Sirklawd Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 (edited) your continual effort to ignore everything everyone says to you shows that you are not here to debate. if you dont play the game you cant score any points. or simply. because you keep getting [b]0WNED[/b] 5001 to 0 : Edited July 28, 2005 by Sirklawd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photosynthesis Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Jul 28 2005, 04:19 PM']RESPONSE: Yes. As the old Irishman said about meeting God: "I sure hope that it isn't going to be an embarrassing moment for the both of us!" On the other hand, maybe God and myself will have a good laugh about the gullibility of some true believers. You think? [right][snapback]662714[/snapback][/right] [/quote] God is not mocked, and neither is His Church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JeffCR07 Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 I find it interesting that all the posts which strike down Les' assertions he passes over as if they did not exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirklawd Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 [quote name='JeffCR07' date='Jul 28 2005, 02:47 PM']I find it interesting that all the posts which strike down Les' assertions he passes over as if they did not exist. [right][snapback]662743[/snapback][/right] [/quote] yeeeup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EcceNovaFacioOmni Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Jul 28 2005, 02:31 PM']RESPONSE: This report is supposedly about one incident. I hope you don't take Eusebius seriously. Eusebius, the famous Church Father, has to be read with real caution. But, if Eusebius is correct, we know that Jesus wrote letters. Well, at least one. I hope Ironmonk enjoys his CD's, but doesn't take them as gospel. In fact, doesn't take the Gospels as gospel. : [right][snapback]662678[/snapback][/right] [/quote] This response is of no merit, it doesn't even try to make a point. Why does it matter if Jesus wrote a personal letter or two? Why does it matter if Eusebius was wrong in reporting this anyway? When was Eusebius given infallible status? What is the Gospel, Les? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted July 28, 2005 Author Share Posted July 28, 2005 [quote name='JeffCR07' date='Jul 28 2005, 02:47 PM']I find it interesting that all the posts which strike down Les' assertions he passes over as if they did not exist. [right][snapback]662743[/snapback][/right] [/quote] RESPONSE: Evidence please. But I don't waste time with posts which supposedly "strike down" my assertions by using faulty reasoning and arguments. For example, if you were to claim that "everybody knows" that saints have halos because they are depicted as having them in so many pictures, I probably am not going to waste time responding. And as a general rule, if a post runs longer than a page and the poster doesn't even include a topic sentence by the close of the first paragraph, it's evident we're dealing with a "rave" rather than an argument. Actually, I don't see too many rebutals to the contradictions in scripture I'm presenting. I felt sure someone would try one of the classic apologics arguments to explain why Matthew claimed Jesus was born during the reign of King Herod (died 4 B.C.) and Luke claimed Jesus was born during the governorship of Quinarius (egan 6 A.D). But, after presenting so many examples, perhaps readers recognize we are really dealing with different stories or legends by different stroytellers after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted July 28, 2005 Author Share Posted July 28, 2005 [quote name='thedude' date='Jul 28 2005, 03:02 PM']This response is of no merit, it doesn't even try to make a point. Why does it matter if Jesus wrote a personal letter or two? Why does it matter if Eusebius was wrong in reporting this anyway? When was Eusebius given infallible status? What is the Gospel, Les? [right][snapback]662770[/snapback][/right] [/quote] RESPONSE: I agree. That's why Ironmonk's insistence that I accept the writings of the Early Chruch fathers makes no sense. Some have merit, but as you have pointed out, they are not infallible (or in many cases even competent). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin D Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Jul 28 2005, 04:25 PM']I don't waste time with posts which supposedly "strike down" my assertions by using faulty reasoning and arguments.[/quote] For once I agree with you, we shouldn't be wasting our time regarding your posts which are filled with faulty reasoning and arguments. [quote]Actually, I don't see too many rebutals to the contradictions in scripture I'm presenting.[/quote] Funniest line ever. [quote]I felt sure someone would try one of the classic apologics arguments to explain why Matthew claimed Jesus was born during the reign of King Herod (died 4 B.C.) and Luke claimed Jesus was born during the governorship of Quinarius (egan 6 A.D).[/quote] Considering you continue on whining away with your list of supposed contradictions, despite our efforts to refute them, you just bring up more. It gets rather repetitive and tiring after a while. [quote]But, after presenting so many examples, perhaps readers recognize we are really dealing with different stories or legends by different stroytellers after all.[/quote] [b]"Only in your mind, my very young apprentice."[/b] - Obi-Wan Kenobi in [i]Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones.