- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 12/23/24 at 3:36 pm to Bass Tiger
quote:
Been there, the building is really cool but it's a grievance museum.
The Cowboy/Western museum in OKC is a much better museum with great western history and the displays are outstanding.
I've been to both. They both serve their purpose. Neither is "better" than the other.
Posted on 12/23/24 at 3:36 pm to Stinger_1066
quote:
Does God exist?
----
No
quote:
I made no proclamation.
You said God does not exist.
That my friend, is a proclamation.
It's a declarative assertion.
Now feel free to amend your arrogant, nonfalsifiable statement as you'd like, and we can address it.
But don't deny you said what you said.
This post was edited on 12/23/24 at 4:05 pm
Posted on 12/23/24 at 3:39 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
1. You obviously take a more "liberal" view than your historian counterparts as most New Testament scholars place the Gospel of John between the years AD 85-100.
I have several Bibles I read, one is called, The Open Bible expanded edition KJV.....very good Bible, the publisher is Thomas Nelson.
The contributors to this great Bible includes 6 PH.Ds and several TH.Ds. Their research shows The Gospel of John was likely penned between 60-90 A.D. The discovery of John Rylands Papyrus 52 which contains portions of John 18:31-33, 37, 38. gives credence to the time frame of 60-90 A.D.
The John Rylands Papyrus 52 was dated to approximately 135 A.D. which means the original scripture was likely many decades earlier because it would have been many decades later after the original scripture was copied and eventually circulated to Egypt via the John Rylands Papyrus 52.
Posted on 12/23/24 at 4:05 pm to Stinger_1066
I logic just fine. You care so little about the church as an institution that you've spent most of the day bleeding all over this threat.
It is you that are lacking in logic here.
I'll give you the last word. We both know that you will have it.
It is you that are lacking in logic here.
I'll give you the last word. We both know that you will have it.
Posted on 12/23/24 at 4:43 pm to yakster
quote:
It wasn’t just Jews that had him crucified
According to Paul,
quote:
6Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away. 7But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. 8None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
And one of Paul’s disciples gave us a clue as ro who the “rulers of this age” were:
quote:
12For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.
Don’t kill the messenger. It wasn’t the Jews or the Romans who said killed Jesus, but the evil angels in heaven who did it.
quote:
The crowd yelled to Pilate, crucify him, let his blood be on our hands and the hands of our children. Matthew 27
Sorry, no reasonable person could possible believe a group of people, in unison, could or would state that they accept the blood guilt of killing an innocent man and that the blood guilt would be passed to their children.
Posted on 12/23/24 at 4:55 pm to Stinger_1066
quote:
OK, now I know you are a complete dumbass
I don’t know man, I would say partial but not complete
quote:
You accused me of "loving rape". I said making an unsubstantiated accusation like that was un-Christian. It had nothing to do with whether or not you or I agree or disagree with rape.
Ehhh, women letting their guard down makes you hard is pretty disturbing
quote:
For the record, rape is wrong and is a crim
I’m glad I talked sense in you
quote:
And you are an intellectual midge
I think I'm on short person level, not midget though. You got kinda redundant there
Posted on 12/23/24 at 5:03 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
Sorry, no reasonable person could possible believe a group of people, in unison, could or would
Is this a joke I don't get? I mean any one reading human history of the last 5000 years knows this as false
Posted on 12/23/24 at 5:23 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
Of course the census of Quirinius is a made of myth by the gospel writer of “Luke” but they’d never believe the evidence.
Actually it did happen, but the timing tells us everything.
Herod died on or before 4 BC. He divided Judea's leadership up between his sons, who had fricked up everything so bad that in 7 AD Rome came in, revoked Judea's independence, and added Judea to their Syrian Providence.
Qurirnius was the Governor of Syria, and needed the citizens counted for taxation and military inscription purposes. So Qurininus really did do a census of Judea on, or shortly after 7 AD.
The problem was this caused massive riots. The peacetime census done by a foreign government was a slap in the face to Jewish custom (see Satan tempting David to perform a peacetime census). So Jews weren't traveling to their place of ancestry, they were rioting. Josephus covers this. Josephus, however, didn't cover earlier riots (which would have happened) for earlier peacetime censuses (because there were none).
The traveling to one's birth place to be counted looks like D tier author who doesn't have control over their story and just starts making shite up to cover up their lack of plot foresight. It is such a ridiculously contrived element to censuses that I have to question the IQ of anyone who'd believe such a thing could happen.
Anyway, the issue this causes is: How can the census that supposedly made Mary and Joseph travel to Bethlehem under the Roman Governor Quirinius which took place in or after 7 AD have occurred on or before 4 BC (when Herod died). This has to be the order of things unless you're going to argue that Zombie Herod (who had been dead for over a decade) tried to kill Jesus as a child.
