New Testament arguments

[Mr.wizard]

Mr, wizzrd, FYI- Jesus FULFILLED/ accomplished the last sacrifice of the OT.
He said so in His last words on the cross, which were subsequent to your bold printed text.

Yes that's my point! If Christians reject the old testament and only accept the new testament, there is no law to fulfill, because the law is from the old testament.

[Ravenshire]

The whole concept of sin is completely un-testable and most likely made up by clever people in order to control dumb people, just like the rest of religious doctrines.

No, it's testable, you just don't get to come back and announce the results of the test.

TEST:
test/
noun
noun: test; plural noun: tests

1.
a procedure intended to establish the quality, performance, or reliability of something, especially before it is taken into widespread use.

verb
verb: test; 3rd person present: tests; past tense: tested; past participle: tested; gerund or present participle: testing

1.
take measures to check the quality, performance, or reliability of (something), especially before putting it into widespread use or practice.

Now you are getting into science. Untested, unprovable theories are only speculation. Can you, PROPERLY and verifiably back up your statement that sin IS testable using the Scientific Method?


So, Huggy, based on the above, I would now like for you to prove to us that sin is real.

In B4 "Sin is an affront to gawd. That makes it real and wrong. Yes or no?"

You've just asked Huggies to provide, not only a straight answer, but evidence as well. Never gonna happen.

[Angrboda]

There was a story not to long ago where a guy died with 7 million dollars worth of gold stashed in his house, the government came in an confiscated all the gold and gave his next of kin the value minus taxes in dollar amount.
By what right did they have to do this?

On December 31, 1974, Public Law 93-373, which removes the restrictions on a person "purchasing, holding, selling, or otherwise dealing with gold," becomes effective. The word "person" in the Act has been construed to include banks. Thus, to the extent authorized by State law, State nonmember banks will be permitted to deal in gold.

https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/ru...0-200.html

[Ravenshire]

Mr, wizzrd, FYI- Jesus FULFILLED/ accomplished the last sacrifice of the OT.
He said so in His last words on the cross, which were subsequent to your bold printed text.

(emphasis is mine)

What were his last words on the cross?!?

[Thumpalumpacus]

Laughably wrong. Value is context-driven. Gold is valuable to industry; outside of that, gold has no more inherent value than the paper money it used to back.

You really can't be serious, gold has been valuable for thousands upon thousands of years.. It's the one thing that has ALWAYS kept it's value.

And people thumbs up this nonsense.

Like i said, if an atheist rolls his face across the keyboard, he gets a kudos.

You clearly don't know what the word "inherent" means.

The value that you are talking about is abstract and extrinsic -- that means it is applied from outside, and doesn't have material value outside of certain industrial and manufacturing processes.

You're welcome.

[LastPoet]

Gold is kept for its resilience to chemical reactions and high conductibility. It doesn't oxide easily, nor falls to simple acids. As a metal it is very malleable and easy to shape. Rare enough to be used a a currency, but for all I care, it is better used on processors.

[The Reality Salesman01]

Mr, wizzrd, FYI- Jesus FULFILLED/ accomplished the last sacrifice of the OT.
He said so in His last words on the cross, which were subsequent to your bold printed text.

Do you think it's inpressive that a first century Jew walked around intentionally fulfilling run of the mill prophecies such as riding a donkey into a specific town, knowing that there's a good chance that it will REALLY piss some people off, and then "fulfilling" his destiny that he'd be crucified after doing everything that gets one crucified?

This is akin to someone in the late 1600s going around telling people that they've come to cast spells on everyone, and then predicting that they'd be killed as a witch. Would you be equally impressed if such a person ultimately burned at the stake as predicted? C'mon, man!

[Ravenshire]

Mr, wizzrd, FYI- Jesus FULFILLED/ accomplished the last sacrifice of the OT.
He said so in His last words on the cross, which were subsequent to your bold printed text.

Do you think it's inpressive that a first century Jew walked around intentionally fulfilling run of the mill prophecies such as riding a donkey into a specific town, knowing that there's a good chance that it will REALLY piss some people off, and then "fulfilling" his destiny that he'd be crucified after doing everything that gets one crucified?

This is akin to someone in the late 1600s going around telling people that they've come to cast spells on everyone, and then predicting that they'd be killed as a witch. Would you be equally impressed if such a person ultimately burned at the stake as predicted? C'mon, man!

The christers always manage to forget that jeebus (or, more logically, the NT writers) had knowledge of and easy access to the OT writings. Very, very easy to contrive the fulfillment of prophesy that way.

Now if the buy-bull had something like this I'd be impressed:
In the latter half of the 20th century there will be machines that will seem to think and will be able to do many tasks that until then could only be done with far slower, more labor intensive processes. And, lo, they shall be called computers.

That would be a fucking prophecy.

No, all we get is bullshit on top of lies on top of ignorance.

[Joods]

You've just asked Huggies to provide, not only a straight answer, but evidence as well. Never gonna happen.

One can only hope. Dealing with something similar in the "sins" thread. Circular arguments that go nowhere when asking a religious person to back up their bullshit.

[Ravenshire]

You've just asked Huggies to provide, not only a straight answer, but evidence as well. Never gonna happen.

One can only hope. Dealing with something similar in the "sins" thread. Circular arguments that go nowhere when asking a religious person to back up their bullshit.

Yeah,.... Nope.

Sooner or later, he'll conflate two or three arguments, distill a loaded question and demand a yes/no answer to it. even though you can't honestly answer it with a yes or a no.

[edit]
Oh... You're arguing with Drich over in that in the "Sins" thread. Yeah, you'll soon learn he hasn't got an honest bone in his body. Though he does have some malevolent ones. Good luck with that ass-hat.