Total Posts:44|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Can you prove Jesus was and is real.

question4u
Posts: 492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2012 10:27:59 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Use whatever evidence you can or findings you can. If you are not willing for your religion or faith to be questioned. Then please do not respond to this.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2012 11:08:32 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/20/2012 10:27:59 AM, question4u wrote:
Use whatever evidence you can or findings you can. If you are not willing for your religion or faith to be questioned. Then please do not respond to this.

The savior wasn't supposed to come from Galilee; he was supposed to come from Bethlehem. So they had to come up with that awkward implausible story about a census that we know didn't happen.

This suggests to me that the Jesus legend was based, in part, on a real person. If he was entirely fictional, the fiction would have him coming from Bethlehem, not Galilee, so the inventors wouldn't have had to embarrass themselves with the absurd census story.

This is not a compelling argument. But it is enough---for me, at least---to tip the balance in favor of a lightly-held belief that there was a real Jesus.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2012 11:10:22 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/20/2012 11:03:34 AM, yoda878 wrote:
no one can prove that to anyone.... Only the light of Christ can prove that to you.

In other words, there is no sound argument in favor of belief. People like William Lane Craig are just messing with us.
yoda878
Posts: 902
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2012 11:14:52 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/20/2012 11:10:22 AM, wiploc wrote:
At 11/20/2012 11:03:34 AM, yoda878 wrote:
no one can prove that to anyone.... Only the light of Christ can prove that to you.

In other words, there is no sound argument in favor of belief. People like William Lane Craig are just messing with us.

There is sound proof but just me telling you will not be proof.
Dang you should know you have to do your own research. I man out in the field with an open mind!
Me
question4u
Posts: 492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2012 11:19:27 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/20/2012 11:03:34 AM, yoda878 wrote:
no one can prove that to anyone.... Only the light of Christ can prove that to you.

We will then let the true jesus worshippers prove their god. What if I told you a light was revealed to me that Jesus does not exist? I prayed I prayed I prayed, I fast I fast I fast as a christian for the truth to be revealed. I was revealed that jesus never existed and I also was given proof. The more I read the bible the more proof was giving to me that Jesus never existed and man created this jesus and made him also a god.

When I was a christian I was able to prove to someone that he existed but is there someone else that can prove that he exist?
yoda878
Posts: 902
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2012 11:37:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/20/2012 11:19:27 AM, question4u wrote:
At 11/20/2012 11:03:34 AM, yoda878 wrote:
no one can prove that to anyone.... Only the light of Christ can prove that to you.

We will then let the true jesus worshippers prove their god. What if I told you a light was revealed to me that Jesus does not exist? I prayed I prayed I prayed, I fast I fast I fast as a christian for the truth to be revealed. I was revealed that jesus never existed and I also was given proof. The more I read the bible the more proof was giving to me that Jesus never existed and man created this jesus and made him also a god.

When I was a christian I was able to prove to someone that he existed but is there someone else that can prove that he exist?

This makes no sense...

I would say to you about the first part you wrote that I would not believe that was from god...
That only shows why no one can prove it to you you have to prove it to yourself. When you were christian you say? You must know what I'm talking about but you can lose it and your knowledge. I know because I have been there done that.
Me
question4u
Posts: 492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2012 12:12:48 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/20/2012 11:37:17 AM, yoda878 wrote:
At 11/20/2012 11:19:27 AM, question4u wrote:
At 11/20/2012 11:03:34 AM, yoda878 wrote:
no one can prove that to anyone.... Only the light of Christ can prove that to you.

We will then let the true jesus worshippers prove their god. What if I told you a light was revealed to me that Jesus does not exist? I prayed I prayed I prayed, I fast I fast I fast as a christian for the truth to be revealed. I was revealed that jesus never existed and I also was given proof. The more I read the bible the more proof was giving to me that Jesus never existed and man created this jesus and made him also a god.

When I was a christian I was able to prove to someone that he existed but is there someone else that can prove that he exist?

This makes no sense...

I would say to you about the first part you wrote that I would not believe that was from god...
That only shows why no one can prove it to you you have to prove it to yourself. When you were christian you say? You must know what I'm talking about but you can lose it and your knowledge. I know because I have been there done that.

