RE: The Three-Headed "Jesus" Problem
August 23, 2015 at 8:25 pm
(This post was last modified: August 23, 2015 at 8:26 pm by Randy Carson.)
(August 23, 2015 at 7:19 pm)Aractus Wrote:(August 23, 2015 at 11:36 am)Minimalist Wrote: Danny, until you are willing to move out of your comfort zone of pious blather you will never learn anything. I'm so sick of the shit you assholes pull wherein anyone who does not tell you what you want to hear is not a "real scholar." Grow the fuck up. Your fairy tales are not true.
Once again Min, it's not me who's saying they aren't real scholars - it's other scholars who say that:
O'Neill destroyed David Fitzgerald. Ehrman took down Richard Carrier. And you've pulled the rug out from under Minimalist. Good work!
Quote:This has been pointed out to you numerous times. Your argument is disingenuous. You are selectively choosing which "historians" to take your selective beliefs from. This is no different to Holocaust denialism. And then you expect that the quacks who you quote from can stand alongside actual experts to complete your rather narrow world-view. You're the one that has blind beliefs and refuses to shift them when presented with evidence - not me. Why not surprise all of us and actually learn something of tangible value?
Quote:You start thread after thread on this same topic and you can't even discuss it. All you can do is quote from your book. You then make up facts that support your hypothesis and claim that you have tangible evidence - when we all know that you don't. Any time I or someone else presents you with a real problem to your mysticism you have a cry and start calling people names. I have less and less a belief that you're an intellectual of any kind, since you display a complete lack of appreciation of how to select an academic source of information to quote and babble on about. Any time we challenge you you call us a bunch of names and refuse to discuss the points put to you.
Preach it, broth...er...um...state your views with great erudition, friend.
Quote:Galatians was most likely written around 45AD. You well know this. You can't exclude dates you don't like just because you don't like them and then claim that everything was written in the time-frame that would suite your hypothesis - that isn't academic it's called junk science.
<snip>
Just because these quacks have swindled you out of your hard-earned and sold you a pile of manure doesn't mean the rest of us are stupid enough to not to smell the shit you've covered yourself in.
I do hope a few other members of this forum are listening closely...what you've said applies no less to them.