Total Posts:8|Showing Posts:1-8
Jump to topic:

I prove reliability of gospels convert now

Artur
Posts: 723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2016 11:25:33 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
now, if someone wrote about the event that took place 3 decades ago, say Chernobyl disaster in a language that is totally alien to the main beligerents of the event, that is an evidence, a historical account and reliable, Right? The same for the gospel which Mark is accused to have written. It too was written at least after 3 decades, you must see it as an evidence and reliavle accpunt. if someone at 50 write about an event that took place 3 decades ago you accept it but dismiss the gospel of Saint Mark. in order to be consistent, you have to dismiss the account 50 year old man wrote about chernobyl as well but you dont. you fools, you hypocrites.

and now I prove matthew's gospels. now, if someone wrote about an event that took place 4 decades ago, again in the language that is alien to the progenitors, it is a historical account of that event. now if someone at 58 wrote account of the USA presidential selections 1976, my account is reliable and historical, you accept it but dismiss the gospel which Saint Matthew is accused to have wrriten. why? just because you do not want to believe. you fools, you hypocrites. Woe to you

now to Gospel of saont John. Just imagine, if someone at 75 writes about something that took place in 1954, what he wrote is a historical account. He wrote it after 60 years just like God's chosen prophet Saint John did, his alleged gospel too is written at least 6 decades later.

now the historical reliability of gospels are demonstrsted. Expecting you to convert and share your testimonies here.
"I'm not as soft or as generous a person as I would be if the world hadn't changed me" Bobby Fischer
Skeptical1
Posts: 696
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2016 11:44:03 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/6/2016 11:25:33 PM, Artur wrote:
now, if someone wrote about the event that took place 3 decades ago, say Chernobyl disaster in a language that is totally alien to the main beligerents of the event, that is an evidence, a historical account and reliable, Right? The same for the gospel which Mark is accused to have written. It too was written at least after 3 decades, you must see it as an evidence and reliavle accpunt. if someone at 50 write about an event that took place 3 decades ago you accept it but dismiss the gospel of Saint Mark. in order to be consistent, you have to dismiss the account 50 year old man wrote about chernobyl as well but you dont. you fools, you hypocrites.


and now I prove matthew's gospels. now, if someone wrote about an event that took place 4 decades ago, again in the language that is alien to the progenitors, it is a historical account of that event. now if someone at 58 wrote account of the USA presidential selections 1976, my account is reliable and historical, you accept it but dismiss the gospel which Saint Matthew is accused to have wrriten. why? just because you do not want to believe. you fools, you hypocrites. Woe to you


now to Gospel of saont John. Just imagine, if someone at 75 writes about something that took place in 1954, what he wrote is a historical account. He wrote it after 60 years just like God's chosen prophet Saint John did, his alleged gospel too is written at least 6 decades later.

now the historical reliability of gospels are demonstrsted. Expecting you to convert and share your testimonies here.

Oh my God, yes! I see it now! How could I have been blind so long? A 52 year old account of events written down must be true. Especially when it tells the story of one who achieves marvelous things and then passes the mantle on to simple, honest folk to continue his life's work in his absence.

I believe, Willy Wonka, I believe!
distraff
Posts: 1,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 12:59:58 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/6/2016 11:25:33 PM, Artur wrote:
now, if someone wrote about the event that took place 3 decades ago, say Chernobyl disaster in a language that is totally alien to the main beligerents of the event, that is an evidence, a historical account and reliable, Right? The same for the gospel which Mark is accused to have written. It too was written at least after 3 decades, you must see it as an evidence and reliavle accpunt. if someone at 50 write about an event that took place 3 decades ago you accept it but dismiss the gospel of Saint Mark. in order to be consistent, you have to dismiss the account 50 year old man wrote about chernobyl as well but you dont. you fools, you hypocrites.


and now I prove matthew's gospels. now, if someone wrote about an event that took place 4 decades ago, again in the language that is alien to the progenitors, it is a historical account of that event. now if someone at 58 wrote account of the USA presidential selections 1976, my account is reliable and historical, you accept it but dismiss the gospel which Saint Matthew is accused to have wrriten. why? just because you do not want to believe. you fools, you hypocrites. Woe to you


now to Gospel of saont John. Just imagine, if someone at 75 writes about something that took place in 1954, what he wrote is a historical account. He wrote it after 60 years just like God's chosen prophet Saint John did, his alleged gospel too is written at least 6 decades later.

now the historical reliability of gospels are demonstrsted. Expecting you to convert and share your testimonies here.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. For example if I told you I saw a cat in my back yard then you would probably take my word for it. If I claimed to have seen a UFO in my yard you are not going to believe me unless you inspect an actual alien, pictures or just seeing the alien won't be enough.

