Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

They are not Christians!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by eider View Post
    You use 'incredibly' there?
    Yes, because she's "incredibly wrong" (i.e., wrong beyond belief)

    Originally posted by eider View Post
    Really? Why do you think I have posted up a thread on this very subject?
    Now, now. You tend to get a tad upset when I give frank and honest answers.



    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

    Comment


    • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
      Incredibly so. Just like you.

      Both of you tend to make these assertions without backing them up (kind of a thing with you ​), or in H_A's case, occasionally trying to support it by posting someone else asserting their opinion without backing it up.

      I noted previously how this nonsense has been largely flushed from academia as more evidence has come forth that has put this notion in severe doubt. Maybe you can offer up some papers (not internet articles or popular press books), where scholars are still even debating this.

      Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

      You appear to consider that Christianity was formed in a cultural vacuum.

      And of course not one single academic source is provided in support of this [as usual] sweeping pronouncement:

      this nonsense has been largely flushed from academia as more evidence has come forth that has put this notion in severe doubt.
      As expected. Incapable of providing scholarly support for her nonsense she resorts to deflection.


      I'm always still in trouble again

      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

      Comment


      • Originally posted by tabibito View Post

        Your tells are showing.
        She'd be a pauper after a serious game of poker.

        I'm always still in trouble again

        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

        Comment


        • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
          Look through your posts over the past week and...






          Aside from that



          You can stop digging. You have amply proven you cannot substantiate these two earlier comments.

          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
          Jesus Mythicism isn't just the concept that He never existed. It also includes the idea that Christianity borrowed everything from pagan sources. The latter is what you promote.
          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
          The last few days you have posted several things pushing the Copycat Christianity myth with great abandon. Are you going to throw those posts under the bus now?
          "It ain't necessarily so
          The things that you're liable
          To read in the Bible
          It ain't necessarily so
          ."

          Sportin' Life
          Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
            He went to those places with his gospel.

            We do not have the complete correspondence.

            I Corinthians appears to be a reply to a [now lost] letter [or some other missive] that had been sent to Paul and Galatians is a warning to his proselytes against backsliding and false teachers along with a distinct animus towards the leaders in Jerusalem.

            He is also somewhat emphatic in chapter one where he states, "In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie!"

            What prompted that?
            Paul was received as an angel of God at his prior visit. Most likely the Galatians heard of Paul from reports Syria and Cilicia. Those journeys were after a three year stay in Damascus after an unknown period of time in Arabia. There was time for Christianity to begin circulating prior to letter to the Galatians and even their initial conversion. The second letter is even 14 years later.

            James, Cephas, and John had no quarrel with Paul.
            P1) If , then I win.

            P2)

            C) I win.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by tabibito View Post

              Really? He had never been to Rome when he wrote the letter to the Romans,
              He may not have been to Rome personally but we cannot rule that one of his followers had established a community there.

              Would Paul have known so many people in a place that he had not visited? Moreover, Paul is not in the habit of greeting addressees by name. Paul usually communicates only a general and collective greeting, so would he have greeted specific individuals and groups even if he knew so many?

              Finally, some of those on the list are associated more closely with the eastern Church than with the western Church. Prisca and Aquila, who are greeted in Romans sixteen verse three - four[a] were in Ephesus [1 Corinthians chapter sixteen verse eight and nineteen] at the time of the writing of I Corinthians. Andronicus and Junia(s) who are greeted in Romans sixteen verse seventeen Paul describes‎ as‎ having ‎been‎ "in ‎prison‎ with me", most likely at Ephesus. Epaenetus who is greeted in Romans sixteen is called "the first convert in Asia" the capital of which was Ephesus.

              Because Paul had not visited Rome, it was to his advantage to mention the names of those Roman believers who he knew from churches elsewhere. Moreover, Paul describes these persons in laudatory terms, which enhances their position‎ in the community and reflects positively on Paul's status.... In this way Paul presents‎ himself as one who was not unknown to the church at Rome.[see entry in Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary, vol 5]



              Originally posted by tabibito View Post
              and IIRC there is one other letter written to a congregation that Paul had not founded.
              Which one was that?

