Is there anything more disgusting than God?

[Kenny]

Interesting, but it proves not one single NT gospel story. Here is a quote from the article,

"Maybe the brother, Jesus, paid for the funeral of James.
Maybe the brother, Jesus, was an unusually famous person."

He could be, and could not be the brother of Jesus. Also, there were probably other men with the same name. I am certain Jesus existed, but I believe he was God in human form. Those romantic and exciting narratives about Jesus were fabricated. They were good writers of fiction.

You are digging up information about events occurring during the time, but so what? For writing gospel stories, the NT authors would have integrated history of the time for their stories. What we need are confirmations for the events they wrote about really happening.

I am certain you will find nothing because Jesus was God, not the son of God. Therefore, son of God stories are fictitious.

Selective bias quoting

It DOES prove the fact that James was the brother of Jesus as stated by his Epistle. ANOTHER confirming archaeological discovery.

I'm waiting for your fragment of Gospel Q or even any evidence that the Gospel didn't happen.

 

[Repox]

Selective bias quoting

It DOES prove the fact that James was the brother of Jesus as stated by his Epistle. ANOTHER confirming archaeological discovery.

I'm waiting for your fragment of Gospel Q.

Why are you harassing me about The Gospel Q. It proves nothing either way. Scholars have concluded the gospel exists by finding it in the NT gospels. I posted all the sources. It is irritating that you can't read, or refuse to acknowledge postings. It appears you are fabricating a Q case to make hey. Give it up, I am not stupid.

You don't seem to understand. I have questioned the authenticity of NT gospels. What you are doing is posting verses from the gospels which are in question. How does that prove they are authentic? I could quote lines from a superman comic book, but that doesn't mean superman exists.

As for archaeological information, I am familiar with it. It just proves people existed during the Bible era. So what?

 

[Kenny]

Why are you harassing me about The Gospel Q. It proves nothing either way. Scholars have concluded the gospel exists by finding it in the NT gospels. I posted all the sources. It is irritating that you can't read, or refuse to acknowledge postings. It appears you are fabricating a Q case to make hey. Give it up, I am not stupid.

You don't seem to understand. I have questioned the authenticity of NT gospels. What you are doing is posting verses from the gospels which are in question. How does that prove they are authentic? I could quote lines from a superman comic book, but that doesn't mean superman exists.

Because you state a position based on simple opinions of scholars that lived 2000 years after the fact at the expense of all the 2nd century quotes of people who would have known those who wrote the Gospels. Illogical and unscientific.

And then you turn around and ask me to prove something when the people who wrote the 4 Gospels, Acts, Hebrews and Epistles independently of each other, confirm what the others said and did.

In a murder, if I am going to find out what happened, I would speak to those who were eyewitnesses along with secondary witnesses that would confirm what the eye-witnesses said. If would then have them write it down to be admitted as evidence. The one thing YOU WOULD NOT say at the trial would be...

"Prove that they are authentic"

Because they are already admitted as statements of what was seen, heard and done.

No... the prosecutor would have to prove that THEY ARE NOT AUTHENTIC.

You haven't given any evidence for me to doubt what is common knowledge along with supportive documentation available at your fingertips.

 

[Bird123]

Not in our understanding:

2 Peter 1:21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Is not this told by mankind? If God can speak to prophets, God can speak to you or anyone. Do relationships really need a middle man? I don't see it.

If I were to start a religion, don't I have to convince people God told me, so that I might convince others to follow? A religion without followers is no religion at all.

As I see it, one should always strive to Discover Real Truth rather than ever settle for beliefs being the truth. It takes much more work, however the Results are so much better.

 

[Repox]

Because you state a position based on simple opinions of scholars that lived 2000 years after the fact at the expense of all the 2nd century quotes of people who would have known those who wrote the Gospels. Illogical and unscientific.

And then you turn around and ask me to prove something when the people who wrote the 4 Gospels, Acts, Hebrews and Epistles independently of each other, confirm what the others said and did.

In a murder, if I am going to find out what happened, I would speak to those who were eyewitnesses along with secondary witnesses that would confirm what the eye-witnesses said. If would then have them write it down to be admitted as evidence. The one thing YOU WOULD NOT say at the trial would be...

