Discussion:
Catholic/Roman
(too old to reply)
W.T.S.
2014-08-03 12:20:44 UTC
Permalink
Main article: Catholic
Shortly before convoking the council that inserted into the
Nicene Creed the description of the church as catholic, Emperor
Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica, which limited the
ecclesiastical application of this term to upholders of the
teaching of the First Council of Nicaea.
OK then.
Another history lesson from the jew boy.
• Was not Jesus a Jew boy ?
I dunno.
I wasn't around.
No, you weren't. But, according to your mythical bible,
he was, and a rabbi to boot.
Too bad he never really existed.
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-03 18:09:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by W.T.S.
Main article: Catholic
Shortly before convoking the council that inserted into the
Nicene Creed the description of the church as catholic, Emperor
Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica, which limited the
ecclesiastical application of this term to upholders of the
teaching of the First Council of Nicaea.
OK then.
Another history lesson from the jew boy.
� Was not Jesus a Jew boy ?
I dunno.
I wasn't around.
No, you weren't. But, according to your mythical bible,
he was, and a rabbi to boot.
Too bad he never really existed.
How is someone who never existed claimed as the MESSIAH?
Moses foretold the Messiah in the Oracles untrusted to the Jews, the Arabs, the cousins of the Jews certified that He really came and His name was Jesus.
Christ had to be born in the world. Jesus is the Christ. Then Jesus was born in to the world. Simple logic
Free Lunch
2014-08-03 18:26:34 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 3 Aug 2014 11:09:37 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by W.T.S.
Main article: Catholic
Shortly before convoking the council that inserted into the
Nicene Creed the description of the church as catholic, Emperor
Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica, which limited the
ecclesiastical application of this term to upholders of the
teaching of the First Council of Nicaea.
OK then.
Another history lesson from the jew boy.
? Was not Jesus a Jew boy ?
I dunno.
I wasn't around.
No, you weren't. But, according to your mythical bible,
he was, and a rabbi to boot.
Too bad he never really existed.
How is someone who never existed claimed as the MESSIAH?
We have no idea if there was a specific model in mind for those stories
or if it was heavily exaggerated. The testable claims seem to fail.
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Moses foretold the Messiah in the Oracles untrusted to the Jews, the Arabs, the cousins of the Jews certified that He really came and His name was Jesus.
Christ had to be born in the world. Jesus is the Christ. Then Jesus was born in to the world. Simple logic
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-04 14:55:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
How is someone who never existed claimed as the MESSIAH?
We have no idea if there was a specific model in mind for those stories
or if it was heavily exaggerated. The testable claims seem to fail.
According to Moses, Messiah has to be born into the world and will have authority to amend the Law given to Israel on behalf of humanity. Jesus is the Messiah and the Law was amended and shared with the rest of humanity, therefore Jesus was born into this world. SIMPLE LOGIC but too difficult for the reprobate minds.
------------
Africa, stick to God and His wise Laws, for the first shall be the last and the last shall be the first.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Moses foretold the Messiah in the Oracles untrusted to the Jews, the Arabs, the cousins of the Jews certified that He really came and His name was Jesus.
Christ had to be born in the world. Jesus is the Christ. Then Jesus was born in to the world. Simple logic
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Free Lunch
2014-08-04 23:11:13 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 07:55:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
How is someone who never existed claimed as the MESSIAH?
We have no idea if there was a specific model in mind for those stories
or if it was heavily exaggerated. The testable claims seem to fail.
According to Moses, Messiah has to be born into the world and will have authority to amend the Law given to Israel on behalf of humanity. Jesus is the Messiah and the Law was amended and shared with the rest of humanity, therefore Jesus was born into this world. SIMPLE LOGIC but too difficult for the reprobate minds.
There is a great deal of evidence that the claims found in Moses are
false.
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
------------
Africa, stick to God and His wise Laws, for the first shall be the last and the last shall be the first.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Moses foretold the Messiah in the Oracles untrusted to the Jews, the Arabs, the cousins of the Jews certified that He really came and His name was Jesus.
Christ had to be born in the world. Jesus is the Christ. Then Jesus was born in to the world. Simple logic
Based on indefensible assumptions.
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-05 14:20:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 07:55:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
How is someone who never existed claimed as the MESSIAH?
We have no idea if there was a specific model in mind for those stories
or if it was heavily exaggerated. The testable claims seem to fail.
According to Moses, Messiah has to be born into the world and will have authority to amend the Law given to Israel on behalf of humanity. Jesus is the Messiah and the Law was amended and shared with the rest of humanity, therefore Jesus was born into this world. SIMPLE LOGIC but too difficult for the reprobate minds.
There is a great deal of evidence that the claims found in Moses are
false.
If the claim were false you will never hear about Ismaelites living in Jerusalem. No, it is not false because the war between Israel and the Arabs is grounded in this claim. Secularism is demaging your brain
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
------------
Africa, stick to God and His wise Laws, for the first shall be the last and the last shall be the first.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Moses foretold the Messiah in the Oracles untrusted to the Jews, the Arabs, the cousins of the Jews certified that He really came and His name was Jesus.
Christ had to be born in the world. Jesus is the Christ. Then Jesus was born in to the world. Simple logic
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Free Lunch
2014-08-05 23:25:17 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 07:20:14 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 07:55:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
How is someone who never existed claimed as the MESSIAH?
We have no idea if there was a specific model in mind for those stories
or if it was heavily exaggerated. The testable claims seem to fail.
According to Moses, Messiah has to be born into the world and will have authority to amend the Law given to Israel on behalf of humanity. Jesus is the Messiah and the Law was amended and shared with the rest of humanity, therefore Jesus was born into this world. SIMPLE LOGIC but too difficult for the reprobate minds.
There is a great deal of evidence that the claims found in Moses are
false.
If the claim were false you will never hear about Ismaelites living in Jerusalem. No, it is not false because the war between Israel and the Arabs is grounded in this claim. Secularism is demaging your brain
Just because three different religions accept certain scriptures and are
willing to kill to support their version about what their god wants,
that does not make those stories true.
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-06 14:36:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 07:20:14 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 07:55:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
How is someone who never existed claimed as the MESSIAH?
We have no idea if there was a specific model in mind for those stories
or if it was heavily exaggerated. The testable claims seem to fail.
According to Moses, Messiah has to be born into the world and will have authority to amend the Law given to Israel on behalf of humanity. Jesus is the Messiah and the Law was amended and shared with the rest of humanity, therefore Jesus was born into this world. SIMPLE LOGIC but too difficult for the reprobate minds.
There is a great deal of evidence that the claims found in Moses are
false.
If the claim were false you will never hear about Ismaelites living in Jerusalem. No, it is not false because the war between Israel and the Arabs is grounded in this claim. Secularism is demaging your brain
Just because three different religions accept certain scriptures and are
willing to kill to support their version about what their god wants,
that does not make those stories true.
This is why I compare you atheists to children who don't really understand the world around them. And this comparison is very apt. All you see is 3 religions accepting certain Scriptures and willing to kill each other.
The Transfiguration is a foreign language for you.
Sir, the Xeros photocopier( Deut. 18:15-19)allowed the Arabs to make a copy of a Jewish Messiah, hence the war over Jerusalem. This too is complicated for your atheistic brain.
Yet, you are the one boasting about historical knowledge. If you were really history literate, you would have known that you are not Christianity first enemies. Countless of antagonists of Christianity went before you but none of them ever used your argument. CHRISTIANITY WAS BORN IN POLEMICS AND CONTROVERSIES and it won all.
Free Lunch
2014-08-06 22:55:53 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 07:36:03 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 07:20:14 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
If the claim were false you will never hear about Ismaelites living in
Jerusalem. No, it is not false because the war between Israel and the
Arabs is grounded in this claim. Secularism is demaging your brain
Just because three different religions accept certain scriptures and are
willing to kill to support their version about what their god wants,
that does not make those stories true.
This is why I compare you atheists to children who don't really
understand the world around them. And this comparison is very apt. All
you see is 3 religions accepting certain Scriptures and willing to kill
each other.
I see no evidence to back up any of the claims of any of those
religions.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The Transfiguration is a foreign language for you.
It is a story that is completely unsubstatiated.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Sir, the Xeros photocopier( Deut. 18:15-19)allowed the Arabs to make a
copy of a Jewish Messiah, hence the war over Jerusalem. This too is
complicated for your atheistic brain.
Did you intend to make sense? You failed.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yet, you are the one boasting about historical knowledge. If you were
really history literate, you would have known that you are not
Christianity first enemies. Countless of antagonists of Christianity
went before you but none of them ever used your argument. CHRISTIANITY
WAS BORN IN POLEMICS AND CONTROVERSIES and it won all.
It won battles of BS without a scintilla of evidence.
Dakota
2014-08-07 00:39:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 07:36:03 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 07:20:14 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
If the claim were false you will never hear about Ismaelites living in
Jerusalem. No, it is not false because the war between Israel and the
Arabs is grounded in this claim. Secularism is demaging your brain
Just because three different religions accept certain scriptures and are
willing to kill to support their version about what their god wants,
that does not make those stories true.
This is why I compare you atheists to children who don't really
understand the world around them. And this comparison is very apt. All
you see is 3 religions accepting certain Scriptures and willing to kill
each other.
I see no evidence to back up any of the claims of any of those
religions.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The Transfiguration is a foreign language for you.
It is a story that is completely unsubstatiated.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Sir, the Xeros photocopier( Deut. 18:15-19)allowed the Arabs to make a
copy of a Jewish Messiah, hence the war over Jerusalem. This too is
complicated for your atheistic brain.
Did you intend to make sense? You failed.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yet, you are the one boasting about historical knowledge. If you were
really history literate, you would have known that you are not
Christianity first enemies. Countless of antagonists of Christianity
went before you but none of them ever used your argument. CHRISTIANITY
WAS BORN IN POLEMICS AND CONTROVERSIES and it won all.
It won battles of BS without a scintilla of evidence.
If Christianity's was born in polemics and controversies and won all,
there would have been no need for that vile religion to torture and
murder so-called heretics. Christianity gained converts not by using
well reasoned arguments but by the sword.
Free Lunch
2014-08-07 22:34:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dakota
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 07:36:03 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 07:20:14 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
If the claim were false you will never hear about Ismaelites living in
Jerusalem. No, it is not false because the war between Israel and the
Arabs is grounded in this claim. Secularism is demaging your brain
Just because three different religions accept certain scriptures and are
willing to kill to support their version about what their god wants,
that does not make those stories true.
This is why I compare you atheists to children who don't really
understand the world around them. And this comparison is very apt. All
you see is 3 religions accepting certain Scriptures and willing to kill
each other.
I see no evidence to back up any of the claims of any of those
religions.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The Transfiguration is a foreign language for you.
It is a story that is completely unsubstatiated.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Sir, the Xeros photocopier( Deut. 18:15-19)allowed the Arabs to make a
copy of a Jewish Messiah, hence the war over Jerusalem. This too is
complicated for your atheistic brain.
Did you intend to make sense? You failed.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yet, you are the one boasting about historical knowledge. If you were
really history literate, you would have known that you are not
Christianity first enemies. Countless of antagonists of Christianity
went before you but none of them ever used your argument. CHRISTIANITY
WAS BORN IN POLEMICS AND CONTROVERSIES and it won all.
It won battles of BS without a scintilla of evidence.
If Christianity's was born in polemics and controversies and won all,
there would have been no need for that vile religion to torture and
murder so-called heretics. Christianity gained converts not by using
well reasoned arguments but by the sword.
Mohammed learned well from Christian leaders.
The Chief Castrator Of The Jews
2014-08-08 21:51:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Dakota
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 07:36:03 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 07:20:14 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
If the claim were false you will never hear about Ismaelites living in
Jerusalem. No, it is not false because the war between Israel and the
Arabs is grounded in this claim. Secularism is demaging your brain
Just because three different religions accept certain scriptures and are
willing to kill to support their version about what their god wants,
that does not make those stories true.
This is why I compare you atheists to children who don't really
understand the world around them. And this comparison is very apt. All
you see is 3 religions accepting certain Scriptures and willing to kill
each other.
I see no evidence to back up any of the claims of any of those
religions.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The Transfiguration is a foreign language for you.
It is a story that is completely unsubstatiated.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Sir, the Xeros photocopier( Deut. 18:15-19)allowed the Arabs to make a
copy of a Jewish Messiah, hence the war over Jerusalem. This too is
complicated for your atheistic brain.
Did you intend to make sense? You failed.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yet, you are the one boasting about historical knowledge. If you were
really history literate, you would have known that you are not
Christianity first enemies. Countless of antagonists of Christianity
went before you but none of them ever used your argument. CHRISTIANITY
WAS BORN IN POLEMICS AND CONTROVERSIES and it won all.
It won battles of BS without a scintilla of evidence.
If Christianity's was born in polemics and controversies and won all,
there would have been no need for that vile religion to torture and
murder so-called heretics. Christianity gained converts not by using
well reasoned arguments but by the sword.
Mohammed learned well from Christian leaders.
This doesn't explain anything. It doesn't explain why he is the Messiah, a sole ruler in the likeness of Ceasar Augustus.
It does not explain, why he is the Messiah a Lawgiver like Moses.
It does NOT EXPLAIN why he is the Messiah, an apostle like Jesus
as the epistle to the Hebrews encourages us to have our eyes fixed on Jesus, the Apostle of our FAITH...
--------------------
"OVERSIMPLIFIERS DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THE BIBLE, SO THEY JUST INVENT AN EXPLANATION THAT DESCRIBE THEIR OWN DESIRE."
Free Lunch
2014-08-08 22:15:46 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 8 Aug 2014 14:51:55 -0700 (PDT), The Chief Castrator Of The Jews
Post by The Chief Castrator Of The Jews
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Dakota
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 07:36:03 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 07:20:14 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
If the claim were false you will never hear about Ismaelites living in
Jerusalem. No, it is not false because the war between Israel and the
Arabs is grounded in this claim. Secularism is demaging your brain
Just because three different religions accept certain scriptures and are
willing to kill to support their version about what their god wants,
that does not make those stories true.
This is why I compare you atheists to children who don't really
understand the world around them. And this comparison is very apt. All
you see is 3 religions accepting certain Scriptures and willing to kill
each other.
I see no evidence to back up any of the claims of any of those
religions.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The Transfiguration is a foreign language for you.
It is a story that is completely unsubstatiated.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Sir, the Xeros photocopier( Deut. 18:15-19)allowed the Arabs to make a
copy of a Jewish Messiah, hence the war over Jerusalem. This too is
complicated for your atheistic brain.
Did you intend to make sense? You failed.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yet, you are the one boasting about historical knowledge. If you were
really history literate, you would have known that you are not
Christianity first enemies. Countless of antagonists of Christianity
went before you but none of them ever used your argument. CHRISTIANITY
WAS BORN IN POLEMICS AND CONTROVERSIES and it won all.
It won battles of BS without a scintilla of evidence.
If Christianity's was born in polemics and controversies and won all,
there would have been no need for that vile religion to torture and
murder so-called heretics. Christianity gained converts not by using
well reasoned arguments but by the sword.
Mohammed learned well from Christian leaders.
This doesn't explain anything. It doesn't explain why he is the Messiah, a sole ruler in the likeness of Ceasar Augustus.
It does not explain, why he is the Messiah a Lawgiver like Moses.
It does NOT EXPLAIN why he is the Messiah, an apostle like Jesus
as the epistle to the Hebrews encourages us to have our eyes fixed on Jesus, the Apostle of our FAITH...
--------------------
"OVERSIMPLIFIERS DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THE BIBLE, SO THEY JUST INVENT AN EXPLANATION THAT DESCRIBE THEIR OWN DESIRE."
Until you offer some evidence that the Bible is reliable, don't waste my
time with your just-so allegations.
The Chief Castrator Of The Jews
2014-08-08 21:54:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Dakota
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 07:36:03 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 07:20:14 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
If the claim were false you will never hear about Ismaelites living in
Jerusalem. No, it is not false because the war between Israel and the
Arabs is grounded in this claim. Secularism is demaging your brain
Just because three different religions accept certain scriptures and are
willing to kill to support their version about what their god wants,
that does not make those stories true.
This is why I compare you atheists to children who don't really
understand the world around them. And this comparison is very apt. All
you see is 3 religions accepting certain Scriptures and willing to kill
each other.
I see no evidence to back up any of the claims of any of those
religions.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The Transfiguration is a foreign language for you.
It is a story that is completely unsubstatiated.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Sir, the Xeros photocopier( Deut. 18:15-19)allowed the Arabs to make a
copy of a Jewish Messiah, hence the war over Jerusalem. This too is
complicated for your atheistic brain.
Did you intend to make sense? You failed.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yet, you are the one boasting about historical knowledge. If you were
really history literate, you would have known that you are not
Christianity first enemies. Countless of antagonists of Christianity
went before you but none of them ever used your argument. CHRISTIANITY
WAS BORN IN POLEMICS AND CONTROVERSIES and it won all.
It won battles of BS without a scintilla of evidence.
If Christianity's was born in polemics and controversies and won all,
there would have been no need for that vile religion to torture and
murder so-called heretics. Christianity gained converts not by using
well reasoned arguments but by the sword.
Mohammed learned well from Christian leaders.
Tell me why he took up that title as a reignal name, then I will know that you understand the issue involved. And who the real owner OF the TITLE IS
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-09 17:38:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Dakota
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 07:36:03 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 07:20:14 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
If the claim were false you will never hear about Ismaelites living in
Jerusalem. No, it is not false because the war between Israel and the
Arabs is grounded in this claim. Secularism is demaging your brain
Just because three different religions accept certain scriptures and are
willing to kill to support their version about what their god wants,
that does not make those stories true.
This is why I compare you atheists to children who don't really
understand the world around them. And this comparison is very apt. All
you see is 3 religions accepting certain Scriptures and willing to kill
each other.
I see no evidence to back up any of the claims of any of those
religions.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The Transfiguration is a foreign language for you.
It is a story that is completely unsubstatiated.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Sir, the Xeros photocopier( Deut. 18:15-19)allowed the Arabs to make a
copy of a Jewish Messiah, hence the war over Jerusalem. This too is
complicated for your atheistic brain.
Did you intend to make sense? You failed.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yet, you are the one boasting about historical knowledge. If you were
really history literate, you would have known that you are not
Christianity first enemies. Countless of antagonists of Christianity
went before you but none of them ever used your argument. CHRISTIANITY
WAS BORN IN POLEMICS AND CONTROVERSIES and it won all.
It won battles of BS without a scintilla of evidence.
If Christianity's was born in polemics and controversies and won all,
there would have been no need for that vile religion to torture and
murder so-called heretics. Christianity gained converts not by using
well reasoned arguments but by the sword.
Mohammed learned well from Christian leaders.
The Arabian Mohammad might have learned from the Christians; but the Jewish Mohammad, the prototype did NOT.
If he Arabian Mohammad as yu say,learned from the Chrisians, and by Christians you mean the Trinitarians, how do you explain his rejection of TRINITY?
He did not make the cross his central doctrinal theme, why?
-------------
Timbuktu shall rise again...
Free Lunch
2014-08-09 20:16:53 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 10:38:50 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Dakota
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 07:36:03 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 07:20:14 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
If the claim were false you will never hear about Ismaelites living in
Jerusalem. No, it is not false because the war between Israel and the
Arabs is grounded in this claim. Secularism is demaging your brain
Just because three different religions accept certain scriptures and are
willing to kill to support their version about what their god wants,
that does not make those stories true.
This is why I compare you atheists to children who don't really
understand the world around them. And this comparison is very apt. All
you see is 3 religions accepting certain Scriptures and willing to kill
each other.
I see no evidence to back up any of the claims of any of those
religions.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The Transfiguration is a foreign language for you.
It is a story that is completely unsubstatiated.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Sir, the Xeros photocopier( Deut. 18:15-19)allowed the Arabs to make a
copy of a Jewish Messiah, hence the war over Jerusalem. This too is
complicated for your atheistic brain.
Did you intend to make sense? You failed.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yet, you are the one boasting about historical knowledge. If you were
really history literate, you would have known that you are not
Christianity first enemies. Countless of antagonists of Christianity
went before you but none of them ever used your argument. CHRISTIANITY
WAS BORN IN POLEMICS AND CONTROVERSIES and it won all.
It won battles of BS without a scintilla of evidence.
If Christianity's was born in polemics and controversies and won all,
there would have been no need for that vile religion to torture and
murder so-called heretics. Christianity gained converts not by using
well reasoned arguments but by the sword.
Mohammed learned well from Christian leaders.
The Arabian Mohammad might have learned from the Christians; but the Jewish Mohammad, the prototype did NOT.
If he Arabian Mohammad as yu say,learned from the Chrisians, and by Christians you mean the Trinitarians, how do you explain his rejection of TRINITY?
He did not make the cross his central doctrinal theme, why?
Israel was a complete failure at imposing their religion by force.
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-10 17:43:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
He did not make the cross his central doctrinal theme, why?
Israel was a complete failure at imposing their religion by force.
Religion doesn't need to be imposed by force, so there is no failure on the part of Israel, yet Israel shares with the Goyim the Moral Law handed down by Moses. The only valid explanation is Al Massioch/Christ, the proper channel as foretold by Deut.18:15-19 and the rest of the biblical text. JESUS IS THE MESSIAH, the light to the Gentiles, terefore he existed. Simple logic
Free Lunch
2014-08-10 17:52:31 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:43:08 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
He did not make the cross his central doctrinal theme, why?
Israel was a complete failure at imposing their religion by force.
Religion doesn't need to be imposed by force, so there is no failure on the part of Israel, yet Israel shares with the Goyim the Moral Law handed down by Moses. The only valid explanation is Al Massioch/Christ, the proper channel as foretold by Deut.18:15-19 and the rest of the biblical text. JESUS IS THE MESSIAH, the light to the Gentiles, terefore he existed. Simple logic
Islam and Christianity are total heresies as far as Judaism is
concerned.
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-11 18:14:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:43:08 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
He did not make the cross his central doctrinal theme, why?
Israel was a complete failure at imposing their religion by force.
Religion doesn't need to be imposed by force, so there is no failure on the part of Israel, yet Israel shares with the Goyim the Moral Law handed down by Moses. The only valid explanation is Al Massioch/Christ, the proper channel as foretold by Deut.18:15-19 and the rest of the biblical text. JESUS IS THE MESSIAH, the light to the Gentiles, terefore he existed. Simple logic
Islam and Christianity are total heresies as far as Judaism is
concerned.
THIS IS WHY THEY LOST JERUSALEM TO THE ISMAELITES. And now they are fighting for it.


