Here's a debate topic fo' yo ass!

marbleheadmaui wrote:

NoRegret wrote:

I will politely and full-heartedly disagree. There are no actual ways of determining one way or the other on this topic.

I appreciate the good manners, but disagree with what? Show me an orthodox Christian Theological source that says other than what I have written. There's lots to work from.

Barth, Calvin, Luther, Augustine, Aquinas, the Gospels, Rahner, Tertullian, Anselm, Bultmann, CS Lewis or Tillich for starters. That's a reasonable cross-section of Catholic and Protestant doctrinally orthodox thinkers.

I dont need a source, there is no hard evidence in what you're saying. Its all exactly what you say it is "theoligical" aka IN THEORY.

that isn't what theological means...

NoRegret wrote:

Id have them sign a contract if they were under 18 saying that they voluntarily and consentually had sex with myself lol

Lol. Is 18 the legal age in America?

Hmmm breaking down the word, one would think that.

Theological means some religious shit. But again, still no proof based on what any of them are saying.

freakzilla316ftw wrote:

NoRegret wrote:

Id have them sign a contract if they were under 18 saying that they voluntarily and consentually had sex with myself lol

Lol. Is 18 the legal age in America?

I think its different in certain states, but where I live it is 18, yes lol.

NoRegret wrote:

freakzilla316ftw wrote:

NoRegret wrote:

Id have them sign a contract if they were under 18 saying that they voluntarily and consentually had sex with myself lol

Lol. Is 18 the legal age in America?

I think its different in certain states, but where I live it is 18, yes lol.

In Australia it's 16. Too bad I prefer older women.

freakzilla316ftw wrote:

NoRegret wrote:

freakzilla316ftw wrote:

NoRegret wrote:

Id have them sign a contract if they were under 18 saying that they voluntarily and consentually had sex with myself lol

Lol. Is 18 the legal age in America?

I think its different in certain states, but where I live it is 18, yes lol.

In Australia it's 16. Too bad I prefer older women.

I will fuck any chick over 17 if she is hot. 16 is cutting it too young for me though. Never fucked a cougar yet, but am lookin forward to it when I can legally go to bars and shit here in like 8 months.

You can go to bars at 18 here. Cougars know how to please

freakzilla316ftw wrote:

You can go to bars at 18 here. Cougars know how to please

Oh i'm sure they do lol

And I go to a couple bars around here but that is because we know the owners a little and they let us drink if we dont get too out of control. But those are laid back bars...not a whole lotta potential there as far as getting any poon action.

NoRegret wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

NoRegret wrote:

I will politely and full-heartedly disagree. There are no actual ways of determining one way or the other on this topic.

I appreciate the good manners, but disagree with what? Show me an orthodox Christian Theological source that says other than what I have written. There's lots to work from.

Barth, Calvin, Luther, Augustine, Aquinas, the Gospels, Rahner, Tertullian, Anselm, Bultmann, CS Lewis or Tillich for starters. That's a reasonable cross-section of Catholic and Protestant doctrinally orthodox thinkers.

I dont need a source, there is no hard evidence in what you're saying. Its all exactly what you say it is "theoligical" aka IN THEORY.

OF COURSE there is hard evidence. My claim is that orthodox Christian doctrine has a specific meaning. I just gave you a whole series of thinkers so you can independently verify it.

Now as the whether those teachings are in any way true? A different question.

Ohh so this is another religion debate?

There is nothing specific in Christianity that hasn't already been written in other religions the predate it.

As for god being the cause of bad things or good things occurring, show me how someone could possibly know that there is or ever was a god and if that is known then why are there a million different religions that preach that there god is the rightful and sole god and that anyone who doesn't want to accept that is bad and evil.

In reality most religions that preach those type of ideals are mostly derived from ancient astrology and sun worship. Do a little investigating into the parallels between Jesus, the Sun, and the Zodiac calender.

well i almost got hit by a dump truck today had i not ran into the street and payed attention i would have gotten nailed, fucker didnt even see me so i reported him

was this meant to be

or was it all a big coincidence?

did i need a wake up call, was god telling me to take the trash out ? was the driver an ass hole raping children and my report is gonna bust him
???

who knows?

oggy420 wrote:

Ohh so this is another religion debate?

There is nothing specific in Christianity that hasn't already been written in other religions the predate it.

As for god being the cause of bad things or good things occurring, show me how someone could possibly know that there is or ever was a god and if that is known then why are there a million different religions that preach that there god is the rightful and sole god and that anyone who doesn't want to accept that is bad and evil.

In reality most religions that preach those type of ideals are mostly derived from ancient astrology and sun worship. Do a little investigating into the parallels between Jesus, the Sun, and the Zodiac calender.

