Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: May 18, 2022, 6:48 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Evangelicals, Trump and a Quick Bible Study
#31
RE: Evangelicals, Trump and a Quick Bible Study
I  know those fanatical evangelicals.
They are the worst of the worst!
Reply
#32
RE: Evangelicals, Trump and a Quick Bible Study
(September 17, 2020 at 11:03 am)Drich Wrote: See i knew you wanted to play!

(September 16, 2020 at 2:51 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: Abortion isn't murder and a fetus isn't a being where the social contract would apply. Your own Bible says as much, though I defer to science. 
So are you saying the OT got it wrong? Was that not also penned under the influence of Yahweh? Or did Yahweh change his mind? And please cite for me in the NT where it now says "life begins at conception". 
that does not follow.. does abortion only happen at conception? in west virginia abortion can happen after birth. why would it need to focus on life beginning at conception when you monsters are killing babies after they leave the womb? show me where a completely viable/ can live outside the mother is not considered murder. in fact I can look up the statute but if a woman is carring a baby she intends on keeping and it has a heart beat it is considered murder if someone where to kill that baby. so again show me where killing a fully developed baby is not murder as i have demonstrated it is a abortion practice.
You are an idiot. All of my children were planned. The first spontaneously aborted at 12 weeks. I and wife wept. We went on to have the planned two. The eldest is now an adult. Both are atheist through no doing of mine. The simple fact that you blame the parents for miscarriages makes you a scumbag.

(September 17, 2020 at 11:03 am)Drich Wrote:
Quote:Same question as before. Are you saying the OT is wrong? 
not for OT jews. Christians are not Ot jews. even jews today are not OT jews nor do they nor can they live by the law you are too foolish to not apply to people in a completely different religion.
Moron. Your jebus endorses the OT. Have you not read your magic book? That's embarrassing.

(September 17, 2020 at 11:03 am)Drich Wrote:
Quote:So the OT is wrong then?
not for ot jews. NT christian live by the law in it's completed form. which boils down to 2 laws. so no need to itemize.
Nope. There are 613 laws and your jebus endorsed all of them in the NT. Want chapter and verse for the book you never read? I can provide that, but you don't want it.

(September 17, 2020 at 11:03 am)Drich Wrote: sanctified marriage is the key.
Had one, didn't work. got financially raped and got the hell out. Starting to wonder if you have ever even had a relationship of any sort.

(September 17, 2020 at 11:03 am)Drich Wrote:
Quote:Show me chapter and verse where it says "one man and one woman"
are you lying to yourself and me or too stupid to make the distinction i made fit your understanding? sanctified does not mean one man one woman intellectually dishonest paladin.. it means man and woman, numbers of man and women can vary. in the ot it was ok to take on as many wives as yo could afford. in the nt paul limited this to one man and one woman in 1 cor 7. as the discussion of justifying homosexuality comes down to sanctification defined as man and woman not numbers of husbands to wives is unimportant, as the different sexes are being highlighted. which again is narrowed down to one man and one woman in nt times. either way this still excludes any type of homosexual relationship as same sex partners can not find a sanctified example of same sex marriage. your argument is over sport. don't make me drag you through the mud. if you have questions ask them nicely.

1/2 truth= whole liar. man and woman appears in the bible as being the only case for a marriage god approves.
Why should anyone care what some magic book has to say about anything at all? Does that mean Harry Potter is real? Because it is in a book?
(September 17, 2020 at 11:03 am)Drich Wrote:
Quote:But not ONE man and ONE woman. Dance around that point all you like. 
So the bible is wrong?


(September 17, 2020 at 11:03 am)Drich Wrote: apples and oranges/misdirection/red herring. because the subject matter is homosexual marriage, not number of spouses. to which despite the number of women david was married to at one time the only relevant point to this discussion of gay marriage is all his partners were born female.. Hence sanctified marriage.

Is there some part of the word "ONE" that you find confusing? 

Yes. It conflicts with the bible claim of hundreds.
After this point you wander off into myth so I don't care about that.

Your mythology means fuck all to me, or to anyone with a brain.

As an atheist, I hold bible study with my children, We read it. I know what is in it, but they are shocked what is mandated in it.

Genocide, incest, human sacrifice, rape, and on and on through a catalog of atrocity. Why are my kids atheist? Because we read the evil book.

Something Drich will never do.

Now, I intentionally did not impose atheism on my kids, I wanted them to reach their own conclusions.

And they did. And I was proud of them.

My eldest is in the place of saying "Got any evidence? No? Then fuck right off"

The younger is in the position of "fashion". If it aint about "fashion" she doesn't care. Not surprising.