So let Judaism tell the real MESSIAH to stand up because this was a part of the COVENANT that they contracted with God on the mountain. Otherwise, it is judaism which is deluded and blinded as Saint Paul had argued.
Transfuration put Jesus standing between Moses and Elijah, the Lawgiver from the Hebrew and the defender of the Law from the Ismaelites as the spirit of jealousy which was casted into Elijah was with him to defend the law.
THIS IS THE MEANING OF THE WAR BETWEEN JEWS AND ARABS OVER JERUSALEM
The Chief Castrator Of The Jews
2014-08-08 21:42:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dakota
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 07:36:03 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 07:20:14 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
If the claim were false you will never hear about Ismaelites living in
Jerusalem. No, it is not false because the war between Israel and the
Arabs is grounded in this claim. Secularism is demaging your brain
Just because three different religions accept certain scriptures and are
willing to kill to support their version about what their god wants,
that does not make those stories true.
This is why I compare you atheists to children who don't really
understand the world around them. And this comparison is very apt. All
you see is 3 religions accepting certain Scriptures and willing to kill
each other.
I see no evidence to back up any of the claims of any of those
religions.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The Transfiguration is a foreign language for you.
It is a story that is completely unsubstatiated.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Sir, the Xeros photocopier( Deut. 18:15-19)allowed the Arabs to make a
copy of a Jewish Messiah, hence the war over Jerusalem. This too is
complicated for your atheistic brain.
Did you intend to make sense? You failed.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yet, you are the one boasting about historical knowledge. If you were
really history literate, you would have known that you are not
Christianity first enemies. Countless of antagonists of Christianity
went before you but none of them ever used your argument. CHRISTIANITY
WAS BORN IN POLEMICS AND CONTROVERSIES and it won all.
It won battles of BS without a scintilla of evidence.
If Christianity's was born in polemics and controversies and won all,
there would have been no need for that vile religion to torture and
murder so-called heretics. Christianity gained converts not by using
well reasoned arguments but by the sword.
You must NOT have read Origene, or Tertullian as
You have your history on Christianity wrong. Papal trinitarianism or Catholicism doesn't make up the whole Christianity.
And the thousand pagans who converted under Saint Paul's ministry did not convert by the sword.
Saint Paul never used violence against anybody.
Even the heretics in the roman world were trouble makers acting against the Law of the land. If the state pass a Law on heresy, the state is acting legally when it enforce it. Before the edict of Milan which was in the fourth century, Christianity was a religion of slaves and destitutes without a buying power
to own a sword. SO YOUR ARGUMENT IS WITHOUT MERIT
The Chief Castrator Of The Jews
2014-08-08 21:17:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 07:36:03 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 07:20:14 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
If the claim were false you will never hear about Ismaelites living in
Jerusalem. No, it is not false because the war between Israel and the
Arabs is grounded in this claim. Secularism is demaging your brain
Just because three different religions accept certain scriptures and are
willing to kill to support their version about what their god wants,
that does not make those stories true.
This is why I compare you atheists to children who don't really
understand the world around them. And this comparison is very apt. All
you see is 3 religions accepting certain Scriptures and willing to kill
each other.
I see no evidence to back up any of the claims of any of those
religions.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The Transfiguration is a foreign language for you.
It is a story that is completely unsubstatiated.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Sir, the Xeros photocopier( Deut. 18:15-19)allowed the Arabs to make a
copy of a Jewish Messiah, hence the war over Jerusalem. This too is
complicated for your atheistic brain.
Did you intend to make sense? You failed.
The sense here is that wherever you have the counterfeit, there is the original.
The Arabs are exhibiting the counterfeit of the Jewis Messiah you said never existed. Now it is for you to explain how this was made possible.
Admit you are a child as you don't understand the wolrd around you.
------------
"Oversimplifiers don't really understand the Bible, so they just invent their own explanations that describe their desires."
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yet, you are the one boasting about historical knowledge. If you were
really history literate, you would have known that you are not
Christianity first enemies. Countless of antagonists of Christianity
went before you but none of them ever used your argument. CHRISTIANITY
WAS BORN IN POLEMICS AND CONTROVERSIES and it won all.
It won battles of BS without a scintilla of evidence.
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-06 18:11:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 07:20:14 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 07:55:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
How is someone who never existed claimed as the MESSIAH?
We have no idea if there was a specific model in mind for those stories
or if it was heavily exaggerated. The testable claims seem to fail.
According to Moses, Messiah has to be born into the world and will have authority to amend the Law given to Israel on behalf of humanity. Jesus is the Messiah and the Law was amended and shared with the rest of humanity, therefore Jesus was born into this world. SIMPLE LOGIC but too difficult for the reprobate minds.
There is a great deal of evidence that the claims found in Moses are
false.
If the claim were false you will never hear about Ismaelites living in Jerusalem. No, it is not false because the war between Israel and the Arabs is grounded in this claim. Secularism is demaging your brain
Just because three different religions accept certain scriptures and are
willing to kill to support their version about what their god wants,
that does not make those stories true.
Not just 3 religions accepting certain scriptures but the symetrical balance between these 3 religions for us speaks of the Glory of God. And the center of the AXIS of these symetries, mind you, is Deut. 18:15-19. No human being could have just inserted this verse in the scriptures accidentally. THIS ONE IS BEYOND YOUR REASON.
Free Lunch
2014-08-06 22:59:09 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:11:35 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 07:20:14 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
If the claim were false you will never hear about Ismaelites living in Jerusalem. No, it is not false because the war between Israel and the Arabs is grounded in this claim. Secularism is demaging your brain
Just because three different religions accept certain scriptures and are
willing to kill to support their version about what their god wants,
that does not make those stories true.
Not just 3 religions accepting certain scriptures but the symetrical balance between these 3 religions for us speaks of the Glory of God. And the center of the AXIS of these symetries, mind you, is Deut. 18:15-19. No human being could have just inserted this verse in the scriptures accidentally. THIS ONE IS BEYOND YOUR REASON.
The prophecies attributed to Jesus have not taken place (Deut. 18:22).
Apparently you preach a false prophet and should also die. Thank you for
pointing out the core failure of your teachings.
The Chief Castrator Of The Jews
2014-08-08 21:26:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:11:35 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 07:20:14 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
If the claim were false you will never hear about Ismaelites living in Jerusalem. No, it is not false because the war between Israel and the Arabs is grounded in this claim. Secularism is demaging your brain
Just because three different religions accept certain scriptures and are
willing to kill to support their version about what their god wants,
that does not make those stories true.
Not just 3 religions accepting certain scriptures but the symetrical balance between these 3 religions for us speaks of the Glory of God. And the center of the AXIS of these symetries, mind you, is Deut. 18:15-19. No human being could have just inserted this verse in the scriptures accidentally. THIS ONE IS BEYOND YOUR REASON.
The prophecies attributed to Jesus have not taken place (Deut. 18:22).
Apparently you preach a false prophet and should also die. Thank you for
pointing out the core failure of your teachings.
It already took place but you did NOT know about it. It is your failure.
Arabs have their own Messiah a prophet in the likeness of Moses. It is not just profecy, it IS also CHRISTOLOGY. And Christ is a title not a name.
I will send you the Messiah a prophet like Moses, Him you shall listen. Deut.18:15
Here is its Christological formulation in the debate regarding the nature of Christ. Messiah is Messenger like Moses or Mohammad is Porphet like Moses
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-09 17:50:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:11:35 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
The prophecies attributed to Jesus have not taken place (Deut. 18:22).
Apparently you preach a false prophet and should also die. Thank you for
pointing out the core failure of your teachings.
So you are admitting that Jesus died? How come you said he never existed since only living being can die?
Yes, he existed, lived like you and me without the sin, and He was NOT a false prophet otherwise he would have died by stoning according to the provision in the Law of Moses. He was hung on the tree according to Roman criminal code. There is a meaning.
Free Lunch
2014-08-09 20:20:57 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 10:50:44 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:11:35 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
The prophecies attributed to Jesus have not taken place (Deut. 18:22).
Apparently you preach a false prophet and should also die. Thank you for
pointing out the core failure of your teachings.
So you are admitting that Jesus died?
I have no idea if there was a single teacher who was the primary model
or it was a mash-up of many teachers.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
How come you said he never existed since only living being can die?
I'm noting what you need to believe to make your stories consistent with
each other.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yes, he existed, lived like you and me without the sin,
So you claim.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
and He was NOT a false prophet otherwise he would have died by stoning
according to the provision in the Law of Moses. He was hung on the tree
according to Roman criminal code. There is a meaning.
Yes, the meaning was that the Romans didn't allow priests of foreign
religions to execute people in their provinces.
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-10 17:30:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 10:50:44 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:11:35 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
The prophecies attributed to Jesus have not taken place (Deut. 18:22).
Apparently you preach a false prophet and should also die. Thank you for
pointing out the core failure of your teachings.
So you are admitting that Jesus died?
I have no idea if there was a single teacher who was the primary model
or it was a mash-up of many teachers.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
How come you said he never existed since only living being can die?
I'm noting what you need to believe to make your stories consistent with
each other.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yes, he existed, lived like you and me without the sin,
So you claim.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
and He was NOT a false prophet otherwise he would have died by stoning
according to the provision in the Law of Moses. He was hung on the tree
according to Roman criminal code. There is a meaning.
Yes, the meaning was that the Romans didn't allow priests of foreign
religions to execute people in their provinces.
My question again: So He was executed? I thought you said He never lived?
Which one is your main contention?
Free Lunch
2014-08-10 17:51:44 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 10:50:44 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:11:35 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
The prophecies attributed to Jesus have not taken place (Deut. 18:22).
Apparently you preach a false prophet and should also die. Thank you for
pointing out the core failure of your teachings.
So you are admitting that Jesus died?
I have no idea if there was a single teacher who was the primary model
or it was a mash-up of many teachers.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
How come you said he never existed since only living being can die?
I'm noting what you need to believe to make your stories consistent with
each other.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yes, he existed, lived like you and me without the sin,
So you claim.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
and He was NOT a false prophet otherwise he would have died by stoning
according to the provision in the Law of Moses. He was hung on the tree
according to Roman criminal code. There is a meaning.
Yes, the meaning was that the Romans didn't allow priests of foreign
religions to execute people in their provinces.
My question again: So He was executed? I thought you said He never lived?
Which one is your main contention?
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-11 18:03:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to them.
Free Lunch
2014-08-12 02:19:24 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 11:03:18 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to them.
You have none.
nature bats last
2014-08-12 04:15:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.

