Fucking "elijah" ain't coming back, either.

(April 5, 2014 at 2:07 pm)ThomM Wrote: Do you have ANY proof this happened - by mention OUTSIDE of the bible?

Do you have any proof that 2+2=4 outside of math?
Do you have any proof of evolution outside of science?
Do you have any proof of the law of non-contradiction outside of the laws of logic?

(April 5, 2014 at 2:07 pm)ThomM Wrote: The bible clearly states things that are NOT TRUE. Once you accept that the bible is NOT always true - the actual truth of any passage rests upon the proof OUTSIDE of the bible.

Example - the bible gives at least TWO different BLOODLINES of the christ

Bloodlines in that era ONLY went through men (Who supplied the seed - the entire basis for the child - women only were carriers)

Both bloodlines say that the christ's blood father was Joseph.
The religion claims the christ had NO human blood father

So - both of these statements are false as far as xtianity is concerned
IT is clear from the bible text - that Joseph had NO marital relations with Mary until after the christ was supposedly born - so he could NOT had been the blood father anyway.

For every alleged untruth in the Bible there is a truthful interpretation. The accounts you are referring to, in Matthew 1 and Luke 3, are not in contradiction if viewed in the understanding that Matthew is naming the successive heirs to the kingdom from David to Jesus, while Luke gives Joseph's private genealogy or actual descent. Or in the light that Matthew gives Joseph's genealogy and Luke gives Mary's.(Paraphrased from Haley, John. Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible. pg. 323) Why do you choose to interpret it the way you do?

(April 5, 2014 at 2:07 pm)ThomM Wrote: I expect that YOU would not accept a long list of Koran quotes to prove a muslim point - why do YOU list a bunch of bible quotes that are equally noit proven?

I do not judge Koran based upon how 'proven it is'. I judge it as to what it claims. Mohammad did not claim to be God as Christ did, but rather the final prophet of Jehovah. So I test him as the Bible tells me to test a prophet. In doing so I would judge his prophecy against the Bible to test it's consistency. It is not consistent with what the scriptures teach even to the point at times it denies what the Bible says. That is why it is to be rejected.

(April 5, 2014 at 7:17 pm)ThomM Wrote: Having said that - the problem is that there is NO reason to believe the christ actually lived - to have risen from the dead. THERE remains not a single mention of him or his "parents" in the historical record of his supposed time - so claiming that OTHERS were brought back from the dead - when there is NO mention of that in other writings is just as comical.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

Quote:Or in the light that Matthew gives Joseph's genealogy and Luke gives Mary's.

No...g-luke does not and who gives a fuck about 'joseph?' According to your bullshit story he was just the cuckold.

(April 6, 2014 at 1:33 am)orangebox21 Wrote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

Read paragraph two and then please, tell us what you can authoritatively tell us about Josephus' Jesus from TF with a straight face.

Josephus was a Pharisaic jew and the idea that he would call some dirty little hippie preacher "moshiach" ( which translates to the Greek Christos ) is simply stupid. He was from a priestly family and his general opinion of those who caused trouble was that they were rightly killed.

Oddly.... disastrously so, to jesus freaks.... in Book 1, Chapter 47 of Origen's Contra Celsus we get this little tidbit:

Quote:For in the 18th book of his Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus bears witness to John as having been a Baptist, and as promising purification to those who underwent the rite. Now this writer, although not believing in Jesus as the Christ,

So, Origen, living some 75 years before Eusebius of Caesarea correctly identifies Book XVIII of Antiquities, correctly notes the JtheB passage but somehow manages to miss the supposed reference to your godboy.

Now, genius. How do you suppose that happened?

(April 6, 2014 at 2:17 am)Minimalist Wrote: So, Origen, living some 75 years before Eusebius of Caesarea correctly identifies Book XVIII of Antiquities, correctly notes the JtheB passage but somehow manages to miss the supposed reference to your godboy.

Now, genius. How do you suppose that happened?

(April 5, 2014 at 3:24 pm)professor Wrote: I wonder if the liberal media was controlling back then?
Maybe that's it.

It's a conspiracy!

(April 6, 2014 at 1:33 am)orangebox21 Wrote: Do you have any proof that 2+2=4 outside of math?
Do you have any proof of evolution outside of science?
Do you have any proof of the law of non-contradiction outside of the laws of logic?

That's a really stupid line of reasoning, as we can observe math working by doing it, we can observe evolution occurring live, and we can find many, many concepts for which the law of non-contradiction applies, and none for which it does not.

On the other hand, nobody has ever, ever been able to confirm any of the miraculous claims in the bible, and we know that the majority of them could not have happened. If this is the comparison you want to be making, then my next question will be: what observations can you make about the bible to confirm it to be true?

(April 6, 2014 at 9:06 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(April 6, 2014 at 1:33 am)orangebox21 Wrote: Do you have any proof that 2+2=4 outside of math?
Do you have any proof of evolution outside of science?
Do you have any proof of the law of non-contradiction outside of the laws of logic?

That's a really stupid line of reasoning, as we can observe math working by doing it, we can observe evolution occurring live, and we can find many, many concepts for which the law of non-contradiction applies, and none for which it does not.

On the other hand, nobody has ever, ever been able to confirm any of the miraculous claims in the bible, and we know that the majority of them could not have happened. If this is the comparison you want to be making, then my next question will be: what observations can you make about the bible to confirm it to be true?

The Romans could have ended the controversy over Jesus' resurrection by bringing his body out of the tomb and showing everybody. I wonder why they didn't do that.

(April 6, 2014 at 4:38 pm)Lek Wrote: The Romans could have ended the controversy over Jesus' resurrection by bringing his body out of the tomb and showing everybody. I wonder why they didn't do that.

Why did Gandalf leave Bilbo and the dwarves?

It was in the script.