OF COURSE THERE IS!

The Divinity of Jesus of Nazareth for starters. Sheesh!

Ahh yes. The story of Horus...ehh hem i mean Jesus. Sorry they are easy to get confused...

oggy420 wrote:

Ahh yes. The story of Horus...ehh hem i mean Jesus. Sorry they are easy to get confused...

Nice.

oggy420 wrote:

Ahh yes. The story of Horus...ehh hem i mean Jesus. Sorry they are easy to get confused...

Bwahahahahaha. You do realize Jesus of Nazareth was a specific figure from history don't you? That references to him appear in non-Biblical sources?

He was a big fan of Horus

Quote :

Bwahahahahaha. You do realize Jesus of Nazareth was a specific figure from history don't you? That references to him appear in non-Biblical sources?

Find one from his life time. Go. A single source. Why did no one in Pilot's time write of him? The first references appear in historical contexts 30-70 AD If I recall correctly. I don't even think "Jesus Christ" existed at all. He is an amalgamation of real false prophets, snake charmers and and other myths.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus


The only reason more people don't question Jesus' existence at all has to be related to why evolution is still described as theory.

Wolfgangsta wrote:

Quote :

Bwahahahahaha. You do realize Jesus of Nazareth was a specific figure from history don't you? That references to him appear in non-Biblical sources?

Find one from his life time. Go. A single source. Why did no one in Pilot's time write of him? The first references appear in historical contexts 30-70 AD If I recall correctly. I don't even think "Jesus Christ" existed at all. He is an amalgamation of real false prophets, snake charmers and and other myths.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus


The only reason more people don't question Jesus' existence at all has to be related to why evolution is still described as theory.

Geeze now THERE is a silly standard. You think there were printing presses in First Century Palestine? History was largely passed on orally in those times in most places.
Who in Miltiades own lifetime wrote of him? You think he didn't exist?

Josephus wrote when people who knew Jesus were still alive. So had he made it up he'd have been called on it. The fact that his execution was attributed to Pilate is VERY powerful evidence. More specific than we have on many figures from the ancient world. Paul wrote his epistles as early as the 40's, within a decade or two of Jesus' execution.

If you'd really like to study the historical Jesus as that research is done in the academic world, as opposed to the religious world, I'd suggest reading the following:

The Historical Figure of jesus by EP Sanders out of Duke
The Historical Jesus by Albert Schweizer
The Historical Jesus by Gerd Thiessen

If you want more I took a graduate course in this and still have a bibliography handy.

Ew, you studied this and you still trust sources based almost entirely in the descriptions of Jesus in the context of writings written by or dealing with his followers?

That is a reflection of what you want to believe. If you want to believe in the historical Jesus, the proof is there, in at least he can't be disproved outright. That's enough if you want to believe in Jesus, regardless of whatever context.

Maui are you a Christian? I probably should have asked this first, though...

Quote :

Josephus wrote when people who knew Jesus were still alive. So had he made it up he'd have been called on it.

This is the silliest thing I've seen you say.

Wolfgangsta wrote:

Ew, you studied this and you still trust sources based almost entirely in the descriptions of Jesus in the context of writings written by or dealing with his followers?

That is a reflection of what you want to believe. If you want to believe in the historical Jesus, the proof is there, in at least he can't be disproved outright. That's enough if you want to believe in Jesus, regardless of whatever context.

Maui are you a Christian? I probably should have asked this first, though...

What is a reflection of what I want to believe exactly?

I gave you source materials. Do some work.

Am I a Christian? I dunno. Raised Roman Catholic, don't go to church except on rare occasions, have the equivalent of a masters in ancient studies and have done a fair bit of work in theology. My guess is there is a Creator God...some of that may be hope.

But that is entriely irrelevant to the question at hand. The evidence that Jesus of Nazareth existed, by the academic standards used to prove the existence of figures in the ancient world, is very, very strong.

No there isn't. There was nothing recorded of him when he was alive and the only sources are essentially the people who invented the myths themselves or at least believed in the folklore.

Wolfgangsta wrote:

No there isn't. There was nothing recorded of him when he was alive and the only sources are essentially the people who invented the myths themselves or at least believed in the folklore.

Your standards are simply silly and would force you to argue that most figures from the ancient world never existed.

Amend that to say most mythological figures, and we got a deal. I am sure different events and people contributed to the Jesus Myth, like all myths, but to say there is an iron clad historical "Jesus of Nazareth" as you did is completely untrue. The only accounts of him are from his believers after his death. Excuse the cynicism in terms of their credibility.

But I understand why people like you who are wayward sheep wanting to keep the option of returning to the flock open.