The silence of the Roman occupiers is particularly
telling -- you'd think that if the tombs opened
up and the dead walked the streets like some HBO
series, one of those obsessive record keepers, the Romans,
might have thought to jot down a note.

Every mention of Jesus, found kalmost exclusively
in the Bible, was set down later, by writers who
never knew Jesus, and thus is entirely hearsay.


Seth
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-13 17:02:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by nature bats last
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.
Granted... But the question remains as why the first century enemies of CHRIST never questioned his existence? The pagan philosophers did NOT EVER
Celsus did not
Lucian did not
Epictetus did not
Galen did not
Porphyry did not
And the Rabbis of Judaism did not
Post by nature bats last
The silence of the Roman occupiers is particularly
telling -- you'd think that if the tombs opened
up and the dead walked the streets like some HBO
series, one of those obsessive record keepers, the Romans,
might have thought to jot down a note.
How would a roman record keeper knows that the guys who walked the street had been killed and were dead before?
And among the thousand criminals, common men and rebel Jews that the Romans crucified, which one of those they kept record of with name and family tree?
The answer is NONE. Therefore, cela va sans dire que for the Romans Jesus was just another common man who did not deserve a special attention.
And this is in line with many of Jesus' own parables where a small seed of mustard as insignificant as it might be died first before growing into a big tree with fruits plenty enough to feed the birds. SUCH WAS THE SEED OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD that no one had seen coming or growing into a big mighty nation.
Post by nature bats last
Every mention of Jesus, found kalmost exclusively
in the Bible, was set down later, by writers who
never knew Jesus, and thus is entirely hearsay.
Seth
b***@m.nu
2014-08-13 17:15:08 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 10:02:09 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.
Granted... But the question remains as why the first century enemies of CHRIST never questioned his existence? The pagan philosophers did NOT EVER
Celsus did not
Lucian did not
Epictetus did not
Galen did not
Porphyry did not
And the Rabbis of Judaism did not
let me ask you this. Did any of those people write anything at alll
about a jesus living or otherwise?
Post by LaBrume Matinale
How would a roman record keeper knows that the guys who walked the street had been killed and were dead before?
And among the thousand criminals, common men and rebel Jews that the Romans crucified, which one of those they kept record of with name and family tree?
The answer is NONE. Therefore, cela va sans dire que for the Romans Jesus was just another common man who did not deserve a special attention.
And this is in line with many of Jesus' own parables where a small seed of mustard as insignificant as it might be died first before growing into a big tree with fruits plenty enough to feed the birds. SUCH WAS THE SEED OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD that no one had seen coming or growing into a big mighty nation.
oh ok I guess not then... LOL kinda funny hehe
Christopher A. Lee
2014-08-13 18:25:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 10:02:09 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
None has ever been presented - at most it's hearsay many times removed
from the alleged events.

But in any case, things like virgin births, coming back to life a few
days after being painfully and slowly executed, don't happen - no
matter how many people write about it.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.
Granted... But the question remains as why the first century
enemies of CHRIST never questioned his existence?
Which assumes the very thing the moron is supposed to be proving -
before he's proved it.

And what "enemies" was he also presuming?
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The pagan philosophers did NOT EVER
Celsus did not
Lucian did not
Epictetus did not
Galen did not
Porphyry did not
And the Rabbis of Judaism did not
The moron imagines pretending these people were the enemies of some
mythical character so they didn't write about him, somehow shows he
was real?
Post by b***@m.nu
let me ask you this. Did any of those people write anything at alll
about a jesus living or otherwise?
It was a transparently stupid, dishonest, desperate rationalisation.

But more importantly, there were a couple of contemporary historians
living in the region at the time, neither of whom mentioned any of the
events from the virgin birth to the crucifixion.

The one whose works are available, Philo Judea, was born 20 BC and
died about 55 AD. He was Jewish aristocracy and related to the Herods
by marriage and business - but even though he was at the heart of
events he makes no mention of anything from the Gospels.

