Comment Thread for The Resurrection of Jesus - Apologiaphoenix vs Gary

[Gary]

I find that doubtful in the extreme. More likely he can't deal with the fact that he made such a transparent error.

Every couple of months I get a visit to my front door by the Jehovah's Witnesses, often accompanied by their young children. Nice, but pushy people. When I open the door one of the first things they try to get me to do is take some of their Watch Tower literature. They hand it to me while they keep talking. I refuse to put out my hand and take it. Why? Answer: I refuse to give any respectability to their superstitious nonsense. After refusing to take their propaganda, I cut them off in mid-sentence and say this: "Shame on you for teaching these little children this superstitious silliness. Hey kids, this stuff isn't true. It is all a lie. Don't believe it. When you grow up, go to a public university and learn about the real world and true reality. What your parents are teaching you is science fiction and scary fairy tales. It isn't true."

The JW's quickly leave my house.

And that is how I believe people should react to anyone peddling supernatural/superstitious beliefs: Refuse to read their literature. Refuse to read their "scholars". Refuse to read even one sentence of their supernatural, nonsensical propaganda.

I respect true scholarship. If someone chooses to become a scholar of ancient texts to understand how ancient people thought and how that belief affected human history, that is a worthwhile endeavor. But when a scholar of one of these ancient texts begins to endorse and try to justify belief in the supernatural claims of that ancient text they have ceased being a scholar and have become a religious cultist. Such "scholars" should be laughed out the door of every center of higher education in western civilization. They should be given the same level of respect that I give to the Jehovah's Witness missionaries who come to my door on Saturday mornings.

[tabibito]

Ah now. Gary still can't deal with the matters he himself brought up earlier. So sad.

[Gary]

Leprechauns are not real.
Unicorns are not real.
Fairies are not real.
Witches are not real.
Warlocks are not real.
Goblins are not real.
Zombies are not real.
Reanimated/resurrected brain-dead first century prophets are not real.

Superstitions are not real, folks. The supernatural is not real. It is imaginary. It only exists in your mind.

Yahweh doesn't exist and Jesus is dead. Free yourselves from the grips of your fear and punishment based supernatural belief system. The world is so much better without believing that vindictive, ego-centric, invisible ghouls control your life.

[tabibito]

If Gary isn't going to engage with issues he himself has raised and simply continue to use this thread as a blog, maybe a place can be found for this thread next door to Mickiel.

[Gary]

If Gary isn't going to engage with issues he himself has raised and simply continue to use this thread as a blog, maybe a place can be found for this thread next door to Mickiel.

I answered Mike's question. He wants me to prove that Jesus must be of the tribe of Judah to be the Messiah. Let him get out his Bible and find it. It's in there.

I again challenge any Christian on TW to give evidence that Jesus was descended from King David. I don't think you can, and if you can't, Jesus was NOT the messiah, and the entire Christian fable collapses.

[Apologiaphoenix]

Hey Nick. I have often wondered about Isaiah's child that we know was present for this prophecy. Its an odd request that is made of isaiah to carry his son along and I rarely see anyone write about it much. I'd be curious if you have come across such a work that gets into that and why the child was required to be there. In most discussions of Isaiah 7 this is just glossed over if mentioned at all

It might be in Robert Reymond's, "Jesus: Divine Messiah." It's been a long time since I read it, but he spends about twenty pages on that passage.

[psstein]

No. I'm not going to buy a book when other scholars such as Bart Ehrman say that there is a "black hole" of information during those years. Give me some evidence that says otherwise and then I might consider buying a book.

The book would change your mind. Therefore you can't read it.

Hurtado and Bauckham are leading the field on early Christology. You should consider giving them some thought, rather than quoting Ehrman, who's a textual critic and not (at all!) involved in Christology.

[tabibito]

Isaiah 7, verses 10 to 16 don't seem to have a logical connection with the passage preceding, nor with the passage succeeding that section. But that is an assessment of the translation.

[tabibito]

I answered Mike's question. He wants me to prove that Jesus must be of the tribe of Judah to be the Messiah. Let him get out his Bible and find it. It's in there.

I again challenge any Christian on TW to give evidence that Jesus was descended from King David. I don't think you can, and if you can't, Jesus was NOT the messiah, and the entire Christian fable collapses.