Spoking like a follower, nothing that sound opposite then your belief will be from the creator, just like the jews were towards the apostles and the old testament jews against the prophets. Anything that sounds opposite then your popluar view and causes you to deny yourself can not be from the creator, but then who could this information be from?
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2012 12:42:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Historicity of Jesus

Habermas and Licona list more than 40 sources, Christian and non-Christian, which mention Jesus within 150 years of his life. These include Josephus, Tacitus, and Suetonius. Beacuse of limited space, I will just mention Josephus' Testimonium Flavianum in this round.

"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct to this day." [1]

Having watched Zeitgeist before, the movie responds to the Testimonium by claiming that it was forged. This claim has a claim of truth, but it overstates the extent to which the work was interpolated. Indeed, scholars have come to somewhat of a consensus that while the passages mentioning the deity of Jesus were later interpolations, the text as a whole is largely genuine. Evidence for this can be found in the Shlomo Pines manuscript, in which an uninterpolated version of the Testmonium can be found. Moreover, Josephus mentions Jesus twice: once in the Testimonium, and another in the "James passage," which Zeitgeist completely neglects to respond to.

Tacitus also mentions Jesus. In his Annals, he writes:

"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus..." [2]
__________

[1] Josephus, Antiquities 18.3.3
[2] Tacitus, Annals 15.44
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
question4u
Posts: 492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2012 1:16:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/20/2012 12:42:38 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
The Historicity of Jesus

Habermas and Licona list more than 40 sources, Christian and non-Christian, which mention Jesus within 150 years of his life. These include Josephus, Tacitus, and Suetonius. Beacuse of limited space, I will just mention Josephus' Testimonium Flavianum in this round.

"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct to this day." [1]

Having watched Zeitgeist before, the movie responds to the Testimonium by claiming that it was forged. This claim has a claim of truth, but it overstates the extent to which the work was interpolated. Indeed, scholars have come to somewhat of a consensus that while the passages mentioning the deity of Jesus were later interpolations, the text as a whole is largely genuine. Evidence for this can be found in the Shlomo Pines manuscript, in which an uninterpolated version of the Testmonium can be found. Moreover, Josephus mentions Jesus twice: once in the Testimonium, and another in the "James passage," which Zeitgeist completely neglects to respond to.

Tacitus also mentions Jesus. In his Annals, he writes:

"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus..." [2]
__________

[1] Josephus, Antiquities 18.3.3
[2] Tacitus, Annals 15.44

Was Josephus a jew?
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2012 2:18:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I went over WSA's points recently in my last debate.

http://debate.org...
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Clash
Posts: 220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2012 2:40:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/20/2012 10:27:59 AM, question4u wrote:
Use whatever evidence you can or findings you can. If you are not willing for your religion or faith to be questioned. Then please do not respond to this.

Indeed, there is great controversy on whether Jesus really claimed to be God or if he really was resurrected. However, there is little doubt that Jesus existed and was real. Almost all historians agrees with the fact that Jesus did exist and was real, and the arguments against his existence are flawed at best. As Wikipedia rightly states, "Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted." [http://en.wikipedia.org...]
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2012 3:35:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/20/2012 2:40:37 PM, Clash wrote:
At 11/20/2012 10:27:59 AM, question4u wrote:
Use whatever evidence you can or findings you can. If you are not willing for your religion or faith to be questioned. Then please do not respond to this.

Indeed, there is great controversy on whether Jesus really claimed to be God or if he really was resurrected. However, there is little doubt that Jesus existed and was real. Almost all historians agrees with the fact that Jesus did exist and was real, and the arguments against his existence are flawed at best. As Wikipedia rightly states, "Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted." [http://en.wikipedia.org...]

Not only do I deny wikipedia as a good source for this generalisation, but I deny not only the factuality of that statement wholesale, but even its relevancy.

1) Habermas' Study found that among Biblical Scholars, 70% believed that Jesus Christ was a real person. Think about that for a second. In a field massively dominated by Christians, dominated by those going in to prove Jesus or come closer to Jesus undeniably (Habermas' study was among the best historians in the field for reference, noting pretty much universal Christian faith), 30% don't believe Jesus was a real historical figure. That's like going into a church and finding 30% of the church-goers don't believe in Christianity, or going to a group of democrats and find 30% of them don't believe in the values of the democrat party. It is a massive percentage. In fact, that percentage is fair to say that the subject is in dispute. One may argue that "virtually all scholars agree with me" till one's face turns blue, but it doesn't agree with the facts.