He's pretty important, because his nephew's wife Berenice is mentioned
in Acts.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
How would a roman record keeper knows that the guys who
walked the street had been killed and were dead before?
Like I said, rationalisation that presumes the very nonsense he is
supposed to be proving.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
And among the thousand criminals, common men and rebel
Jews that the Romans crucified, which one of those they kept
record of with name and family tree?
The Romans didn't crucify common criminals.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The answer is NONE. Therefore, cela va sans dire que for the
Romans Jesus was just another common man who did not
deserve a special attention.
Again, this presumes the very thing he is supposed to be proving, and
is no more than a rationalisation.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
And this is in line with many of Jesus' own parables where a small
seed of mustard as insignificant as it might be died first before
growing into a big tree with fruits plenty enough to feed the birds.
As does this.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
SUCH WAS THE SEED OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD
WHAT FUCKING KINGDOM OF WHAT FUCKING GOD was the idiot rudely and
stupidly presuming where it's just so much nonsense?
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
that no one had seen coming or growing into a big mighty nation.
What frisking nation?
Post by b***@m.nu
oh ok I guess not then... LOL kinda funny hehe
It was just being in-your-face, rudely stupid.

It knows atheists aren't Christians yet it bullshat _at_ us as if we
were.
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-13 22:24:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 10:02:09 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
None has ever been presented - at most it's hearsay many times removed
from the alleged events.
Remove from the alleged event? You don't need to be con·tem·po·ra·ne·ous of an alleged event to disprove its existence. ARE NOT YOU REMOVED FROM IT?
Post by Christopher A. Lee
But in any case, things like virgin births, coming back to life a few
days after being painfully and slowly executed, don't happen - no
matter how many people write about it.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.
Granted... But the question remains as why the first century
enemies of CHRIST never questioned his existence?
Which assumes the very thing the moron is supposed to be proving -
before he's proved it.
And what "enemies" was he also presuming?
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The pagan philosophers did NOT EVER
Celsus did not
Lucian did not
Epictetus did not
Galen did not
Porphyry did not
And the Rabbis of Judaism did not
The moron imagines pretending these people were the enemies of some
mythical character so they didn't write about him, somehow shows he
was real?
Post by b***@m.nu
let me ask you this. Did any of those people write anything at alll
about a jesus living or otherwise?
It was a transparently stupid, dishonest, desperate rationalisation.
But more importantly, there were a couple of contemporary historians
living in the region at the time, neither of whom mentioned any of the
events from the virgin birth to the crucifixion.
The one whose works are available, Philo Judea, was born 20 BC and
died about 55 AD. He was Jewish aristocracy and related to the Herods
by marriage and business - but even though he was at the heart of
events he makes no mention of anything from the Gospels.
He's pretty important, because his nephew's wife Berenice is mentioned
in Acts.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
How would a roman record keeper knows that the guys who
walked the street had been killed and were dead before?
Like I said, rationalisation that presumes the very nonsense he is
supposed to be proving.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
And among the thousand criminals, common men and rebel
Jews that the Romans crucified, which one of those they kept
record of with name and family tree?
The Romans didn't crucify common criminals.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The answer is NONE. Therefore, cela va sans dire que for the
Romans Jesus was just another common man who did not
deserve a special attention.
Again, this presumes the very thing he is supposed to be proving, and
is no more than a rationalisation.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
And this is in line with many of Jesus' own parables where a small
seed of mustard as insignificant as it might be died first before
growing into a big tree with fruits plenty enough to feed the birds.
As does this.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
SUCH WAS THE SEED OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD
WHAT FUCKING KINGDOM OF WHAT FUCKING GOD was the idiot rudely and
stupidly presuming where it's just so much nonsense?
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
that no one had seen coming or growing into a big mighty nation.
What frisking nation?
Post by b***@m.nu
oh ok I guess not then... LOL kinda funny hehe
It was just being in-your-face, rudely stupid.
It knows atheists aren't Christians yet it bullshat _at_ us as if we
were.
Free Lunch
2014-08-13 22:42:34 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:24:52 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 10:02:09 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
None has ever been presented - at most it's hearsay many times removed
from the alleged events.
Remove from the alleged event? You don't need to be con·tem·po·ra·ne·ous of an alleged event to disprove its existence. ARE NOT YOU REMOVED FROM IT?
We don't have to disprove every claim that has ever been made by
religious folks who have no evidence to support their claims.

Until you have something, you have lost.
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Christopher A. Lee
But in any case, things like virgin births, coming back to life a few
days after being painfully and slowly executed, don't happen - no
matter how many people write about it.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.
Granted... But the question remains as why the first century
enemies of CHRIST never questioned his existence?
Which assumes the very thing the moron is supposed to be proving -
before he's proved it.
And what "enemies" was he also presuming?
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The pagan philosophers did NOT EVER
Celsus did not
Lucian did not
Epictetus did not
Galen did not
Porphyry did not
And the Rabbis of Judaism did not
The moron imagines pretending these people were the enemies of some
mythical character so they didn't write about him, somehow shows he
was real?
Post by b***@m.nu
let me ask you this. Did any of those people write anything at alll
about a jesus living or otherwise?
It was a transparently stupid, dishonest, desperate rationalisation.
But more importantly, there were a couple of contemporary historians
living in the region at the time, neither of whom mentioned any of the
events from the virgin birth to the crucifixion.
The one whose works are available, Philo Judea, was born 20 BC and
died about 55 AD. He was Jewish aristocracy and related to the Herods
by marriage and business - but even though he was at the heart of
events he makes no mention of anything from the Gospels.
He's pretty important, because his nephew's wife Berenice is mentioned
in Acts.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
How would a roman record keeper knows that the guys who
walked the street had been killed and were dead before?
Like I said, rationalisation that presumes the very nonsense he is
supposed to be proving.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
And among the thousand criminals, common men and rebel
Jews that the Romans crucified, which one of those they kept
record of with name and family tree?
The Romans didn't crucify common criminals.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The answer is NONE. Therefore, cela va sans dire que for the
Romans Jesus was just another common man who did not
deserve a special attention.
Again, this presumes the very thing he is supposed to be proving, and
is no more than a rationalisation.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
And this is in line with many of Jesus' own parables where a small
seed of mustard as insignificant as it might be died first before
growing into a big tree with fruits plenty enough to feed the birds.
As does this.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
SUCH WAS THE SEED OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD
WHAT FUCKING KINGDOM OF WHAT FUCKING GOD was the idiot rudely and
stupidly presuming where it's just so much nonsense?
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
that no one had seen coming or growing into a big mighty nation.
What frisking nation?
Post by b***@m.nu
oh ok I guess not then... LOL kinda funny hehe
It was just being in-your-face, rudely stupid.
It knows atheists aren't Christians yet it bullshat _at_ us as if we
were.
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-13 22:50:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:24:52 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 10:02:09 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
None has ever been presented - at most it's hearsay many times removed
from the alleged events.
Remove from the alleged event? You don't need to be con�tem�po�ra�ne�ous of an alleged event to disprove its existence. ARE NOT YOU REMOVED FROM IT?
We don't have to disprove every claim that has ever been made by
religious folks who have no evidence to support their claims.
Then you may NOT know what "disprove" means. You are disproving Christianity by claiming that there is NO CHRIST because JESUS never existed. But you don't answer the question that you rise. WHO IS THE CHRIST/MESSIAH then? He was supposed to be born into this world and Arabs are exhibiting his counterfeit, therefore he existed.
Post by Free Lunch
Until you have something, you have lost.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
But in any case, things like virgin births, coming back to life a few
days after being painfully and slowly executed, don't happen - no
matter how many people write about it.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.
Granted... But the question remains as why the first century
enemies of CHRIST never questioned his existence?
Which assumes the very thing the moron is supposed to be proving -
before he's proved it.
And what "enemies" was he also presuming?
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The pagan philosophers did NOT EVER
Celsus did not
Lucian did not
Epictetus did not
Galen did not
Porphyry did not
And the Rabbis of Judaism did not
The moron imagines pretending these people were the enemies of some
mythical character so they didn't write about him, somehow shows he
was real?
Post by b***@m.nu
let me ask you this. Did any of those people write anything at alll
about a jesus living or otherwise?
It was a transparently stupid, dishonest, desperate rationalisation.
But more importantly, there were a couple of contemporary historians
living in the region at the time, neither of whom mentioned any of the
events from the virgin birth to the crucifixion.
The one whose works are available, Philo Judea, was born 20 BC and
died about 55 AD. He was Jewish aristocracy and related to the Herods
by marriage and business - but even though he was at the heart of
events he makes no mention of anything from the Gospels.
He's pretty important, because his nephew's wife Berenice is mentioned.
James, Jesus' brother was mentioned. Is this enough. Double standard?
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Christopher A. Lee
in Acts.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
How would a roman record keeper knows that the guys who
walked the street had been killed and were dead before?
Like I said, rationalisation that presumes the very nonsense he is
supposed to be proving.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
And among the thousand criminals, common men and rebel
Jews that the Romans crucified, which one of those they kept
record of with name and family tree?
The Romans didn't crucify common criminals.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The answer is NONE. Therefore, cela va sans dire que for the
Romans Jesus was just another common man who did not
deserve a special attention.
Again, this presumes the very thing he is supposed to be proving, and
is no more than a rationalisation.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
And this is in line with many of Jesus' own parables where a small
seed of mustard as insignificant as it might be died first before
growing into a big tree with fruits plenty enough to feed the birds.
As does this.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
SUCH WAS THE SEED OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD
WHAT FUCKING KINGDOM OF WHAT FUCKING GOD was the idiot rudely and
stupidly presuming where it's just so much nonsense?
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
that no one had seen coming or growing into a big mighty nation.
What frisking nation?
Post by b***@m.nu
oh ok I guess not then... LOL kinda funny hehe
It was just being in-your-face, rudely stupid.
It knows atheists aren't Christians yet it bullshat _at_ us as if we
were.
Free Lunch
2014-08-14 00:10:16 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:50:49 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:24:52 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
...
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Christopher A. Lee
None has ever been presented - at most it's hearsay many times removed
from the alleged events.
Remove from the alleged event? You don't need to be con?tem?po?ra?ne?ous of an alleged event to disprove its existence. ARE NOT YOU REMOVED FROM IT?
We don't have to disprove every claim that has ever been made by
religious folks who have no evidence to support their claims.
Then you may NOT know what "disprove" means. You are disproving
Christianity by claiming that there is NO CHRIST because JESUS never
existed. But you don't answer the question that you rise. WHO IS THE
CHRIST/MESSIAH then? He was supposed to be born into this world and
Arabs are exhibiting his counterfeit, therefore he existed.
I don't claim that Jesus never existed. I don't care if he did or not. I
admire much of what he is said to have taught. I find that there are
many Christians here who seem to reject Jesus' teachings for their own
bigotry and self-righteousness, inventing something that they like, but
calling it Christianity. I am aware that the stories found in the
scriptures are often contrary to history and science and that the rest
of the stories are unreliable. There is no valid reason to accept the
stories found in the scriptures of any religion.

