and comparing it to 2000 years ago REALLY? If you lived between 50-100 A.D. you would have been able to obtain Gov. records of Jesus' life, considering he was so popular, the Jews recorded his life and the Romans would have had records of his execution. You would have been able to obtain the original writings of the Apostles and the writings of Paul. You would have been able to conduct oral interviews...I thought that the community of “professional” historians were pretty much unmoved by postmodern relativists. Do you not see the utter unliveability of your views on almost everything? How do you get along in this world?
Last edited:
Yeah, you did a good job refuting that dismal comparison, you should have been a lawyer. According to his philosophy, 2000 yrs from now the Normandy Invasion will be as accurate as the bible is today. That's his persuasion, but I do have to give him a little credit for his last post, he did not plagiarize, that's a first. I can give an accurate account from Desert Storm too, considering I was actually involved, does that mean I can give an accurate account of the Hundred Years War. No... This is all relatively speaking of course.
Why in hell can't the Army do it if the Marines can. They are the same kind of men; why can't they be like Marines.
Gen. John J. "Black Jack" Pershing, USA; 12 February 1918
javaguru
Banned
There are two references to jesus outside of the bible, the josephus reference is likely plagiarized from the roman source but even if you accept that as legitimate it doesn't prove the veracity of the stories attributed to jesus. We know Alexander the Great existed because we have coins with his image and numerous sources but the story of the Gordian Knot is almost certainly fabricated. Likewise, mid eastern archaeology used to be called biblical archaeology until they realized the biblical accounts were unverifiable or completely contrary to the evidence.
javaguru
Banned
Nope, the records for WWII will still most likely exist two thousand years from now and but for Constantine Christianity would have died off as just another Jewish cult. In the 1st century you couldn't swing a stick in Jerusalem without hitting the messiah...much like attorneys in the United States.
You can give your limited account of Desert Storm but experiences varied and as we both know the military treats you like a mushroom....they keep you in the dark and feed you shit all day. I would rather read the direct accounts of the top generals and try to sort out their bullshit as opposed to the day to day life of an enlisted man or junior officer. That isn't to say they don't have historical merit on a personal level but that's about it.
An example of how modern technology allows the preservation of historical accounts.
"The Pacific" was partially based on this account by Eugene Sledge and he has passed...
If you want to talk about Desert Storm...73 Easting...FYI for people not familiar with military parlance a Troop is a cavalry term for a company sized element..roughly 100 men; A brigade consists of between 4,000-5,000 soldiers.
Only two?
And here I thought you of all people would probably love the Celsus excerpts.
And what about mention of him in Hindu texts from the first few centuries?
lol @ saying likely plagarized. There are more than two btw...that is a popular misconception. There are several references to Jesus outside the bible...but even so by what criteria have you determined it is likely plagarized? Most of your posts (java) recently are completely your opinion, and are total conjecture. You have to get these ideas from new-atheist websites or material because no serious historian or scholar would make that claim. Are you trying to say that you're not even sure Jesus existed as a person? Now, do we need to go step by step on how to overcome the objectives to the objectivity of history? No, probably not because you just apply that philosophy to the gospels and any account of Jesus...do you realize that is hypocrisy?
Is the truth what your peers will let you get away with saying?
also lmfao @ saying what records will likely be around 2000 years from now. Is java a prophet? Did you receive revelation about the future?
Is the truth what your peers will let you get away with saying?
also lmfao @ saying what records will likely be around 2000 years from now. Is java a prophet? Did you receive revelation about the future?
Last edited:
What about the Qu'ran? Islam is the second biggest religion in the world (20%). It accepts Jesus existed, and was born of a virgin.
No, you can't say that the records from WWII will still exist in accurate form. Just like the bible, those documents will go through too many hands by then and will be altered to what people want them to say, right?
Well, what's that tell you if you could not swing a stick without hitting the messiah? I would say he was pretty popular, woudn't you? It appears, he is pretty popular today because we have people that are obsessed with talking about how he didn't exist. He is the most debated person in history, can't refute that if you tried.
No, I rather gather all the stories from the people that fought the battles rather than a bunch of pen pushers that were on the side lines giving orders. Who would have more accurate details of the fighting? The soldiers that seen it, and fought the battles or some brass in the rear with the gear? Heck, they did not even come up with a game plan for us in DS, my Colonial did, and he was right there mixing it up with us.
