Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

To all white Christians and Jews


  • Please log in to reply
142 replies to this topic

#31 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,185 posts

Posted 03 March 2013 - 05:09 PM

So your point is that... yhwh is white?


I think mine was a question.

#32 PhillyB

PhillyB

    hug it chug it football

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,743 posts
  • LocationGreensboro

Posted 03 March 2013 - 05:16 PM

First of all there is no reason to think that Jesus even existed in the first place.


it's difficult to find scholars who believe jesus never existed. his historicity is constantly challenged but very rarely his existence

#33 lightsout

lightsout

    Doin' stuff...thaaaangs

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,616 posts

Posted 03 March 2013 - 05:46 PM

it's difficult to find scholars who believe jesus never existed. his historicity is constantly challenged but very rarely his existence



That's because most concede that it's completely possible that a man named Jesus (or a man that Jesus of the bible is based on) existed. Sure, I can concede that Jesus existed. However, the stories in the bible require evidence. They make claims that absolutely require it.


There is no contemporary record of the existence of Jesus. Nothing outside of the Bible that points to it. No accounts, no birth/death record, nothing. No writings from him. Nothing. But, it's sort of silly to try to argue that he didn't exist. His existence doesn't validate the bible's claims. That's why scholars don't really care about his existence as much as support for the claims made about him.

#34 carpantherfan84

carpantherfan84

    Abductive Reasoner

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,578 posts

Posted 03 March 2013 - 07:41 PM

I really didn't want this to devolve into a debate about the existence of Jesus or the validaty of the Judeo-Christian faith. If you dont believe you can not answer the question posed in the OP. So what do you really have to contribute? This is to no one in particular just trying to stem the tide.

#35 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,185 posts

Posted 03 March 2013 - 07:58 PM

it's difficult to find scholars who believe jesus never existed. his historicity is constantly challenged but very rarely his existence


Ever listened to RC Sproul's Apologetics series on Youtube? Pretty interesting. Pretty detailed and lengthy howeveer.

#36 PhillyB

PhillyB

    hug it chug it football

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,743 posts
  • LocationGreensboro

Posted 03 March 2013 - 08:02 PM

Ever listened to RC Sproul's Apologetics series on Youtube? Pretty interesting. Pretty detailed and lengthy howeveer.


no, though i am familiar with sproul. i've spent vast amounts of time studying apologetics... does he depart from the standard set by guys like strobel/mcdowell/kreeft in any way? what does he offer that's new?

#37 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,185 posts

Posted 03 March 2013 - 08:02 PM

I really didn't want this to devolve into a debate about the existence of Jesus or the validaty of the Judeo-Christian faith. If you dont believe you can not answer the question posed in the OP. So what do you really have to contribute? This is to no one in particular just trying to stem the tide.


I dont think folks had any certain direction in the beginning of where you were headed, not sure it that still is not the case.

I am not sure that true belief or disbelief in a god could be turned on or off based on skin color. If it could, then I am certain it would be little more than a shallow excercise and unsustainable.

#38 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,185 posts

Posted 03 March 2013 - 08:06 PM

no, though i am familiar with sproul. i've spent vast amounts of time studying apologetics... does he depart from the standard set by guys like strobel/mcdowell/kreeft in any way? what does he offer that's new?


Very lengthy and totally against any sort of blind faith. Series is long. Epistomology discussions are where is starts to get interesting. Best thing is that each section is between 20-25 mins, so it can be "eaten" a bit at a time.

He was a professor at temple and had his students study the leading atheists. Pretty different from mainstream, blind faith guys who think it taboo to even entertain alternate thought.

#39 PhillyB

PhillyB

    hug it chug it football

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,743 posts
  • LocationGreensboro

Posted 03 March 2013 - 08:09 PM

all of apologetics argues against blind faith by arguing manifest teleology as a knowable basis from which a causal entity may be derived. i know of no apologeticist that takes any other angle.

what does he say about epistemology?

#40 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,389 posts

Posted 03 March 2013 - 10:13 PM

it's difficult to find scholars who believe jesus never existed. his historicity is constantly challenged but very rarely his existence

Easier to find them than a witness account of Jesus from before a century after he died.

#41 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,237 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 03 March 2013 - 10:22 PM

what if the lack of some lock solid evidence is there simply for it having to be by faith?

if everything was 100% open and shut, what would be the point in faith in God? many times the riddles in our lives aren"t a nice and neat ending like a Michael Bay movie.

#42 PhillyB

PhillyB

    hug it chug it football

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,743 posts
  • LocationGreensboro

Posted 03 March 2013 - 10:46 PM

what if the lack of some lock solid evidence is there simply for it having to be by faith?

if everything was 100% open and shut, what would be the point in faith in God? many times the riddles in our lives aren"t a nice and neat ending like a Michael Bay movie.


i can't help but think this is theology adapting to concrete conditions rather than conditions resulting from that original truth

i think that makes sense

#43 PhillyB

PhillyB

    hug it chug it football

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,743 posts
  • LocationGreensboro

Posted 03 March 2013 - 10:49 PM

Easier to find them than a witness account of Jesus from before a century after he died.


maleable historicity aside, do you believe jesus existed as a historical figure?

#44 Floppin

Floppin

    Smooches

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,485 posts
  • LocationShallotte, NC

Posted 03 March 2013 - 11:44 PM

I really didn't want this to devolve into a debate about the existence of Jesus or the validaty of the Judeo-Christian faith. If you dont believe you can not answer the question posed in the OP. So what do you really have to contribute? This is to no one in particular just trying to stem the tide.


Yeah guys seriously - can we get back on my track with my race baiting now please?!?!

#45 Proudiddy

Proudiddy

    The Thread Killer (Since 2004)

  • Moderators
  • 14,672 posts

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:42 AM

I like how it is always acceptable for people to get douchey and mock people's religious beliefs and use derogatory language towards religious types on here, but anything outside of religion (women, gays, etc.) makes you a bigot.

You can talk all day and show how well-versed you are in "history," of which accounts were also written by men, but how do you fill in the gaps? When science has yet to explain something, what is your answer? Coincidence? LOL.

To haphazardly assume that you have all the answers of this universe with your insignificant brain within the vast scope of it is purely ignorance at its finest.

And yet, what is even more ignorant is to speak in scientific terms about something that is supernatural. Evidence, "blind faith," historical records, or whatever else... If you have not experienced something that is supernatural, how can you accurately speak on such? You are talking out of place and from an ill informed perspective. When one has experienced something that is supernatural and know that it is God, and then is able to link that supernatural experience with something that is "known" in historical or scientific accounts, how can you try to explain away what they know, when you haven't had the same experience?

This isn't to any one person in particular, just in general.
/rant

Now hit me with another anti-religious joke! Man, they're such knee slappers! Huckhuckhuck11!!1


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.