...
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-13 22:27:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 10:02:09 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
None has ever been presented - at most it's hearsay many times removed
from the alleged events.
But in any case, things like virgin births, coming back to life a few
days after being painfully and slowly executed, don't happen - no
matter how many people write about it.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.
Granted... But the question remains as why the first century
enemies of CHRIST never questioned his existence?
Which assumes the very thing the moron is supposed to be proving -
before he's proved it.
And what "enemies" was he also presuming?
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The pagan philosophers did NOT EVER
Celsus did not
Lucian did not
Epictetus did not
Galen did not
Porphyry did not
And the Rabbis of Judaism did not
The moron imagines pretending these people were the enemies of some
mythical character so they didn't write about him, somehow shows he
was real?
Celsius is reported by ORIGEN to have written a book against Jesus CALLED TRUE WORD
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
let me ask you this. Did any of those people write anything at alll
about a jesus living or otherwise?
It was a transparently stupid, dishonest, desperate rationalisation.
But more importantly, there were a couple of contemporary historians
living in the region at the time, neither of whom mentioned any of the
events from the virgin birth to the crucifixion.
The one whose works are available, Philo Judea, was born 20 BC and
died about 55 AD. He was Jewish aristocracy and related to the Herods
by marriage and business - but even though he was at the heart of
events he makes no mention of anything from the Gospels.
He's pretty important, because his nephew's wife Berenice is mentioned
in Acts.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
How would a roman record keeper knows that the guys who
walked the street had been killed and were dead before?
Like I said, rationalisation that presumes the very nonsense he is
supposed to be proving.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
And among the thousand criminals, common men and rebel
Jews that the Romans crucified, which one of those they kept
record of with name and family tree?
The Romans didn't crucify common criminals.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The answer is NONE. Therefore, cela va sans dire que for the
Romans Jesus was just another common man who did not
deserve a special attention.
Again, this presumes the very thing he is supposed to be proving, and
is no more than a rationalisation.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
And this is in line with many of Jesus' own parables where a small
seed of mustard as insignificant as it might be died first before
growing into a big tree with fruits plenty enough to feed the birds.
As does this.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
SUCH WAS THE SEED OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD
WHAT FUCKING KINGDOM OF WHAT FUCKING GOD was the idiot rudely and
stupidly presuming where it's just so much nonsense?
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
that no one had seen coming or growing into a big mighty nation.
What frisking nation?
Post by b***@m.nu
oh ok I guess not then... LOL kinda funny hehe
It was just being in-your-face, rudely stupid.
It knows atheists aren't Christians yet it bullshat _at_ us as if we
were.
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-13 22:39:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 10:02:09 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
None has ever been presented - at most it's hearsay many times removed
from the alleged events.
But in any case, things like virgin births, coming back to life a few
days after being painfully and slowly executed, don't happen - no
matter how many people write about it.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.
Granted... But the question remains as why the first century
enemies of CHRIST never questioned his existence?
Which assumes the very thing the moron is supposed to be proving -
before he's proved it.
And what "enemies" was he also presuming?
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The pagan philosophers did NOT EVER
Celsus did not
Lucian did not
Epictetus did not
Galen did not
Porphyry did not
And the Rabbis of Judaism did not
The moron imagines pretending these people were the enemies of some
mythical character so they didn't write about him, somehow shows he
was real?
Post by b***@m.nu
let me ask you this. Did any of those people write anything at alll
about a jesus living or otherwise?
It was a transparently stupid, dishonest, desperate rationalisation.
But more importantly, there were a couple of contemporary historians
living in the region at the time, neither of whom mentioned any of the
events from the virgin birth to the crucifixion.
The one whose works are available, Philo Judea, was born 20 BC and
died about 55 AD. He was Jewish aristocracy and related to the Herods
by marriage and business - but even though he was at the heart of
events he makes no mention of anything from the Gospels.
He's pretty important, because his nephew's wife Berenice is mentioned
in Acts.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
How would a roman record keeper knows that the guys who
walked the street had been killed and were dead before?
Like I said, rationalisation that presumes the very nonsense he is
supposed to be proving.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
And among the thousand criminals, common men and rebel
Jews that the Romans crucified, which one of those they kept
record of with name and family tree?
The Romans didn't crucify common criminals.
Anybody who took part of the Bar Khokba revolt was not an influential person. Historians kept a record that thousand persihed crucified. No one know their names or family trees.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
The answer is NONE. Therefore, cela va sans dire que for the
Romans Jesus was just another common man who did not
deserve a special attention.
Again, this presumes the very thing he is supposed to be proving, and
is no more than a rationalisation.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
And this is in line with many of Jesus' own parables where a small
seed of mustard as insignificant as it might be died first before
growing into a big tree with fruits plenty enough to feed the birds.
As does this.
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
SUCH WAS THE SEED OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD
WHAT FUCKING KINGDOM OF WHAT FUCKING GOD was the idiot rudely and
stupidly presuming where it's just so much nonsense?
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
that no one had seen coming or growing into a big mighty nation.
What frisking nation?
Post by b***@m.nu
oh ok I guess not then... LOL kinda funny hehe
It was just being in-your-face, rudely stupid.
It knows atheists aren't Christians yet it bullshat _at_ us as if we
were.
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-13 21:59:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 10:02:09 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.
Granted... But the question remains as why the first century enemies of CHRIST never questioned his existence? The pagan philosophers did NOT EVER
Celsus did not
Lucian did not
Epictetus did not
Galen did not
Porphyry did not
And the Rabbis of Judaism did not
let me ask you this. Did any of those people write anything at alll
about a jesus living or otherwise?
They tried to refute His teaching. It would have been easier for them to use your line of arguments and state that He never existed. THAT IS MY POINT
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
How would a roman record keeper knows that the guys who walked the street had been killed and were dead before?
And among the thousand criminals, common men and rebel Jews that the Romans crucified, which one of those they kept record of with name and family tree?
The answer is NONE. Therefore, cela va sans dire que for the Romans Jesus was just another common man who did not deserve a special attention.
And this is in line with many of Jesus' own parables where a small seed of mustard as insignificant as it might be died first before growing into a big tree with fruits plenty enough to feed the birds. SUCH WAS THE SEED OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD that no one had seen coming or growing into a big mighty nation.
oh ok I guess not then... LOL kinda funny hehe
b***@m.nu
2014-08-13 22:19:56 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 14:59:30 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 10:02:09 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.
Granted... But the question remains as why the first century enemies of CHRIST never questioned his existence? The pagan philosophers did NOT EVER
Celsus did not
Lucian did not
Epictetus did not
Galen did not
Porphyry did not
And the Rabbis of Judaism did not
let me ask you this. Did any of those people write anything at alll
about a jesus living or otherwise?
They tried to refute His teaching. It would have been easier for them to use your line of arguments and state that He never existed. THAT IS MY POINT
You never answered my question; however, someone else did.. And there
is no way to refute anyones teaching... because there was none to
refute

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ***@netfront.net ---
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-13 22:31:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@m.nu
You never answered my question; however, someone else did.. And there
is no way to refute anyones teaching... because there was none to
refute
NOTHING FROM THE CLASSICAL TIME SUPPORTS YOUR ASSERTION.
Pagans philosophers tried to refute Christianity by refuting Jesus. At least that is historical.
Free Lunch
2014-08-13 22:43:10 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:31:17 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by b***@m.nu
You never answered my question; however, someone else did.. And there
is no way to refute anyones teaching... because there was none to
refute
NOTHING FROM THE CLASSICAL TIME SUPPORTS YOUR ASSERTION.
Pagans philosophers tried to refute Christianity by refuting Jesus. At least that is historical.
Direct me to such actions.
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-13 22:51:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:31:17 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by b***@m.nu
You never answered my question; however, someone else did.. And there
is no way to refute anyones teaching... because there was none to
refute
NOTHING FROM THE CLASSICAL TIME SUPPORTS YOUR ASSERTION.
Pagans philosophers tried to refute Christianity by refuting Jesus. At least that is historical.
Direct me to such actions.
YOU DID NOT EVEN KNOW?
Free Lunch
2014-08-14 00:11:27 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:51:36 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:31:17 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by b***@m.nu
You never answered my question; however, someone else did.. And there
is no way to refute anyones teaching... because there was none to
refute
NOTHING FROM THE CLASSICAL TIME SUPPORTS YOUR ASSERTION.
Pagans philosophers tried to refute Christianity by refuting Jesus. At least that is historical.
Direct me to such actions.
YOU DID NOT EVEN KNOW?
Does this tell us that you cannot provide any references?

Free Lunch
2014-08-13 22:33:02 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 14:59:30 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 10:02:09 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.
Granted... But the question remains as why the first century enemies of CHRIST never questioned his existence? The pagan philosophers did NOT EVER
Celsus did not
Lucian did not
Epictetus did not
Galen did not
Porphyry did not
And the Rabbis of Judaism did not
let me ask you this. Did any of those people write anything at alll
about a jesus living or otherwise?
They tried to refute His teaching. It would have been easier for them to use your line of arguments and state that He never existed. THAT IS MY POINT
Which teachings do you allege they tried to refute? Please be specific
for each one.

...
Free Lunch
2014-08-13 22:31:31 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 10:02:09 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.
Granted... But the question remains as why the first century enemies of CHRIST never questioned his existence? The pagan philosophers did NOT EVER
Celsus did not
Lucian did not
Epictetus did not
Galen did not
Porphyry did not
And the Rabbis of Judaism did not
That would be consistent with Jesus' nonexistence. Apparently the myth
started later.