If I claim that I can fix cars you will probably believe me, but if I claimed that I can cure cancer then you are going to want to see a demonstration.

The same can be applied to the story of Troy. We accept the non-supernatural accounts of what happened but the claims of involvement by the Gods are not believed in because they have a higher unmet standard of evidence.

Supernatural claims are more suspect because most of the supernatural claims made by thousands of religions have to be false and supernatural claims have not been objectively verified or are disputed by experts and a majority of people.

Nuclear accidents are bound to happen and there is a lot of documentations and pictures of Chernobyl from reputable sources. Same goes for presidential elections. Jesus's miracles since they are more extraordinary and require the supernatural require more evidence and only have some 2,000 year old documents supposedly written by biased sources in his inner circle.

Also there are many people who knew the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith who claimed that he performed many miracles and wrote accounts much more recent than just 40 years later. Yet we know that he is a fraud.

Cult leaders are very good at tricking their followers into believing that they have supernatural powers and exaggerating what really happened. And those in the inner circle may not be entirely honest. If the apostles had admitted they were lying they would have just enraged their enemies and alientated their friends.

Also, people didn't usually live past 40 year back then so someone writing the gospels in their 70s is pretty unlikely. It is possible that somebody else wrote them later.
KwLm
Posts: 501
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 1:15:53 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/6/2016 11:25:33 PM, Artur wrote:
now, if someone wrote about the event that took place 3 decades ago, say Chernobyl disaster in a language that is totally alien to the main beligerents of the event, that is an evidence, a historical account and reliable, Right? The same for the gospel which Mark is accused to have written. It too was written at least after 3 decades, you must see it as an evidence and reliavle accpunt. if someone at 50 write about an event that took place 3 decades ago you accept it but dismiss the gospel of Saint Mark. in order to be consistent, you have to dismiss the account 50 year old man wrote about chernobyl as well but you dont. you fools, you hypocrites.


and now I prove matthew's gospels. now, if someone wrote about an event that took place 4 decades ago, again in the language that is alien to the progenitors, it is a historical account of that event. now if someone at 58 wrote account of the USA presidential selections 1976, my account is reliable and historical, you accept it but dismiss the gospel which Saint Matthew is accused to have wrriten. why? just because you do not want to believe. you fools, you hypocrites. Woe to you


now to Gospel of saont John. Just imagine, if someone at 75 writes about something that took place in 1954, what he wrote is a historical account. He wrote it after 60 years just like God's chosen prophet Saint John did, his alleged gospel too is written at least 6 decades later.

now the historical reliability of gospels are demonstrsted. Expecting you to convert and share your testimonies here.

Thought I told you to stop being a fool
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 2:20:39 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/6/2016 11:25:33 PM, Artur wrote:
now, if someone wrote about the event that took place 3 decades ago, say Chernobyl disaster in a language that is totally alien to the main beligerents of the event, that is an evidence, a historical account and reliable, Right? The same for the gospel which Mark is accused to have written. It too was written at least after 3 decades, you must see it as an evidence and reliavle accpunt. if someone at 50 write about an event that took place 3 decades ago you accept it but dismiss the gospel of Saint Mark. in order to be consistent, you have to dismiss the account 50 year old man wrote about chernobyl as well but you dont. you fools, you hypocrites.


and now I prove matthew's gospels. now, if someone wrote about an event that took place 4 decades ago, again in the language that is alien to the progenitors, it is a historical account of that event. now if someone at 58 wrote account of the USA presidential selections 1976, my account is reliable and historical, you accept it but dismiss the gospel which Saint Matthew is accused to have wrriten. why? just because you do not want to believe. you fools, you hypocrites. Woe to you


now to Gospel of saont John. Just imagine, if someone at 75 writes about something that took place in 1954, what he wrote is a historical account. He wrote it after 60 years just like God's chosen prophet Saint John did, his alleged gospel too is written at least 6 decades later.

now the historical reliability of gospels are demonstrsted. Expecting you to convert and share your testimonies here.

