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.
originally posted by: Eunuchorn
a reply to: chr0naut
The post you're quoting is specifically referring to the Josephus forgeries, I believe.
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Eunuchorn
Yeah, thanks. When I was talking about lies. I was referring to the Josephus forgeries.
a reply to: chr0naut
None of the gospels claim to be written by their name sake or to be an eye witnesses to the narratives they present.
originally posted by: Eunuchorn
a reply to: chr0naut
"...this, process, perhaps reflects your..."
or
...this process, perhaps, reflects your...
Your experience with the academe obviously hasn't done you much good. But it definitely reflects your long term conditioning!
& your reading comprehension is obviously still lacking after that nice little tangent that barely addressed my point.
Don't worry, comprehension & grammar aren't required to get into heaven, only your servitude.
Accepting words written thousands of years ago, retranslated, & rewritten in any number of ways since then as the ultimate truth of the universe is your way of academically questioning everything? Riiigghhtt
You are, therefore, wrong on both counts.
The authorship of John
Who was the author of John? Tradition has it that it was written by the apostle John, the son of Zebedee who is identified with "the beloved disciple" mentioned on at least four occasions in the gospel (John 13:23-25; 19:26f, 20:2-8 and 21:7f). This would make the gospel an eyewitness account. However several consideration shows that this is extremely improbable..............
The authorship of John, like that of the three gospels, is therefore anonymous. We can be reasonably certain, though, that it was not John the apostle.
www.rejectionofpascalswager.net...
We may never know for certain who wrote the Gospel of John, any more than we can know who write the books of Matthew, Mark and Luke.
www.biblicalarchaeology.org...
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: chr0naut
You are, therefore, wrong on both counts.
So, basically what your saying is that Bart Ehrman is a liar?! Okay then, here's some other people's works.
The authorship of John
Who was the author of John? Tradition has it that it was written by the apostle John, the son of Zebedee who is identified with "the beloved disciple" mentioned on at least four occasions in the gospel (John 13:23-25; 19:26f, 20:2-8 and 21:7f). This would make the gospel an eyewitness account. However several consideration shows that this is extremely improbable..............
The authorship of John, like that of the three gospels, is therefore anonymous. We can be reasonably certain, though, that it was not John the apostle.
www.rejectionofpascalswager.net...
Gospels Not Written By Matthew, Mark, Luke or John
We may never know for certain who wrote the Gospel of John, any more than we can know who write the books of Matthew, Mark and Luke.
www.biblicalarchaeology.org...
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Eunuchorn
a reply to: chr0naut
"...this, process, perhaps reflects your..."
or
...this process, perhaps, reflects your...
Your experience with the academe obviously hasn't done you much good. But it definitely reflects your long term conditioning!
& your reading comprehension is obviously still lacking after that nice little tangent that barely addressed my point.
Don't worry, comprehension & grammar aren't required to get into heaven, only your servitude.
Accepting words written thousands of years ago, retranslated, & rewritten in any number of ways since then as the ultimate truth of the universe is your way of academically questioning everything? Riiigghhtt
And, just because I feel this of the utmost importance, the message of the Christian Bible is that; to get to Heaven, you don't have to be servile (and follow some rules), or even be a good person.
God's forgiveness is and always will be, undeserved.
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: chr0naut
You are, therefore, wrong on both counts.
So, basically what your saying is that Bart Ehrman is a liar?! Okay then, here's some other people's works.
The authorship of John
Who was the author of John? Tradition has it that it was written by the apostle John, the son of Zebedee who is identified with "the beloved disciple" mentioned on at least four occasions in the gospel (John 13:23-25; 19:26f, 20:2-8 and 21:7f). This would make the gospel an eyewitness account. However several consideration shows that this is extremely improbable..............
The authorship of John, like that of the three gospels, is therefore anonymous. We can be reasonably certain, though, that it was not John the apostle.
www.rejectionofpascalswager.net...
