It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Love vs Tyranny

page: 15
7
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by adjensen
 


You mean the archaic Judaic Law that he created?

Show me the chapter and verse that says God created a law that says you can't reap grain on the Sabbath.


Or that you can't take a crap on the Sabbath. (Essenes)




posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


How can you argue what they wrote if you never read it?


What on earth are you talking about? Never read what?



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by windword
The only evidence that exists of Jesus and John the Baptist having been influenced or part of the Essene sect is in the Bible!

I thought that you just said that there is no mention of the Essenes in the Bible, because it had all been expunged by the evil Catholics? (Who, you apparently missed, were quite open about the Essenes existence and beliefs in their encyclopedia, published 40 years before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls.) I've shown evidence that Jesus was not an Essene that is in the Bible, I've seen nothing conclusive from the contrary point of view.

As for "going off-topic", I'm pretty sure that I wouldn't bring up the Essenes in this thread... goes to check... nope, first instance of the word in this thread isn't by me. Complaining about topic drift is usually more effective if one isn't the person who took things off-topic in the first place.


I know it's hard for you to stay on topic, when you are trying to discredit the thread's topic altogether. But the introduction of the Essenes to the issue was first touched upon up my me HERE

Then later, when you and NuT started mocking the very idea, and using the idea of Jesus being an Essene to derail a thread about Tyranny Vs Love, I said this:



The reason I mentioned the Essenes in this thread is because they were a sect of Judaism that rejected the tyrannical qualities and demands of the god of the Old Testament.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


You said: "I was arguing what the person said". If you never read what he said then how can you argue what he said? You didn't read it!



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by windword
 



There is no "actual" historical evidence that Jesus even existed!


That's wholly untrue. The gospels are historical documents. His enemies mention that He existed, and non-Christian historical figures of His time affirm it as well. That's multiple source attestation including hostile-source.


edit on 3-3-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)


Outside of the Bible, which is a questionable source as to accuracy, there is no historical data or archaeological evidence to back up the actual existence of Jesus.

Outside of the stories in the Bible , there is no evidence of Jesus having been an Essene.

Happy?



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Point is that, if you introduce an off-topic issue (and Jesus being an Essene is clearly off-topic,) you shouldn't complain that other people are off-topic for replying to you.

Now, can we just accept the fact that Jesus wasn't an Essene and move on?



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


You said: "I was arguing what the person said". If you never read what he said then how can you argue what he said? You didn't read it!


What are the damn specifics?? I asked for it to be shown where I rejected a source because of the bias of the source, which was stated that I did. No one has shown me doing that yet. Then the goalposts were moved.

So what are you talking about that I didn't read?



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
Outside of the stories in the Bible , there is no evidence of Jesus having been an Essene.

Happy?

Please explain the differences between the Essenes' view of the Sabbath (NOTurTypical is right -- they wouldn't even go to the bathroom on the Sabbath) with Jesus' teachings?



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


The greatest Jewish and Roman historians of that era talk about Jesus. That's historical attestation. From non-Christian as well as hostile source attestation from the Talmuds. You'd think if He never existed the Talmuds would mention that once instead of arguing that He was a charlatan and blasphemer.

Hostile-source attestation is extremely compelling evidence.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by adjensen
 


You mean the archaic Judaic Law that he created?

Show me the chapter and verse that says God created a law that says you can't reap grain on the Sabbath.


Or that you can't take a crap on the Sabbath. (Essenes)


The Essenes had a high standard for purity. However, I'm sure that if there was loud knocking at the back door, it would take more work to hold back than to let go. The admonition was against work.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:52 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I didn't move any "goalposts", the topic you brought up was that of logical fallacies by saying i was using an ad hominem fallacy. I pointed out that you used an ad hominem by assuming a source (whichever one that disagrees with your bias) doesn't know what they're talking about after not reading said source.

How can you assume that they don't know what they're talking about when you read just a snippet of the source that someone quotes?



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by windword
Outside of the stories in the Bible , there is no evidence of Jesus having been an Essene.

Happy?

Please explain the differences between the Essenes' view of the Sabbath (NOTurTypical is right -- they wouldn't even go to the bathroom on the Sabbath) with Jesus' teachings?


Yes please compare the two, then contrast that with Christ's seething remarks to the Pharisees in Mark 7 who elevated their traditions to the level of the Torah.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by adjensen
 



Exodus 16


Good enough? I'm assuming no.

Of course not. Where does it say that was a law that God created? I asked you:


Show me the chapter and verse that says God created a law that says you can't reap grain on the Sabbath.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Did you miss my answer to your question? Exodus 16 explains how god forbade the Israelites from picking up bread on the Sabbath.

So again, how was Jesus fulfilling the law if he broke it? And how can he refute the Sabbath yet still fulfill the law? The Sabbath IS part of the law!



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I didn't move any "goalposts", the topic you brought up was that of logical fallacies by saying i was using an ad hominem fallacy. I pointed out that you used an ad hominem by assuming a source (whichever one that disagrees with your bias) doesn't know what they're talking about after not reading said source.


...
.......
.............

Which happened where and when, with which argument and which source?


How can you assume that they don't know what they're talking about when you read just a snippet of the source that someone quotes?


I try to always argue against what a person or source states and never the character of the person making the claims. And secondly, the rejection of a statement on the basis of bias of the souce is a "circumstantial" ad hominem, not a plain ad hom argument.
edit on 3-3-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


So you ignore the chapter that you asked for? Why ask for it if you're going to ignore it.

That passage clearly says that when some of the Israelites went out to gather bread on the Sabbath, that they were ignoring gods commands, a.k.a. law. He forbade them from doing it, yet they still did it.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


It's not off topic to mention that the Essenes were a Judaic sect that rejected the tyrannical parts of the Law. They believed that the temple priests were wicked and honoring the wrong God. (Mammon)

Jesus introduced up to a new "father god" the same "father god" that the Essenes were already worshiping.

This is not a new concept. The Marcions also believed that Jesus presented a different God than Yahweh.


Marcionism Study of the Jewish Scriptures, along with received writings circulating in the nascent Church, led Marcion to conclude that many of the teachings of Jesus were incompatible with the actions of the god of the Old Testament, Yahweh. Marcion responded by developing a dualist system of belief around the year 144.[6] This dual-god notion allowed Marcion to reconcile supposed contradictions between Old Covenant theology and the Gospel message proclaimed by Jesus.
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by adjensen
 


You mean the archaic Judaic Law that he created?

Show me the chapter and verse that says God created a law that says you can't reap grain on the Sabbath.


Or that you can't take a crap on the Sabbath. (Essenes)


The Essenes had a high standard for purity. However, I'm sure that if there was loud knocking at the back door, it would take more work to hold back than to let go. The admonition was against work.


So they added their traditions and own rules to the Torah?



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by adjensen
 


So you ignore the chapter that you asked for? Why ask for it if you're going to ignore it.

That passage clearly says that when some of the Israelites went out to gather bread on the Sabbath, that they were ignoring gods commands, a.k.a. law. He forbade them from doing it, yet they still did it.

Where does it say that God created a law saying that you couldn't gather grain on the Sabbath?

Are you saying that you believe that God wrote Exodus, so everything in there is his direct commandment?



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 09:02 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 



Jesus introduced up to a new "father god"


How can you continue that error after it's been pointed out that Moses and Isaiah introduced YHWH as "Father God" figure?

That's very disingenuous.



new topics




 
7
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join