|
Post by déjà vu on Apr 3, 2014 23:24:54 GMT -5
so you don't believe what the Bible says?
Genesis 1 makes it clear that all of God’s living creations are designed to reproduce “according to their own kinds
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 3, 2014 23:46:55 GMT -5
so you don't believe what the Bible says? Genesis 1 makes it clear that all of God’s living creations are designed to reproduce “according to their own kinds How about Mary and Jesus? Some people think Jesus was not our kind.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 4, 2014 0:38:44 GMT -5
so you don't believe what the Bible says? Genesis 1 makes it clear that all of God’s living creations are designed to reproduce “according to their own kinds The Bible is true... Satan/fallen angels have been tampering/creating their own hybrid race for hundreds, thousands, millions of years to be RULERS of the Universe and on planet earth. They are VERY powerful beings from heaven. They have been mixing their genes with animals, dinosaurs, reptiles, birds, humans for thousands, million years. That was one of the main reasons God wiped out Satan Hybrid race from the earth in Noah's days. When Jesus returns He will cleanse the earth from Satan's hybrid race AGAIN with Fire from heaven this time. Nathan, you haven't answered my question. Do the workers tell you this stuff?
|
|
|
Post by faune on Apr 4, 2014 8:07:07 GMT -5
Nathan, you haven't answered my question. Do the workers tell you this stuff? No, I just found out these things about a year and half ago on my own. Nathan ~ For example, are you saying this is the reason for all those large birds and dinosaurs that were part of the pre-historic age was the result of this reptilian race of fallen angels mingling with man & animals over the years to form these giants which Noah's flood was supposed to have eradicated? But, by some chance, they even survived this world-wide flood and are amongst us today?
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Apr 4, 2014 8:19:15 GMT -5
They weren't the writers -- they're supposed to be the people who told the people who told the writers. Works for me that a scribe may have done the actual writing of Matthew's, Mark's, Luke's and John's gospel accounts of Jesus. Or that a scribe may have done the actual writing of the epistles for those whose account it actually is.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 4, 2014 9:21:11 GMT -5
Does your wife find you interesting or boring? Consistent in my beliefs and able to provide either logical or material support.
|
|
|
Post by faune on Apr 4, 2014 9:22:30 GMT -5
They weren't the writers -- they're supposed to be the people who told the people who told the writers. Works for me that a scribe may have done the actual writing of Matthew's, Mark's, Luke's and John's gospel accounts of Jesus. Or that a scribe may have done the actual writing of the epistles for those whose account it actually is. Perhaps this article that Snow presented earlier explains the need for logic progression behind these assertions, although it deals only with the creation of the Old Testament?
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/belief-list.html (Short form of above article.)
In reference to Bob's statement above, here's an article relating to the creation of the New Testament and how it came into existence with the Table of Contents included with reference to the Early Church Fathers (ECF's).
infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/NTcanon.html
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 4, 2014 9:29:18 GMT -5
They weren't the writers -- they're supposed to be the people who told the people who told the writers. Works for me that a scribe may have done the actual writing of Matthew's, Mark's, Luke's and John's gospel accounts of Jesus. Or that a scribe may have done the actual writing of the epistles for those whose account it actually is. When people say they were not the writers they are not meaning the physical process but the source of the content. Given the average life span was about 40 years, how many would have been alive when the text was finally developed into a physical form?
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Apr 4, 2014 9:48:52 GMT -5
Works for me that a scribe may have done the actual writing of Matthew's, Mark's, Luke's and John's gospel accounts of Jesus. Or that a scribe may have done the actual writing of the epistles for those whose account it actually is. When people say they were not the writers they are not meaning the physical process but the source of the content. Given the average life span was about 40 years, how many would have been alive when the text was finally developed into a physical form? There are too many witnesses to the authenticity that the accounts are of those to whom they are attributed.
|
|
|
Post by faune on Apr 4, 2014 10:07:52 GMT -5
When people say they were not the writers they are not meaning the physical process but the source of the content. Given the average life span was about 40 years, how many would have been alive when the text was finally developed into a physical form? There are too many witnesses to the authenticity that the accounts are of those to whom they are attributed.