              "It ain't necessarily so
              The things that you're liable
              To read in the Bible
              It ain't necessarily so
              ."

              Sportin' Life
              Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

              Comment


              • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                As expected. Incapable of providing scholarly support for her nonsense she resorts to deflection.
                I am questioning your sweeping pronouncement for which you did not provide a scintilla of scholarly support. To wit:

                his nonsense has been largely flushed from academia as more evidence has come forth that has put this notion in severe doubt.
                "It ain't necessarily so
                The things that you're liable
                To read in the Bible
                It ain't necessarily so
                ."

                Sportin' Life
                Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Diogenes View Post

                  Paul was received as an angel of God at his prior visit.
                  That is what he writes. However, no one else has left an account of their angelic experience.

                  Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
                  Most likely the Galatians heard of Paul from reports Syria and Cilicia. Those journeys were after a three year stay in Damascus after an unknown period of time in Arabia. There was time for Christianity to begin circulating prior to letter to the Galatians and even their initial conversion.
                  What Christianity though? The views of James etc? Or the views of Paul?

                  Originally posted by Diogenes View Post
                  James, Cephas, and John had no quarrel with Paul.
                  That depends on how you read the text. And again we have no attested personal accounts from any those individuals. All we have is Paul's account.
                  "It ain't necessarily so
                  The things that you're liable
                  To read in the Bible
                  It ain't necessarily so
                  ."

                  Sportin' Life
                  Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                    You can stop digging. You have amply proven you cannot substantiate these two earlier comments.


                    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post

                    Jesus Mythicism isn't just the concept that He never existed. It also includes the idea that Christianity borrowed everything from pagan sources. The latter is what you promote.


                    If you don't believe Rogue, maybe Richard Carrier will be convincing.
                    1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                    .
                    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                    Scripture before Tradition:
                    but that won't prevent others from
                    taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                    of the right to call yourself Christian.

                    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by tabibito View Post

                      If you don't believe Rogue, maybe Richard Carrier will be convincing.
                      I do not accept the position of either Carrier or Price. However, the possibility cannot be entirely ruled out.

                      My own opinion of the flesh and blood man is also different from the Jesus figures with which we are presented in the four canonical gospels.
                      "It ain't necessarily so
                      The things that you're liable
                      To read in the Bible
                      It ain't necessarily so
                      ."

                      Sportin' Life
                      Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                        He may not have been to Rome personally but we cannot rule that one of his followers had established a community there.

                        Would Paul have known so many people in a place that he had not visited? Moreover, Paul is not in the habit of greeting addressees by name. Paul usually communicates only a general and collective greeting, so would he have greeted specific individuals and groups even if he knew so many?

                        Finally, some of those on the list are associated more closely with the eastern Church than with the western Church. Prisca and Aquila, who are greeted in Romans sixteen verse three - four[a] were in Ephesus [1 Corinthians chapter sixteen verse eight and nineteen] at the time of the writing of I Corinthians. Andronicus and Junia(s) who are greeted in Romans sixteen verse seventeen Paul describes‎ as‎ having ‎been‎ "in ‎prison‎ with me", most likely at Ephesus. Epaenetus who is greeted in Romans sixteen is called "the first convert in Asia" the capital of which was Ephesus.

                        Because Paul had not visited Rome, it was to his advantage to mention the names of those Roman believers who he knew from churches elsewhere. Moreover, Paul describes these persons in laudatory terms, which enhances their position‎ in the community and reflects positively on Paul's status.... In this way Paul presents‎ himself as one who was not unknown to the church at Rome.[see entry in Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary, vol 5]



                        Which one was that?
                        Paul was not responsible for founding the church in Rome as you baselessly speculate.

