ElishaElijah
Return
Get your own source, if they found Floyd dead alone in his home they would’ve ruled it a overdose with the amount of fentanyl he had in his system. Go find your own information or believe whatever you want to, could care less.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why I CANNOT Believe in The Resurrection
- Thread starter SeekingAllTruth
- Start date
-
- Tags
- resurrection
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
You made the overdose claim, you need to support it. Frankly it looks like you were making **** up. Now what sort of white person makes up things about black people . . .
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
ElishaElijah (a Christian Believer) quoted Matthew 4:3-11 NKJV, "“Away with you, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the LORD your God, and Him only you shall serve.’ ”
It confirms, I understand, point # 9 among the following 14 points taken by me from Wikipedia, a research article by scholars :
- (Definition of*) Gospel[note 1] originally meant the Christian message, but in the 2nd century it came to be used also for the books in which the message was set out;[2] in this sense a gospel can be defined as a loose-knit, episodic narrative of the words and deeds of Jesus of Nazareth,
- Mark never calls him (Jesus*) “God”,[6]
- They (the 4-Gospels*) contain details which are irreconcilable, and attempts to harmonize them would be disruptive to their distinct theological messages.[8]
- They were probably written between AD 66 and 110.[9][10][11]
- All four were anonymous (the modern names were added in the 2nd century),
- almost certainly none (of the 4-Gospels*) were by eyewitnesses, and all are the end-products of long oral and written transmission.[12] Modern scholars are cautious of relying on the gospels uncritically, but nevertheless they do provide a good idea of the public career of Jesus, and critical study (of 4-Gospels) can attempt to distinguish the original ideas of Jesus (before the event of Crucifixion*) from those of the later authors (who wrote after or much after the event of Crucifixion*).[18][19]
- Mark never calls him (Jesus) “God” or claims that he existed prior to his earthly life, apparently believes that he had a normal human parentage and birth, makes no attempt to trace his ancestry back to King David or Adam, and originally had no post-resurrection appearances,[6] [21] although Mark 16:7, in which the young man discovered in the tomb instructs the women to tell “the disciples and Peter” that Jesus will see them again in Galilee, hints that the author knew of the tradition.[22]
- the miracle stories in Mark confirm Jesus’ status as an emissary of God (which was Mark’s understanding of the Messiah), but in Matthew they demonstrate divinity.[25]
- The Gospel of John is the only gospel to call Jesus God. In contrast to Mark, where Jesus hides his identity as messiah, in John he openly proclaims it.[28]
- all four are anonymous and most scholars agree that none were written by eyewitnesses.[32]
- Their source was the Greek version of the scriptures, called the Septuagint – they do not seem familiar with the original Hebrew.[43]
- they present the Christian message of the second half of the first century AD,[46] and as Luke’s attempt to link the birth of Jesus to the census of Quirinius demonstrates, there is no guarantee that the gospels are historically accurate.[47]
- Matthew 1:18, altered to imply the pre-existence of Jesus.[50]
- (John …..) its testimony that Jesus was executed before, rather than on, Passover, might well be more accurate
This is in line with Quran authored by God:
4:173
لَنۡ یَّسۡتَنۡکِفَ الۡمَسِیۡحُ اَنۡ یَّکُوۡنَ عَبۡدًا لِّلّٰہِ وَ لَا الۡمَلٰٓئِکَۃُ الۡمُقَرَّبُوۡنَ ؕ وَ مَنۡ یَّسۡتَنۡکِفۡ عَنۡ عِبَادَتِہٖ وَ یَسۡتَکۡبِرۡ فَسَیَحۡشُرُہُمۡ اِلَیۡہِ جَمِیۡعًا ﴿۱۷۳﴾
Surely, [a]the Messiah will never disdain to be a servant of Allah, nor will the angels near unto God; and whoso disdains to worship Him and feels proud, He will gather them all to Himself.
Holy Quran: Read, Listen and Search
Right?
Regards
_____________
*some explanatory additions obvious in the context within brackets are done by me for ease of understanding.
So your lack of an objective standard to dismiss the Quran leads you to insults those who you disagree with? It's almost as if you realize you have no basis for your claim.
The bible is the standard which disproves Islam.
Let's not ignore that no one is certain a Jesus actually existed, and that this person was actually crucified, and especially the fantastic stories about God and salvation. If you want agreement that the story of Jesus in the Gospels says he was crucified, yes, that is part of the story. Whether that story is objectively true? Well, that's dubious.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
The Quran is the standard the refutes the Bible.
And this of course refutes both of them:
I win! My argument is the silliest!!