2) Biblical scholars are by and large bad. Completely immune to the work in history of other fields, ignorant of all historical narratives and postmodernism, their work is historically stunted. Frankly, I don't care what secondary scholars say on the field because they are people imposing their own opinion on an unchallenged grand narrative that I don't buy into (and neither would most).

3) Even *if* there was this agreement and I accepted this as existent, it is hardly relevant. It is only an ad populum plea of no real value or impotrance.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2012 3:37:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
For reference, I am happy to debate this with anyone who wishes to challenge me.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
question4u
Posts: 492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2012 3:50:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/20/2012 2:40:37 PM, Clash wrote:
At 11/20/2012 10:27:59 AM, question4u wrote:
Use whatever evidence you can or findings you can. If you are not willing for your religion or faith to be questioned. Then please do not respond to this.

Indeed, there is great controversy on whether Jesus really claimed to be God or if he really was resurrected. However, there is little doubt that Jesus existed and was real. Almost all historians agrees with the fact that Jesus did exist and was real, and the arguments against his existence are flawed at best. As Wikipedia rightly states, "Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted." [http://en.wikipedia.org...]

Ok since you believe because scholars debated a good debate means that the information is true. For example people debate 1+1+1=1, they have debated it very well but does that mean that it is true? NO.

Ok who is Joshua the Nazerene? Was he replaced by jesus? If Yeshua or Yahashua is hebrew then the greek translation would be Joshua and the english translation of that would be joshua? Correct. Ok but how did we get Iesous from Yeshuah when it is not the same. Sounds like someone has tricked the masses. Oh yeah the poor will believe in anything instead of the truth. Ok how can Jesus and Joshua be the same when they are not? How come there is no trace of joshua in the early translation of the new testament when it should have been? Because they wanted to not connect the old with the new? What is the meaning for Jesus? Well Joshua names means Yahweh will saved or deliver. Why change the name to jesus or I know to take away the old testament creator from the new testatment jesush god. Translators and scholars went so far as to remove joshua when it was plainly joshua just because they had the power to and because they did not want the two to be the same, because there not. .

And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest.

6 Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief:

7 Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts.

8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.

Heb. 4:8

suppose to say For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day. Why change or english when plainly joshua is the english word for Yeshua or Yahshua.

Acts 7:45
Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drave out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David

This verse below if strange because they did not put jesus when plainly it suppose to be joshua but they put jose. Why this was not translated to jesus like the rest, if jose could be translated to Joshua? Not mistakes but purposely

Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,

"Make them believe a lie is true then the truth is a lie"
DanielChristopherBlowes
Posts: 1,066
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 10:03:14 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/20/2012 10:27:59 AM, question4u wrote:
Use whatever evidence you can or findings you can. If you are not willing for your religion or faith to be questioned. Then please do not respond to this.

I spend my time proving (purifying) myself to Him..
Everyone on the side of Truth listens to Me. (Jesus Christ)
todd_vetter
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 8:20:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/20/2012 10:27:59 AM, question4u wrote:
Use whatever evidence you can or findings you can. If you are not willing for your religion or faith to be questioned. Then please do not respond to this.

True testimony proves Jesus was real, Unfortunately the only sign given to the Christian world, they have messed up considerably.

I would like to share what I have found concerning Jesus as being posibly real, but this evidence being that it presents potential truth is primarily rejected by Christians.

http://thedeathandresurection.com...
Dogknox
Posts: 5,051
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 9:23:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/20/2012 10:27:59 AM, question4u wrote:
Use whatever evidence you can or findings you can. If you are not willing for your religion or faith to be questioned. Then please do not respond to this.