...
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-13 22:42:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 10:02:09 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.
Granted... But the question remains as why the first century enemies of CHRIST never questioned his existence? The pagan philosophers did NOT EVER
Celsus did not
Lucian did not
Epictetus did not
Galen did not
Porphyry did not
And the Rabbis of Judaism did not
That would be consistent with Jesus' nonexistence. Apparently the myth
started later.
How do you refute the teaching of someone who never existed? By just pointing out that he was a fiction. THEY DID NOT POINT IT OUT. Therefore they knew he existed
Post by b***@m.nu
...
Free Lunch
2014-08-13 22:44:50 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:42:32 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 10:02:09 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.
Granted... But the question remains as why the first century enemies of CHRIST never questioned his existence? The pagan philosophers did NOT EVER
Celsus did not
Lucian did not
Epictetus did not
Galen did not
Porphyry did not
And the Rabbis of Judaism did not
That would be consistent with Jesus' nonexistence. Apparently the myth
started later.
How do you refute the teaching of someone who never existed? By just pointing
out that he was a fiction. THEY DID NOT POINT IT OUT. Therefore they knew he existed
Show me. Why should I trust you when you preach religious claims that
are without evidence?
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-13 22:53:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:42:32 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 10:02:09 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by nature bats last
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.
Granted... But the question remains as why the first century enemies of CHRIST never questioned his existence? The pagan philosophers did NOT EVER
Celsus did not
Lucian did not
Epictetus did not
Galen did not
Porphyry did not
And the Rabbis of Judaism did not
That would be consistent with Jesus' nonexistence. Apparently the myth
started later.
How do you refute the teaching of someone who never existed? By just pointing
out that he was a fiction. THEY DID NOT POINT IT OUT. Therefore they knew he existed
Show me. Why should I trust you when you preach religious claims that
are without evidence?
So you are wasting my time because you did not research the topic as scholars usually do...
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-13 22:11:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by nature bats last
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:30:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
I have no contention. There's not evidence to support any speculation.
So why don't you just listen to the contentions presented by
people who lived in Jesus'time and the evidence presented to
them.
That would be a bit hard, as there are no writings from
anyone who supposedly heard Jesus during his lifetime.
The silence of the Roman occupiers is particularly
telling -- you'd think that if the tombs opened
up and the dead walked the streets like some HBO
series, one of those obsessive record keepers, the Romans,
might have thought to jot down a note.
Every mention of Jesus, found kalmost exclusively
in the Bible, was set down later, by writers who
never knew Jesus, and thus is entirely hearsay.
Again If you are NOT a Christian, your logic is weird. I can see If a Muslim rejects the authority of the pope because he can not confirm that Jesus gave the keys to Peter. Thereby they establish their own apostolic line.
You are rejecting what is called SCRIPTURES ALONE OR SOLA SCRIPTURA doctrine. It is proved that there were Christian in Thessalonica AD 40. Now it doesn't matter when the narratives were written down or accepted as canonical. Check the evidence and compare those Christians belief with the narrative and see If there is another Jesus Christ who was worshipped or the same that was crucified under Pontius Pilatus. If it is the same Jesus then we know why the pagan writers never contested His existence because they knew he lived. Very simple.
Post by nature bats last
Seth
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-10 17:33:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 10:50:44 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:11:35 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
The prophecies attributed to Jesus have not taken place (Deut. 18:22).
Apparently you preach a false prophet and should also die. Thank you for
pointing out the core failure of your teachings.
So you are admitting that Jesus died?
I have no idea if there was a single teacher who was the primary model
or it was a mash-up of many teachers.
And you blame us for your ignorance? You should have researched the background of the case before trying to jump in.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
How come you said he never existed since only living being can die?
I'm noting what you need to believe to make your stories consistent with
each other.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yes, he existed, lived like you and me without the sin,
So you claim.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
and He was NOT a false prophet otherwise he would have died by stoning
according to the provision in the Law of Moses. He was hung on the tree
according to Roman criminal code. There is a meaning.
Yes, the meaning was that the Romans didn't allow priests of foreign
religions to execute people in their provinces.
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-10 18:26:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 10:50:44 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:11:35 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
The prophecies attributed to Jesus have not taken place (Deut. 18:22).
Apparently you preach a false prophet and should also die. Thank you for
pointing out the core failure of your teachings.
So you are admitting that Jesus died?
I have no idea if there was a single teacher who was the primary model
or it was a mash-up of many teachers.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
How come you said he never existed since only living being can die?
I'm noting what you need to believe to make your stories consistent with
each other.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yes, he existed, lived like you and me without the sin,
So you claim.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
and He was NOT a false prophet otherwise he would have died by stoning
according to the provision in the Law of Moses. He was hung on the tree
according to Roman criminal code. There is a meaning.
Yes, the meaning was that the Romans didn't allow priests of foreign
religions to execute people in their provinces.
So, are you saying that THE Romans enforced Jewish Laws with their own capital punishment? Since the Romans executed Jesus as a false prophet according to the provision found in the Law of Moses? Is it this what you are saying?
You sound like you got all your information from the Jesus seminar and that you never checked anything for yourself.
Free Lunch
2014-08-10 19:00:50 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 10:50:44 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:11:35 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
The prophecies attributed to Jesus have not taken place (Deut. 18:22).
Apparently you preach a false prophet and should also die. Thank you for
pointing out the core failure of your teachings.
So you are admitting that Jesus died?
I have no idea if there was a single teacher who was the primary model
or it was a mash-up of many teachers.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
How come you said he never existed since only living being can die?
I'm noting what you need to believe to make your stories consistent with
each other.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yes, he existed, lived like you and me without the sin,
So you claim.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
and He was NOT a false prophet otherwise he would have died by stoning
according to the provision in the Law of Moses. He was hung on the tree
according to Roman criminal code. There is a meaning.
Yes, the meaning was that the Romans didn't allow priests of foreign
religions to execute people in their provinces.
So, are you saying that THE Romans enforced Jewish Laws with their own capital punishment?
No.
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Since the Romans executed Jesus as a false prophet
No, the story does not state that.
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
according to the provision found in the Law of Moses? Is it this what you are saying?
No, the story does not say that the Romans did anything based on the Law
of Moses. Have you ever read any of these gospel stories?
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
You sound like you got all your information from the Jesus seminar and that you never checked anything for yourself.
You have made it clear that you are not competent to judge.
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-11 17:53:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 10:50:44 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:11:35 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
The prophecies attributed to Jesus have not taken place (Deut. 18:22).
Apparently you preach a false prophet and should also die. Thank you for
pointing out the core failure of your teachings.
So you are admitting that Jesus died?
I have no idea if there was a single teacher who was the primary model
or it was a mash-up of many teachers.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
How come you said he never existed since only living being can die?
I'm noting what you need to believe to make your stories consistent with
each other.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Yes, he existed, lived like you and me without the sin,
So you claim.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
and He was NOT a false prophet otherwise he would have died by stoning
according to the provision in the Law of Moses. He was hung on the tree
according to Roman criminal code. There is a meaning.
Yes, the meaning was that the Romans didn't allow priests of foreign
religions to execute people in their provinces.
So, are you saying that THE Romans enforced Jewish Laws with their own capital punishment?
No.
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Since the Romans executed Jesus as a false prophet
No, the story does not state that.
This is what you meant
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
according to the provision found in the Law of Moses? Is it this what you are saying?
No, the story does not say that the Romans did anything based on the Law
of Moses. Have you ever read any of these gospel stories?
You are the one who said that the false prophet was executed by the Romans enforcing Moses Law according to the Roman capital punishment. This is what you meant when you retorted that I was preaching a false prophet. I never said that it was a part of the story. Why did you quote Deut. 18:22 then?
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
You sound like you got all your information from the Jesus seminar and that you never checked anything for yourself.
You have made it clear that you are not competent to judge.
Where did I make clear that you were NOT an ASSHOLE?
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-05 14:30:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
There is a great deal of evidence that the claims found in Moses are
false.
Yet the Arabs still have their own Messiah, a prophet like Moses curved out on the ORIGINAL ONE, the Messiah of the Law.
Olrik
2014-08-06 04:02:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
There is a great deal of evidence that the claims found in Moses are
false.
Yet the Arabs still have their own Messiah, a prophet like Moses curved out on the ORIGINAL ONE, the Messiah of the Law.
And yet, the Bouddah has been proven true by Shiva, the Many Limbed One,
who annouced the Blessed Sheep of THE SPIRIT, and thus will HAVE YOU IN
HELL FOR ALL ETERNITY!
--
Olrik
aa #1981
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
The Chief Castrator Of The Jews
2014-08-05 17:38:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
There is a great deal of evidence that the claims found in Moses are
false.
You guys (atheists) are desperate. Don't you feel ridiculed to sit around like children without understanding the real meaning of events in history.
Moses told his countrymen that God would send them the Messiah, a prophet like himself; Transfiguration in Matthew described Jesus as the Messiah and announces that He would be duplicated among the Ismaelites. Arabs are exhibiting that photocopy -duplicate- in Jerusalem, and you still cannot pick it up. Where there is a photocopy, there must be the original also. Contrary to evolution, NOTHING CAN COME FROM NOTHING. A photocopy implies that the original exists or existed
How sad it can be to THINK like an ignorant atheist.
---------------
Africaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! stick with God and His wise Laws for the first shall be the last, and the last the first.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
------------
Africa, stick to God and His wise Laws, for the first shall be the last and the last shall be the first.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Moses foretold the Messiah in the Oracles untrusted to the Jews, the Arabs, the cousins of the Jews certified that He really came and His name was Jesus.
Christ had to be born in the world. Jesus is the Christ. Then Jesus was born in to the world. Simple logic
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Olrik
2014-08-06 04:06:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Chief Castrator Of The Jews
---------------
Africaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! stick with God
And continue to be poor, sick, uneducated, colonized, destroyed,
exploited, abused and ignored.

You act against your own people, you little creep. You're worst that
racists.
--
Olrik
aa #1981
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-06 17:54:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 07:55:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
How is someone who never existed claimed as the MESSIAH?
We have no idea if there was a specific model in mind for those stories
or if it was heavily exaggerated. The testable claims seem to fail.
According to Moses, Messiah has to be born into the world and will have authority to amend the Law given to Israel on behalf of humanity. Jesus is the Messiah and the Law was amended and shared with the rest of humanity, therefore Jesus was born into this world. SIMPLE LOGIC but too difficult for the reprobate minds.
There is a great deal of evidence that the claims found in Moses are
false.
And your evidence is?
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
------------
Africa, stick to God and His wise Laws, for the first shall be the last and the last shall be the first.
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Moses foretold the Messiah in the Oracles untrusted to the Jews, the Arabs, the cousins of the Jews certified that He really came and His name was Jesus.
Christ had to be born in the world. Jesus is the Christ. Then Jesus was born in to the world. Simple logic
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Free Lunch
2014-08-06 23:00:21 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 10:54:35 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 07:55:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
...
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
According to Moses, Messiah has to be born into the world and will have authority to amend the Law given to Israel on behalf of humanity. Jesus is the Messiah and the Law was amended and shared with the rest of humanity, therefore Jesus was born into this world. SIMPLE LOGIC but too difficult for the reprobate minds.
There is a great deal of evidence that the claims found in Moses are
false.
And your evidence is?
Physical evidence collected by scientists, particularly archaeologists.
The Chief Castrator Of The Jews
2014-08-08 21:29:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 10:54:35 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 07:55:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
...
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
According to Moses, Messiah has to be born into the world and will have authority to amend the Law given to Israel on behalf of humanity. Jesus is the Messiah and the Law was amended and shared with the rest of humanity, therefore Jesus was born into this world. SIMPLE LOGIC but too difficult for the reprobate minds.
There is a great deal of evidence that the claims found in Moses are
false.
And your evidence is?
Physical evidence collected by scientists, particularly archaeologists.
Physical evidence from archaeologists is a claim not evidence. Archaeologists are faillible men who interpret the work according to their own agenda
Free Lunch
2014-08-08 22:16:45 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 8 Aug 2014 14:29:03 -0700 (PDT), The Chief Castrator Of The Jews
Post by The Chief Castrator Of The Jews
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 10:54:35 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 07:55:54 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
...
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
According to Moses, Messiah has to be born into the world and will have authority to amend the Law given to Israel on behalf of humanity. Jesus is the Messiah and the Law was amended and shared with the rest of humanity, therefore Jesus was born into this world. SIMPLE LOGIC but too difficult for the reprobate minds.
There is a great deal of evidence that the claims found in Moses are
false.
And your evidence is?
Physical evidence collected by scientists, particularly archaeologists.
Physical evidence from archaeologists is a claim not evidence. Archaeologists are faillible men who interpret the work according to their own agenda
Evidence is evidence. You have an unreliable book that you foolishly
make indefensible claims about.
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-04 15:08:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 3 Aug 2014 11:09:37 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by W.T.S.
Main article: Catholic
Shortly before convoking the council that inserted into the
Nicene Creed the description of the church as catholic, Emperor
Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica, which limited the
ecclesiastical application of this term to upholders of the
teaching of the First Council of Nicaea.
OK then.
Another history lesson from the jew boy.
? Was not Jesus a Jew boy ?
I dunno.
I wasn't around.
No, you weren't. But, according to your mythical bible,
he was, and a rabbi to boot.
Too bad he never really existed.
How is someone who never existed claimed as the MESSIAH?
We have no idea if there was a specific model in mind for those stories
or if it was heavily exaggerated. The testable claims seem to fail.
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Moses foretold the Messiah in the Oracles untrusted to the Jews, the Arabs, the cousins of the Jews certified that He really came and His name was Jesus.
Christ had to be born in the world. Jesus is the Christ. Then Jesus was born in to the world. Simple logic
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Not assumptions, but facts vindicated by history.
Free Lunch
2014-08-04 23:11:55 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 08:08:19 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 3 Aug 2014 11:09:37 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by W.T.S.
Main article: Catholic
Shortly before convoking the council that inserted into the
Nicene Creed the description of the church as catholic, Emperor
Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica, which limited the
ecclesiastical application of this term to upholders of the
teaching of the First Council of Nicaea.
OK then.
Another history lesson from the jew boy.
? Was not Jesus a Jew boy ?
I dunno.
I wasn't around.
No, you weren't. But, according to your mythical bible,
he was, and a rabbi to boot.
Too bad he never really existed.
How is someone who never existed claimed as the MESSIAH?
We have no idea if there was a specific model in mind for those stories
or if it was heavily exaggerated. The testable claims seem to fail.
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Moses foretold the Messiah in the Oracles untrusted to the Jews, the Arabs, the cousins of the Jews certified that He really came and His name was Jesus.
Christ had to be born in the world. Jesus is the Christ. Then Jesus was born in to the world. Simple logic
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Not assumptions, but facts vindicated by history.
You clearly know no history.
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-05 14:22:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 08:08:19 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 3 Aug 2014 11:09:37 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by W.T.S.
Main article: Catholic
Shortly before convoking the council that inserted into the
Nicene Creed the description of the church as catholic, Emperor
Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica, which limited the
ecclesiastical application of this term to upholders of the
teaching of the First Council of Nicaea.
OK then.
Another history lesson from the jew boy.
? Was not Jesus a Jew boy ?
I dunno.
I wasn't around.
No, you weren't. But, according to your mythical bible,
he was, and a rabbi to boot.
Too bad he never really existed.
How is someone who never existed claimed as the MESSIAH?
We have no idea if there was a specific model in mind for those stories
or if it was heavily exaggerated. The testable claims seem to fail.
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Moses foretold the Messiah in the Oracles untrusted to the Jews, the Arabs, the cousins of the Jews certified that He really came and His name was Jesus.
Christ had to be born in the world. Jesus is the Christ. Then Jesus was born in to the world. Simple logic
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Not assumptions, but facts vindicated by history.
You clearly know no history.
EVOLUTION IS NOT HISTORY. I am glad I don't know that
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-06 18:03:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 08:08:19 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 3 Aug 2014 11:09:37 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by W.T.S.
Main article: Catholic
Shortly before convoking the council that inserted into the
Nicene Creed the description of the church as catholic, Emperor
Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica, which limited the
ecclesiastical application of this term to upholders of the
teaching of the First Council of Nicaea.
OK then.
Another history lesson from the jew boy.
? Was not Jesus a Jew boy ?
I dunno.
I wasn't around.
No, you weren't. But, according to your mythical bible,
he was, and a rabbi to boot.
Too bad he never really existed.
How is someone who never existed claimed as the MESSIAH?
We have no idea if there was a specific model in mind for those stories
or if it was heavily exaggerated. The testable claims seem to fail.
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Moses foretold the Messiah in the Oracles untrusted to the Jews, the Arabs, the cousins of the Jews certified that He really came and His name was Jesus.
Christ had to be born in the world. Jesus is the Christ. Then Jesus was born in to the world. Simple logic
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Not assumptions, but facts vindicated by history.
You clearly know no history.
Yeah, historian, you should have known that atheists like Celsus Porphyry and many more preceded you and they all failed to debunk Christianity.
Free Lunch
2014-08-06 23:01:56 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:03:40 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 08:08:19 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Not assumptions, but facts vindicated by history.
You clearly know no history.
Yeah, historian, you should have known that atheists like Celsus
Porphyry and many more preceded you and they all failed to debunk Christianity.
No evidence supports your religion.
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-09 17:41:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:03:40 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 08:08:19 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Not assumptions, but facts vindicated by history.
You clearly know no history.
Yeah, historian, you should have known that atheists like Celsus
Porphyry and many more preceded you and they all failed to debunk Christianity.
No evidence supports your religion.
The Law of Moses that the Jews shared with the Goyim through Al Massih is the evidence, fool
Free Lunch
2014-08-09 20:17:50 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 10:41:01 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:03:40 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 08:08:19 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Not assumptions, but facts vindicated by history.
You clearly know no history.
Yeah, historian, you should have known that atheists like Celsus
Porphyry and many more preceded you and they all failed to debunk Christianity.
No evidence supports your religion.
The Law of Moses that the Jews shared with the Goyim through Al Massih is the evidence, fool
There is absolutely no evidence that any god had anything to do with
those laws. Don't let priests mislead you with their teachings.
Dakota
2014-08-09 22:43:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 10:41:01 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:03:40 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 08:08:19 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Not assumptions, but facts vindicated by history.
You clearly know no history.
Yeah, historian, you should have known that atheists like Celsus
Post by Free Lunch
Porphyry and many more preceded you and they all failed to debunk Christianity.
No evidence supports your religion.
The Law of Moses that the Jews shared with the Goyim through Al Massih is the evidence, fool
There is absolutely no evidence that any god had anything to do with
those laws. Don't let priests mislead you with their teachings.
Is LaBrume a new Duncan sock?
Olrik
2014-08-10 04:41:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dakota
Post by Free Lunch
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 10:41:01 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:03:40 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 08:08:19 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Not assumptions, but facts vindicated by history.
You clearly know no history.
Yeah, historian, you should have known that atheists like Celsus
Post by Free Lunch
Porphyry and many more preceded you and they all failed to debunk Christianity.
No evidence supports your religion.
The Law of Moses that the Jews shared with the Goyim through Al
Massih is the evidence, fool
There is absolutely no evidence that any god had anything to do with
those laws. Don't let priests mislead you with their teachings.
Is LaBrume a new Duncan sock?
No. It's just the ol' Codebreaker, changing nyms weekly, it seems.

