African Children Denounced As "Witches" By Christian Pastors

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Th'Pusher

Is there any textual dispute around that particular passage Phenomanul? Like a lion?

---

There are...

http://jerusalemcouncil.org/articles.../

But both interpretations are correct. (Though I'm not claiming to be a Hebrew scholar).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

Hey can I book your witch doctor church for August? I could use a good exorcism then, it's hot as fuck.

---

The church was burned down...

But if you want a demon to 'perform' that trick in your home just ask one... no harm, no foul right...? I mean, none of them exist after all... You might even save some money on your utility bill.

Come August, let us know how that goes... :hat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phenomanul

The church was burned down...

But if you want a demon to 'perform' that trick in your home just ask one... no harm, no foul right...? I mean, none of them exist after all... You might even save some money on your utility bill.

Come August, let us know how that goes... :hat

---

:cry But I was asking one of your demons to come perform it :cry

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

:cry But I was asking one of your demons to come perform it :cry

---

Sorry bro... I don't have any.

You can request one if you want by conjuring them up. Some folks even get something in return for 'selling their soul'... Who knows... you might get lucky. :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phenomanul

Sorry bro... I don't have any.

You can request one if you want by conjuring them up. Some folks even get something in return for 'selling their soul'... Who knows... you might get lucky. :lol

---

I don't know how to conjure, it's not as easy as in Skyrim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mingus

What you stated in the first paragraph here is an entirely different thing than what you did before.

If you had any dignity you'd man up and admit the fact that you grossly simplified sensibilitities & ideas about those verses, during the process of which made a broad generalization, and that you don't need to be Mel Gibson to do just that.

I'm pretty close to throwing a furry of obscenities your way. On account of that, I'll probably just back out. I'll read, keep my distance. It's an intresting discussion aside from that. But these sorts of interactions bring out the worst in me.

---

Why? Because I referenced the Jewish nation at the time of JESUS as having rejected him? Many Jews today believe in JESUS as Messiah. So no... I have nothing against Jews. If you feel you have to throw 'obscenities my way' simply because I believe JESUS qualifies as Messiah and you don't - I don't know what to say to that.

You are entitled to believe whatever you want. That's the freedom of choice GOD gave us all.

But yeah... I apologize if you felt offended. Going back and re-reading I did generalize for the sake of trying to make a separate point... that the Hebrew scriptures pre-dated Christ.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

I don't know how to conjure, it's not as easy as in Skyrim.

---

You're using the wrong method... try Diablo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phenomanul

I'm not condemning Jews mingus (I'm not Mel Gibson over here)... from my point of view I'm stating the fact that Jews have rejected JESUS as their Messiah. That's true, and most certainly an unspoken tenet of their belief system today. IF stating that fact somehow offends you... it's not my intent to do so. And if it does, ask yourself why it should bother you at all...?

I'm simply trying to point out that the prophecies JESUS would have to fulfill to claim to be/be called Messiah were all written in the Hebrew/Judaic scriptural canon. They couldn't be changed after-the-fact because they pre-dated JESUS' arrival. They were written a priori...

As for Psalms 22, it was written roughly 1,000 years before the crucifixion... and yet it already includes references to the fact that JESUS' hands and feet would be pierced. Bear in mind that the Persian, Carthaginic, and Macedonian empires (which included variations of this death torture method - had not yet developed the crucifixion method - which would later be adopted by the Roman empire) - and YET the explicit references to JESUS' death were already being described.

Furthermore, Jews also believe in Angels and Demons. That's the common-ground that's important to the theme of this thread. Folks here seem to think that those realms are wholly fictitious, which is there prerogative to do so... I've simply provided anecdotal context to show that manifestations in said realm do exist. And again, folks can choose not to believe. The other common ground is the finding of the Dead Sea Scrolls, texts which affirm/authenticate the fidelity with which Judaic texts have permeated through time. In other words, claims that authenticity of literary works should be questioned simply because they are archaic is fallacious in light of the practices that were employed to ensure their fidelity, and textual accuracy.

---

re the the dating of psalms.

There were five (or 4) writers of the OT & NT, correct? Do you subscribe to this belief? "Experts" have pretty much been able to give a ballpark idea of the time in which each writer lived/wrote/edited etc., no? If yes, then I'm assuming they've validated your number. If no, where'd you get that number?

Were their other ther forms of torture/punishment that would've pierced his hands & feet that those other peoples used that the writer may have been referring to (assuming the 1000 yr estimate is on point?).

If no ^^^, does one specific, nonminipulatable prophetic detail (that's all I'm counting) allow to hold up all the prophetic but non-specific, manipulateable details?

How many of the other prophecies in the OT didn't get fulfilled?

^^^If a lot then maybe people found a needle (truth) in a haystack (the many falsities). What's to stop one from believing someone threw something that stuck?