Nice video by-the-way, I did enjoy it.
javaguru
Banned
Belief and popularity are not proof of anything...quotations from chairman Mao is the second best selling book of all time and Candle in the Wind by Elton John is the best selling single of all time....What's your point? When Islam becomes the largest religion in the world will you convert?
javaguru
Banned
They exist as they were finalized at the time. Even the most fervent christian biblical scholars admit the bible was put to pen from 20 -50 years after the events they describe. There is a reason AAR's are conducted as soon as possible and paperwork required to be filed.
My mother has my father's separation papers from the Navy in 1948, it would be a dd 214 to you and I, and it hasn't been altered since 1948 and probably exists in triplicate within the federal bureaucracy; I can look at the document and with certainty believe he was awarded two purple hearts as a corpsman serving in the Tarawa and Iwo Jima campaigns.
The Bible was translated by hand for centuries and different scribes made notes in the margins that were incorporated by later scribes as original text, they're called interpolations. There are no original manuscripts for the bible, the best you have are hand written copies of copies.
javaguru
Banned
Last I checked there were Jews and Romans making the records in Jerusalem...Indians weren't power players. People looking at "prophecy" are just trying to confirm their bias. How do you explain a lack of historical record for the resurrection of Jesus based on biblical accounts? The Bible is quite clear that not only did Jesus arise from the dead but EVERY dead person in Jerusalem rose from the dead and walked around greeting their friends and family...I'm pretty sure someone would have written down the fact every dead person in Jerusalem rose from the dead with Jesus and walked around greeting their family members.
javaguru
Banned
lol @ saying likely plagarized. There are more than two btw...that is a popular misconception. There are several references to Jesus outside the bible...but even so by what criteria have you determined it is likely plagarized? Most of your posts (java) recently are completely your opinion, and are total conjecture. You have to get these ideas from new-atheist websites or material because no serious historian or scholar would make that claim. Are you trying to say that you're not even sure Jesus existed as a person? Now, do we need to go step by step on how to overcome the objectives to the objectivity of history? No, probably not because you just apply that philosophy to the gospels and any account of Jesus...do you realize that is hypocrisy?
Is the truth what your peers will let you get away with saying?
also lmfao @ saying what records will likely be around 2000 years from now. Is java a prophet? Did you receive revelation about the future?
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to conclude that when two accounts are almost verbatim someone was plagiarized, especially when it's such a limited statement. You need to lay off the Glenn Beck Koolaid that laymen who read a few books and study the Bible in their spare time are more informed than people who do it for a living; Cindy is short on evidence and long on hot air...much like Glenn and Bill...
As far as records are concerned...I can access records from the American Civil War via my computer over the internet so it's perfectly rational to assume public records will continue to transition to new formats as technology develops.
You only want to apply skepticism to the foundations of the Christian faith. The community of professional historians accept that Jesus did exist. You know it. I know it. Java is long on hot air and short on the truth.
I don't know why are trying to troll me by bringing up Glenn Beck. You know that was just a shtick just for you. I have no idea what you're talking about.
but lmfao @ trying to discredit me by using television programs that you suggested we watch together
I probably deserved it because I was being a little snide but even so, I guess that means that this thread is over because you're done if you have to start doing stuff like that.
Last edited:
Okay wait a minute. What? The bible is quite clear that EVERY dead person in Jerusalem rose from the dead and walked around greeting their friends and family? Wow Java. I love how you used "quite clear" and then EVERY like that. LMFAO.
Not every dead person in Jerusalem rose from the dead. It does not even say that anywhere so I don't see how that is VERY CLEAR THAT EVERY DEAD PERSON rose from the dead and walked around. There wouldn't be enough room in Jerusalem for people to stand. Think about it. When was the last time you read the gospels? Have you even read them? I guess it has been a minute. Where else did you hear or read that the gospels say that? Who told you that? Who are you listening to? I didn't know you thought that...some people did raise from the dead but not ALL the dead...not EVERY dead person, no the bible is NOT quite clear about that. You sound so sure of yourself...
Last edited:
My point is to expose your lack of knowledge in this subject. I will quote you, you said, "there are only two references to Jesus outside the bible." I gave you a third reference, so you can see that you are wrong. I severely doubt that I would consider converting to Islam, considering I have at least 20-25 confirmed and probably over a 100 probables. I would be such a hypocrite.
I never would have guessed the bible was written in pen, thanks for letting me in on that one. I suppose if there was typewriters in 40 A.D. the bible would still be in tack, right? Just think if there would have been information technology back then, you would be totally converted. What about the men that fought in the Crimean War? Can you find their actual discharge papers? If not, then that war never happened according to your philosophy. That war supposedly occurred only 150 yrs ago.