Cody's a messed-up kid. He pretends to be a muslim xian, or an xian
muslim. All in all, he hates everything, especially women.
--
Olrik
aa #1981
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
Dakota
2014-08-10 05:03:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Olrik
Post by Dakota
Post by Free Lunch
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 10:41:01 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:03:40 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 08:08:19 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Not assumptions, but facts vindicated by history.
You clearly know no history.
Yeah, historian, you should have known that atheists like Celsus
Post by Free Lunch
Porphyry and many more preceded you and they all failed to debunk Christianity.
No evidence supports your religion.
The Law of Moses that the Jews shared with the Goyim through Al
Massih is the evidence, fool
There is absolutely no evidence that any god had anything to do with
those laws. Don't let priests mislead you with their teachings.
Is LaBrume a new Duncan sock?
No. It's just the ol' Codebreaker, changing nyms weekly, it seems.
Cody's a messed-up kid. He pretends to be a muslim xian, or an xian
muslim. All in all, he hates everything, especially women.
Thanks.
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-10 17:44:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dakota
Post by Free Lunch
On Sat, 9 Aug 2014 10:41:01 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:03:40 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 08:08:19 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Not assumptions, but facts vindicated by history.
You clearly know no history.
Yeah, historian, you should have known that atheists like Celsus
Post by Free Lunch
Porphyry and many more preceded you and they all failed to debunk Christianity.
No evidence supports your religion.
The Law of Moses that the Jews shared with the Goyim through Al Massih is the evidence, fool
There is absolutely no evidence that any god had anything to do with
those laws. Don't let priests mislead you with their teachings.
Is LaBrume a new Duncan sock?
At least he is not like your smelling fag.
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-10 17:27:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
There is absolutely no evidence that any god had anything to do with
those laws. Don't let priests mislead you with their teachings.
The Mathematical symetry betheen Jusdaism, Trinitarianism, Unitarianism(Islam)
with Deut. 18:15 as the center of the AXIS is the evidence.
Free Lunch
2014-08-10 17:51:07 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:27:25 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
There is absolutely no evidence that any god had anything to do with
those laws. Don't let priests mislead you with their teachings.
The Mathematical symetry betheen Jusdaism, Trinitarianism, Unitarianism(Islam)
with Deut. 18:15 as the center of the AXIS is the evidence.
Evidence is a concept that completely eludes you.
Dakota
2014-08-10 18:32:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:27:25 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
There is absolutely no evidence that any god had anything to do with
those laws. Don't let priests mislead you with their teachings.
The Mathematical symetry betheen Jusdaism, Trinitarianism, Unitarianism(Islam)
with Deut. 18:15 as the center of the AXIS is the evidence.
Evidence is a concept that completely eludes you.
The idiot forgot to mention Joey Smith, Jim Jones, and Dave Koresh.
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-11 18:15:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dakota
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:27:25 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
There is absolutely no evidence that any god had anything to do with
those laws. Don't let priests mislead you with their teachings.
The Mathematical symetry betheen Jusdaism, Trinitarianism, Unitarianism(Islam)
with Deut. 18:15 as the center of the AXIS is the evidence.
Evidence is a concept that completely eludes you.
The idiot forgot to mention Joey Smith, Jim Jones, and Dave Koresh.
Joey Smith, Jim Jones, and Dave Koresh are NOT mentionned in the Gospels. Caesar Augustus and Jesus are.
Free Lunch
2014-08-12 02:18:45 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 11:15:34 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Dakota
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:27:25 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
There is absolutely no evidence that any god had anything to do with
those laws. Don't let priests mislead you with their teachings.
The Mathematical symetry betheen Jusdaism, Trinitarianism, Unitarianism(Islam)
with Deut. 18:15 as the center of the AXIS is the evidence.
Evidence is a concept that completely eludes you.
The idiot forgot to mention Joey Smith, Jim Jones, and Dave Koresh.
Joey Smith, Jim Jones, and Dave Koresh are NOT mentionned in the Gospels. Caesar Augustus and Jesus are.
The gospels are stories like Harry Potter stories.
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-13 16:31:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 11:15:34 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Dakota
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:27:25 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
There is absolutely no evidence that any god had anything to do with
those laws. Don't let priests mislead you with their teachings.
The Mathematical symetry betheen Jusdaism, Trinitarianism, Unitarianism(Islam)
with Deut. 18:15 as the center of the AXIS is the evidence.
Evidence is a concept that completely eludes you.
The idiot forgot to mention Joey Smith, Jim Jones, and Dave Koresh.
Joey Smith, Jim Jones, and Dave Koresh are NOT mentionned in the Gospels. Caesar Augustus and Jesus are.
The gospels are stories like Harry Potter stories.
It is the Gospel not the gospels as if in plural. You see, could not make sense of it; and you correct see through the rational behind the canonization and the naming of the books.
Free Lunch
2014-08-13 22:23:36 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 09:31:50 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 11:15:34 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Dakota
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:27:25 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
There is absolutely no evidence that any god had anything to do with
those laws. Don't let priests mislead you with their teachings.
The Mathematical symetry betheen Jusdaism, Trinitarianism, Unitarianism(Islam)
with Deut. 18:15 as the center of the AXIS is the evidence.
Evidence is a concept that completely eludes you.
The idiot forgot to mention Joey Smith, Jim Jones, and Dave Koresh.
Joey Smith, Jim Jones, and Dave Koresh are NOT mentionned in the Gospels. Caesar Augustus and Jesus are.
The gospels are stories like Harry Potter stories.
It is the Gospel not the gospels as if in plural.
There are four of them: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John.

Nothing about them has been shown to be anything but fiction.
Post by LaBrume Matinale
You see, could not make sense of it; and you correct see through the
rational behind the canonization and the naming of the books.
Canonization was the decision of a bunch of priests to select the books
that best fit their desires.
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-11 17:59:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:27:25 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
There is absolutely no evidence that any god had anything to do with
those laws. Don't let priests mislead you with their teachings.
The Mathematical symetry betheen Jusdaism, Trinitarianism, Unitarianism(Islam)
with Deut. 18:15 as the center of the AXIS is the evidence.
Evidence is a concept that completely eludes you.
No, evidence is not ONE size-fits-all. Some other rules of evidence elude you
Free Lunch
2014-08-12 02:19:07 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:59:04 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:27:25 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
There is absolutely no evidence that any god had anything to do with
those laws. Don't let priests mislead you with their teachings.
The Mathematical symetry betheen Jusdaism, Trinitarianism, Unitarianism(Islam)
with Deut. 18:15 as the center of the AXIS is the evidence.
Evidence is a concept that completely eludes you.
No, evidence is not ONE size-fits-all. Some other rules of evidence elude you
What evidence do you think you have?
Olrik
2014-08-12 03:36:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:59:04 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:27:25 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
There is absolutely no evidence that any god had anything to do with
those laws. Don't let priests mislead you with their teachings.
The Mathematical symetry betheen Jusdaism, Trinitarianism, Unitarianism(Islam)
with Deut. 18:15 as the center of the AXIS is the evidence.
Evidence is a concept that completely eludes you.
No, evidence is not ONE size-fits-all. Some other rules of evidence elude you
What evidence do you think you have?
The evidence he thinks he has......
--
Olrik
aa #1981
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-13 16:37:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:59:04 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
No, evidence is not ONE size-fits-all. Some other rules of evidence elude you
What evidence do you think you have?
What archaeological evidence do you have that Darwin visited the Galapagos Island?
b***@m.nu
2014-08-13 17:18:17 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 09:37:28 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:59:04 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
No, evidence is not ONE size-fits-all. Some other rules of evidence elude you
What evidence do you think you have?
What archaeological evidence do you have that Darwin visited the Galapagos Island?
well considering that darwin was a real person and wrote an entire
book and I am sure the captain of the ship kept proper logs and there
were the other witnesses on the ship. just as I am sure there are/were
records of the harbor master from darwin having paid the fees and
taxes to take the boat trip in the first place.
Are you a moron are you just so desperate to keep your wonderfuly evil
bible so holy
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-13 22:13:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 09:37:28 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:59:04 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
No, evidence is not ONE size-fits-all. Some other rules of evidence elude you
What evidence do you think you have?
What archaeological evidence do you have that Darwin visited the Galapagos Island?
well considering that darwin was a real person and wrote an entire
Prove it that he was a real person.
Give me one archaelogical evidence that there was such a person called Darwin.
Post by b***@m.nu
book and I am sure the captain of the ship kept proper logs and there
were the other witnesses on the ship. just as I am sure there are/were
records of the harbor master from darwin having paid the fees and
taxes to take the boat trip in the first place.
Are you a moron are you just so desperate to keep your wonderfuly evil
bible so holy
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-13 22:18:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 09:37:28 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:59:04 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
No, evidence is not ONE size-fits-all. Some other rules of evidence elude you
What evidence do you think you have?
What archaeological evidence do you have that Darwin visited the Galapagos Island?
well considering that darwin was a real person and wrote an entire
book and I am sure the captain of the ship kept proper logs and there
were the other witnesses on the ship. just as I am sure there are/were
records of the harbor master from darwin having paid the fees and
taxes to take the boat trip in the first place.
Are you a moron are you just so desperate to keep your wonderfuly evil
bible so holy.
These are claims NOT evidence. A book written by Jesus would NOT be an evidence for Jesus, but a claim that someone called Jesus wrote a book.
Now I am glad you are apealing to eyes witnesses. If eye witnesses are NOT good enough to pprove Jesus' existence, they are NOT good enough to prove that of Darwin EITHER.
Free Lunch
2014-08-13 22:30:20 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:18:37 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 09:37:28 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
What evidence do you think you have?
What archaeological evidence do you have that Darwin visited the Galapagos Island?
well considering that darwin was a real person and wrote an entire
book and I am sure the captain of the ship kept proper logs and there
were the other witnesses on the ship. just as I am sure there are/were
records of the harbor master from darwin having paid the fees and
taxes to take the boat trip in the first place.
Are you a moron are you just so desperate to keep your wonderfuly evil
bible so holy.
These are claims NOT evidence. A book written by Jesus would NOT be an evidence for Jesus, but a claim that someone called Jesus wrote a book.
Why do you bother with the contrafactuals?
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Now I am glad you are apealing to eyes witnesses. If eye witnesses are NOT good enough to pprove Jesus' existence, they are NOT good enough to prove that of Darwin EITHER.
There is no eyewitness testimony that Jesus existed. None. That is a lie
that has been spread by religious con men.
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-13 22:32:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:18:37 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 09:37:28 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
What evidence do you think you have?
What archaeological evidence do you have that Darwin visited the Galapagos Island?
well considering that darwin was a real person and wrote an entire
book and I am sure the captain of the ship kept proper logs and there
were the other witnesses on the ship. just as I am sure there are/were
records of the harbor master from darwin having paid the fees and
taxes to take the boat trip in the first place.
Are you a moron are you just so desperate to keep your wonderfuly evil
bible so holy.
These are claims NOT evidence. A book written by Jesus would NOT be an evidence for Jesus, but a claim that someone called Jesus wrote a book.
Why do you bother with the contrafactuals?
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Now I am glad you are apealing to eyes witnesses. If eye witnesses are NOT good enough to pprove Jesus' existence, they are NOT good enough to prove that of Darwin EITHER.
There is no eyewitness testimony that Jesus existed. None. That is a lie
that has been spread by religious con men.
That is your claim. YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE for that.
Free Lunch
2014-08-13 22:41:37 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:32:51 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:18:37 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 09:37:28 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by b***@m.nu
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
What evidence do you think you have?
What archaeological evidence do you have that Darwin visited the Galapagos Island?
well considering that darwin was a real person and wrote an entire
book and I am sure the captain of the ship kept proper logs and there
were the other witnesses on the ship. just as I am sure there are/were
records of the harbor master from darwin having paid the fees and
taxes to take the boat trip in the first place.
Are you a moron are you just so desperate to keep your wonderfuly evil
bible so holy.
These are claims NOT evidence. A book written by Jesus would NOT be an evidence for Jesus, but a claim that someone called Jesus wrote a book.
Why do you bother with the contrafactuals?
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Now I am glad you are apealing to eyes witnesses. If eye witnesses are NOT good enough to pprove Jesus' existence, they are NOT good enough to prove that of Darwin EITHER.
There is no eyewitness testimony that Jesus existed. None. That is a lie
that has been spread by religious con men.
That is your claim. YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE for that.
If there were evidence that Jesus existed, you would have been able to
direct me to it and proven me wrong. All you can do is whine that I have
pointed out a serious failing of your religion and you don't like it and
will stamp your foot like an unhappy toddler.

