African Children Denounced As "Witches" By Christian Pastors

[RandomGuy]

As an aside, it's somewhat comical that people have argued for centuries the merits of the proof of Jesus' existence/life/ministry. The proof consisting of very real artifacts and manuscripts, 1st hand accounts - tangible, observable, measurable evidence. Given the context that Jesus lived roughly 2,000 years ago you all make it seem like the authenticity of any such proof is entirely up for debate because of the time factor.

YET those very same detractors then turn around and tell you with ALL CERTAINTY that man knows exactly what happened millions and billions of years ago on our planet/cosmos.

The inconsistency in standards is rather convenient.

You think the standards of evidence are somehow different? They aren't. That is your problem in dealing with these topics.

You want an exception to standards of evidence when it comes to the thing you want to believe in. It is a very human thing to do.

[RandomGuy]

Except that the accounts I referenced are historical accounts by secular historians, wholly independent from scripture... they reference unexplained phenomena that was evident to all who were there to witness it... The Acts of Pontius Pilate for example, affirms that Jesus was performing miracles that defied all explanation (clearly prose not fiction)... the excerpt from Phlegon's writings talk about the sun being blacked out throughout the land "for all to see", and was explicit about the time of day (which coincides with the Gospel narrative)... He later in said book suggests that it couldn't be explained away with a solar eclipse because the moon was not in the proper position in the sky to produce an eclipse (which he also suggests is besides the point because solar eclipses don't last hours nor do they produce earthquakes) (again clearly prose not fiction)...

I'm just pointing out that the references to Jesus extraordinary life are out there - and not all of them are scriptural as boutons was trying to suggest.

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.

[RandomGuy]

Really? You need to catch up on your bot-like rebuttals.

Jesus and reference to Christians are found in:

The writings of Greek historian Lucian of Samosata (second century)...

The Acts of Pontius Pilate
or other Roman accounts from the first and second centuries
Gaius Suetonius
Cornelius Tacitus
Pliny the Younger

100 years+ after the events? That is 5 generations removed.

Not quite first hand accounts. "I heard from this guy that...".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suetonius_on_Christians

The best that can be said is to indicate that someone with a name similar to "Christ" existed.

(shrugs)

I don't really care overmuch to debate whether "Chrestus" existed. I'll even grant that, for the sake of argument Jesus existed at some point. That seems reasonable. I know humans exist.

Show me where Gaius talks about the same kinds of miracles he witnessed, or recorded an account of fantastical events, and that would start getting you the other arm or your assertion. "Jesus existed, AND he was the Son of God that did these miracles". Even then you still have a pretty high hurdle to clear. We can talk to people about their first-hand accounts of being abducted by aliens. Does that mean alien abductions are real?

The evidence supporting the magic in the gospels... is far thinner than you seem to think.

[Phenomanul]

You think the standards of evidence are somehow different? They aren't. That is your problem in dealing with these topics.

You want an exception to standards of evidence when it comes to the thing you want to believe in. It is a very human thing to do.

Turn that around and speak into a mirror.

All I'm pointing out is that we have cold cases after 48 hours in most forensic investigations... the Scientific method still applies with limitations.

We have artifacts and manuscripts that reference Jesus' existence and his works... the Scientific method still applies with limitations.

And then we have events that are neither directly observable, measurable, repeatable or predictable.... the Scientific method completely falls apart for that event!!! And yet the established view for most folks like yourself is that YOU ALL are CERTAIN of what happened billions of years ago.

Origins "science" falls out of the realm of science because the Scientific method cannot be applied to the same standard and rigor in order to assess the merits of any postulates or theories concerning the subject.

I've often said that elements of faith are required to believe what you believe regarding the origins of the Cosmos and the origins of Life. Yet you staunchly disagree that this is the case.

We have agreed to disagree on that one, but my premise remains. Origins science... isn't science at all.

[Phenomanul]

100 years+ after the events? That is 5 generations removed.

Not quite first hand accounts. "I heard from this guy that...".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suetonius_on_Christians

The best that can be said is to indicate that someone with a name similar to "Christ" existed.

(shrugs)

I don't really care overmuch to debate whether "Chrestus" existed. I'll even grant that, for the sake of argument Jesus existed at some point. That seems reasonable. I know humans exist.