This post was edited on 12/23/24 at 5:27 pm
Posted on 12/23/24 at 5:58 pm to Azkiger
quote:
Herod died on or before 4 BC. He divided Judea's leadership up between his sons, who had fricked up everything so bad that in 7 AD Rome came in, revoked Judea's independence, and added Judea to their Syrian Providence.
Christians on this site can’t understand basic math and recorded history. They will deny this.
quote:
The traveling to one's birth place to be counted looks like D tier author who doesn't have control over their story and just starts making shite up to cover up their lack of plot foresight. It is such a ridiculously contrived element to censuses that I have to question the IQ of anyone who'd believe such a thing could happen.
That’s what I’ve been trying to convey. And it’s not one’s birth place, but the birth place of one of a million ancestors from a thousand years ago.
It’s not that they are all stupid, though some or many are. Even intelligent people get brainwashed and are incapable of basic logical thought when it comes to their deeply held religious beliefs.
quote:
Anyway, the issue this causes is: How can the census that supposedly made Mary and Joseph travel to Bethlehem under the Roman Governor Quirinius which took place in or after 7 AD have occurred on or before 4 BC (when Herod died).
I am hopeful, but I doubt you will get one legitimate logical answer out of these people.
Posted on 12/23/24 at 6:19 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:Again, you're staggering poster to poster, reverting to legalese debates of scripture which is written in peri-historic non-legalese. Worse yet, it's scripture in which you do not believe, and your belief set is pertinent because your resultant bias is evident. It is neither logical, nor scientific, nor fact based.
Squirrelmeister
So assuming a desire to expand your knowledge, how about staying clear of scripture, and addressing non-Christian historical accounts? Address first the aspects which are non-debatable. Then again, you attempt to scripturalize those too.
All of which points to a lack of ability to carry an argument on this stage at all.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 4:04 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
You said God does not exist.
That my friend, is a proclamation.
It's a declarative assertion.
Now feel free to amend your arrogant, nonfalsifiable statement as you'd like, and we can address it.
But don't deny you said what you said.
The discussion in this thread is about whether or not Jesus was a refugee. You refuse to accept that, because deep down it makes you feel guilty about supporting a closed border. Your defense mechanism is to deny the truth of the commercial.
I did not come here to try to convince you or anyone else that there is no god. I came here to point out to people like you that, based on the scriptures that you believe, Jesus was in fact a refugee. So now you are between a rock and a hard place. Caught in a dilemma.
I, however, have a clear conscience about wanting Trump to stop illegal immigration because I do not feel the guilt that you feel. I don't believe in your scriptures, so there is no reason for me to feel any guilt. They can run their commercial 1000 times and it has no impact on me.
During the course of this discussion, for some unknown reason, you decided to ask me if there is a god. I said no. I owe you no proof. But if you accept my answer as fact, then you also will have nothing to feel guilty about.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 4:54 am to Stinger_1066
it makes you feel guilty about supporting a closed border
What countries of the world have any thing but closed borders? You think people want the control on borders due to religious beliefs.
What a wasted bunch of pages to simply deny anything to do with Christ Jesus.
Satan thanks you for your service.
Peace and love to you all through Christ Jesus.
What countries of the world have any thing but closed borders? You think people want the control on borders due to religious beliefs.
What a wasted bunch of pages to simply deny anything to do with Christ Jesus.
Satan thanks you for your service.
Peace and love to you all through Christ Jesus.
This post was edited on 12/24/24 at 4:56 am
Posted on 12/24/24 at 4:56 am to Stinger_1066
quote:You have no clue as to what I do or don't accept. None whatsoever.
The discussion in this thread is about whether or not Jesus was a refugee. You refuse to accept that
Given that, allow me to cue you in. When you approach the Faith of others here under a penumbra of pseudologic, and with nothing but intent to defame or undermine, you're going to get exenterated, just as happened in this thread.
quote:Great news then. You did not accomplish what you didn't come here to accomplish.
I did not come here to try to convince you
quote:Again, you have no clue as to what I feel. None. If you crave knowledge of my feelings as a sort of comparator or interrelational compass to yours, you should inquire as to what they are.
I do not feel the guilt that you feel.
quote:Were it true you owed no proof, it would be a good thing.
During the course of this discussion, for some unknown reason, you decided to ask me if there is a god. I said no. I owe you no proof.
Because clearly you provided none.
Unfortunately, if a declarative assertion such as the one you made is not backed by such proof, it relegates the issuer to a fool's status.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 5:07 am to Stinger_1066
quote:
I came here to point out to people like you that, based on the scriptures that you believe, Jesus was in fact a refugee.
Only in the gospel according to Matthew was Jesus a refugee. Born in Bethlehem in a house where Joseph and Mary lived, they escaped to Egypt. Coming back to Judea, they headed straight back to their home in Bethlehem. At the last minute they turned north and headed to Nazareth.