"Prove that they are authentic"

Because they are already admitted as statements of what was seen, heard and done.

No... the prosecutor would have to prove that THEY ARE NOT AUTHENTIC.

You haven't given any evidence for me to doubt what is common knowledge along with supportive documentation available at your fingertips.

I was an insurance investigator before I became and college professor and scholar. I know a lot about criminal investigations and the rule of law requirement for witnesses. In most cases, two witnesses are required, otherwise you could assert the witness lied. In the case of gospel stories, you don't have eye witnesses, and information about what people had witnessed in past decades was hearsay evidence. In other words, people could make up stories and there was no way of knowing if they lied or not. Actually, NT authors did not get involved in eye witness accounts, they just made it up.

Knowing that there is no such person as the son of God, I have an advantage. I know with certainty, those NT authors fabricated the stories. Give it up, it is a waste of time.

Yes, it is to bad there are so many questions about the authenticity of NT stories. I am sure those authors wouldn't approve. However, we don't know if they lied or not. People haven't changed, just times.

I am sure, however, you are learning a lot about NT times. Have fun.

 

[Kenny]

I was an insurance investigator before I became and college professor and scholar. I know a lot about criminal investigations and the rule of law requirement for witnesses. In most cases, two witnesses are required, otherwise you could assert the witness lied.

And that is quite biblical too.

In the case of gospel stories, you don't have eye witnesses, and information about what people had witnessed in past decades was hearsay evidence. In other words, people could make up stories and there was no way of knowing if they lied or not. Actually, NT authors did not get involved in eye witness accounts, they just made it up.

I disagree completely.

1. Peter was an eye-witness in his Epistles
2. John was an eye-witness in His Epistles.
3. John-Mark (Gospel of Mark) - traveled with Peter and got first hand information from him
4. Luke talked to the eye-witnesses and jotted the information down
5. As an addition, Paul's letters confirm what the Apostles declared, having spoken with them, and is admissible evidence.

Knowing that there is no such person as the son of God, I have an advantage. I know with certainty, those NT authors fabricated the stories. Give it up, it is a waste of time.

Sorry buddy. You aren't an eye-witness and therefore your position is inadmissible.

Yes, it is to bad there are so many questions about the authenticity of NT stories. I am sure those authors wouldn't approve. However, we don't know if they lied or not. People haven't changed, just times.

Exactly! People are the same! They have been fighting the history ever since it started... they could have stopped it by producing the body of Jesus... but OOPS! they couldn't find it.

I am sure, however, you are learning a lot about NT times. Have fun.

For more than a quarter of a century.

Still waiting for the Gospel of Q... LOL -- I know! you don't have it to present it as evidence

 

[Kenny]

Is not this told by mankind? If God can speak to prophets, God can speak to you or anyone. Do relationships really need a middle man? I don't see it.

Yes... that is certainly true because of the Cross and the resurrection. Because of the outpouring of God's Holy Spirit, anybody can speak under the influence of God.

If I were to start a religion, don't I have to convince people God told me, so that I might convince others to follow? A religion without followers is no religion at all.

That is true. Thus we have a plethora of religions. Question, of course, is whether they are personally making it up, is there another spirit behind it or if it is truth

As I see it, one should always strive to Discover Real Truth rather than ever settle for beliefs being the truth. It takes much more work, however the Results are so much better.

One thing for sure, when you know the truth, the truth wills set you free. That's why I can trust Jesus.

 

[Repox]

And that is quite biblical too.


I disagree completely.

1. Peter was an eye-witness in his Epistles
2. John was an eye-witness in His Epistles.
3. John-Mark (Gospel of Mark) - traveled with Peter and got first hand information from him
4. Luke talked to the eye-witnesses and jotted the information down
5. As an addition, Paul's letters confirm what the Apostles declared, having spoken with them, and is admissible evidence.

Sorry buddy. You aren't an eye-witness and therefore your position is inadmissible.


Exactly! People are the same! They have been fighting the history ever since it started... they could have stopped it by producing the body of Jesus... but OOPS! they couldn't find it.

For more than a quarter of a century.