Show me where Gaius talks about the same kinds of miracles he witnessed, or recorded an account of fantastical events, and that would start getting you the other arm or your assertion. "Jesus existed, AND he was the Son of God that did these miracles". Even then you still have a pretty high hurdle to clear. We can talk to people about their first-hand accounts of being abducted by aliens. Does that mean alien abductions are real?

The evidence supporting the magic in the gospels... is far thinner than you seem to think.

That's only because you are conveniently choosing to ignore the accounts of those who walked with JESUS, citing bias (more like speculation of bias).

Imagine if we could all pick and choose which pieces of evidence were admissible as evidence, simply based on a priori SPECULATION that the sources were lying.

I could bet you $1000 that if some historian from that time period had written "Jesus never existed, he was entirely made up" you would take that to the bank as certifiable fact. The point is you don't want to believe the credibility of the other sources simply because you don't like their narrative. And so you keep moving the goal posts. Oddly enough, such an account while being as plausible as any other doesn't exist - and SEVERAL relating the opposite DO exist. That you don't want to believe them is another matter entirely.

First, you suggested that the Gospel writers had somehow written in JESUS as the fulfillment of prophecy AFTER-the-fact.

I pointed out that said prophecies were thousands of years old... and yet not all of them were common knowledge. It's rather difficult to satisfy the rigor of a fulfilling a plethora of prophecies if you don't know said prophecies even exist. YET JESUS satisfies ALL of them - every last one. If the Gospel writers had erred on the slightest of details then out of omission or mistake JESUS would have missed one or two prophecies. YET HE didn't. He satisfies them ALL.

Furthermore, I explained why this after-the-fact dynamic simply wasn't possible, because commoners simply didn't have access to the central depository of all the writings that contained the prophecies that JESUS would have to fulfill (located only at the temple in Jerusalem) - and more on point because JESUS' followers would have CERTAINLY been denied access to said depository for handy "cross-checking".... you then moved the goal posts.

I don't even know why I bother pointing this out.

[Phenomanul]

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.

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

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.

[Phenomanul]

I've had things happen to me that were "odd" in the sense that there seems to be at least a slight possibility they occurred due to the supernatural. I don't know necessarily if they were or not due to the fact they they weren't and for all intents and purposes can't be tested using the scientific method. It is what it is. What you want to make of it is up to you, what other people want to make of it is up to them.

I take it with a grain of salt tho. It's been my personal experience that when push comes to shove both atheists and religious people have a pretty equal tendency to abandon what they SAY they believe.

Then they go on Internet forums and try and act like that never happened.

I can't find an explanation for the instantaneous drop in temperature in the sanctuary (of at least over 60 °F over a wide space of about 1,000 sqft), nor explanation for the details of what transpired in the separate room where the boy was taken (which I didn't delve into).

It would be denial of the highest order to suggest that none of that took place (to gloss over it as if it didn't occur). I was there. It was real. There were 100s of witnesses that can attest to what transpired that day.

I honestly don't care that they laugh about that. It's their own damn volition to believe or not. What I was berating however, was their insensitivity towards the murder of my friends. They're jerks. They know it, they flaunt it even... they just don't care.

[baseline bum]

I can't find an explanation for the instantaneous drop in temperature in the sanctuary (of at least over 60 °F over a wide space of about 1,000 sqft), nor explanation for the details of what transpired in the separate room where the boy was taken (which I didn't delve into).

It would be denial of the highest order to suggest that none of that took place (to gloss over it as if it didn't occur). I was there. It was real. There were 100s of witnesses that can attest to what transpired that day.

I honestly don't care that they laugh about that. It's their own damn volition to believe or not. What I was berating however, was their insensitivity towards the murder of my friends. They're jerks. They know it, they flaunt it even... they just don't care.

Your friends were witches for causing a 60F drop in temperature tbh

[Phenomanul]

facetious is as facetious does...

[baseline bum]

That tribe was doing the Lord's work, thank God none of your brothers' anchor babies made it across the river.

[CosmicCowboy]

I can't find an explanation for the instantaneous drop in temperature in the sanctuary (of at least over 60 °F over a wide space of about 1,000 sqft), nor explanation for the details of what transpired in the separate room where the boy was taken (which I didn't delve into).

It would be denial of the highest order to suggest that none of that took place (to gloss over it as if it didn't occur). I was there. It was real. There were 100s of witnesses that can attest to what transpired that day.