Gospels Not Written By Matthew, Mark, Luke or John
We may never know for certain who wrote the Gospel of John, any more than we can know who write the books of Matthew, Mark and Luke.
www.biblicalarchaeology.org...
You do understand the difference between an opinion and a fact?
I cannot know that Dr Bart Ehrman is a liar.
But as it is human to misrepresent the truth, or to unwittingly repeat unsubstantiated untruths, or even to just exaggerate, I suspect we are ALL liars by definition.
That is why we would need God to pardon us.
originally posted by: Eunuchorn
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Eunuchorn
a reply to: chr0naut
"...this, process, perhaps reflects your..."
or
...this process, perhaps, reflects your...
Your experience with the academe obviously hasn't done you much good. But it definitely reflects your long term conditioning!
& your reading comprehension is obviously still lacking after that nice little tangent that barely addressed my point.
Don't worry, comprehension & grammar aren't required to get into heaven, only your servitude.
Accepting words written thousands of years ago, retranslated, & rewritten in any number of ways since then as the ultimate truth of the universe is your way of academically questioning everything? Riiigghhtt
And, just because I feel this of the utmost importance, the message of the Christian Bible is that; to get to Heaven, you don't have to be servile (and follow some rules), or even be a good person.
God's forgiveness is and always will be, undeserved.
If you can't see why that isn't the most contemptuous verbal excrement in the history of humans trying to justify their own inner evils, then I pity you & everyone like you.
If only I had someone to pray to for your soul, that I might feel better about being filled with such sinful opinions on your belief system.
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: chr0naut
It's cool. I don't like Bart Ehrman either. I think he's sell out too. But, for the most part, his research is sound.
originally posted by: Tangerine
originally posted by: Myrtales Instinct
You have to remember that God (the Father) told Jesus (the Son) exactly what to say and exactly what to do. These things were laid out from the foundation of the heavens and earth. He opened his mouth in parables because of people like you who are merely "curious" as to why those of us who follow him choose to call him, God, Savior, or a sacrifice.
He plainly said that he was going to die and on the third day rise again. He didn't lie. But what is veiled within the parables and his teachings is how he the Son of God who has been given EVERYTHING has the power to resurrect inside of you and me. NO ONE else has the ability to do such things! No one else has the power to achieve such a feat but Jesus and that makes him the One.
He sacrificed his life to bring us the truth and part of knowing the truth is understanding how he gets inside us - that is why there are miracles, signs, miraculous signs and wonders. All enlightening the spiritual narrow path.
Jesus called some of his own disciples dull and you really need to start asking some harder questions about him. You have the ability to get his full undivided attention or a big eye roll.Lol
You're making claims of fact about a God you can't prove exists in regard to Jesus for whom there isn't an iota of contemporaneous documentation proving he ever lived. You may as well be talking about Gandalf and Frodo. Your fantasies do not translate to fact unless, of course, you can cite testable evidence making them fact. Would you care to do so?
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Eunuchorn
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Eunuchorn
a reply to: chr0naut
"...this, process, perhaps reflects your..."
or
...this process, perhaps, reflects your...
Your experience with the academe obviously hasn't done you much good. But it definitely reflects your long term conditioning!
& your reading comprehension is obviously still lacking after that nice little tangent that barely addressed my point.
Don't worry, comprehension & grammar aren't required to get into heaven, only your servitude.
Accepting words written thousands of years ago, retranslated, & rewritten in any number of ways since then as the ultimate truth of the universe is your way of academically questioning everything? Riiigghhtt
And, just because I feel this of the utmost importance, the message of the Christian Bible is that; to get to Heaven, you don't have to be servile (and follow some rules), or even be a good person.
God's forgiveness is and always will be, undeserved.
If you can't see why that isn't the most contemptuous verbal excrement in the history of humans trying to justify their own inner evils, then I pity you & everyone like you.
If only I had someone to pray to for your soul, that I might feel better about being filled with such sinful opinions on your belief system.
You are absolutely correct. I am an abject sinner
So "logically" what is the point of this thread? Not trying to be rude or anything, but really...whats the point?