Shoe: >The remarkable thing is that there is a core that is >agreed upon by the vast majority of those who believe >that the Bible literally from God. Just cause you keep saying it doesn't make it true. You are getting ready to go down in flames. No time right now or you would be a burnin' JB PS: Of course Shoe will simply say that the "way to salvation" over which there is MASSIVE disagreement is not a "core" issue. ROFLAO!!!!!!!!!!!!! (I know he will...I've been down this road with him before)
It seems to me that what is needed is a clearer and more precise definition of the terms being used at the beginning of the debate. Sometimes it seems we are saying the same thing but using different terms. Might save a lot of time and frustration.
I think I remember now: you brought up the Mormons previously. Obviously I don't count non-evangelical cults (which are a small 5 of the Bible-believing population) that use extra-biblical material. You can also leave out Jehovah Witnesses, etc.
Jem: >Records being one of the frequent >exceptions to the hearsay objection. OMG! Axe, if you don't nail him on the irrelevance of the above statement I WILL! >Leave the law to lawyers. I will leave it to the GOOD ones, but not ones that misrepresent rules such as the above. JB
aren't there 10 times as many catholics as all the evangelicals combined? what about the major protestant denominations (lutheran, church of england, etc), do they count as evangelicals? as an outsider to c'ianity it seems to me that (a) bob jones etc is a prototypical example of evangelical c'ianity and (b) bob jones is decidely in the minority. is my perception incorrect?
OOooooh its coming Dont you love lawyers who think they can pull the wool over yours eyes? Yeah.... I think ill leave the law to GOOD lawyers too peace axeman
ok, need to back up a little. virtually every significant belief system on the planet has at its core a small set of tenets that are nearly universal. the golden rule being a prime example. so i agree it is possible for consensus on some core issues across a very very broad spectrum of humanity, c'ian and otherwise. but how to get from being the selfish little prigs we tend to be to a society where people actually live the golden rule - on that there is precious little consensus. some favor the "ban all temptation" approach, others go the mystical/charismatic route, still others are (ahem) materialists in approach. i'm curious, how is that compatible with sola scriptura?
JEM: May be name calling but it is true because you put up misrepresenations and distortions. Two can play at that game. YOUR AN IDIOT. May be name calling but its true Drop the childish bullshit Jem, I expect this from longshot, but not from you. JEM: Burden of Proof -- you made the argument that there is no record of Jesus. I point out that if you put together every record of anything 2000 years old it adds up to a small bookshelf, and you say the burden is on me. That is a great juvenile response. But, why not admit your argument was misleading and lacking in foundation. Clearly you are confused. The burden of proof *IS* on me when it comes to there being no contemporary record of jesus, that is true. But that is NOT what I was referring to when I claimed the burden of proof was on you. You provided the exceptionally LAME excuse that there is no evidence simply because its been 2000 years. We have evidence for other OLDER figures than this, DUH. Aristotle anyone? Now THIS is a NEW ASSERTION on your part and the one which I was referring to. You imply this is a valid excuse when it clearly is not. I might as well claim I have 100% proof for the lochness monster because there are close up high resolution photos! Oh but guess what? The photos were taken 20 years ago and so much time has passed that they were lost. Riiiiighhht.... yeah that works! NOT! Now try producing a REAL rebuttal ok? Crying about lost documents cannot make a case. You must actually produce them. If you cant...tough, thats YOUR problem. I would love to see you walk into court and tell a judge that your evidence is MISSING because too much time as passed! LOL JEM:A proper argument would point out that we have x number of pages of records that are 2000 years old and that only Josepheus and a few others reference christ or christians. I have seen christians argue the other side of this point. The fact is your argument sucked. LOL. Another lame assertion. My much stronger argument is that Josephus was CLEARLY TAMPERED WITH, and secondly ***HE IS NOT A CONTEMPORARY HISTORIAN***. His tiny little jesus quote is MERE HEARSAY. You continue to GLOSS OVER this fact because you know the argument is rock solid and you are standing on no ground. Further.... for someone so WIDELY known, isnt it funny that ONLY Jesus's records were lost when we know so much about the Romans of the time??? Give me a break! JEM:Some, not all of the passages are in question. Not the whole record All legitmate academics agree with this assesment. The only ones you point to were wackos with books written to sell to atheists. Wackos on the internet with wacko books are not worth consideration. Oooooh of course!!! Anyone YOU quote is an expert. Anyone I quote is a whacko! LMAOOOOO your getting pathetic here JEM! Your desperation is showing!! In case you didnt notice, I QUOTED BIBLICAL SCHOLARS who are THEISTS which claim Josephus is TAINTED. Your claim that "All legitmate academics agree" ALL Jem? ALL? You KNOW this is blatantly false. JEM:As you are undereducated in this matter I should inform you that hearsay is allowed in trials all the time. Leave the law to lawyers. Records being one of the frequent exceptions to the hearsay objection. Ummmm Jem.... my close friend is also an attorney so I checked with him and google. He says you are full of it In general hearsay evidence is inadmissible *unless* it falls within a common law or statutory exception. Since you mentioned "Records" as one of these exceptions the law states that: To be admissable, hearsay records must follow the 'best evidence' rule by being recorded in the normal course of doing business AND AT THE TIME BUSINESS WAS CONDUCTED Josephus recorded a hearsay rumour 35 years AFTER THE FACT and NOT during the course of a public/business style recording. So sorry.... BZZZZZZZZT. Its NOT admissable by law. Didnt think I would check Jem? Come on dude. You should know better than that. Stop trying to play the attorney card. I have the attorney resources and you are NOT going to slip one by me like that. AXE:Try providing ONE CONTEMPORARY HISTORIAN who mentions jesus, the man god who was supposedly WIDELY known. Full of holes JEM. The weakest most unsupported argument ive ever heard you make. Very disappointing for an attorney. I hope your not a trail lawyer, would feel sorry for anyone you were defending I see you failed to address this. Because you cant. Come on JEM... give us ONE CONTEMPORARY historian. JUST ONE, LOL! JEM:You pick, you choose, you distort. You value to legitimate debate is useless. You are probably a fine person just a useless person to engage in discussion with. More Ad Hominems form a desperate opponent who has been sliced to pieces in this debate. LOL Your frustration and emotions give you away Jem. Your entire position rests on a tiny, out of context phrase, with a high probability of forgery, from a NON-contemporary historian, consisting of 35 year old HEARSAY which is NOT admissable in a court of LAW!!! I think than sums it up nicely! Need I say more? Dont think so.... but what the hell... I enjoy slamming coffin nails until they are paper thin Isnt it INTERESTING that you didnt address the fact that the FORGED Josephus quote did NOT appear in earlier copies of Josephus?!?!?! LOL! Dude... give it up. Its too easy chopping your weak argument to pieces. Because its impossible to support with so much riding against you. peace axeman
This summary cracks me up so much I have to re-post Your entire position rests on a tiny, out of context phrase, with a high probability of forgery, from a NON-contemporary historian, consisting of 35 year old HEARSAY which is NOT admissable in a court of LAW!!! peace axeman