|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 18, 2022 19:48:54 GMT -8
Here's a couple of questions that I've asked you, but you have not answered. Why do you think they went to these lengths to show that they're is a Messiah? And, why did they choose Jesus Christ as that person? Why did they choose Jesus? Because he said and did the right things? Because they heard stories and believed them? They lived in a very primitive and superstitious time. People believed a lot of riduclous, absurd stuff. We don't believe in those things today because we now know how ridiculous they were. Ultimately, they WANTED to believe that Jesus was the Son of God. They needed that hope in their otherwise miserable, painful lives. They lived in a very harsh, cruel world and desperately needed to believe in God and some kind of better life after death. They needed to believe that Jesus was their savior to get them to that better life after death. Without that hope they had nothing to live for. On the flip side, there were MANY who witnessed his Miracles, not the stories of them, first hand, and still didn't believe. There were hundreds who saw him resurrected and still didn't believe. If someone does not WANT to believe, no matter what they witness, they'll never believe.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 18, 2022 20:10:55 GMT -8
I asked you what you thought of the passage in the Old Testament, Isaiah 53 which was written 700 years before Christ death. If you don't know this scripture, please read it and tell me whether you think it's talking about Jesus Christ and what he was going to go through. The brutal torment.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 18, 2022 21:23:47 GMT -8
I asked you what you thought of the passage in the Old Testament, Isaiah 53 which was written 700 years before Christ death. If you don't know this scripture, please read it and tell me whether you think it's talking about Jesus Christ and what he was going to go through. The brutal torment. Just because one fictional passage/plot mirrors another fictional prediction doesn't make either of them real. Do you just not get that? They fit Jesus into that story because it fit their needs. They needed to believe it. And these so called witnesses of miracles saw things they misinterpreted, misunderstood, or just didn't see at all, but claimed they did. There is literally no evidence that would stand up to legal, historic, or scientific scrutiny when it comes to proving that Jesus was anything more than a regular human being.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 19, 2022 7:18:21 GMT -8
I asked you what you thought of the passage in the Old Testament, Isaiah 53 which was written 700 years before Christ death. If you don't know this scripture, please read it and tell me whether you think it's talking about Jesus Christ and what he was going to go through. The brutal torment. Just because one fictional passage/plot mirrors another fictional prediction doesn't make either of them real. Do you just not get that? They fit Jesus into that story because it fit their needs. They needed to believe it. And these so called witnesses of miracles saw things they misinterpreted, misunderstood, or just didn't see at all, but claimed they did. There is literally no evidence that would stand up to legal, historic, or scientific scrutiny when it comes to proving that Jesus was anything more than a regular human being. So, you're choosing to have faith in the notion that they ALL, (emphasizing ALL) were duped, or liars. Ok. You're also choosing to believe that Isaiah 53 was written, and then 700 years later they tried to fit that into Jesus life. Ok..... By the way, that's just ONE example, so you're not correct when you insinuate that it's only one example.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 19, 2022 7:48:29 GMT -8
Just because one fictional passage/plot mirrors another fictional prediction doesn't make either of them real. Do you just not get that? They fit Jesus into that story because it fit their needs. They needed to believe it. And these so called witnesses of miracles saw things they misinterpreted, misunderstood, or just didn't see at all, but claimed they did. There is literally no evidence that would stand up to legal, historic, or scientific scrutiny when it comes to proving that Jesus was anything more than a regular human being. So, you're choosing to have faith in the notion that they ALL, (emphasizing ALL) were duped, or liars. Ok. You're also choosing to believe that Isaiah 53 was written, and then 700 years later they tried to fit that into Jesus life. Ok..... By the way, that's just ONE example, so you're not correct when you insinuate that it's only one example. You're corroborating the Bible with the Bible. There is zero evidence outside of the Bible that Jesus was, "The Son of God." You're a college educated man. You know that none of this stuff would hold up in court if you were trying to prove it. You know that not a single historian would say that there is any kind of reliable proof that Jesus was the Son of God. A real person? Maybe, but not the Son of God. And certainly none of this holds up to scientific scrutiny - show me the physical evidence of these miracles. There is none. The Chrisitan beliefs that Jesus was the Son of God don't hold up to critical thinking. Only if you believe that everything in the Bible is 100% correct can you believe that. But there are tons of contradictions in the Bible. And you can't honestly believe that the world is only 10,000 or so years old. Science proved long ago that it is BILLIONS of years old.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 19, 2022 8:19:44 GMT -8