Not according to medical experts. They said he died from a number of circumstances with the primary cause of death being caused by Chauvin. Are you a medical expert whose expertise is superior to those who testified in court? If not, they I reject your lay judgment and will defer to experts. The question is why you don't defer to experts yourself.
The conduct of the officers was not anything that flood did. They have independent standards of conduct and protocol, and Chauvin, and at least two others, violated the rules. Only one officer suggesting turning Floyd on his side which is protocol. That one officer might not be convicted.
Denying a 'certain Jesus ' existed? If you mean a person called Jesus who claimed to be the Son of God, deity, claimed to be from heaven, caused quite a stir in Jerusalem, Gained Jewish followers, Taught publicly , stirred up the scribes and pharisees, offered for judgment under pilate, Was crucified , and subsequently an empty tomb was discovered. No body found ect . If you deny this ( I'm not saying you have to believe it ) then that puts you in the fringe, radical skeptics ,corner .
So your standard applies to any arbitrary and fallible mortal who decides to assert their book is special and superior to all others. What authority does any arbitrary mortal have?
We know the Bible has no inherent authority or standard for religions outside of Christianity.
In other words, the Bible is only a religious standard to any arbitrary person, like yourself, if they say so, yet it means nothing to anyone else who believes otherwise. And you have no authority over anyone of some other religion.
You're quoting stories that aren't verified as being true historically. I don't treat these stories as fact as you seem to be doing. I'm pointing out your error.
If the stories were of a guy who ate a ham sandwich and taught others how to be better people, that would be plausible. But all the god and supernatural nonsense? Yeah, we throw that out as being history.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
It really does not. One thing that Richard Carrier did was to show how the acceptance of even the existence of Jesus is not based upon reliable evidence. By the standards of history applied to any other religious figure his existence is questionable. You merely name call because you have no rational response to the arguments that Carrier makes.
And unlike apologists that try to rely on false authority Carrier had the guts to publish in peer reviewed journals. If he is wrong others will make his errors very clear Has anyone done this? They need to be people that also lack fear and have done so through the means of peer review. Those publishing in their own apologists sites where their claims will not be challenged do not count.
Find someone that is willing to "put his money where his mouth is" so to speak, that can refute Carrier.
Let's break down what you're saying.
I asked how could non-Christian reports of Christians believing something happened be evidence that it did happen.
You make two points:
a. You point out that lack of evidence isn't evidence of lack, especially from the view point of religious people.
b. You note that belief in holy texts is important, because if not, then that means you don't believe in God.
To the first point: While I agree with you on this point, your point still does not provide any reason for me to believe that Jesus was resurrected, merely because some Christians believed he was resurrected. Again, not that they claimed they actually saw him resurrected, but they believed that this is what happened.
To the second point, this is an extension of the first point: What we believe in. I am not Christian, thus, see no reason to believe in Jesus's resurrection, especially if provided "evidence" is that there happen to be people who believe it happened. There happen to be people who also believe that they are Jesus incarnate. There people who believe they are descendants of aliens. There are people that believe Muhammad rose a flying horse. Okay, so? I'm not one of these people. I have my own beliefs. Yes, you are free to infer from this that I don't believe in god, because indeed, I don't believe in Christianity's god.
ElishaElijah
Return
Am I white? What nationality am I? You make a lot of
Did Floyd resist arrest? Yes, Did he have heart problems? Yes, Did he have enough fentanyl in his system to cause an overdose, Yes, Did he have other drugs in his system that contributed to his breathing problems, Yes. If Floyd didn’t resist arrest and complied with police he wouldn’t have ended up on the ground. Was the cop at fault too? Yes. Simple
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
You sound just like a very privileged white person. I could not say for sure. You could be Asian. You could be Native American. You could even be black. There are a very small minority that believe as you do. It is very strange when someone is racist against one's own race but it does happen at times.
You should have watched the trial.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
How do you think that helps you? No one has denied the autopsy. Where does it say "overdose"?
ElishaElijah
Return
The drug cocktail in the report was enough to cause someone to OD.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Citation needed.
Claiming that it did is not good enough. I could just as easily claim that it was not.
You are not an expert. You know nothing about the effects of certain combinations. Guess what? I am not an expert either. But I will not base claims upon my non-expert competence. I know that I would probably screw up.
All you have are the claims of the defense attorney. Guess what? He was not an expert either.
EDIT: I do at least have some experience with someone that had fentanyl in his blood for years. It die not kill him. It was not a factor in his death.
ElishaElijah
Return
"[Dr. Andrew Baker] said that if Mr. Floyd had been found dead in his home (or anywhere else) and there were no other contributing factors he would conclude that it was an overdose death,” the June 1 memo said.