Actually, White Christmas by Bing Crosby is the best selling single of all time, but who keeps a record of that stuff?
Glenn Beck reads off a teleprompter, kinda like what you do with the YouTube videos.
bigpokey
Banned
^THIS x 9999999 milligreens
"In tack"???
Lol... I guess I could have used a better word. However, the word does fit (to secure something). I suppose a typewriter would have made the bible more secure opposed to a pen. At least that's what Java is trying to get across.
javaguru
Banned
Matthew 27:51-53
51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
Where is the historical record of this zombie plague upon Jerusalem? Nobody recorded the earthquake? There would have been plenty of Roman officials to record this event. All these saints appeared and only Jesus is recorded by name in the Bible? WTF? If I'm a saint I should get my mother fucking props...Jesus was obviously that douchebag that stabs you in the back at work after you helped him get where he is...
51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
Where is the historical record of this zombie plague upon Jerusalem? Nobody recorded the earthquake? There would have been plenty of Roman officials to record this event. All these saints appeared and only Jesus is recorded by name in the Bible? WTF? If I'm a saint I should get my mother fucking props...Jesus was obviously that douchebag that stabs you in the back at work after you helped him get where he is...
javaguru
Banned
No, that isn't my point, I can obtain a copy of some conspirator rag that claims the United States only landed on the moon thanks to the 1948 Roswell alien crash. They claim to have living first person accounts of those alien spaceship crashes and the cover ups as well as redacted govt documents proving their position; Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence...
javaguru
Banned
You only want to apply skepticism to the foundations of the Christian faith. The community of professional historians accept that Jesus did exist. You know it. I know it. Java is long on hot air and short on the truth.
I don't know why are trying to troll me by bringing up Glenn Beck. You know that was just a shtick just for you. I have no idea what you're talking about.
but lmfao @ trying to discredit me by using television programs that you suggested we watch together
Accepting the existence of Jesus as a historical person doesn't mean a thing when it comes to theology...I've always been willing to concede his existence. However, you also have to concede the existence of Achilles and Hector....and that doesn't mean you have to concede the supernatural qualities attributed to them.
javaguru
Banned
I missed your third historical reference to Jesus outside the bible...can you repost?
I'm making the low hanging fruit argument....if in fact you could even prove Jesus existed it doesn't prove a single claim made in the bible about the events in this persons life. We have hieroglyphics from ancient Egypt that were cut into stone, clearly unaltered, with the same kinds of fanciful stories that exist in the bible.
To use American mythology....Davy Crockett existed due to the numerous references to him but his autobiography should be ignored when it comes to facts and I'm pretty sure he didn't kill a bear when he was three.....
Saints that helped Jesus get where he is? What? The people that were raised where those that believed during Jesus' life and were baptized. How many do you think that was? The earthquake was recorded. It's funny what you said...conquering death not being enough for you...you want your mother fucking PROPS and blame God if you don't get your mother fucking PROPS. Never mind that though...
Again, have you thought that maybe you only apply your skepticism to the foundations of the Christian faith? That you might believe anything you're told as long as it rejects theology? There is evidence..several lines of evidence that indicate that Jesus' tomb was found empty by a group of women, not couting postmortem appearances. If you want, I'm ready to go through this and think this through to the end with you. Once we arrive there are you going to try and attempt to explain that psychologically? Hallucinations? I'm ready to go through each one with of those objections with you. Even skeptical scholars at least admit that these people believed that his man had been raised from the dead. We need to go through why they would believe that once we get there. Even if you just define the Jesus of history as only the person you can recover today with your philosophy on history (that you only apply to the historical evidence of Christianity) you still run into serious problems, and we can go through those too. For the time being, at least we know that you admit he existed. That is a start.
Last edited:
javaguru
Banned
Saints that helped Jesus get where he is? What? The people that were raised where those that believed during Jesus' life and were baptized. How many do you think that was? The earthquake was recorded. It's funny what you said...conquering death not being enough for you...you want your mother fucking PROPS and blame God if you don't get your mother fucking PROPS. Never mind that though...