StAnne ~ Are you referring to I Corinthians 15 here? There's also recorded in Matthew 27:51-53 the story of dead saints who arose from their graves and walked around town after Jesus' resurrection. However, you find no reference to this strange occurrence in any of the historical accounts by Roman historians at this time or in the articles which follow. For some reason, they leave this fabulous tale out of the timeline accounts below? You would think such a spectacular event would be remembered in history, but not a word! After all, these dead saints walking around town in Matthew 27:51-53 were perhaps the best testimony to Jesus being who He said He was and proof of His resurrection, too? However, what stands out to me in this account is that the word "saints" to describe Christian believers did not come into being until the RCC had become the established church in Rome around the 4th century. Could this have been one of those additions of even more evidence to back up the resurrection of Jesus by the Roman Catholic Church?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint
christianity.about.com/od/biblestudyresources/a/jesusfinalhours.htm
www.highlandpc.com/studies/fojc/rezafter.php
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 4, 2014 10:18:49 GMT -5
Hard to believe that Jesus lost out to Miley Cyrus (452,000,000 results). And Justin Bieber (542,000,000). Sticking with historical figures George Washington (812,000,000 results (0.24 seconds). Of course, you probably knew that sex (952,000,000 results) would raise its ugly head! Do you really think looking for google hits in a very christian country is going to give any results that mean anything? I mean, plain old CARBON (145,000,000 results) beat Christ (97,400,000 results). hmm..thats odd when i google miley cyrus justin beiber i only got 49 million hits each and george got 93 million as for sex and carbon thats just silly were talking people not objects... Miley Cyrun - About 485,000,000 results (0.23 seconds) Justin Beiber - About 514,000,000 results (0.26 seconds) George Washington - About 813,000,000 results (0.26 seconds) Jesus - About 171,000,000 results (0.22 seconds) Christ - About 97,400,000 results (0.36 seconds) Jesus Christ - About 116,000,000 results (0.30 seconds) I believe you have some filtering in place on your system. In any case I think it shows that in terms of importance/popularity/etc this methodology is meaningless.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 4, 2014 10:22:19 GMT -5
When people say they were not the writers they are not meaning the physical process but the source of the content. Given the average life span was about 40 years, how many would have been alive when the text was finally developed into a physical form? There are too many witnesses to the authenticity that the accounts are of those to whom they are attributed. No, there are not independent witnesses. That is one of the problems. Tradition says Matthew wrote the gospel and for years people believed it without question. Careful examination shows that blind acceptance to be unfounded.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Apr 4, 2014 10:22:52 GMT -5
There are too many witnesses to the authenticity that the accounts are of those to whom they are attributed. No, there are not independent witnesses. That is one of the problems. Tradition says Matthew wrote the gospel and for years people believed it without question. Careful examination shows that blind acceptance to be unfounded. professing.proboards.com/post/582001/thread
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Apr 4, 2014 10:23:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Apr 4, 2014 10:24:27 GMT -5
The homilies of the early church presbyters also attest to the authenticity of the gospel accounts.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 4, 2014 10:33:47 GMT -5
No, there are not independent witnesses. That is one of the problems. Tradition says Matthew wrote the gospel and for years people believed it without question. Careful examination shows that blind acceptance to be unfounded. professing.proboards.com/post/582001/threadIndependent would be some evidence other than the RCC supporting their claim.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 4, 2014 10:39:04 GMT -5
The homilies of the early church presbyters also attest to the authenticity of the gospel accounts. Can you provide a link to some examples?
|
|
|
Post by faune on Apr 4, 2014 10:39:16 GMT -5
The homilies of the early church presbyters also attest to the authenticity of the gospel accounts. StAnne ~ For comparison purposes to the articles I provided earlier regarding the organization of the Bible itself, here's a Wiki article regarding the New Testament canons, which also agrees with my other references in content.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_New_Testament_canon
Development of the New Testament Canon
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 4, 2014 11:20:39 GMT -5
And, it was regional and not worldwide, right? Snow, according to Gen 7:17-24 it was Worldwide.