I honestly don't care that they laugh about that. It's their own damn volition to believe or not. What I was berating however, was their insensitivity towards the murder of my friends. They're jerks. They know it, they flaunt it even... they just don't care.

Uh Huh.

Was this one of those Mexican churches that eat these?

[Phenomanul]

Uh Huh.

Was this one of those Mexican churches that eat these?

LOL I don't do drugs... Mmmmkay...

[mingus]

Ummmm... the bulk of those prophecies were written thousands of years before Christ's birth. The latest of those 400 years before his birth. HOW THE can Jesus' fulfillment of the scriptures be written in after-the-fact?!? Jesus fulfilled all the prophecies from Genesis to Malachi concerning His role and nature... None of the writers of the Gospels could have known about all of them simply because it's not like any one person at the time carried around the "latest edition" of all the scrolls that comprise the Hebrew canon. Other than the Jerusalem temple (which was destroyed in A.D. 70), there was no central depository for the COMPLETE writings of the Hebrew scrolls - much less would they be made available to just anyone for "referencing and cross-checking of facts". Especially not Jesus' followers or the writers of the Gospels.

The fact remains that even the Jewish nation rejected their long awaited Messiah because they were awaiting a military leader and not a spiritual one. They failed to recognize all of the prophecies concerning Jesus because largely the general population was unaware of them. To this day the passages from Isaiah 53 or Psalms 22 are NEVER read aloud at synagogues BECAUSE they clearly reference Jesus Christ. The few Jews that have had a chance to read them can't even believe the writings are legitimately contained in their own canon or believe that somehow Christians must have added them in after the fact (as you smugly suggested). They would want to believe that because the context and references to Jesus' crucifixion are so explicit and detailed that mere coincidence alone can't explain them away. Here's the catch... The Book of Isaiah was written 800 years before Christ!!!

In fact, the oldest of the Dead Sea Scrolls discovered during the original 1947 find, is actually a mostly complete copy of the The Book of Isaiah - it dates to 125-140 BCE cementing/validating the authenticity of the references to Jesus in these scriptures and just as important, that these copies pre-date Jesus' entirely by over a century. But go ahead and gloss over that fact. Fuzzy's narrative/rant was a whole bunch of "they say this --> but logically this makes more sense" - his arguments are entirely speculative and lack the fundamental proof to gain any ground as a true counter-narrative. The established narrative has been attacked for centuries, and yet secular accounts - existing outside of the context of scripture" - also support the historicity of Jesus and many of the events surrounding his ministry/life that are narrated in the Gospels. You don't think people much smarter than Fuzzy have already tried to debunk the Gospel accounts, or have tried to deny Jesus' existence altogether...? They will continue to stand the test of time - and only man's pride refuses to accept what is historically evident...

Bringing up fictional accounts as a counter argument (Neil Patrick Harris' encounter with the Smurfs - on two occasions no less), doesn't make sense in light of THE CONTENT of the gospels. Now THAT, RG is a deluded argument. It's entirely disingenuous to suggest that the reader cannot discern the differences between fiction and prose. The Gospels are not written as fiction. It's clearly a revelation about GOD's nature and His desire for mankind.

John 3:16-22 New International Version (NIV)

16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

Then there's this tidbit. YOU ALL always gripe about the use of scripture to support anything believers say, but then have the audacity to try and tell adherents how to interpret their own writings - because your assumption is that they must be interpreting incorrectly. YOU ALL can't have it both ways. It's rather laughable actually.

Finally, I noticed how in all of your replies you chose to ignore the only question I actually posited for you.

I wonder if RG has seen the videos of 1,000s of Christians (women, children, men, elderly) being brutally beaten and burned alive in Nigeria? Where is his outrage on that front?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on why you chose not to address it. But it's very clear to me that this is simply another run-o-the-mill "let's all bash Christianity" thread - let's "point out how it's adherents are less than perfect" (mind you the faith has never claimed as much). Folks start about 3-5 of these threads per week (mainly boutons_deux) to again bolster their own disbelief. That said, I have no doubt in my mind that no one else responded to my question out of convenience to their continued and deliberate respite towards Christianity, its tenets, its believers and most importantly towards Jesus Himself. Carry on. You all are en led to do as you wish.

Note: I have no idea what that video shows (cause I cannot access it from work).