Again, have you thought that maybe you only apply your skepticism to the foundations of the Christian faith? That you might believe anything you're told as long as it rejects theology? There is evidence..several lines of evidence that indicate that Jesus' tomb was found empty by a group of women, not couting postmortem appearances. If you want, I'm ready to go through this and think this through to the end with you. Once we arrive there are you going to try and attempt to explain that psychologically? Hallucinations? I'm ready to go through each one with of those objections with you. Even skeptical scholars at least admit that these people believed that his man had been raised from the dead. We need to go through why they would believe that once we get there. Even if you just define the Jesus of history as only the person you can recover today with your philosophy on history (that you only apply to the historical evidence of Christianity) you still run into serious problems, and we can go through those too. For the time being, at least we know that you admit he existed. That is a start.
I'm a skeptic by nature...have you read my posts on global warming? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Yes I know
So if certain Christians play the skeptic in certain areas they are the worst idiots, but if you play skeptic you're brilliant? You compare the gospels to legend and folk tales but you know that most folk stories don't contain actual historical individuals in real places talking about real events that actually happened. The way they memorized and passed down their tradition was highly reliable and was a well developed skill for their time. No modern scholar thinks that the gospels are an outright LIE that stuff just comes from websites and books/movies. You know that historians have been able to reconstruct with confidence the past with less than the first generation eyewitness testimony that the gospels have. So, now we know that these people recorded to the best of their ability what happened to the man Jesus and what he said, what he did, how he died and they recorded an empty tomb discovered by group of women and recorded him in his body alive after his death. Why did these people believe that he died and didn't stay dead? Even after all of that, the discovery of Jesus' empty tomb istelf can be shown reliable without even showing that the gospels themselves are trustworthy. I don't have to defend the reliablity of the whole gospels to defend one event written in them...the empty tomb...a pretty extraordinary event.
P.S. Since I don't think ledhead is checking this thread: Ancient non-Christian literary sources that mention Jesus outside the bible: Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, Thallus, Celsus, Lucian of Samosata, and Mara bar Serapion
Last edited:
E
EarthRider
Guest
again cindy pwnes java
if i was single i'd have a e-crush
if i was single i'd have a e-crush
Well, not really. I didn't respond to the argument that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence because it sounds very common sense but it does not work that way. It's a false presupposition. You would never be able to believe any report of an extraordinary event. You have to consider not just the probability of that event, you also have to take into account the probablity of the evidence being just as it is had the event not taken place.
So, we would have to determine the probablity of the evidence being as it is... the empty tomb, postmortem appearances, and the belief of the disciples that he had raised from the dead if it actually hadn't happened.
He was getting ahead of me...but even so once you think about it the way you should, it still seems to suggest that the extraordinary events written about Jesus probably happened.I'm not trying to pwn him because I understand that it is hard to wrap your mind around the events that were written at first glance...but I'll always be prepared to defend and explain the hope that is in me.
Last edited:
And all of those sources mention him directly, not by referring to a prior mention by one of the other sources?
Josephus: AD37-AD100
Tacitus: AD56-AD117
Suetonius: AD70-AD130
Pliny the Younger: AD61-AD112
Thallus: can't find birth and death dates, but his history text is from AD52
Celsus: Second Century
Lucian of Samosata: AD125-AD180
Mara bar Serapion: no dates -- sometime between AD73 and the 3rd Century
Of these historians, only one, Thallus, may possibly have been alive during Jesus' lifetime. So none of these historical references are first hand reports.
I didn't mention rabbinic traditions either, but that wasn't what javaguru asked...if it was I didn't realize it because it wasn't directed to me...that's why I left it in the P.S section... Even so, how much literature from the ancient world do we have at all? Most of it has been lost...so that leaves open the possibility that there was more than what we have. Is there any evidence from what we do have that Jesus was an outright lie? I know some legendary-jesus theorists have called some of those "dubious" scources but some people continue to make the claim that Jesus wasn't mentioned at all outside the gospels, that's just not true especially considering what we do have and what has been lost. The first generation testimony is in the gospels.
One thing I'll mention quickly about Celsus because I don't have the time to go through them all is that no one in the ancient world seemed to outright deny that Jesus performed miracles (or that he existed) they just have their various ways of trying to explain it. That seems to me difficult to explain if Jesus was nothing more than a legend...a folk story.
javaguru
Banned
I was asking for credible sources outside the bible....Like I've said before..you have to reach to establish the existence of the mythological Jesus let alone the veracity of the acts attributed to him in Christian mythology. I can find articles written interviewing people who claimed to have seen Elvis, Hitler and Michael Jackson...these are first hand accounts of those who claim to have seen them in person after their death.