You didn't think this through. Events such as Chernobyl and Presidential elections have been covered by a huge number of people at the time of their occurrence, many different sources that can corroborate the event, that's what gives it reliability and credibility. Not so with those gospels.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Archaholic
Posts: 260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 3:26:43 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
I don't think christians care about the veracity of the scriptures. People convert to christianity because of the power of the biblical message. Their words are heart touching and meaningful, specially for people who are experiencing severe life problems.

BR
ClicknClock
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 7:38:12 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/6/2016 11:25:33 PM, Artur wrote:
now, if someone wrote about the event that took place 3 decades ago, say Chernobyl disaster in a language that is totally alien to the main beligerents of the event, that is an evidence, a historical account and reliable, Right? The same for the gospel which Mark is accused to have written. It too was written at least after 3 decades, you must see it as an evidence and reliavle accpunt. if someone at 50 write about an event that took place 3 decades ago you accept it but dismiss the gospel of Saint Mark. in order to be consistent, you have to dismiss the account 50 year old man wrote about chernobyl as well but you dont. you fools, you hypocrites.


and now I prove matthew's gospels. now, if someone wrote about an event that took place 4 decades ago, again in the language that is alien to the progenitors, it is a historical account of that event. now if someone at 58 wrote account of the USA presidential selections 1976, my account is reliable and historical, you accept it but dismiss the gospel which Saint Matthew is accused to have wrriten. why? just because you do not want to believe. you fools, you hypocrites. Woe to you


now to Gospel of saont John. Just imagine, if someone at 75 writes about something that took place in 1954, what he wrote is a historical account. He wrote it after 60 years just like God's chosen prophet Saint John did, his alleged gospel too is written at least 6 decades later.

now the historical reliability of gospels are demonstrsted. Expecting you to convert and share your testimonies here. : :

The 9/11 attacks on U.S. soil happened 15 years ago and many people believe it was an inside job. You should believe these people who believe that the 9/11 attacks were caused by people who lived in the U.S. because of their beliefs.

The written words in a book called the Bible were easily changed by devious men who were trying to control the masses of people. If you believe every word in the Bible as being the true words that God's trusted servants wrote, then you will believe those words to be true. If you're one of the many people who don't believe those words to be the true written words by God's trusted servants, then you will believe the Bible is tainted.

I know the truth so I don't have to believe anymore. You can believe in anything you observe or hear from other people but unless you know the truth, you will only have your beliefs and that's all.
Willows
Posts: 2,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 8:07:31 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/6/2016 11:25:33 PM, Artur wrote:
now, if someone wrote about the event that took place 3 decades ago, say Chernobyl disaster in a language that is totally alien to the main beligerents of the event, that is an evidence, a historical account and reliable, Right? The same for the gospel which Mark is accused to have written. It too was written at least after 3 decades, you must see it as an evidence and reliavle accpunt. if someone at 50 write about an event that took place 3 decades ago you accept it but dismiss the gospel of Saint Mark. in order to be consistent, you have to dismiss the account 50 year old man wrote about chernobyl as well but you dont. you fools, you hypocrites.


and now I prove matthew's gospels. now, if someone wrote about an event that took place 4 decades ago, again in the language that is alien to the progenitors, it is a historical account of that event. now if someone at 58 wrote account of the USA presidential selections 1976, my account is reliable and historical, you accept it but dismiss the gospel which Saint Matthew is accused to have wrriten. why? just because you do not want to believe. you fools, you hypocrites. Woe to you


now to Gospel of saont John. Just imagine, if someone at 75 writes about something that took place in 1954, what he wrote is a historical account. He wrote it after 60 years just like God's chosen prophet Saint John did, his alleged gospel too is written at least 6 decades later.

now the historical reliability of gospels are demonstrsted. Expecting you to convert and share your testimonies here.

Obviously, you hit a few branches on the way down while falling out of the stupid tree.

Let's wait a couple more decades, then all the testaments of JK Rowling will be proven.