GC,

You can not offer me, an atheist, any reason to believe that the New Testament is a credible souce of ancient history, much less a credible attestation for miraculous events. All the evidence points to regurgitated storytelling with subsequent embellishments.

Dawn

(February 15, 2018 at 11:16 am)vorlon13 Wrote:

(February 15, 2018 at 1:43 am)Minimalist Wrote: Is there any stupid shit in that book that you won't fall for?

We seem to have a dearth of snake chortlers and poison guzzlers here . . .

They're all in Kentucky.

https://www.christianpost.com/news/kentu...es-142061/

Quote:Kentucky Snake Handler Bit During Church Service Refuses Medical Treatment and Dies

Way to go, snake.

(February 16, 2018 at 7:42 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: While we all have our faults the only one being stupid on this thread is you.  You believe in an ancient ethnocentric Middle Eastern Jewish deity named Yahweh and in an imaginary Jewish zombie with the alias of Jesus who will save your soul and give you eternal life.  You're nuts. 

Prove I'm wrong in my knowledge of God and that my salvation through Jesus is not real.

WoG Wrote:The talking snake or serpent in the story was the Egyptian pharaoh. Noah's flood is a war story, most likely about the Egyptian invasion and conquest of the Levant area.  Moses' exodus is about the Egyptian withdrawal from the Levant.  The biblical God character was simply the series of crazy men who ruled the dominant empire in the ancient Middle East and kept the Hebrews under their thumbs.  The last one bit the dust around 530 B.C. with the collapse of the Babylonian Empire.  He is never, ever, coming back. 

You have enlightened the biblical scholars about these events and how about the history scholars I'm sure they would rewrite history with this new found evidence.

WoG Wrote:The Saul/Paul created the Jesus character as a way to sell his resurrection religion.  He even said that it was bull shit.  Later writers wrote prequels (the Gospels) to show why the Jesus character should be worshiped as a deity.  They also included some political acts by the three main rebels and wrote them as religious stories involving Paul's Jesus character. 

You ever consider writing mystery novels, because no one would be able to figure out what you were doing, it would be a true mystery. 

WoG Wrote:While there may have been various scraps of manuscripts floating around the area the Bible didn't exist in any form until a committee of story tellers, writers, and artists produced three master copies in Latin in the 690s to counter Uthman's Koran from the 640s.  Christianity existed from the First Century but it didn't have an unified written fairy tale until the 690s.

We have copies of a book that dates back to 300 BC and they show that hardly a word was changed even into modern times. We accept that the writings of Shakespeare, that is the copies are the same as written by someone that is said to be Shakespeare, but there's no proof that a man named Shakespeare wrote those works.

WoG Wrote:And despite all of the bull shit you can throw at the wall you simply can't produce an original legitimate Bible written before the 690s.  

And remember, even the Bible says that it's just a fairy tale written for entertainment purposes and that people shouldn't believe in Jewish fairy tales.

 The books of the Bible were written long before they were put together as one book and the Torah was put together long before Jesus time. The disciples preached from the Torah and the Prophets because they tell of Jesus, something I'm sure you have missed. You need to prove the bold statement (bold by me). if you can't bring these proofs including the bold about Paul then we have nothing else to talk about.

GC

GC,

I would like to know your thoughts from the following passage from the Acts of Peter. Do you believe it to be historical; in other words, did it actually happen, and if not, why do you believe that?

Quote:IX. As Peter spake thus with great sorrow of mind, many were added unto them that believed on the Lord. But the brethren besought Peter to join battle with Simon and not suffer him any longer to vex the people. And without delay Peter went quickly out of the synagogue (assembly) and went unto the house of Marcellus, where Simon lodged: and much people followed him. And when he came to the door, he called the porter and said to him: Go, say unto Simon: Peter because of whom thou fleddest out of Judaea waiteth for thee at the door. The porter answered and said to Peter: Sir, whether thou be Peter, I know not: but I have a command; for he had knowledge that yesterday thou didst enter into the city, and said unto me: Whether it be by day or by night, at whatsoever hour he cometh, say that I am not within. And Peter said to the young man: Thou hast well said in reporting that which he compelled thee to say. And Peter turned unto the people that followed him and said: Ye shall now see a great and marvellous wonder. And Peter seeing a great dog bound with a strong chain, went to him and loosed him, and when he was loosed the dog received a man's voice and said unto Peter: What dost thou bid me to do, thou servant of the unspeakable and living God? Peter said unto him: Go in and say unto Simon in the midst of his company: Peter saith unto thee, Come forth abroad, for thy sake am I come to Rome, thou wicked one and deceiver of simple souls. And immediately the dog ran and entered in, and rushed into the midst of them that were with Simon, and lifted up his forefeet and in a loud voice said: Thou Simon, Peter the servant of Christ who standeth at the door saith unto thee: Come forth abroad, for thy sake am I come to Rome, thou most wicked one and deceiver of simple souls. And when Simon heard it, and beheld the incredible sight, he lost the words wherewith he was deceiving them that stood by, and all of them were amazed.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/te...peter.html

GC,

Do you believe that the talking dog was a Great Dane?

R'uh r'oh!