E
EarthRider
Guest
java, that is where it can so much be on faith. When I accepted God into my life, my life has never been the same. I truely believe something happened in me, and no matter what you say or think, you can't change that. I may not have exact proof that whatever your trying to prove is true. But, God has changed my life, and I feel I am living a happy and fullfilled life because of Him. You can't change that, and you can't change the way I feel. Just as it takes faith to believe in God, it also takes faith not to.
No..it is actually not a reach. IMO you're reaching.
You have to reach to hold the view you're holding...legendary-jesus. You didn't explain why Celcus would go on trying to explain miracles if he knew they were a fabricated legend. Did you not read any of my other posts where I can not only be sure of the gospels reliability but even if I couldn't be sure of that I can defend certain events..for example the empty tomb and resurrection. I've already gone over how we can't look at history with your philosophy, that we can't know anything about the past(because no actual professional historian would even have any reason to get up and do any real research) How am I reaching by just looking at what is in front of me, that combined with my experience isn't enough? The first hand testimony is in the gospels which I can show to be reliable. Reaching? lol I can barely call it faith anymore.
Last edited:
Earthrider that is great...of course no one is going to change how you feel, I agree with most of your post.
How do you know Christianity is true? Wouldn't you like to not only be able to know but to show that it is true? It is not just a feeling or blind faith. I don't think my faith is irrational or unjustified but supported with evidencial foundation. The experience of the Holy Spirit combined with argument and evidence...I can barely call it faith anymore. The only faith I have at this point is that God will fulfill in the future what He has promised. The rest isn't faith.
blueta2
New member
well said!!!
I have accepted my high power (which is my God in the non-biblical sense) and it changed my life as well. I'm working on faith every day.
blueta2
New member
Hey Blueta!
Hey doll...hug
E
EarthRider
Guest
I agree with you Cindy.
I was a youth pastor for 8 years, and one thing I have found is if people are determined not to believe in God, there isn't much I can say or do to change there mind. No matter what you show or prove to them, they wont accept it (a majority of the time). It is those who are searching that find Him. I think it is awesome how much you have studied up on this, and learned. I also think it is very important for believers to study too.
My personal life I love Micah 6:8
Do justice, love mercy, live humbly before your God
I also live by this
1 Peter 3:15
But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,
I was a youth pastor for 8 years, and one thing I have found is if people are determined not to believe in God, there isn't much I can say or do to change there mind. No matter what you show or prove to them, they wont accept it (a majority of the time). It is those who are searching that find Him. I think it is awesome how much you have studied up on this, and learned. I also think it is very important for believers to study too.
My personal life I love Micah 6:8
Do justice, love mercy, live humbly before your God
I also live by this
1 Peter 3:15
But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,
javaguru
Banned
Well, there was a point in my life where I decided that drinking and womanizing were very bad for me. Something happened in me, I thought about my life, and I stopped that lifestyle...not because of faith but decided for java that booze and nightclubs are bad for java. I never needed faith to determine it, it was painfully obvious, I just needed to see the writing on the wall.
It's not about changing your life or your ways externally. Aside from being rebellious when I was a teen, some light partying that never hurt anyone (which I wouldn't call immoral) and one moarally questionable act that I was always able to argue was moral (my selfish nature) I've lived a morally upright life (externally at least). People have hurt me more than I've hurt them. At the time I became a Christian I was living a very upright life on my own. Yet, even I knew that I was guilty and had no problem believing that. When I looked inside my own heart I saw the blackness, the darkness...everything I did was tainted with selfishness. We all have it. You have it. Not the thoughts that go on in our heads, but the voice that is in our hearts as we go throughout our days are dark underneath it all. There is nothing external about it at all...you're missing the spiritual element because you've not been made aware of your soul yet. Was your discovery painfully obvious because you were hurting other people or was it painfully obvious that you were hurting yourself?
Forget about young earth creationism java! Why let that stand between you and God? You know I don't share that view, and most Christians (even evangelicals) don't share that view despite what the media wants to tell you and their very vocal movement in some churches. Most of us move on from an inherited faith from our childhood and move on to an adult faith that is our own. Usually it is people's theological presuppositions that usually will determine where they end up. Maybe God wasn't the engineer that you needed him to be. Maybe you couldn't bring together the idea that god would tinker with his creation using evolutionary development, you don't want to worship a God like that. You've closed your mind with naturalism and now that is all you have, you're chained to it. IMO it is best (and more free) to keep our minds open to the evidence and see what has actually happened, what God has actually done, who He actually is, not what I want Him to be for me or what I need to have happened.