Still waiting for the Gospel of Q... LOL -- I know! you don't have it to present it as evidence

I wish you would stop mentioning Gospel Q, it makes you look like a huckster, or a fraud. I never said those things about Q! You made up what I said! It means you aren't honest, in which case we won't discuss.

Present historical evidence for those eye witness reports. It is all hearsay evidence, it was made up by Jesus movement leaders. It is a foolish idea to say the author of a certain work was an eye witness to their own work. How silly is that?

We are discussing the NT gospels. I have not agreed to discuss Paul, maybe later.

You are wasting my time with nonsense.

 

[Kenny]

I wish you would stop mentioning Gospel Q, it makes you look like a huckster, or a fraud. I never said those things about Q! You made up what I said! It means you aren't honest, in which case we won't discuss.

I'm sorry... it was you that brought up the Q subject and I quote "
The reason is the Jesus movement people made it up. It is all there in historical records. If you want an excellent reference, here it is: The Lost Gospel Q by Burton L. Mack."

Present historical evidence for those eye witness reports. It is all hearsay evidence, it was made up by Jesus movement leaders.

Yes... you keep saying that but provide no supportive documentation. Inadmissible for lack of evidence.

It is a foolish idea to say the author of a certain work was an eye witness to their own work. How silly is that?

That's a silly statement. They were eye-witnesses to the work of Jesus.

We are discussing the NT gospels. I have not agreed to discuss Paul, maybe later.

It's a free country.

You are wasting my time with nonsense.

I've brought up nothing but supportive material... so who is talking unsupported nonsense?

 

[Repox]

I'm sorry... it was you that brought up the Q subject and I quote "
The reason is the Jesus movement people made it up. It is all there in historical records. If you want an excellent reference, here it is: The Lost Gospel Q by Burton L. Mack."


Yes... you keep saying that but provide no supportive documentation. Inadmissible for lack of evidence.


That's a silly statement. They were eye-witnesses to the work of Jesus.


It's a free country.

I've brought up nothing but supportive material... so who is talking unsupported nonsense?

Okay, but you have to read the Mack book to understand how Q is referenced by scholars. I have explained it, but you haven't understood. I stated the actual gospel doesn't exist, the verses have been found in the four gospels. So, I get irritated when you say where is it! It is immaterial however for my assertion that there is not historical confirmation for NT gospel stories.

Yes, there must have been eyewitnesses, but by the time the four gospels were written most of them were deceased. If you do further research you'll find references to authorship of the four gospels. It seems they were anomonous until church leaders found author names. The Catholic church did a marvelous job creating a gospel community, one that is mostly fictitious. Again, I don't doubt the existence of Jesus. However, I am convinced he was God, not the son of God.

Your supporting material is bogus. It is nothing. It just quotes from old copies from the NT gospels. If you research it, you'll find the original gospel manuscripts don't exist. You keep going off on the wrong track. You need to find historical evidence for those gospel stories. That would prove Jesus was the son of God. That is the issue!

 

[Kenny]

Okay, but you have to read the Mack book to understand how Q is referenced by scholars. I have explained it, but you haven't understood. I stated the actual gospel doesn't exist, the verses have been found in the four gospels. So, I get irritated when you say where is it! It is immaterial however for my assertion that there is not historical confirmation for NT gospel stories.

Yes, there must have been eyewitnesses, but by the time the four gospels were written most of them were deceased. If you do further research you'll find references to authorship of the four gospels. It seems they were anomonous until church leaders found author names. The Catholic church did a marvelous job creating a gospel community, one that is mostly fictitious. Again, I don't doubt the existence of Jesus. However, I am convinced he was God, not the son of God.

Your supporting material is bogus. It is nothing. It just quotes from old copies from the NT gospels. If you research it, you'll find the original gospel manuscripts don't exist. You keep going off on the wrong track. You need to find historical evidence for those gospel stories. That would prove Jesus was the son of God. That is the issue!

Let's look at this.... again.

You view the NT Gospels without considering those who wrote in the 1st and 2nd centuries on the basis that you think if was contrived... but with no evidence.

You state there is a Gospel Q based on a theory that some scholars, which are mostly liberal and secular. This theory is not based on hard facts of another Gospel but simply because some scriptures are the same in the Gospels. This is also omitting the all the differences that there are on the same documents.