In Luke, Joseph and Mary lived in Nazareth to begin with and didn’t even have a house in Bethlehem. But there is no refugee story in Luke. In fact, the text says when they were done with Mary’s purification, they went straight back to Nazareth.
Guys like NC_retard aren’t even aware of the contradiction or don’t understand. They’ll make up shite in their head to rationalize the two contradictory myths into one.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 5:12 am to SkiUtah420
quote:
he traveled from Roman Judea to Roman Egypt
So, he didn't even need a passport?
Jesus was a refugee, same as the people in California who are moving to Texas.
This post was edited on 12/24/24 at 5:29 am
Posted on 12/24/24 at 5:15 am to Squirrelmeister
quote:Fearful of Archelaus, as the story goes.
At the last minute they turned north and headed to Nazareth.
You and Stinger_1066 are up early together. Did he disturb you when he got out of bed to pee?
Posted on 12/24/24 at 5:42 am to Squirrelmeister
the evil angels in heaven who followed Lucifer thrown out of Heaven by God that did it.
That is the Spiritual warfare my brother.
That is the Spiritual warfare my brother.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 7:53 am to themunch
quote:
the evil angels in heaven who followed Lucifer thrown out of Heaven by God that did it.
I think you are confusing the story of the angels kicked out of heaven with the story of Helel Ben Shahar. Let me explain.
The most important scripture to New Testament authors was a book we call 1 Enoch. It didn’t make it into the Roman canon but did make it into the Christian canon in Ethiopia. The references to the angels falling from heaven in the New Testament are derived from this book 1 Enoch. The sect(s) of Jews that became Christians preserved this book, while the sect(s) of Jews that controlled Jerusalem (Pharisees and Sadducees) did not preserve 1 Enoch because it conflicted with their theology. Long story short - as a response to the first New Testament Bible produced by Markion of Sinope who was very anti-Jewish, the Roman Christians took Markion’s Bible and wanted to add the Jewish scriptures to the front of it and call it the Old Testament. They made a mistake though… rather than using the scriptures early Christians like Paul used, they instead grabbed scriptures that the descendants of the Pharisees preserved.
In 1 Enoch, the cosmos are set in an orderly fashion by El Elyon (God most High - the father of all the gods). All El’s angels, including Yahweh (the LORD) had a job to do. Yahweh’s job was to be the king over Israel. Other angels were stars in the sky… and they had a very orderly path they had to take as part of the covenant with El. But they transgressed the covenant and came out at the wrong time, and they were consequently cast down from heaven and imprisoned in a deep pit on earth. Those are the fallen angels in Christian mythology, or at least the root of the myths.
But why’d those stars come out at the wrong time in the wrong position? It’s a tale of two calendars. It was a calendar dispute. You see, first temple Jews and Israelites used a solar calendar. After getting their asses whooped and destroyed, the exiles returned from Babylon with a new priestly class and a new calendar- the Babylonian lunar calendar. The remnants of the first temple sect that used the solar calendar wasn’t allowed to participate in rituals in the temple in Jerusalem… this sect became “Enochian” Jewish sects like the Essenes. The lunar calendar using Jews in charge in the temple were called Pharisees which is just a barely different spelling of Parsis (Persians). Check out Isaiah 45:1-2 if you want to learn more.
So who is Lucifer? It’s the Latin translation of “Phosphorus” which is the Greek word chosen by the translators of the Septuagint (Greek translation of Hebrew Old Testament). Phosphorus was chosen to replace the word Helel of the full phrase Helel Ben Shahar.
Lucifer son of the morning is a translation of Helel Ben Shahar. We know what Helel Ben Shahar means and where is comes from now, thanks to deciphering of what is called the Ugaritic library… it was dug up just north of Tyre and was a library of Canaanite literature. Helel Ben Shahar was Helel (just a name) Ben (son of) Shahar (the god of the rising son). Phosphorus or Lucifer really isn’t that bad of a translation considering that the son of a sun deity would probably be shining.
In the Ugaritic library, there was a story of Helel Ben Shahar (same exact words used in order in Isaiah 14:12) who tried to usurp El Elyon but was defeated and cast down. Ok now re-read Isaiah 14 in its proper context, you now knowing that the author is comparing the king of Babylon to Helel Ben Shahar.
Side note: Shahar (god of the rising son) was the twin brother of Shalim (god of the setting son). This is all contained within the Ugaritic library.
The original inhabitants of Jerusalem were the Jebusites (another Canaanite tribe similar to the Israelites and Judahites). They named their city Jerusalem. Je for Jebusites. Salem for Shalim the god of dusk.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 8:09 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Fearful of Archelaus, as the story goes.
Yeah the same Archelaus that we know from non Christian records was out of power or dead by the time Quirinius became governor.
quote:
You and Stinger_1066 are up early together. Did he disturb you when he got out of bed to pee?
At least your gay comments are funny, unlike Roger who himself is a closeted homosexual.
Page 11 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News