Excerpt from Wikipedia encyclopedia..
A number of ancient non-Christian documents, such as Jewish and Greco-Roman sources, have been used in historical analyses of the existence of Jesus.[34] These include the works of 1st century Roman historians Josephus and Tacitus.[34][35] Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldman has stated that "few have doubted the genuineness" of Josephus' reference to Jesus in Antiquities 20, 9, 1 and it is only disputed by a small number of scholars.[36][37][38][39] Bart D. Ehrman states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by the Romans is attested to by a wide range of sources, including Josephus and Tacitus.[40]
&
Eddy and Boyd state that it is now "firmly established" that there is non-Christian confirmation of the crucifixion of Jesus.[23] Bart Ehrman states that the crucifixion of Jesus on the orders of Pontius Pilate is the most certain element about him.[59] John Dominic Crossan states that the crucifixion of Jesus is as certain as any historical fact can be.[22] John P. Meier views the crucifixion of Jesus as historical fact and states that based on the criterion of embarrassment Christians would not have invented the painful death of their leader.[60] Meier states that a number of other criteria, e.g. the criterion of multiple attestation (i.e. confirmation by more than one source), the criterion of coherence (i.e. that it fits with other historical elements) and the criterion of rejection (i.e. that it is not disputed by ancient sources) help establish the crucifixion of Jesus as a historical event.[61]

Dogknox
Composer
Posts: 5,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2012 1:41:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/20/2012 10:27:59 AM, question4u wrote:
Use whatever evidence you can or findings you can. If you are not willing for your religion or faith to be questioned. Then please do not respond to this.

Excerpt from Wikipedia encyclopedia..
A number of ancient non-Christian documents, such as Jewish and Greco-Roman sources, have been used in historical analyses of the existence of Jesus.[34] These include the works of 1st century Roman historians Josephus and Tacitus.[34][35] Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldman has stated that "few have doubted the genuineness" of Josephus' reference to Jesus in Antiquities 20, 9, 1 and it is only disputed by a small number of scholars.[36][37][38][39] Bart D. Ehrman states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by the Romans is attested to by a wide range of sources, including Josephus and Tacitus.[40]

Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster:

1. Josephus remained a Jew; so obviously he didn't believe the BS those claiming to be xtians tried to deceive him & others with!

2. The entire source of Josephus' scant records is 100% hearsay at its very best!

At 11/21/2012 9:23:19 PM, Dogknox wrote
Eddy and Boyd state that it is now "firmly established" that there is non-Christian confirmation of the crucifixion of Jesus.[23] Bart Ehrman states that the crucifixion of Jesus on the orders of Pontius Pilate is the most certain element about him.[59] John Dominic Crossan states that the crucifixion of Jesus is as certain as any historical fact can be.[22] John P. Meier views the crucifixion of Jesus as historical fact and states that based on the criterion of embarrassment Christians would not have invented the painful death of their leader.[60] Meier states that a number of other criteria, e.g. the criterion of multiple attestation (i.e. confirmation by more than one source), the criterion of coherence (i.e. that it fits with other historical elements) and the criterion of rejection (i.e. that it is not disputed by ancient sources) help establish the crucifixion of Jesus as a historical event.[61]

Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster: What Bart really said -

. . . . HOWEVER " when viewing the literature/story of Jesus Christ as written in the gospels, complete with supernatural events and claims, the Bible overlaps with previous literary traditions to such a degree that it is impossible for any of those claims/stories to have begun with a historical Jesus Christ. So what Bart is saying (and what, if pushed to "follow the evidence" as he himself mandates, he would have to agree to) is that there was a historical figure of Jesus but all of the fantastical elements of the story that are prefigured by earlier literary traditions did not originate with him. So the "historical Jesus" of Ehrman and New Testament scholars was not born of a virgin, did not say most of the things ascribed to him (at least not all the stuff that is so familiar to Philo, Stoicism, the Essenes or the Pharisees), was not the "Logos/Son of God", and did not resurrect.

For me, what is profoundly important is to show that the New Testament descriptions of Jesus Christ are literature based on compound mythology, resulting in the final claim (which is NOT revolutionary but rather was the decision of nearly a century of Bible scholars in the early days of historical criticism) that the Jesus of History is virtually unknowable and the Jesus of the gospels is mythology. . . . . (Source: http://www.holyblasphemy.net...)

Your mentor & literal Saviour moi!
DanielChristopherBlowes
Posts: 1,066
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2012 4:37:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/22/2012 1:41:41 AM, Composer wrote:
At 11/20/2012 10:27:59 AM, question4u wrote:
Use whatever evidence you can or findings you can. If you are not willing for your religion or faith to be questioned. Then please do not respond to this.