Until you have evidence to provide, I have no reason to withdraw my
statement.
Free Lunch
2014-08-13 22:27:51 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 09:37:28 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:59:04 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
Post by LaBrume Matinale
No, evidence is not ONE size-fits-all. Some other rules of evidence elude you
What evidence do you think you have?
What archaeological evidence do you have that Darwin visited the Galapagos Island?
You have made it clear that you don't deal with evidence. Why bother
asking me for something you don't care about?
Olrik
2014-08-10 04:38:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:03:40 -0700 (PDT), Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 08:08:19 -0700 (PDT), LaBrume Matinale
...
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by Free Lunch
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by Free Lunch
Based on indefensible assumptions.
Not assumptions, but facts vindicated by history.
You clearly know no history.
Yeah, historian, you should have known that atheists like Celsus
Porphyry and many more preceded you and they all failed to debunk Christianity.
No evidence supports your religion.
The Law of Moses that the Jews shared with the Goyim through Al Massih is the evidence, fool
But that does not concern the Chinese, Indian or African people, who
have thousands of years of history before your so-called «jesus» or
«mohamed», both gratuitous creations.
--
Olrik
aa #1981
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
Greywolf
2014-08-03 18:57:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by W.T.S.
Main article: Catholic
Shortly before convoking the council that inserted into the
Nicene Creed the description of the church as catholic, Emperor
Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica, which limited the
ecclesiastical application of this term to upholders of the
teaching of the First Council of Nicaea.
OK then.
Another history lesson from the jew boy.
� Was not Jesus a Jew boy ?
I dunno.
I wasn't around.
No, you weren't. But, according to your mythical bible,
he was, and a rabbi to boot.
Too bad he never really existed.
How is someone who never existed claimed as the MESSIAH?
Moses foretold the Messiah in the Oracles untrusted to the Jews, the Arabs, the cousins of the Jews certified that He really came and His name was Jesus.
Christ had to be born in the world. Jesus is the Christ. Then Jesus was born in to the world. Simple logic
____________

Christians are forever pointing to Micah 5:2 as the "prophecy" proving Jesus of Nazareth, was indeed, the "Messiah".

But keep reading further:

He will stand and shepherd his flock in the strength of the LORD, in the majesty of the name of the LORD his God. And they will live securely, for then his greatness will reach to the ends of the earth.


5 And he will be their peace. When the Assyrian invades our land and marches through our fortresses, we will raise against him seven shepherds, even eight leaders of men. 6 They will rule the land of Assyria with the sword, the land of Nimrod with drawn sword. He will deliver us from the Assyrian when he invades our land and marches into our borders. 7 The remnant of Jacob will be in the midst of many peoples like dew from the LORD, like showers on the grass, which do not wait for man or linger for mankind.

Now tell we atheists just *when* Jesus is going to "raise against him [the Assyrian nation] seven shepherds, even eight leaders of men" and rule Assyria "with the sword"?

What's that? Micah didn't literally mean "sword", but tanks, fighter jets, missiles, and chemical weapons!

Well, why didn't he just *say* so? And uh, isn't "Assyria" a defunct "ancient" country?

Oh, I get it. Micah was telling the people of his day that the Jesus was going to do all that thousands of years into the future instead of SOON. So there was no need to worry their pretty little heads over it. That's its just a bunch of useless information that has no relevance for them at all. Right?
Sinoxis The Africanus
2014-08-04 15:04:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Greywolf
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Moses foretold the Messiah in the Oracles untrusted to the Jews, the Arabs, the cousins of the Jews certified that He really came and His name was Jesus.
Christ had to be born in the world. Jesus is the Christ. Then Jesus was born in to the world. Simple logic
____________
Christians are forever pointing to Micah 5:2 as the "prophecy" proving Jesus >of Nazareth, was indeed, the "Messiah".
Trinitarians don't make up CHRISTIANITY. If Trinitarians are forever pointing to Micah 5:2, we, Muslims, are pointing to the Torah of Moses, Deut. 18:15-19 to prove that Jesus is a Moses-like prophet, therefore He is the Messiah.
Before Micah, there was Moses and his Torah which Jesus appealed to as prove of His authority.
Post by Greywolf
He will stand and shepherd his flock in the strength of the LORD, in the majesty of the name of the LORD his God. And they will live securely, for then his greatness will reach to the ends of the earth.
5 And he will be their peace. When the Assyrian invades our land and marches through our fortresses, we will raise against him seven shepherds, even eight leaders of men. 6 They will rule the land of Assyria with the sword, the land of Nimrod with drawn sword. He will deliver us from the Assyrian when he invades our land and marches into our borders. 7 The remnant of Jacob will be in the midst of many peoples like dew from the LORD, like showers on the grass, which do not wait for man or linger for mankind.
Now tell we atheists just *when* Jesus is going to "raise against him [the Assyrian nation] seven shepherds, even eight leaders of men" and rule Assyria "with the sword"?
What's that? Micah didn't literally mean "sword", but tanks, fighter jets, missiles, and chemical weapons!
Well, why didn't he just *say* so? And uh, isn't "Assyria" a defunct "ancient" country?
Oh, I get it. Micah was telling the people of his day that the Jesus was going to do all that thousands of years into the future instead of SOON. So there was no need to worry their pretty little heads over it. That's its just a bunch of useless information that has no relevance for them at all. Right?
duke
2014-08-05 20:20:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Greywolf
Christians are forever pointing to Micah 5:2 as the "prophecy" proving Jesus of Nazareth, was indeed, the "Messiah".
He will stand and shepherd his flock in the strength of the LORD, in the majesty of the name of the LORD his God. And they will live securely, for then his greatness will reach to the ends of the earth.
5 And he will be their peace. When the Assyrian invades our land and marches through our fortresses, we will raise against him seven shepherds, even eight leaders of men. 6 They will rule the land of Assyria with the sword, the land of Nimrod with drawn sword. He will deliver us from the Assyrian when he invades our land and marches into our borders. 7 The remnant of Jacob will be in the midst of many peoples like dew from the LORD, like showers on the grass, which do not wait for man or linger for mankind.
Yep, solid prophesy of the coming of the Lord Jesus.
Post by Greywolf
Now tell we atheists just *when* Jesus is going to "raise against him [the Assyrian nation] seven shepherds, even eight leaders of men" and rule Assyria "with the sword"?
Long past. It's a spiritual message.
Post by Greywolf
What's that? Micah didn't literally mean "sword", but tanks, fighter jets, missiles, and chemical weapons!
Well, why didn't he just *say* so? And uh, isn't "Assyria" a defunct "ancient" country?
He didn't.
Post by Greywolf
Oh, I get it. Micah was telling the people of his day that the Jesus was going to do all that thousands of years into the future instead of SOON. So there was no need to worry their pretty little heads over it. That's its just a bunch of useless information that has no relevance for them at all. Right?
Nope. Past event.

the dukester, American-American

*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
Olrik
2014-08-04 03:12:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sinoxis The Africanus
Post by W.T.S.
Main article: Catholic
Shortly before convoking the council that inserted into the
Nicene Creed the description of the church as catholic, Emperor
Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica, which limited the
ecclesiastical application of this term to upholders of the
teaching of the First Council of Nicaea.
OK then.
Another history lesson from the jew boy.
� Was not Jesus a Jew boy ?
I dunno.
I wasn't around.
No, you weren't. But, according to your mythical bible,
he was, and a rabbi to boot.
Too bad he never really existed.
How is someone who never existed claimed as the MESSIAH?
Moses foretold the Messiah in the Oracles untrusted to the Jews, the Arabs, the cousins of the Jews certified that He really came and His name was Jesus.
Christ had to be born in the world. Jesus is the Christ. Then Jesus was born in to the world. Simple logic
It's called «fiction». Look into it.
--
Olrik
aa #1981
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
LaBrume Matinale
2014-08-03 18:21:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by W.T.S.
Main article: Catholic
Shortly before convoking the council that inserted into the
Nicene Creed the description of the church as catholic, Emperor
Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica, which limited the
ecclesiastical application of this term to upholders of the
teaching of the First Council of Nicaea.
OK then.
Another history lesson from the jew boy.
� Was not Jesus a Jew boy ?
I dunno.
I wasn't around.
No, you weren't. But, according to your mythical bible,
he was, and a rabbi to boot.
Too bad he never really existed.
You are saying that Obama was elected president according to the constitution of the United State but he never "existed" in the White House.
Either, you don't know what the prerogatives of a president are, or you don't understand the founding documents of America. Either way you an IDIOT.
JESUS IS THE MESSIAH, fool. Moses foretold Him, Mohammad confirmed him, thus is fulfilled the message inserted in the Transfiguration, story found in Matthew.
Olrik
2014-08-04 03:14:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Post by W.T.S.
Main article: Catholic
Shortly before convoking the council that inserted into the
Nicene Creed the description of the church as catholic, Emperor
Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica, which limited the
ecclesiastical application of this term to upholders of the
teaching of the First Council of Nicaea.
OK then.
Another history lesson from the jew boy.
� Was not Jesus a Jew boy ?
I dunno.
I wasn't around.
No, you weren't. But, according to your mythical bible,
he was, and a rabbi to boot.
Too bad he never really existed.
You are saying that Obama was elected president according to the constitution of the United State but he never "existed" in the White House.
No, he's not saying that.

Why do you lie?
Post by LaBrume Matinale
Either, you don't know what the prerogatives of a president are, or you don't understand the founding documents of America. Either way you an IDIOT.
JESUS IS THE MESSIAH, fool. Moses foretold Him, Mohammad confirmed him, thus is fulfilled the message inserted in the Transfiguration, story found in Matthew.
--
Olrik
aa #1981
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
Loading...