Comment Thread for The Resurrection of Jesus - Apologiaphoenix vs Gary

[Christianbookworm]

No point in trying to reason with a fundy atheist. One would have better odds of training a dog to not eat its vomit.

Good thing I am not in charge of Gary's eternal destiny. I'm sure he wouldn't want to be in a boring room with no internet and only yucky protien bars and warm water to eat and drink. He wouldn't have to be alone. He could have a few fundy atheist roommates and they can talk about how much we Christians stink. And he could leave the room, but he'd be too scared of what might be on the other side of the door supposedly waiting to torture him. With cutesy low quality children's cartoons.

[Mikeenders]

No point in trying to reason with a fundy atheist. One would have better odds of training a dog to not eat its vomit.

In fairness there are some a lot better than this. Gary is just awful at logic.

[Christianbookworm]

In fairness there are some a lot better than this. Gary is just awful at logic.

I'm not referring to atheists in general, but just the ones like Gary that fail Biblical hermeneutics, ancient history, sociology/anthropology of said ancient peoples, and theology.

[Gary]

You have got to be joking. The whole Amalekite tribe were land priates! And social services nor prisons existed back then. Nice try. The only available orphanage for them would be heaven.

Satire, Wormy. Satire.

[Christianbookworm]

Satire, Wormy. Satire.

Gary knows how to use satire! Yay for wittle Gary!

[Gary]

I'm not referring to atheists in general, but just the ones like Gary that fail Biblical hermeneutics, ancient history, sociology/anthropology of said ancient peoples, and theology.

Dear Wormy: You are so sadly delusional, my friend.

Below is a short, but very powerful video. However, it is only for educated Christians. If you do not have a college degree, don't listen to it. For those of you who do, please bring your brain, and leave behind all rationalizations.

[Christianbookworm]

Dear Wormy: You are so sadly delusional, my friend.

Below is a short, but very powerful video. However, it is only for educated Christians. If you do not have a college degree, don't listen to it. For those of you who do, please bring your brain, and leave behind all rationalizations.

Really? That vid is STUPID! And I have a B.S. in Psychology and a Masters in Library and information science so don't claim I'm uneducated you goofball. Stop using fundy atheist vids!

[JonathanL]

Yes, I am.

Good.

[Gary]

I find it funny how Nick does NOT believe the Bible literally when it comes to Creation, the age of the universe, or the slaughters of infants recorded in the OT, but he DOES believe the Bible literally on a bodily resurrection, for which there are ZERO scholars. Scholars in early Christian beliefs, yes, but scholars in reanimations/resurrections, no. Yet Nick believes that a first century dead man walked out of his grave, ate a broiled fish sandwich with his former fishing buddies, and then levitated into outer space.

So how about this one, Nicky? Do you believe that the condemnation in the OT and by Paul regarding homosexuality should be read nonliterally, or should we persecute homosexuals and ban them from full participation in Christian churches due to their "sin" as the OT and Paul instruct us?

[Apologiaphoenix]

Dear Wormy: You are so sadly delusional, my friend.

Below is a short, but very powerful video. However, it is only for educated Christians. If you do not have a college degree, don't listen to it. For those of you who do, please bring your brain, and leave behind all rationalizations.

How funny!

As if we've never heard this before!

DRINK!

[Christianbookworm]

I'm just curious. What are your credentials/education and age, Gary?

[Apologiaphoenix]

I find it funny how Nick does NOT believe the Bible literally when it comes to Creation, the age of the universe, or the slaughters of infants recorded in the OT,

Actually I do believe it literally. Literally means according to the intent of the author. THerefore, the intent of the author is to give us a functional account of the universe and not to discuss its origins. Therefore, age has nothing to do with it so the Bible says nothing about age. The Bible is also meant to give us an account of the YHWH wars that took place in the OT and does so using warfare language common to the ANE.

but he DOES believe the Bible literally on a bodily resurrection,

That's because the authors intended to say that they believed Jesus was risen bodily so again, I follow the literal intent. You're just caught up on a fundy idea of literalism.

for which there are ZERO scholars.

Michael Licona, N.T. Wright, Gary Habermas, Craig Evans, Ben Witherington III, Pinchas Lapides, do I need to keep going?

