Should Billy Graham's legacy be rescued?

Should Billy Graham's legacy be rescued?

There are 1638 comments on the Q-Notes story from Feb 13, 2013, titled Should Billy Graham's legacy be rescued?. In it, Q-Notes reports that:

President Barack Obama with Rev. Billy Graham at his house in Montreat, N.C., April 25, 2010.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Q-Notes.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#977 Apr 23, 2013
Really Now wrote:
He was a hell of a wrestler....the Super Star...Billly Graham
He was a con man, and nothing BUT a con man.

He stole from the poor-- over and over too.

That's how he got so .... rich.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#978 Apr 23, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>so you post something with no link, no credit.
Interesting. This link:

" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dating_th... ;

pretty much puts these things from roughly 300BCE to as late as 233CE.

That's quite a range-- the most narrow is still MUCH WIDER than your LIE where you said-- DEFINITIVELY-- it was prior to what was it? 400BCE or so..?

My how you like to LIE.

In any case? The contents of the DSS do not confirm the divinity of your Jewsus.

At all...

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#979 Apr 23, 2013
Again how did they do any such thing dolt? How?

Actually what they show is that the people of the time used holy (bible) books that are rejected today.. You know man editing what he wants to go into the so called word of god collection!

Lmfao!
barry wrote:
<quoted text>again gml no one said that there were any NT writings contained in them. what was said was that they confirmed Nt writings, teachings and doctrines. Phrases and doctrines that your friends claimed were invented as late as the second century can be found in the DSS.
again you are either deliberately trying to shift the conversation or you have a comprehension problem.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#980 Apr 23, 2013
Again these are common phrases that NT writers stole from previous sources.

Glad you agree.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>no, these things are not found in the OT.

the DSS contain these concepts.
when talking about the coming Messiah, they refer to him as the "Son of God" and the "son of the Most High" he will "judge the earth in righteousness" they talk of a "new covenant" they use the term "Holy Spirit". all phrases that are new to the NT.

this hymn: "But Thou, O my God, hast put into my mouth
as it were rain for all those who thirst
and a fount of living waters which shall not fail.
When they are opened they shall not run dry" (1QH8; Hymn 14) parallels the Words of Christ in John chapter 4 and chapter 7.

the teaching that one was to hate their enemies which Jesus condemned is found not in the OT but in the DSS.

the term "sons of light" is found in the DSS so is the phrase "the wealth of unrighteousness"

http://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/openhse/deadse ...

this phrase in Luke 7 and Mathew 11; " the dead are raised up, the poor have the glad tiding preached to them" is not found in the OT but is found in the DSS

http://religiousstudies.uncc.edu/people/jtabo ...

"For he will heal the wounded, resurrect the dead,
and proclaim glad tiding to the poor."

and the list could go on.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#982 Apr 23, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>the mind set is that the idea that gentiles were dogs is not taught in the Bible. it is a tradition of men developed and taught during the time of the DSS. so while you try to deflect in an effort to bring some validity to your comment, you can not show that any where does Christ or the Bible teach that gentiles are dogs.
and yes you and bob seem to have the same challenges when it comes to comprehending the simple things of this conversation.
Mind set? There is not even a hint that he was saying what others were thinking. It was Jewsus's words Doofus, it is his words. But then I can assume that is one of the bible parts you idiots ignore? Or do you believe that your Rabbi was a puppet for another's "mind set"?

Who was the ventriloquist whose hand was up his back side, directing his words?
barry

Rainsville, AL

#983 Apr 24, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not my place to correct your educational lack.
The links in the Wiki ALL point to Liars For Jewus websites, rendering the wiki entry invalid.
There was not ONE scientific link in the whole bunch.
Obviously, Liars For Jewsus keep editing the Dead Sea shyt article to suit their fantasy-delusions.
so once again, you have no link outside of the one that is missing in your own mind.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#984 Apr 24, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO!
Your links are DEAD----
-- just like your PROOF.
Entirely... MISSING!
LMAO!
www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/openhs e/deadsea.html
religiousstudies.uncc.edu/people/jtabo
barry

Rainsville, AL

#985 Apr 24, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO!
Your links are DEAD----
-- just like your PROOF.
Entirely... MISSING!
LMAO!
apparently topix is not allowing the connection.

google this phrase and it will come up

"But Thou, O my God, hast put into my mouth"
http://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/openhse/deadse...
barry

Rainsville, AL

#986 Apr 24, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO!
Your links are DEAD----
-- just like your PROOF.
Entirely... MISSING!
LMAO!
apparently the connection does not work from topix.

google this phrase and it will come up;

"proclaim glad tiding to the poor"
religiousstudies.uncc.edu/people/jtabor/4q521...
barry

Rainsville, AL

#987 Apr 24, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Interesting. This link:
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dating_th... ;
pretty much puts these things from roughly 300BCE to as late as 233CE.
That's quite a range-- the most narrow is still MUCH WIDER than your LIE where you said-- DEFINITIVELY-- it was prior to what was it? 400BCE or so..?
My how you like to LIE.
In any case? The contents of the DSS do not confirm the divinity of your Jewsus.
At all...
funny, i remember you saying this a few posts back;
"Wiki is hardly definitive"
yet your source is wiki.

so i am wondering who is the hypocrite?

now you also know or perhaps you really didn't comprehend it that i never claimed a date of 400 bce. what i posted was much shorter. but then facts are not really important to you.

now if we look at your wiki link we find a table of 14c results from Zurich (Z), Tucson (T) and Libby (L, amazingly only one manuscript (Wadi-Daliyeh deed) fits your date description and it didn't even come from the caves.