That's a lot to read, and I'll get to reading it later only under the condition you can provide further support for the stuff you said about Isaiah 53 & Psalms 22. There's really nothing specific other than crufixion part (and wasn't that a relatively death sentence practice anyway?). Everything else is stuff Jesus & Apostles could've read at some point and bull ted that it happened, no? What I'm trying to get at is you make it seem like those prophecies offered some important detail or details that nobody could've manipulated or that if they happened would've been almost inconceivable (ie crusifixion). I just don't see it. Maybe you can help me understand your POV better. If we can't see eye to eye on that I'm not sure there's any value to discussing much else on this on my part.

Another thing, as a Jew the mass generalization concerning Jews is just stupid and as most generalizations are a little offensive. I'm sure you don't like it when others do that to Christians. Aren't you supposed to treat your neighbors as you'd want to be treated? Hypocrite.

[Phenomanul]

That tribe was doing the Lord's work, thank God none of your brothers' anchor babies made it across the river.

I missed this... but just goes to show the ignorance of your over-arching assumptions.

My missionary friends were full-blooded U.S. Citizens, from Minnesota. They had a 2 small children and a teen who were also killed. But go on... keep mocking their deaths.

[baseline bum]

I missed this... but just goes to show the ignorance of your over-arching assumptions.

My missionary friends were full-blooded U.S. Citizens, from Minnesota. They had a 2 small children and a teen who were also killed. But go on... keep mocking their deaths.

They sound more dangerous than ISIS if they can drop the temperature 60F tbh

[Phenomanul]

That's a lot to read, and I'll get to reading it later only under the condition you can provide further support for the stuff you said about Isaiah 53 & Psalms 22. There's really nothing specific other than crufixion part (and wasn't that a relatively death sentence practice anyway?). Everything else is stuff Jesus & Apostles could've read at some point and bull ted that it happened, no? What I'm trying to get at is you make it seem like those prophecies offered some important detail or details that nobody could've manipulated or that if they happened would've been almost inconceivable (ie crusifixion). I just don't see it. Maybe you can help me understand your POV better. If we can't see eye to eye on that I'm not sure there's any value to discussing much else on this on my part.

Another thing, as a Jew the mass generalization concerning Jews is just stupid and as most generalizations are a little offensive. I'm sure you don't like it when others do that to Christians. Aren't you supposed to treat your neighbors as you'd want to be treated? Hypocrite.

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 fic ious, 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.

[Phenomanul]

They sound more dangerous than ISIS if they can drop the temperature 60F tbh

Only your cold heart is more astounding.

[baseline bum]

Only your cold heart is more astounding.

You would want such powerful witches back in our country?

[Phenomanul]

ENOUGH.

Go spit on someone else's graves. They don't deserve your mockery.

[baseline bum]

ENOUGH.

Go spit on someone else's graves. They don't deserve your mockery.

Sure they do, they're witches.

[baseline bum]

ENOUGH.

Go spit on someone else's graves. They don't deserve your mockery.

Hey, did their ghosts visit yesterday? If so, can you please thank them? I was getting sick of this 80 degree bull in December.

[Th'Pusher]

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.

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

[Phenomanul]

Sure they do, they're witches.

BTW baseline bum your respite and hatred is against JESUS himself - not me.

John 8:42-45

42 Jesus told them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, because I have come to you from God. I am not here on my own, but He sent me. 43 Why can't you understand what I am saying? It's because you can't even hear me! 44 For you are the children of your father the devil, and you love to do the evil things he does. He was a murderer from the beginning. He has always hated the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, it is consistent with his character; for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me.

Whatever... do as you wish.

John 7:7

7 The world cannot hate you, but it hates me [Jesus] because I testify about it that its works are evil.

[mingus]

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 fic ious, 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.

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 sensibili ies & 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.

[baseline bum]

BTW baseline bum your respite and hatred is against JESUS himself - not me.

John 8:42-45

42 Jesus told them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, because I have come to you from God. I am not here on my own, but He sent me. 43 Why can't you understand what I am saying? It's because you can't even hear me! 44 For you are the children of your father the devil, and you love to do the evil things he does. He was a murderer from the beginning. He has always hated the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, it is consistent with his character; for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me.

Whatever... do as you wish.

John 7:7

7 The world cannot hate you, but it hates me [Jesus] because I testify about it that its works are evil.

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