BTW, these are questions I have that stem from genuine curiosity (admittedly inged with no doubt a certain degree--but not self-fulfilling--of skepticism), and not from a "scurred" Jew who cowers from oppositional beliefs/ideas/facts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phenomanul

Why? Because I referenced the Jewish nation at the time of JESUS as having rejected him? Many Jews today believe in JESUS as Messiah. So no... I have nothing against Jews. If you feel you have to throw 'obscenities my way' simply because I believe JESUS qualifies as Messiah and you don't - I don't know what to say to that.

You are entitled to believe whatever you want. That's the freedom of choice GOD gave us all.

But yeah... I apologize if you felt offended. Going back and re-reading I did generalize for the sake of trying to make a separate point... that the Hebrew scriptures pre-dated Christ.

---

It's more than that, though. It was a gross simplification of what Jews who don't belief in Jesus as Messiah (in the interest of avoiding confusion here, I'm talking about the Jewish faithful ONLY--not Jewish ethnicity--in which case they'd no longer be Jews [again, by faith]).

You represented practicing Jews disingenuously & unfairly in your caricature of them (I don't practice) as people leave out shit in the OT solely because it doesn't align with their beliefs--basically, that the only way they can "get around" these verses you referenced is by not addressing them at all. That's a steaming pile of bullshit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phenomanul

There are...

http://jerusalemcouncil.org/articles.../

But both interpretations are correct. (Though I'm not claiming to be a Hebrew scholar).

---

this translation doesn't sound much like a description of a crusifixion

Psalms 22:16 (22:17) For dogs have encompassed me; a company of evil-doers have inclosed me; like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet. (JPS)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phenomanul

Except that the accounts I referenced are historical accounts by secular historians...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

There is no "except that". You fail to acknowledge even the most rudimentary form of the logic you are attempting to use.

Either the logic operates that way or it doesn't.

X was a real person.
Y was a real place.
Z is an recorded event/happening that involves X and Y.

If X and Y, then Z must be a real event.

Is this true in all cases? Yes or no will do. A "why or why not" might also be helpful.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phenomanul

The problem with absolutes is that it is devoid of context. That's why your rudimentary logic simply isn't the governing one. It's way too simplified.

Al Capone was a real person.

He operated out of a very real place (Chi Town)

There are many recorded events that incorporate both those facts.

And yet we still don't know what happened to him. Science - or forensic science in this case - with all of it's advancements and tools isn't capable of producing the truth... Absolute truth is not attainable with Science alone.

---

Again, not really an answer. It is indeed a simplification of sorts, but I will assert that it is still useful to outline a general and quite important principle.

Perhaps a re-phrasing is in order.

Is it possible that an account of an event about a real person in a real place can be completely made up? Again yes or no is all that is needed here.

I'm confused. Don't we know what happened to Al Capone? he died in Palm Beach after stroke/pneumonia/heart attack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

I'm confused. Don't we know what happened to Al Capone? he died in Palm Beach after stroke/pneumonia/heart attack.

---

I noticed that. My guess: he is confusing him with Jimmy Hoffa. His point was made well enough for me to get what he was driving at, so I let it go. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

Again, not really an answer. It is indeed a simplification of sorts, but I will assert that it is still useful to outline a general and quite important principle.

Perhaps a re-phrasing is in order.

Is it possible that an account of an event about a real person in a real place can be completely made up? Again yes or no is all that is needed here.

---

Yes. Its entirely possible.

That's why the multiple - wholly independent references - paint the overarching picture of Jesus' existence - and what he was up to.

Again, the Acts of Pontius Pilate, a Roman elected governor - wrote concerning Jesus and his miraculous acts. It's a secular work, historical annals - completely independent of the authors of the Gospels... yet it supports the basic premise of Jesus' extraordinary life.

The other historical writers witnessed an "unnatural" blacking out of the sun for several hours DESPITE not being present in Jerusalem at the time of Jesus' crucifixion. They knew those were very real events that other people had also seen - and no one questioned the events themselves - because they too were witnesses of the phenomena despite not knowing what was causing them.

The catch (the connection to the crucifixion) is that the times match those as written in the Gospels to a "T". From "the 6th to the 9th hour darkness covered all the land."

No astronomical event that we know of is capable of producing this phenomena.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

I noticed that. My guess: he is confusing him with Jimmy Hoffa. His point was made well enough for me to get what he was driving at, so I let it go. :)

---

Yes. Jimmy Hoffa.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Th'Pusher

this translation doesn't sound much like a description of a crusifixion

Psalms 22:16 (22:17) For dogs have encompassed me; a company of evil-doers have inclosed me; like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet. (JPS)

---

The Hebrew texts are explained by Jewish scholars in the link I provided.

The lion reference is written in to denote the type of pain being inflicted. So how can a lion hurt us? Either by piercing and slashing us with his claws, or by piercing us with his fangs. The context is shown.

:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mingus

re the the dating of psalms.

There were five (or 4) writers of the OT & NT, correct? Do you subscribe to this belief? "Experts" have pretty much been able to give a ballpark idea of the time in which each writer lived/wrote/edited etc., no? If yes, then I'm assuming they've validated your number. If no, where'd you get that number?