                        Paul makes it clear in Romans 15:20 that he avoids going to where others already had established a church

                        Scripture Verse: Romans 15:20

                        and thus I make it my ambition to preach the gospel, not where Christ has already been named, lest I build on someone else’s foundation,

                        © Copyright Original Source



                        But coming to Rome wasn't exactly his choice[1] and in v.22 Paul elaborates

                        Scripture Verse: Romans 15:22

                        This is the reason why I have so often been hindered from coming to you.

                        © Copyright Original Source



                        Making it clear that Rome is not a church he established.

                        This is verified in Acts as well where it is made clear he had not been there before

                        Scripture Verse: Acts 1:10

                        always in my prayers, asking that somehow by God's will I may now at last succeed in coming to you.

                        © Copyright Original Source




                        Tradition holds it was Peter who was responsible for establishing the church in Rome, and while there is no conclusive evidence confirming this, there is indeed still evidence. One piece would be the salutation found in I Peter 5:13. In it greetings are given to the Christian churches of Asia Minor from "she who is in Babylon." While a tiny hand full of scholars have speculated this might be a reference to his wife, it is nearly universally agreed that this is a reference to the church he is writing from. Since Babylon was widely being used as a synonym for Rome by this point, the church mentioned by all accounts represents Rome.

                        Even if you argue that Peter had nothing to do with the epistle, it still offers confirmation of Peter's association with the church very early on.





                        1. technically I guess one could say it was since he chose to appeal to Rome

                        I'm always still in trouble again

                        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          Paul was not responsible for founding the church in Rome as you baselessly speculate.

                          Paul makes it clear in Romans 15:20 that he avoids going to where others already had established a church.
                          So why does he mention those individuals he knew elsewhere?

                          Nor can we be certain that Paul appealed to Rome - again this is Acts and can anyone seriously believe this?

                          Then he summoned two of the centurions and said, “Get ready to leave by nine o’clock tonight for Caesarea with two hundred soldiers, seventy horsemen, and two hundred spearmen. 24 Also provide mounts for Paul to ride and take him safely to Felix the governor[ [Acts 23]


                          All that for one man?

                          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post

                          Tradition holds it was Peter who was responsible for establishing the church in Rome, and while there is no conclusive evidence confirming this, there is indeed still evidence. One piece would be the salutation found in I Peter 5:13. In it greetings are given to the Christian churches of Asia Minor from "she who is in Babylon." While a tiny hand full of scholars have speculated this might be a reference to his wife, it is nearly universally agreed that this is a reference to the church he is writing from. Since Babylon was widely being used as a synonym for Rome by this point, the church mentioned by all accounts represents Rome.

                          Even if you argue that Peter had nothing to do with the epistle, it still offers confirmation of Peter's association with the church very early on.
                          One teensy weensy problem. The author of 1 Peter is not an Aramaic speaking Jewish fisherman.





                          "It ain't necessarily so
                          The things that you're liable
                          To read in the Bible
                          It ain't necessarily so
                          ."

                          Sportin' Life
                          Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                            Yes, because she's "incredibly wrong" (i.e., wrong beyond belief)


                            Now, now. You tend to get a tad upset when I give frank and honest answers.

                            Oh come on, you give me my biggest laughs here.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                              One teensy weensy problem. The author of 1 Peter is not an Aramaic speaking Jewish fisherman.
                              Quite correct. He wasn't a fisherman, even if Simon/Cephas/Peter was the author.
                              1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                              .
                              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                              Scripture before Tradition:
                              but that won't prevent others from
                              taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                              of the right to call yourself Christian.

                              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by tabibito View Post

                                Quite correct. He wasn't a fisherman, even if Simon/Cephas/Peter was the author.
                                You affect to have a passing knowledge of Koine Greek.

                                Find the original Greek text and analyse it for use of language and its style.
                                "It ain't necessarily so
                                The things that you're liable
                                To read in the Bible
                                It ain't necessarily so
                                ."

                                Sportin' Life
                                Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                39 responses
                                176 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                132 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                427 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by rogue06, 12-26-2023, 11:05 AM
                                406 responses
                                2,510 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Working...
                                X