So, you're choosing to have faith in the notion that they ALL, (emphasizing ALL) were duped, or liars. Ok. You're also choosing to believe that Isaiah 53 was written, and then 700 years later they tried to fit that into Jesus life. Ok..... By the way, that's just ONE example, so you're not correct when you insinuate that it's only one example. You're corroborating the Bible with the Bible. There is zero evidence outside of the Bible that Jesus was, "The Son of God." You're a college educated man. You know that none of this stuff would hold up in court if you were trying to prove it. You know that not a single historian would say that there is any kind of reliable proof that Jesus was the Son of God. A real person? Maybe, but not the Son of God. And certainly none of this holds up to scientific scrutiny - show me the physical evidence of these miracles. There is none. The Chrisitan beliefs that Jesus was the Son of God don't hold up to critical thinking. Only if you believe that everything in the Bible is 100% correct can you believe that. But there are tons of contradictions in the Bible. And you can't honestly believe that the world is only 10,000 or so years old. Science proved long ago that it is BILLIONS of years old. So, do you not believe ANYTHING in history that you weren't there for, and that was simply passed down through history? That IS what you are saying.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 19, 2022 8:24:17 GMT -8
So, you're choosing to have faith in the notion that they ALL, (emphasizing ALL) were duped, or liars. Ok. You're also choosing to believe that Isaiah 53 was written, and then 700 years later they tried to fit that into Jesus life. Ok..... By the way, that's just ONE example, so you're not correct when you insinuate that it's only one example. You're corroborating the Bible with the Bible. There is zero evidence outside of the Bible that Jesus was, "The Son of God." You're a college educated man. You know that none of this stuff would hold up in court if you were trying to prove it. You know that not a single historian would say that there is any kind of reliable proof that Jesus was the Son of God. A real person? Maybe, but not the Son of God. And certainly none of this holds up to scientific scrutiny - show me the physical evidence of these miracles. There is none. The Chrisitan beliefs that Jesus was the Son of God don't hold up to critical thinking. Only if you believe that everything in the Bible is 100% correct can you believe that. But there are tons of contradictions in the Bible. And you can't honestly believe that the world is only 10,000 or so years old. Science proved long ago that it is BILLIONS of years old. By the way, radiometric dating is not reliable in terms of dating the earth. Too many assumptions have to be made by scientists to validate it.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 19, 2022 10:28:59 GMT -8
You're corroborating the Bible with the Bible. There is zero evidence outside of the Bible that Jesus was, "The Son of God." You're a college educated man. You know that none of this stuff would hold up in court if you were trying to prove it. You know that not a single historian would say that there is any kind of reliable proof that Jesus was the Son of God. A real person? Maybe, but not the Son of God. And certainly none of this holds up to scientific scrutiny - show me the physical evidence of these miracles. There is none. The Chrisitan beliefs that Jesus was the Son of God don't hold up to critical thinking. Only if you believe that everything in the Bible is 100% correct can you believe that. But there are tons of contradictions in the Bible. And you can't honestly believe that the world is only 10,000 or so years old. Science proved long ago that it is BILLIONS of years old. So, do you not believe ANYTHING in history that you weren't there for, and that was simply passed down through history? That IS what you are saying. I don't believe in superstitious ghost stories and supernatural myths, no. I believe in factual events that can be documented through multiple reliable sources. The Bible is not a reliable source. It is a story of superstition, myth, and is largely a work of fiction (some of it platiarized from prior sources).
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 19, 2022 10:38:39 GMT -8
You're corroborating the Bible with the Bible. There is zero evidence outside of the Bible that Jesus was, "The Son of God." You're a college educated man. You know that none of this stuff would hold up in court if you were trying to prove it. You know that not a single historian would say that there is any kind of reliable proof that Jesus was the Son of God. A real person? Maybe, but not the Son of God. And certainly none of this holds up to scientific scrutiny - show me the physical evidence of these miracles. There is none. The Chrisitan beliefs that Jesus was the Son of God don't hold up to critical thinking. Only if you believe that everything in the Bible is 100% correct can you believe that. But there are tons of contradictions in the Bible. And you can't honestly believe that the world is only 10,000 or so years old. Science proved long ago that it is BILLIONS of years old. By the way, radiometric dating is not reliable in terms of dating the earth. Too many assumptions have to be made by scientists to validate it. If you TRULY believe that the entire universe is only about 10,000 years old you are saying you do not believe in science. Because there are multiple ways in which science can prove the universe is billions of years old. I suppose you don't believe in evolution, either.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 19, 2022 11:07:35 GMT -8
So, do you not believe ANYTHING in history that you weren't there for, and that was simply passed down through history? That IS what you are saying. I don't believe in superstitious ghost stories and supernatural myths, no. I believe in factual events that can be documented through multiple reliable sources. The Bible is not a reliable source. It is a story of superstition, myth, and is largely a work of fiction (some of it platiarized from prior sources). Ok. I understand. Just like I thought. You will not believe anything that you were not there to touch, or see during the Biblical time era. Pretty narrow minded. Or, you're the type of person that will pick and choose what he or she wants to believe in.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 19, 2022 11:08:52 GMT -8
I don't believe in superstitious ghost stories and supernatural myths, no. I believe in factual events that can be documented through multiple reliable sources. The Bible is not a reliable source. It is a story of superstition, myth, and is largely a work of fiction (some of it platiarized from prior sources). Ok. I understand. Just like I thought. You will not believe anything that you were not there to touch, or see during the Biblical time era. Pretty narrow minded. Or, you're the type of person that will pick and choose what he or she wants to believe in. How old is the Universe? Do you believe in evolution?