But given our bible study, we always end up in a place. They will say "No way the bible says that" to which I reply "let me open the magic book because it really does".
Some reading later, they will say "that's nukking futs" (paraphrased)

Anyhoo, I introduced them to Drich posts. Do you think you can guess their response? Yep, even children can spot a clown.
Reply
#33
RE: Evangelicals, Trump and a Quick Bible Study
(September 14, 2020 at 11:22 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: Jesus never said anything about either abortion or gay rights. He did, however, spend a lot of time talking about the things that liberals like. He denounced greed. He instructed us to care for the poor and unfortunate. He healed the sick. He preached a message of peace.

Do an experiment for me, would you?  Get an old (or, even new, they are still sold) red-letter Bible, the type that have the words of Jesus in the Gospels colored in red, and read the Gospel of Mark.  If and when you do this, you will not find many words of Jesus in Mark.  As for Matthew and Luke, most of the so-called words of Jesus come from a hypothetical source which scholars call 'Q'.  As for John, the Jesus Seminar, in its Five Gospels, coded John as being entirely in black, indicating, in the Fellows opinion, that not a single phrase found in the Gospel of John can be traced back to the historical Jesus.

As so, the words of Jesus have, largely, been lost to time.  In any case, the earliest words of Jesus are, clearly, apocalyptic.  He was not an ethical teacher, even if he, on occasion, taught ethics.  The Romans, respecting the rule of law and tradition, both Roman and non, did not execute individuals for teaching ethics, only for sedition against the empire and other crimes, and almost certainly, that's what landed Jesus in trouble.
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 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. (The Acts of Peter, 9)
Reply
#34
RE: Evangelicals, Trump and a Quick Bible Study
(October 25, 2020 at 3:10 pm)Jehanne Wrote: As for Matthew and Luke, most of the so-called words of Jesus come from a hypothetical source which scholars call 'Q'. 

Actually, most of Jesus words come from old testament.
teachings of the Bible are so muddled and self-contradictory that it was possible for Christians to happily burn heretics alive for five long centuries. It was even possible for the most venerated patriarchs of the Church, like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, to conclude that heretics should be tortured (Augustine) or killed outright (Aquinas). Martin Luther and John Calvin advocated the wholesale murder of heretics, apostates, Jews, and witches. - Sam Harris, "Letter To A Christian Nation"
Reply
#35
RE: Evangelicals, Trump and a Quick Bible Study
(October 25, 2020 at 4:07 pm)Fake Messiah Wrote:
(October 25, 2020 at 3:10 pm)Jehanne Wrote: As for Matthew and Luke, most of the so-called words of Jesus come from a hypothetical source which scholars call 'Q'. 

Actually, most of Jesus words come from old testament.

Problem is that Jesus did not speak them.  Third generation Christians came along put those words on his lips.
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 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. (The Acts of Peter, 9)
Reply
#36
RE: Evangelicals, Trump and a Quick Bible Study
(October 25, 2020 at 6:58 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Problem is that Jesus did not speak them.  Third generation Christians came along put those words on his lips.

Sure, considering that the only historical person on which Jesus was based was when Mark borrowed the trial from Josephus's story of Jesus ben-Ananias. Ben-Ananias preached about the soon-coming judgment, the destruction of the temple, and the end of ordinary life, for example, weddings (Matthew 24:38). Ben-Ananias was then hauled before the Roman procurator, who interrogated him but got only silence for an answer, and was ultimately let go with little flogging.

So if you consider Jesus ben-Ananias as historical Jesus then Jesus didn't say any of that, but again, almost everything Jesus "said" was copied from the old testament, and perhaps the bigger question is: what makes someone who constantly quotes what other people said special?
teachings of the Bible are so muddled and self-contradictory that it was possible for Christians to happily burn heretics alive for five long centuries. It was even possible for the most venerated patriarchs of the Church, like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, to conclude that heretics should be tortured (Augustine) or killed outright (Aquinas). Martin Luther and John Calvin advocated the wholesale murder of heretics, apostates, Jews, and witches. - Sam Harris, "Letter To A Christian Nation"
Reply
#37
RE: Evangelicals, Trump and a Quick Bible Study
(October 25, 2020 at 3:10 pm)Jehanne Wrote:
(September 14, 2020 at 11:22 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: Jesus never said anything about either abortion or gay rights. He did, however, spend a lot of time talking about the things that liberals like. He denounced greed. He instructed us to care for the poor and unfortunate. He healed the sick. He preached a message of peace.

Do an experiment for me, would you?  Get an old (or, even new, they are still sold) red-letter Bible, the type that have the words of Jesus in the Gospels colored in red, and read the Gospel of Mark.  If and when you do this, you will not find many words of Jesus in Mark.  As for Matthew and Luke, most of the so-called words of Jesus come from a hypothetical source which scholars call 'Q'.  As for John, the Jesus Seminar, in its Five Gospels, coded John as being entirely in black, indicating, in the Fellows opinion, that not a single phrase found in the Gospel of John can be traced back to the historical Jesus.