In short, you are making assertions, but you can't point to anything definitive with which to back those assertions. And given that you have already been shown incorrect on your claim regarding the promise to David, you can't even point to a reasonable expectation of reliability that would lead to any confidence that your unreasonable demand would be more than a wild goose chase.

[Gary]

In short, you are making assertions, but you can't point to anything definitive with which to back those assertions. And given that you have already been shown incorrect on your claim regarding the promise to David, you can't even point to a reasonable expectation of reliability that would lead to any confidence that your unreasonable demand would be more than a wild goose chase.

[tabibito]

What are you blabbering about, Tabby? I never said that there would always be a Davidic king on the throne of Israel. What I said is that the messiah must come from the tribe of Judah and must be a descendant of King David. Show me where I said otherwise.

You are obviously very embarrassed by your lack of evidence that Mary was a descendant of King David that is why you continue your smoke and mirrors argument. God promised the throne of Israel to David "forever". God promised that the Messiah would be a descendant of David.

Now, give us evidence that Mary was a descendant of David or kindly shut up.

Unless I am mistaken, you also claimed that the messiah would have to be descended from David AND Solomon.


And you think that these references point to a descendant of David, rather than someone of the tribe of Judah, and not only a descendant of David, but a descendant of David through the male line: where in fact it is stated that the messiah will be a priest-king after the order of Melchizedek.

[Gary]

www.aish.comhttp://www.totheends.com/eligible.htm

[psstein]

And that is how I believe people should react to anyone peddling supernatural/superstitious beliefs: Refuse to read their literature. Refuse to read their "scholars". Refuse to read even one sentence of their supernatural, nonsensical propaganda.

I respect true scholarship. If someone chooses to become a scholar of ancient texts to understand how ancient people thought and how that belief affected human history, that is a worthwhile endeavor. But when a scholar of one of these ancient texts begins to endorse and try to justify belief in the supernatural claims of that ancient text they have ceased being a scholar and have become a religious cultist. Such "scholars" should be laughed out the door of every center of higher education in western civilization. They should be given the same level of respect that I give to the Jehovah's Witness missionaries who come to my door on Saturday mornings.

So you're an anti-intellectual, and you think that Hurtado/Bauckham have apologetic interests, when they've constantly stated that their conclusions are based on evidence, not personal convictions.

[Mikeenders]

I answered Mike's question. He wants me to prove that Jesus must be of the tribe of Judah to be the Messiah.

Just pure lying at this point. I have asked repeatedly for a verse or proof that God stated any such rule as you stated - that the tribal rights to being king can only be passed down through the Father's blood line. Anyone reading this thread can see this is like my fourth or fifth time making it clear what I was asking. I even gave you an example in King David where he did NOT have the tribal rights to be king the way you claimed was necessary. Now in total dishonesty you are going to claim I asked you for proof of something else and worse that you answered where you never have .

Nope I asked you for proof for the claim YOU made that YOU claimed absolutely disqualified Jesus from being the Messiah - Where in any prophecy or part of the law of god handed down to Moses in the bible does it state that a king can only be king if his father's blood line runs through a previous king. David had no such qualification

Look I think everyone hear knows you are not going to answer the question because you can't . My point in holding you, after 320+ pages of you asking and receiving answers, to actually dealing with one issue that YOU needed to answer is to make it clear you have no interest in the truth of any matter. When you build an objection on almost anything and that thing is shown to be flat out wrong you just pretend you dealt with it and try and move on to another topic.

Its intellectually dishonest to say the least.

The other reason I held you to it and will for a bit longer is to encourage others to do the same thing. We've been allowing you to dance from subject to subject and its only served to encourage you in an intellectual dishonest approach to matters under your consideration. We should not be encouraging you in that sin.

[Gary]

So you're an anti-intellectual, and you think that Hurtado/Bauckham have apologetic interests, when they've constantly stated that their conclusions are based on evidence, not personal convictions.

I'm could care less if the earliest Christians developed a high Christology BEFORE Jesus had even died! Even if Hurtado and Bauckham can prove that the earliest Christians believed that Jesus was Yahweh himself, the Creator of Heaven and Earth, that would not be evidence for the Christian equivalent of leprechauns (the resurrection of a dead body). Studying the beliefs of ancient peoples is one thing, trying to convince people living in the 21st century that first century brain-dead bodies were reanimated/resurrected is not scholarship, it is religious supernaturalism, which I say is unprovable, superstitious nonsense.