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 19, 2022 11:09:58 GMT -8
By the way, radiometric dating is not reliable in terms of dating the earth. Too many assumptions have to be made by scientists to validate it. If you TRULY believe that the entire universe is only about 10,000 years old you are saying you do not believe in science. Because there are multiple ways in which science can prove the universe is billions of years old. I suppose you don't believe in evolution, either. Tell me some of those ways that prove that the earth is billions of years old without adding in assumptions. Cold hard facts, the ones that you like to say are the only way to prove something and not containing assumptions from scientists.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 19, 2022 11:11:20 GMT -8
If you TRULY believe that the entire universe is only about 10,000 years old you are saying you do not believe in science. Because there are multiple ways in which science can prove the universe is billions of years old. I suppose you don't believe in evolution, either. Tell me some of those ways that prove that the earth is billions of years old without adding in assumptions. Cold hard facts, the ones that you like to say are the only way to prove something. No assumptions. Carbon dating, which may not be exact to the year, but it is exact within thousands of years, and when you're talking billions of years that's pretty damned close.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 19, 2022 11:12:43 GMT -8
Ok. I understand. Just like I thought. You will not believe anything that you were not there to touch, or see during the Biblical time era. Pretty narrow minded. Or, you're the type of person that will pick and choose what he or she wants to believe in. How old is the Universe? Do you believe in evolution? Around 6,000 years old. A tadpole can become a frog, yes. I do believe in forms of evolution like most Christians.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 19, 2022 11:16:31 GMT -8
How old is the Universe? Do you believe in evolution? Around 6,000 years old. A tadpole can become a frog, yes. I do believe in forms of evolution like most Christians. If you really, truly believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old then we're done. Science has proven that it is billions of years old.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 19, 2022 12:25:41 GMT -8
Around 6,000 years old. A tadpole can become a frog, yes. I do believe in forms of evolution like most Christians. If you really, truly believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old then we're done. Science has proven that it is billions of years old. Like I asked you before, show me the proof without the assumptions from scientists, that prove it's billions of years old. You're the one that does not rely on faith, but only cold hard facts that you can prove in a court of law.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 19, 2022 12:32:23 GMT -8
If you really, truly believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old then we're done. Science has proven that it is billions of years old. Like I asked you before, show me the proof without the assumptions from scientists, that prove it's billions of years old. You're the one that does not rely on faith, but only cold hard facts that you can prove in a court of law. Carbon f****** dating, pal. It is a proven science. Also, the laws of physics prove that the stars and galaxies have moved over what would take billions of years.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 19, 2022 13:05:08 GMT -8
Like I asked you before, show me the proof without the assumptions from scientists, that prove it's billions of years old. You're the one that does not rely on faith, but only cold hard facts that you can prove in a court of law. Carbon f****** dating, pal. It is a proven science. Also, the laws of physics prove that the stars and galaxies have moved over what would take billions of years. You're flesh is getting testy my friend. Take a cold shower. Lowering myself to your level here. Come on pal. I've already stated that Carbon (radioactive) testing makes assumptions into their "theory." It's a theory, not a fact. You should try reading up on it more before you spew. Also, if it was a cold hard fact, Christians could not make the claim that the earth is currently 6-10,000 years old. So there's that. Do more research on carbon testing and get back to me.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 19, 2022 13:07:47 GMT -8
Carbon f****** dating, pal. It is a proven science. Also, the laws of physics prove that the stars and galaxies have moved over what would take billions of years. You're flesh is getting testy my friend. Take a cold shower. Lowering myself to your level here. Come on pal. I've already stated that Carbon (radioactive) testing makes assumptions into their "theory." It's a theory, not a fact. You should try reading up on it more before you spew. Also, if it was a cold hard fact, Christians could not make the claim that the earth is currently 6-10,000 years old. So there's that. Do more research on carbon testing and get back to me.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 19, 2022 13:36:56 GMT -8
You're flesh is getting testy my friend. Take a cold shower. Lowering myself to your level here. Come on pal. I've already stated that Carbon (radioactive) testing makes assumptions into their "theory." It's a theory, not a fact. You should try reading up on it more before you spew. Also, if it was a cold hard fact, Christians could not make the claim that the earth is currently 6-10,000 years old. So there's that. Do more research on carbon testing and get back to me. That's what I figured.
|
|