(May 28, 2016 at 1:10 am)Minimalist Wrote: Yes, and even worse is that history and archaeology cannot identify any place called "Arimathea."   And even worse than that the usage X of Y is not consistent with the Jewish aristocracy which would have been the patronymic X son of Y.

Um yes we can, from the reference in the gospels. Which is pretty much all the evidence that exists for the naming of a lot of ancient localities.

(May 28, 2016 at 5:59 am)popsthebuilder Wrote:

(May 28, 2016 at 4:31 am)Constable Dorfl Wrote: You do realise that Yeshua fulfilled exactly none of the jewish prophesies, right? Most of the "prophesies" he fulfilled were either pervrsions of jewish ones (the virgin birth thing), made up stories to make him look like fulfilling them (creating a census out of thin air to have him be born in Bethlehem, not that Joseph would have gone to Bethlehem for a real census), or just plain made up.

Interesting opinion. Can you produce unbiased evidence of said claims? I am genuinely curious.

Thanks

Peace

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

I can't produce unbiased evidence, because the bible is heavily biased in reifying the Jesus mythos. But on one of the "prophesies" I mentioned, the "virgin birth", firstly the prophesy supposedly fulfilled used the word "almah" Aramaic for young woman, which was applied whether the woman wad virgin or not. And the prophesy goes, "before that young woman gives birth to the child is pregnant with, the invaders will be kicked out of Judah, so says YHWH. In praise you'll call her son Immanuel". No relevance to the jesus mythos there, especially as the ibvaders were a bunch of Assyrians ib the 7th century BCE.

As regards totally made up ones I'm thinking of stuff like Jesus "sayin" that the second temple would be destroyed in the future, the "no stone left unturned" one, which only entered the Jesus mythos, and this next word is important, after the rebellion i. 70's CE, the rebellion where the Romans tore down the temple as retribution.

As I said no unbiased source, but even a reading of the heavily biased bible with a modicum of historical knowledge will expose the miracles and prophesies as a pack of lies.

(May 28, 2016 at 6:14 am)Aractus Wrote:

(May 28, 2016 at 1:10 am)Minimalist Wrote: Yes, and even worse is that history and archaeology cannot identify any place called "Arimathea."   And even worse than that the usage X of Y is not consistent with the Jewish aristocracy which would have been the patronymic X son of Y.

Um yes we can, from the reference in the gospels. Which is pretty much all the evidence that exists for the naming of a lot of fictional localities.

Fixed your post.

(May 28, 2016 at 6:14 am)Aractus Wrote:

(May 28, 2016 at 1:10 am)Minimalist Wrote: Yes, and even worse is that history and archaeology cannot identify any place called "Arimathea."   And even worse than that the usage X of Y is not consistent with the Jewish aristocracy which would have been the patronymic X son of Y.

Um yes we can, from the reference in the gospels. Which is pretty much all the evidence that exists for the naming of a lot of ancient localities.

Yeah, and Tolkien's writings and maps are our only basis for the geography of Middle Earth. Why do you suppose that is, Rake?

(May 27, 2016 at 9:16 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:

(May 27, 2016 at 6:38 pm)Godschild Wrote:  Peter didn't live that long and we do not have an original copy to date either.

GC

Methuselah lived for 969 years, didn't he?    BTW, which flood survivor told that story?

 God told Moses all about it. You ever read the Bible, are you even old enough to be on your own, you act like a little child.

GC

(May 27, 2016 at 9:11 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:

(May 27, 2016 at 6:10 pm)Godschild Wrote:  You're not very intelligent are you, all the books of the NT were finished by the end of the first century.

GC

They may have been written but they were not in the Bible and they were not in anything resembling their current format.

 Your right by the end of the first century these letters and the Gospels were being copied and pass around to the churches, these copies are what we have today.

GC

(May 27, 2016 at 6:58 pm)Jehanne Wrote:

(May 27, 2016 at 6:38 pm)Godschild Wrote:  Peter didn't live that long and we do not have an original copy to date either.

GC

That's the point; II Peter was a forgery.  Do you believe that the Gospel of Peter was written by Peter?

 Peter did not write a Gospel, Peter wrote letters to the churches. None of the letters that Peter wrote that we have today are forgeries.

GC

(May 28, 2016 at 6:14 am)Aractus Wrote:

(May 28, 2016 at 1:10 am)Minimalist Wrote: Yes, and even worse is that history and archaeology cannot identify any place called "Arimathea."   And even worse than that the usage X of Y is not consistent with the Jewish aristocracy which would have been the patronymic X son of Y.

Um yes we can, from the reference in the gospels. Which is pretty much all the evidence that exists for the naming of a lot of ancient localities.

You let me know when you find it, Danny.

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.co...bably.html

Quote:In the first place we have no idea where the location of the town of Arimathea is, whereas we do know the location of other Biblical cites like Bethlehem, Nazareth, Jerusalem, Capernaum and Damascus. According to Roy W. Hoover, “the location of Arimathea has not (yet) been identified with any assurance; the various ‘possible’ locations are nothing more than pious guesses or conjectures undocumented by any textual or archaeological evidence.”[1] More than likely Hoover means we don’t have any other textual reference to the town in any ancient text apart from those influenced by the Biblical narrative, and there is no archaeology confirming the location of this town. No wonder that Luke’s gospel, written to the Greeks from some place in the Roman Empire after the gospels of Mark and Matthew, had to explain why they had never heard of this town before, so it says Arimathea was a “Jewish town,” one which they probably weren’t so familiar (Luke 23:51).

You know, even in Shakespeare's time he always had to have a group of soldiers, or kinsmen, or officials show up after the hero died to cart the body off stage.  There were no curtains.  It wouldn't do to have the dead guy get up at the end of the play and walk away.

Just a literary creation to get the body off the stage!

(May 27, 2016 at 6:51 pm)Gemini Wrote:

(May 27, 2016 at 6:36 pm)Godschild Wrote: you would be guilty of sin but God would be justified in His action. 

So If God commanded me to poke you in the eye, and I did, then I would be guilty of sin, but God would be blameless?

Please tell me I've misunderstood you.

 Okay let's get real about sin here. Poking me in the eye would be a sin against me, a sin you did without God influencing you, God wouldn't do that. 
You are wanting to get into an area of God's rights as creator, this can be a complicated discussion that could take quite a while to complete, it would be better to do as a study than on a forum. God has providence over His entire creation and thus God is justified in anything He does that is within who He is. You need to understand this part of God's plan, it's to redeem all those who will accept His Son, Jesus Christ, for who He is and what He did for us. God is not in the business of tempting people to sin, that would be contrary to who He is.
 I was doing something in our discussion that I rarely ever do and that's to speculate a situation that would not ever happen and I should have let you know that to begin with, sorry.
 I'm not even sure how to try and go through a discussion like this in a forum format. I'll look up some theological explanations in one of my book to see if I can come up with something, could take some time. Just remember this, we understand from the scriptures that God can not sin and He will not tempt someone to sin, both would be contrary to who God is. I'm sure I've confused this even more and, shouldn't have started this discussion speculating an impossible situation, again I'm sorry, ask more questions and I'll try and get back to you Monday, have a good weekend.

GC

(May 27, 2016 at 9:22 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

(May 27, 2016 at 6:10 pm)Godschild Wrote:  You're not very intelligent are you, all the books of the NT were finished by the end of the first century.

GC

That's very funny coming from an idiot who thinks that shit was real, G-C.

 What I believe is true even though you do not accept it, the fact is what I posted is true and I see you had no problem with that.

GC