Scholars in early Christian beliefs, yes, but scholars in reanimations/resurrections, no. Yet Nick believes that a first century dead man walked out of his grave, ate a broiled fish sandwich with his former fishing buddies, and then levitated into outer space.

And Gary believes that he as a modern doctor knows that dead people don't stay dead and those ancient stupid people didn't know that. Hey Gary. Come up with a better explanation yet?

So how about this one, Nicky? Do you believe that the condemnation in the OT and by Paul regarding homosexuality should be read nonliterally, or should we persecute homosexuals and ban them from full participation in Christian churches due to their "sin" as the OT and Paul instruct us?

Oh wow! Dan Savage! More excellent Bible scholarship!

Tell you what? How about this interview that I did with Robert Gagnon:

http://deeperwaters.ddns.net/podcast...bertGagnon.mp3

Who is he? He's an actual credentialed scholar who specializes in this area. He's debated many of the leading defenders of homosexual revisionism of Scripture.

You can also listen to my interview with three ex-homosexuals: http://deeperwaters.ddns.net/podcast...Homosexual.mp3

After that, try going through this: http://www.amazon.com/Homosexuality-...MNK2M25XZ469B4

If you do, you might realize that there is nothing new under the sun. There were mixed attitudes about homosexuality in the ancient world and this without the indoctrination of religion supposedly. Some condemned it. Some affirmed it. There were even theories around about what led to homosexuality and whether it was what we would call genetic or not.

Nothing new under the sun.

Sorry you never learned how to read a text.

Edited to add: And if you want to say I'm wrong about what literal means, try my interview with Holly Ordway.

http://deeperwaters.ddns.net/podcast...ollyOrdway.mp3

[Mikeenders]

I find it funny how Nick does NOT believe the Bible literally when it comes to Creation, the age of the universe,

lol...Gary is teaching Sunday school today folks....ok Gary can I have the literal verse where the bible states the age of the universe. Is Hezekiah chapter 10 what you are looking at?

[Apologiaphoenix]

When Gary is done with a Sunday school approach to Genesis One, he can listen to my interview with a real scholar in the field.
http://deeperwaters.ddns.net/podcast...JohnWalton.mp3

That's John Walton on The Lost World of Genesis One.

[Gary]

Actually I do believe it literally. Literally means according to the intent of the author. THerefore, the intent of the author is to give us a functional account of the universe and not to discuss its origins. Therefore, age has nothing to do with it so the Bible says nothing about age. The Bible is also meant to give us an account of the YHWH wars that took place in the OT and does so using warfare language common to the ANE.



That's because the authors intended to say that they believed Jesus was risen bodily so again, I follow the literal intent. You're just caught up on a fundy idea of literalism.



Michael Licona, N.T. Wright, Gary Habermas, Craig Evans, Ben Witherington III, Pinchas Lapides, do I need to keep going?



And Gary believes that he as a modern doctor knows that dead people don't stay dead and those ancient stupid people didn't know that. Hey Gary. Come up with a better explanation yet?



Oh wow! Dan Savage! More excellent Bible scholarship!

Tell you what? How about this interview that I did with Robert Gagnon:

http://deeperwaters.ddns.net/podcast...bertGagnon.mp3

Who is he? He's an actual credentialed scholar who specializes in this area. He's debated many of the leading defenders of homosexual revisionism of Scripture.

You can also listen to my interview with three ex-homosexuals: http://deeperwaters.ddns.net/podcast...Homosexual.mp3

After that, try going through this: http://www.amazon.com/Homosexuality-...MNK2M25XZ469B4

If you do, you might realize that there is nothing new under the sun. There were mixed attitudes about homosexuality in the ancient world and this without the indoctrination of religion supposedly. Some condemned it. Some affirmed it. There were even theories around about what led to homosexuality and whether it was what we would call genetic or not.

Nothing new under the sun.

Sorry you never learned how to read a text.

Edited to add: And if you want to say I'm wrong about what literal means, try my interview with Holly Ordway.

http://deeperwaters.ddns.net/podcast...ollyOrdway.mp3

What exactly is an "ex-homosexual", Nick? From a medical perspective, I was not aware that such an entity exists.