Excerpt from Wikipedia encyclopedia..
A number of ancient non-Christian documents, such as Jewish and Greco-Roman sources, have been used in historical analyses of the existence of Jesus.[34] These include the works of 1st century Roman historians Josephus and Tacitus.[34][35] Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldman has stated that "few have doubted the genuineness" of Josephus' reference to Jesus in Antiquities 20, 9, 1 and it is only disputed by a small number of scholars.[36][37][38][39] Bart D. Ehrman states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by the Romans is attested to by a wide range of sources, including Josephus and Tacitus.[40]

Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster:

1. Josephus remained a Jew; so obviously he didn't believe the BS those claiming to be xtians tried to deceive him & others with!

2. The entire source of Josephus' scant records is 100% hearsay at its very best!

At 11/21/2012 9:23:19 PM, Dogknox wrote
Eddy and Boyd state that it is now "firmly established" that there is non-Christian confirmation of the crucifixion of Jesus.[23] Bart Ehrman states that the crucifixion of Jesus on the orders of Pontius Pilate is the most certain element about him.[59] John Dominic Crossan states that the crucifixion of Jesus is as certain as any historical fact can be.[22] John P. Meier views the crucifixion of Jesus as historical fact and states that based on the criterion of embarrassment Christians would not have invented the painful death of their leader.[60] Meier states that a number of other criteria, e.g. the criterion of multiple attestation (i.e. confirmation by more than one source), the criterion of coherence (i.e. that it fits with other historical elements) and the criterion of rejection (i.e. that it is not disputed by ancient sources) help establish the crucifixion of Jesus as a historical event.[61]

Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster: What Bart really said -

. . . . HOWEVER " when viewing the literature/story of Jesus Christ as written in the gospels, complete with supernatural events and claims, the Bible overlaps with previous literary traditions to such a degree that it is impossible for any of those claims/stories to have begun with a historical Jesus Christ. So what Bart is saying (and what, if pushed to "follow the evidence" as he himself mandates, he would have to agree to) is that there was a historical figure of Jesus but all of the fantastical elements of the story that are prefigured by earlier literary traditions did not originate with him. So the "historical Jesus" of Ehrman and New Testament scholars was not born of a virgin, did not say most of the things ascribed to him (at least not all the stuff that is so familiar to Philo, Stoicism, the Essenes or the Pharisees), was not the "Logos/Son of God", and did not resurrect.

For me, what is profoundly important is to show that the New Testament descriptions of Jesus Christ are literature based on compound mythology, resulting in the final claim (which is NOT revolutionary but rather was the decision of nearly a century of Bible scholars in the early days of historical criticism) that the Jesus of History is virtually unknowable and the Jesus of the gospels is mythology. . . . . (Source: http://www.holyblasphemy.net...)

Your mentor & literal Saviour moi!

One word rebuttal: TROLL.
Everyone on the side of Truth listens to Me. (Jesus Christ)
Composer
Posts: 5,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2012 8:40:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/22/2012 8:20:35 PM, Dogknox wrote:
DanielChristopherBlowes My two cents... Best thing is; "Don't reply"!
Dogknox

Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster: You Cult clowns can't legitimately reply because you are proven TROLLS!

Best advice for you is therefore not to reply any more because you, your Story books, jebus, its god remain as always impotent against fabulous troll moi!

IF however you wish to try your luck against moi again, then as always, prepare to alwys have your ideological butts severely & successfully kicked!

Your mentor & literal Saviour moi!

Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster!
DanielChristopherBlowes
Posts: 1,066
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2012 1:38:27 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/22/2012 8:40:12 PM, Composer wrote:
At 11/22/2012 8:20:35 PM, Dogknox wrote:
DanielChristopherBlowes My two cents... Best thing is; "Don't reply"!
Dogknox

Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster: You Cult clowns can't legitimately reply because you are proven TROLLS!

Best advice for you is therefore not to reply any more because you, your Story books, jebus, its god remain as always impotent against fabulous troll moi!

IF however you wish to try your luck against moi again, then as always, prepare to alwys have your ideological butts severely & successfully kicked!

Your mentor & literal Saviour moi!

Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster!

I always get the last word and that word IS:

Troll.
Everyone on the side of Truth listens to Me. (Jesus Christ)
Dogknox
Posts: 5,051
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2012 9:23:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/23/2012 1:38:27 AM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/22/2012 8:40:12 PM, Composer wrote:
At 11/22/2012 8:20:35 PM, Dogknox wrote:
DanielChristopherBlowes My two cents... Best thing is; "Don't reply"!
Dogknox

Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster: You Cult clowns can't legitimately reply because you are proven TROLLS!