For 40 days the flood kept coming on the earth. As the waters rose higher, they lifted the ark high above the earth. The waters rose higher and higher on the earth. And the ark floated on the water. The waters rose on the earth until ALL of the high mountains under the entire sky were covered. 20 The waters continued to rise until they covered the mountains by more than 20 feet.Every living thing that moved on the earth died. The birds, the livestock and the wild animals died. All of the creatures that fill the earth also died. And so did every human being. Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in it died. Every living thing on the earth was wiped out. People and animals were destroyed. The creatures that move along the ground and the birds of the air were wiped out.Everything was destroyed from the earth. Only Noah and those who were with him in the ark were left. The waters flooded the earth for 150 days. How would the people of that time know anything about worldwide when they didn't even know about the 'whole' world?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 4, 2014 11:27:26 GMT -5
How would the people of that time know anything about worldwide when they didn't even know about the 'whole' world? That is your question? I wonder where all the water went. Why the salt water fish didn't die from the infusion of fresh water. So many questions with a single answer - god-of-the-gaps.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 4, 2014 11:44:13 GMT -5
How would the people of that time know anything about worldwide when they didn't even know about the 'whole' world? That is your question? I wonder where all the water went. Why the salt water fish didn't die from the infusion of fresh water. So many questions with a single answer - god-of-the-gaps. Well I do have a lot of other questions too, but I just don't have time to ask them all. Besides, the answers are always the same. God did it. Since I don't agree with that, their answers are just more of the same and it gets boring. Course Nathan is NEVER boring lol.
|
|
|
Post by faune on Apr 4, 2014 12:08:30 GMT -5
StAnne ~ I somehow missed your explanation regarding the witnesses to Jesus' teachings found within the ECF's accounts. At the time, I thought you were talking about witnesses to Jesus' resurrection instead, since we were discussing this topic, too.
So, in all fairness to you in this discussion, I want to re-post your earlier response. I never saw this presented in this fashion before and appreciated you sharing it with us, although I missed this posting somehow in my reading over this thread. This Muratorian Fragment is also among the topics covered in my Wiki reference earlier.
infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/NTcanon.html
|
|
|
Post by xna on Apr 4, 2014 12:18:56 GMT -5
Nailed: Ten Christian Myths That Show Jesus Never Existed at All - David Fitzgerald A presentation on the historicity of Jesus from his best selling book. youtu.be/MzrIHdN9O7M
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Apr 4, 2014 12:25:57 GMT -5
The homilies of the early church presbyters also attest to the authenticity of the gospel accounts. Can you provide a link to some examples? There is no need for independent claims. The Canon of Scripture is by the authority of the Church, Given be Christ in Mt 16. It's a take it or leave it. Many accept it as the inspired written word of God. Some don't.
|
|
|
Post by faune on Apr 4, 2014 12:26:31 GMT -5
Nailed: Ten Christian Myths That Show Jesus Never Existed at All - David Fitzgerald A presentation on the historicity of Jesus for his best selling book. youtu.be/MzrIHdN9O7M Xna ~ Thanks for your presentation here to add to this discussion from both sides of the fence. I hope you don't mind me adding the description associated with this video below?
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Apr 4, 2014 12:27:41 GMT -5
Sorry - iPhone posting will have to correct later.
|
|
|
Post by faune on Apr 4, 2014 12:37:03 GMT -5
Can you provide a link to some examples? There is no need for independent claims. The Canon of Scripture is by the authority of the Church, Given be Christ in Mt 16. It's a take it or leave it. Many accept it as the inspired written word of God. Some don't. StAnne ~ When you say "there is no need for independent claims," or other secular historical references apart from the RCC backing up their own claims with references to ECF's, I tend to disagree with you. Since the RCC actually conducted the major assembly of the Bible as we know it today, I feel a close evaluation of how this came about in determining the specific canons selected deserves to be considered here, too. Otherwise, you are asking us to take the word of the Roman Catholic Church at face value without even researching it further for authenticity from historical records at that time. Just my thoughts! If the Bible is to be considered inerrant and a truthful account regarding Jesus' existence and teachings, than there should be no problem with verifying this fact from historical records found within the first century. Just my thoughts, since truth should hold up to scrutiny, IMHO?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 4, 2014 13:31:26 GMT -5
Can you provide a link to some examples? There is no need for independent claims. The Canon of Scripture is by the authority of the Church, Given be Christ in Mt 16. It's a take it or leave it. Many accept it as the inspired written word of God. Some don't. Think how excited the RCC would be should some external proof surface.
|
|