You base the the four gospels were written when most of them were deceased. Not based on any facts or information that is supported by sources but simply based on what people may "think" they were written. Forget the reality that we found a manuscript in Cave 7 of the Dead Sea Scrolls written in 52AD way before any of them died and BLOWS your position out of the water. And forget that none of them mentioned that Jerusalem was destroyed in 70AD--which would impact their statements and thus suggest that they were all written before 70AD and before they died. AND forget that the current documents we have are copies and thus demand that the original was created before the copies.

Forget that I have given MULTIPLE historical evidences, both in multiplicity of witnesses, correct historical events that are corroborated, events that match that time and that nobody produced a body that would have stopped the resurrection in its tracks. (not to mention the outside historical documents that say there was a Jesus who it was purported that he lives)

You have moved goal posts, misquoted, made false statements and ruined your credibility.

Do me a favor...

Before you continue, get some facts instead of theory.

 

[Repox]

Let's look at this.... again.

You view the NT Gospels without considering those who wrote in the 1st and 2nd centuries on the basis that you think if was contrived... but with no evidence.

You state there is a Gospel Q based on a theory that some scholars, which are mostly liberal and secular. This theory is not based on hard facts of another Gospel but simply because some scriptures are the same in the Gospels. This is also omitting the all the differences that there are on the same documents.

You base the the four gospels were written when most of them were deceased. Not based on any facts or information that is supported by sources but simply based on what people may "think" they were written. Forget the reality that we found a manuscript in Cave 7 of the Dead Sea Scrolls written in 52AD way before any of them died and BLOWS your position out of the water. And forget that none of them mentioned that Jerusalem was destroyed in 70AD--which would impact their statements and thus suggest that they were all written before 70AD and before they died. AND forget that the current documents we have are copies and thus demand that the original was created before the copies.

Forget that I have given MULTIPLE historical evidences, both in multiplicity of witnesses, correct historical events that are corroborated, events that match that time and that nobody produced a body that would have stopped the resurrection in its tracks. (not to mention the outside historical documents that say there was a Jesus who it was purported that he lives)

You have moved goal posts, misquoted, made false statements and ruined your credibility.

Do me a favor...

Before you continue, get some facts instead of theory.

Obviously, you don't know how to do scholarly research. First you must have an hypothesis. I have stated the hypothesis so many times it makes one dizzy. Not one of your many replies has presented historical evidence for a single NT gospel story. You remind of a politician. If you can't tell the truth, throw up a smoke screen. Have fun looking for those historical documents. Because Jesus was not the son of God, and because NT authors fabricated NT stories, there is nothing.

You are dishonest by stating I have moved the goal post. That is not true. I have been consistent, I keep asking the same question. Where is historical evidence for the NT gospel stories?

 

[Kenny]

Obviously, you don't know how to do scholarly research. First you must have an hypothesis. I have stated the hypothesis so many times it makes one dizzy. Not one of your many replies has presented historical evidence for a single NT gospel story. You remind of a politician. If you can't tell the truth, throw up a smoke screen. Have fun looking for those historical documents. Because Jesus was not the son of God, and because NT authors fabricated NT stories, there is nothing.

You are dishonest by stating I have moved the goal post. That is not true. I have been consistent, I keep asking the same question. Where is historical evidence for the NT gospel stories?

Fortunately, it is on record for view.

Your logic is illogical. You have a hypothesis with no evidence other than similar scriptures and no original Gospel Q
You say there is no Son of God, but offer nothing to support it but a nightmare.
You say that NT fabricated the gospel stories but offer absolutely no evidence of the statement.

I have given multiple evidence and you hold onto that I haven't given you anything.

If there is an example of today's politician fake news, you take the cake.

 

[Repox]

Fortunately, it is on record for view.

Your logic is illogical. You have a hypothesis with no evidence other than similar scriptures and no original Gospel Q
You say there is no Son of God, but offer nothing to support it but a nightmare.
You say that NT fabricated the gospel stories but offer absolutely no evidence of the statement.

I have given multiple evidence and you hold onto that I haven't given you anything.

If there is an example of today's politician fake news, you take the cake.

It is for you to prove NT gospel stories. Since the beginning of our unnecessarily long discussion, you have used deceptive tactics. If you can't play by the rules, give it up. I am tired of your deceptions.