Best advice for you is therefore not to reply any more because you, your Story books, jebus, its god remain as always impotent against fabulous troll moi!

IF however you wish to try your luck against moi again, then as always, prepare to alwys have your ideological butts severely & successfully kicked!

Your mentor & literal Saviour moi!

Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster!

I always get the last word and that word IS:

Troll.
DanielChristopherBlowes All people have a need for God, they look in all the wrong places. Drugs, alcohol, sex, parties, money, power..etc they will never be happy until they find God, and fill that void only god can fill!

God made all people.. he loves all people... The sad thing is, there is a whack of people that reject him!>>> To their loss!!!

Dogknox
DanielChristopherBlowes
Posts: 1,066
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2012 6:21:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/23/2012 9:23:10 PM, Dogknox wrote:
At 11/23/2012 1:38:27 AM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/22/2012 8:40:12 PM, Composer wrote:
At 11/22/2012 8:20:35 PM, Dogknox wrote:
DanielChristopherBlowes My two cents... Best thing is; "Don't reply"!
Dogknox

Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster: You Cult clowns can't legitimately reply because you are proven TROLLS!

Best advice for you is therefore not to reply any more because you, your Story books, jebus, its god remain as always impotent against fabulous troll moi!

IF however you wish to try your luck against moi again, then as always, prepare to alwys have your ideological butts severely & successfully kicked!

Your mentor & literal Saviour moi!

Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster!

I always get the last word and that word IS:

Troll.
DanielChristopherBlowes All people have a need for God, they look in all the wrong places. Drugs, alcohol, sex, parties, money, power..etc they will never be happy until they find God, and fill that void only god can fill!

God made all people.. he loves all people... The sad thing is, there is a whack of people that reject him!>>> To their loss!!!

Dogknox

Save your little witticisms for the mob..
Everyone on the side of Truth listens to Me. (Jesus Christ)
question4u
Posts: 492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2013 9:33:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/24/2012 6:21:35 AM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/23/2012 9:23:10 PM, Dogknox wrote:
At 11/23/2012 1:38:27 AM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/22/2012 8:40:12 PM, Composer wrote:
At 11/22/2012 8:20:35 PM, Dogknox wrote:
DanielChristopherBlowes My two cents... Best thing is; "Don't reply"!
Dogknox


Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster: You Cult clowns can't legitimately reply because you are proven TROLLS!

Best advice for you is therefore not to reply any more because you, your Story books, jebus, its god remain as always impotent against fabulous troll moi!

IF however you wish to try your luck against moi again, then as always, prepare to alwys have your ideological butts severely & successfully kicked!

Your mentor & literal Saviour moi!

Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster!

I always get the last word and that word IS:

Troll.
DanielChristopherBlowes All people have a need for God, they look in all the wrong places. Drugs, alcohol, sex, parties, money, power..etc they will never be happy until they find God, and fill that void only god
can fill!

God made all people.. he loves all people... The sad thing is, there is a whack of people that reject him!>>> To their loss!!!

Dogknox

Save your little witticisms for the mob..

No proved jesus exist but ican prove many jesus lived and did so called miracles and even died at the cross also christian ask yor pastor bishp or pope who jesus barabbas and what is the meaning of his name
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2013 7:59:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/20/2012 10:27:59 AM, question4u wrote:
Use whatever evidence you can or findings you can. If you are not willing for your religion or faith to be questioned. Then please do not respond to this.

I have no desire to prove Jesus was real, is it possible you have never heard the word "faith" associated with religion before?

What would constitute proof to you anyway, and why is that important?

He is the single most written about man from antiquity, there is much more evidence that he existed than Pythagoras or Socrates. Do you question whether they were real?

The question becomes, what sort of internal conflict makes this an issue for you? Why do you care?
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2013 8:34:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/20/2012 11:03:34 AM, yoda878 wrote:
no one can prove that to anyone.... Only the light of Christ can prove that to you.

I used the light from Christ one time, the man burned my blunt. Now he asks for my forgiveness.
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2013 8:38:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
its very possible that the man who is named jesus could be real. if you include the abilities that he had, that's a different story
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.