As so, the words of Jesus have, largely, been lost to time.  In any case, the earliest words of Jesus are, clearly, apocalyptic.  He was not an ethical teacher, even if he, on occasion, taught ethics.  The Romans, respecting the rule of law and tradition, both Roman and non, did not execute individuals for teaching ethics, only for sedition against the empire and other crimes, and almost certainly, that's what landed Jesus in trouble.

Most of Mark is deriverd from the apocryphal Q, biblical "scholars" also believe.
As a species, we are fucked. To the next generation, I offer my inadequate apologies.
Reply
#38
RE: Evangelicals, Trump and a Quick Bible Study
(October 26, 2020 at 5:36 am)Nomad Wrote:
(October 25, 2020 at 3:10 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Do an experiment for me, would you?  Get an old (or, even new, they are still sold) red-letter Bible, the type that have the words of Jesus in the Gospels colored in red, and read the Gospel of Mark.  If and when you do this, you will not find many words of Jesus in Mark.  As for Matthew and Luke, most of the so-called words of Jesus come from a hypothetical source which scholars call 'Q'.  As for John, the Jesus Seminar, in its Five Gospels, coded John as being entirely in black, indicating, in the Fellows opinion, that not a single phrase found in the Gospel of John can be traced back to the historical Jesus.

As so, the words of Jesus have, largely, been lost to time.  In any case, the earliest words of Jesus are, clearly, apocalyptic.  He was not an ethical teacher, even if he, on occasion, taught ethics.  The Romans, respecting the rule of law and tradition, both Roman and non, did not execute individuals for teaching ethics, only for sedition against the empire and other crimes, and almost certainly, that's what landed Jesus in trouble.

Most of Mark is deriverd from the apocryphal Q, biblical "scholars" also believe.

What is your source for that claim?
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 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. (The Acts of Peter, 9)
Reply
#39
RE: Evangelicals, Trump and a Quick Bible Study
The source of the Q Hypothesis is, essentially, a venn diagram of when and how the synoptic gospels agree and disagree.

One of two things must be true. Some order of the synoptic gospels resolves the synoptic problem, the double tradition problem, and the triple tradition problem..... or some order -plus- the addition of an (or many) unknown sources account for the synoptic problem, the double tradition problem, and the triple tradition problem.

IDK if it fits to call it apocryphal, though. It's status as apocrypha, in this context, is an accident of history and not a comment on it's state as fundamental to christian belief.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#40
RE: Evangelicals, Trump and a Quick Bible Study
Q seems to be a forced conjecture from people who desperately want there to be some historical Jesus behind the gospels. I don't see why it couldn't be that Mark wrote his gospel first and then Matthew copied Mark and added a few more things and then Luke copied them both and added a few of his things.

But then again, maybe Q did exist as from of sayings from Torah and that some people started prescribing those saying to some hypotheticall guy.
teachings of the Bible are so muddled and self-contradictory that it was possible for Christians to happily burn heretics alive for five long centuries. It was even possible for the most venerated patriarchs of the Church, like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, to conclude that heretics should be tortured (Augustine) or killed outright (Aquinas). Martin Luther and John Calvin advocated the wholesale murder of heretics, apostates, Jews, and witches. - Sam Harris, "Letter To A Christian Nation"
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Without citing the bible, what marks the bible as the one book with God's message? Whateverist 143 35513 March 31, 2022 at 7:05 am
Last Post: Gwaithmir
  When Evangelicals freak out. Jehanne 17 665 December 4, 2020 at 8:44 pm
Last Post: purplepurpose
  Bibe Study 2: Questionable Morality Rhondazvous 30 1643 May 27, 2019 at 12:23 pm
Last Post: Vicki Q
  Bible Study: The God who Lies and Deceives Rhondazvous 50 2998 May 24, 2019 at 5:52 pm
Last Post: Aegon
  Atheist Bible Study 1: Genesis GrandizerII 614 44295 March 9, 2019 at 8:38 pm
Last Post: Bucky Ball
  Bad News For Evangelicals Minimalist 62 4420 November 15, 2018 at 8:10 pm
Last Post: Dr H
  Priest publicly wishes for Pope's quick death... c172 18 3604 March 22, 2018 at 1:10 am
Last Post: c172
  The Problem With This Guy Is That He Does Not Understand Evangelicals Minimalist 1 780 April 6, 2017 at 12:19 am
Last Post: vorlon13
  Catholics vs. Evangelicals? TrueChristian 40 7426 January 15, 2016 at 1:23 pm
Last Post: MTL
  Review so far of the Romans study Drich 199 29113 December 18, 2015 at 12:17 pm
Last Post: TheRocketSurgeon



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)