You say, "I have given multiple evidence and you hold onto that I haven't given you anything." You have given me nothing but deceptive statements and falsehoods.

Where is the historical evidence for NT gospel stories?

 

[Muffled]

Is not this told by mankind? If God can speak to prophets, God can speak to you or anyone. Do relationships really need a middle man? I don't see it.

If I were to start a religion, don't I have to convince people God told me, so that I might convince others to follow? A religion without followers is no religion at all.

As I see it, one should always strive to Discover Real Truth rather than ever settle for beliefs being the truth. It takes much more work, however the Results are so much better.

I believe so. Although everyone should be able to hear God speak it seems few do.

 

[Cateau]

I want to do God's will and I pray that I do God's will and find it thoroughly disgusting that God would remain silent and refuse to let me know His will. More than anything I want to know what God wants me to do and He just remains silent and refuses to let me know. It is despicable that God would refuse to reveal his will to a sincere seeker!

I just pray and pray that God would give me the Holy Spirit like he said he would and enlighten me so that I serve him and be obedient to everything he desires, but He insists on being unreasonable, dishonest, and completely the opposite of what He claims he is. God makes me nauseous with all his lies! So many people could do His will but God insisted on leaving them confused and refusing to speak up. It thoroughly disgusts me every time I think of how God has treated His people! God is absolutely responsible for how sick, fowl, confused, and gruesome our world is.

I find God to be completely nauseating! He ruined countless lives when he chose to hide himself, hide the truth, and leave people without understanding and enlightenment. When was the last time God left you with a clear message? I just want to do God's will, nothing more, and God is so shockingly revolting he refuses to let a genuine seeker have understanding. How could you Lord?!? You make me sick!

Sorry, I just need to vent. God's chronic silence and hiding himself is totally sickening don't you think?

Noah waited 120 years before the predicted rains arrived.
Abraham waited 25 years for a promised son.
Joseph waited 14 years in prison for a crime he did not commit.
Job waited perhaps a lifetime, 60 to 70 years, for God's justice.

God prepares leaders in a slow cooker not in a microwave oven. More important than the awaited goal is the work God does in us while we wait. Waiting deepens and matures us, levels our perspective and broadens our understanding. Tests of time determine whether we can endure seasons of seemingly unfruitful preparations and indicate whether we can recognize and seize the opportunities that comes our way.

John C. Maxwell

[GALLERY=media, 7909]2e5da40bbac110ed858be926b1222b09 by Cateau posted Mar 12, 2017 at 11:37 PM[/GALLERY]

 

[Spiderman]

Noah waited 120 years before the predicted rains arrived.
Abraham waited 25 years for a promised son.
Joseph waited 14 years in prison for a crime he did not commit.
Job waited perhaps a lifetime, 60 to 70 years, for God's justice.

God prepares leaders in a slow cooker not in a microwave oven. More important than the awaited goal is the work God does in us while we wait. Waiting deepens and matures us, levels our perspective and broadens our understanding. Tests of time determine whether we can endure seasons of seemingly unfruitful preparations and indicate whether we can recognize and seize the opportunities that comes our way.

John C. Maxwell

[GALLERY=media, 7909]2e5da40bbac110ed858be926b1222b09 by Cateau posted Mar 12, 2017 at 11:37 PM[/GALLERY]

Thank you! I appreciate it. I would also like to apologize to God and RF for making this offensive thread. I was having an immature outburst of rage and hatred for God. I'm over that now.

It still really bothers me that God doesn't speak clearly to people, but still, I should show God some gratitude for the good that He has done in my life and the misery he spared me. I'm sorry

 

[Cateau]

Thank you! I appreciate it. I would also like to apologize to God and RF for making this offensive thread. I was having an immature outburst of rage and hatred for God. I'm over that now.

It still really bothers me that God doesn't speak clearly to people, but still, I should show God some gratitude for the good that He has done in my life and the misery he spared me. I'm sorry

Hah no worries we've all had to be weened off the hatred for god at one point, but just remember the prophets have rebuked thoughts for a reason. And no one should be badgering you for being honest, brothers in faith are here to lift you back up not drag you down. Hang in there.