"The Great Isaiah Scroll 1QIsaa has been tested three times, once by Libby, once at Zurich and once at Tucson. The results from the latter two were almost identical, which is a good indicator of the basic accuracy of this dating method. 1QS (#15), tested at Zurich, and 4QSamc (#8), tested at Tucson, provide overlapping date ranges, which is to be expected when both texts are attributed to the same scribe.[7] When 4Q258 (#24) was tested at Tucson its result was so anomalous (129-255 or 303-318 CE) that the laboratory was asked to retest another sample from the same document. The second test (#21) yielded a result (50 BCE-130 CE) that was deemed more satisfactory."

so perhaps you might try to find something that agrees with you because i will read your sites.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#988 Apr 24, 2013
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>Mind set? There is not even a hint that he was saying what others were thinking. It was Jewsus's words Doofus, it is his words. But then I can assume that is one of the bible parts you idiots ignore? Or do you believe that your Rabbi was a puppet for another's "mind set"?
Who was the ventriloquist whose hand was up his back side, directing his words?
so show me where he called her a dog? use his words. the mind set is documented in the dss.

"Doofus", real classy.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#989 Apr 24, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Again how did they do any such thing dolt? How?
Actually what they show is that the people of the time used holy (bible) books that are rejected today.. You know man editing what he wants to go into the so called word of god collection!
Lmfao!
<quoted text>
so then you agree that the concepts of Christianity existed long before they were supposedly invented in the second century as your friends claim?
barry

Rainsville, AL

#990 Apr 24, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Not UP to me to prove your stupid and wild claims. You are trying to shift the burden of PROOF-- all I have to do? To prove your "evidence" false? Is point to a VALID CRITICISM. Which I did.
Here-- let's go over that one more time:
YOU CLAIMED THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS HAD PROOF OF NEW TESTAMENT.
It is up to YOU to back that claim-- with REAL sources, not Liars For Jewsus ones.
If you have a link to a REAL university? Say... Harvard? Yale? No?
We thought as much.
was it harvard that gave us barack obama?

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#991 Apr 24, 2013
I skimmed to the last three paragraphs and just about pissed myself laughing.

Wow could you find a more pie in the sky apologetic nonsense? Sheesh I can't believe you wasted your time posting that m.

Smh
barry wrote:

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#992 Apr 24, 2013
Is that what I said? I suggest you read my post again about a dozen times out load before answering so you don't make an even bigger braying jackass out of yourself.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>so then you agree that the concepts of Christianity existed long before they were supposedly invented in the second century as your friends claim?

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#993 Apr 24, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>so once again, you have no link outside of the one that is missing in your own mind.
YOUR claim. YOUR responsibility to back your idiotic claim that the Dead Sea Scrolls "proves" the New Testament.

They don't.

Nothing you linked to says otherwise.

You have NOTHING to back your lie.

As per your usual, you attempt to shift the blame.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#994 Apr 24, 2013
barry wrote:
Dea link.

Likely a Lying For Jewsus website too-- rejected automatically as FRAUD.

Just like you: fraud.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#995 Apr 24, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>apparently topix is not allowing the connection.
Likely because it's fraud and not real-- it is how you roll.
barry wrote:
google this phrase and it will come up
"But Thou, O my God, hast put into my mouth"
http://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/openhse/deadse...
No. Not up to ME to prove your lies.

It is up to YOU to prove you are NOT lying.

And Lying For Jewsus websites do not count in any case.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#996 Apr 24, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>apparently the connection does not work from topix.
Because you are lying? Making sh7t up, as per your habit?
barry wrote:
google this phrase and it will come up;
"proclaim glad tiding to the poor"
religiousstudies.uncc.edu/people/jtabor/4q521...
That proves zip, ziltch, nothing.

Unless the Dead Sea crap has THE SAME BOOKS as your New Testament?

It does NOT prove your NT.

A very common word or phrase is not good enough.

We already KNOW the NT is 100% copied from other legends.

That would prove this, and nothing more.

Which won't help YOUR argument at all...

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#997 Apr 24, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>funny, i remember you saying this a few posts back;
"Wiki is hardly definitive"
yet your source is wiki.
I sourced it because YOU DID FIRST-- and I was SHOWING HOW YOU LIED BY OMMISSION.

You do that-- you lie, by leaving OUT critical information in order to make your point SEEM reasonable.

You god-robots are like that: you lie in so MANY ways.

You lie outright
You lie by telling partial truth--leaving out the part that refutes you completely
You lie by misquoting people, re-arranging their words so that they APPEAR to support your lies.

Just as YOU did with your Wiki post:

YOU LIED and said Wiki puts the DDS at 400BC or so.

So I decided I had better go look myself-- you LIED, by leaving out the wide range of dates-- and the fact that they are all over the place, too!

Your post was a flat lie.

It's how you roll.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Wedding Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The Christian owners of a bakery found to have ... 5 min Ex Senator Santpo... 29
News Ireland same-sex marriage 18 min Josh 367
News Republic of Ireland votes for equal marriage 1 hr truthandcommonsense 158
News Why I'll be voting 'No' to same-sex marriage, e... 2 hr Wondering 2,555
News Mormon church backs Utah LGBT anti-discriminati... 3 hr Dana Robertson 3,831
News How to Witness to a Jehovah's Witness Ray Comfo... (Nov '14) 6 hr little lamb 1,339
News Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 7 hr Brian_G 51,761
More from around the web