Were their other ther forms of torture/punishment that would've pierced his hands & feet that those other peoples used that the writer may have been referring to (assuming the 1000 yr estimate is on point?).

If no ^^^, does one specific, nonminipulatable prophetic detail (that's all I'm counting) allow to hold up all the prophetic but non-specific, manipulateable details?

How many of the other prophecies in the OT didn't get fulfilled?

^^^If a lot then maybe people found a needle (truth) in a haystack (the many falsities). What's to stop one from believing someone threw something that stuck?

BTW, these are questions I have that stem from genuine curiosity (admittedly inged with no doubt a certain degree--but not self-fulfilling--of skepticism), and not from a "scurred" Jew who cowers from oppositional beliefs/ideas/facts.

---

353 Separate prophetical clauses are fulfilled by JESUS according to the following list.

http://www.accordingtothescriptures....rophecies.html

The likelihood that any one person in history would satisfy all of those - every single one - is astoundingly low.

Most modern scholars view the Acts of Pilate as not authentic and as a Christian composition designed to rebut pagan sources.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tlongII

Most modern scholars view the Acts of Pilate as not authentic and as a Christian composition designed to rebut pagan sources.

---

Except that they would have to brush away references to said work by Nero and Hadrian (both Roman Emperors).

You'd be giving 1st century "Christian forgers" too much credit if you believe 1) that they could pass off writings (an entire volume no less) and attribute them to a high ranking Roman official (Pilate) and 2) that those same works would then be legitimized (as authentic - not necessarily "in agreement with") by 2 separate Roman Emperors which were actually hunting Christ's followers down.

Ultimately, you choose to believe what you want to believe. No amount of evidence will sway you one way or the other. And in the case of most posters here THAT choice has already been made.

If you are truly genuine about researching Jesus' historicity I recommend the following books written by an atheist turned Christian author (Lee Strobel)...

The Case for Christ
The Case for the Real Jesus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phenomanul

Yes. Its entirely possible.

That's why the multiple - wholly independent references - paint the overarching picture of Jesus' existence - and what he was up to.

Again, the Acts of Pontius Pilate, a Roman elected governor - wrote concerning Jesus and his miraculous acts. It's a secular work, historical annals - completely independent of the authors of the Gospels... yet it supports the basic premise of Jesus' extraordinary life.

The other historical writers witnessed an "unnatural" blacking out of the sun for several hours DESPITE not being present in Jerusalem at the time of Jesus' crucifixion. They knew those were very real events that other people had also seen - and no one questioned the events themselves - because they too were witnesses of the phenomena despite not knowing what was causing them.

The catch (the connection to the crucifixion) is that the times match those as written in the Gospels to a "T". From "the 6th to the 9th hour darkness covered all the land."

No astronomical event that we know of is capable of producing this phenomena.

---

A step forward. Thank you.

How do you know the Gospels account of the date of the crucifixion is accurate? Because the Gospels say so?

I am impressed by the number of amateur religious scholars in here. Wouldn't have thought to find that in a political forum.

If the gospels were written long after the life of jesus, they could easily incorporate real, known events, such as an eclipse. They could even pencil in all the details of Jesus' life to match that of the prophesies Jesus was supposed to fulfill.

Pauls writings, which form the basis for the new testament were written long after Jesus' death. Not overly convincing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

I am impressed by the number of amateur religious scholars in here. Wouldn't have thought to find that in a political forum.

---

It interests me. I have had a running bet with a very devout friend who asked me to read/listen to C.S. Lewis' "Mere Christianity" and read the Book of John. I did both twice, and have been looking for material for him to watch/listen/read for almost a year. It has been interesting, and I have learned a lot.

Still need to get him a good playlist.

A good one I found was this youtube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/user/QualiaSoup

Very concise criticisms of religion in general.

One of the best things I have found is a couple of short videos made in Britain.



Lays out some of the overarching thoughts, and avoids being heavy-handed. Personally I don't find the arguments about whether jesus was real to be overly productive. Once one starts delving into the details, it gets understandably murky. Easy enough to accept that someone named Jesus actually lived. I don't find that overly interesting. That doesn't get you to a supernatural being though, which is much less supported.

Even that aside, there are some really basic flaws in the entire ethos of Christianity. One might be able to quibble about Jesus existence, but there are some much more important questions to me.



or



Videos aside, here is an interesting thought experiment for you or anyone else for that matter:

If you could go back in time to Jesus' Crucifixion with the means of stopping it, would you? why or why not?

Quote:

---

Videos aside, here is an interesting thought experiment for you or anyone else for that matter:

If you could go back in time to Jesus' Crucifixion with the means of stopping it, would you? why or why not?

---

If you buy into the 'Jesus died to give you eternal life" argument then saving Jesus would be dumb. if you don't buy into it and he was just a man then fighting the Romans to try and save him would be dumb.