[/i] I wouldn't say "readers", more like a particular "reader", singular, you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EcceNovaFacioOmni Posted July 28, 2005 Share Posted July 28, 2005 (edited) [quote name='LittleLes' date='Jul 28 2005, 04:29 PM']RESPONSE: I agree. That's why Ironmonk's insistence that I accept the writings of the Early Chruch fathers makes no sense. Some have merit, but as you have pointed out, they are not infallible (or in many cases even competent). [right][snapback]662800[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I was talking about [i]your[/i] response. The questions were directed to [i]you[/i]. Edited July 28, 2005 by thedude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JeffCR07 Posted July 29, 2005 Share Posted July 29, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Jul 28 2005, 03:25 PM']RESPONSE: Evidence please. But I don't waste time with posts which supposedly "strike down" my assertions by using faulty reasoning and arguments. For example, if you were to claim that "everybody knows" that saints have halos because they are depicted as having them in so many pictures, I probably am not going to waste time responding. And as a general rule, if a post runs longer than a page and the poster doesn't even include a topic sentence by the close of the first paragraph, it's evident we're dealing with a "rave" rather than an argument. Actually, I don't see too many rebutals to the contradictions in scripture I'm presenting. I felt sure someone would try one of the classic apologics arguments to explain why Matthew claimed Jesus was born during the reign of King Herod (died 4 B.C.) and Luke claimed Jesus was born during the governorship of Quinarius (egan 6 A.D). But, after presenting so many examples, perhaps readers recognize we are really dealing with different stories or legends by different stroytellers after all. [right][snapback]662793[/snapback][/right] [/quote] You conveniently skipped Sirklawd's post on the last page (which I subsequently asked you to respond to) as well as my post on the last page, rebutting your allegations concerning the Precurser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted July 29, 2005 Share Posted July 29, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Jul 28 2005, 09:51 AM']Answering the claim that the New Testmant is "literal" (precise, factual) history, we can begin with this: Matthew 2: 1 "...Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king" and then we have the account of Herod's alleged Slaughter of the Innocent. King Herod died in 4 B.C. On the other hand, Luke 2:1-2 writes about the census which required that Mary and Joseph travel to Bethlehem. "This census happened to be the first when Quirinius governed Syria." Quirinius was appointed governor of Syria in 6 A.D. See the contradiction? Are both "literal" history then??? [right][snapback]662367[/snapback][/right] [/quote] You have no solid proof that Luke was wrong in his account. From the Jerusalem Bible notes: "the most probable explanation is that the census, which was made with a view to taxation, took place around 8-6 B.C. as part of a general census of the empire, and that it was organised in Palestine by Quirinius who was especially appointed for this purpose." Also, exact dates of these events are not known, being estimates given by later historians. None of this does anything to prove Luke's Gospel false. The dating of the Christian era is based on a later miscalculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IcePrincessKRS Posted July 29, 2005 Share Posted July 29, 2005 Trolling... it reminds me of a song... Everybody, (yeah) everybody, (yeah) lets get into it, (yeah) get STOOPID (come on)Get retarded, (come on)get retarded, (yeah) get retarded Lets get retarded in hah, lets get retarded in here Lets get retarded in hah, lets get retarded in here Lets get retarded in hah, lets get retarded in here Lets get retarded in hah, lets get retarded in here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted July 29, 2005 Author Share Posted July 29, 2005 [quote name='JeffCR07' date='Jul 28 2005, 07:54 PM']You conveniently skipped Sirklawd's post on the last page (which I subsequently asked you to respond to) as well as my post on the last page, rebutting your allegations concerning the Precurser. [right][snapback]663124[/snapback][/right] [/quote] RESPONSE: I thought that I'd responded. If you can tell me the dates and the times of the messages, I'll look them up. I'll respond if I can understand the point being argued, and if it is a reasonable question. If it's not - e.g. "Can you prove St. Peter didn't live in Brooklyn?" I'll explain why I'm declining to respond. Fair enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted July 29, 2005 Author Share Posted July 29, 2005 [quote name='Socrates' date='Jul 28 2005, 08:21 PM']You have no solid proof that Luke was wrong in his account. From the Jerusalem Bible notes: "the most probable explanation is that the census, which was made with a view to taxation, took place around 8-6 B.C. as part of a general census of the empire, and that it was organised in Palestine by Quirinius who was especially appointed for this purpose." Also, exact dates of these events are not known, being estimates given by later historians. None of this does anything to prove Luke's Gospel false. The dating of the Christian era is based on a later miscalculation. [right][snapback]663188[/snapback][/right] [/quote] RESPONSE: This piece of apologetics nonsense is really reaching. (1) What evidence do you offer that Quinarius was governor of Syria in 8 - 6 B.C.? (2) And the exact dates are, in fact, known. If you like, I'll look up the references to Josephus's "Antiquities of the Jews" for you or you can find them on line (I think). The existence of a census in 6. A.D. under Quinarius is verified. It occurred when Judea came under direct Roman control (That was the reason for the census - Tax) . The census was of Judea and Syria only, not a universal census. The first universal census of the empire was conducted by Vespasian and Titus in 74 A.D. So, nice try Jerusalem Bible. I can see why you were replaced by the New American Bible! If you have evidence to the contrary, especially a reference that says that Quirinius was governor of Syria in 8-6 B.C. and conducted a census at that time, I invite you to present it. As an aside and possible later thread, has anyone noticed a connection between the gospel of Luke and the writings of Josephus? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnanc Posted July 29, 2005 Share Posted July 29, 2005 [quote name='Paladin D' date='Jul 28 2005, 05:18 PM'] [b]"Only in your mind, my very young apprentice."[/b] - Obi-Wan Kenobi in [i]Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones.[/i] [right][snapback]662946[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now