Should Billy Graham's legacy be rescued?

Feb 13, 2013 Full story: Q-Notes 1,638

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

Full Story

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#1386 May 15, 2013
Thinking wrote:
My point is you're too cu*ting thick to spell "altar" properly.
<quoted text>
On the previous page alone ... some real doozies. "Angle, alter, etches, tf and he'e". Add to those, the failure to begin sentences with a capitalized word, no capitalizing names, improper spacing and punctuation in far too many posts. It makes me sad to even witness it.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1387 May 15, 2013
Obtuse?:))
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>Valid point, you have there. What do you think god's angle was?
Thinking

London, UK

#1388 May 16, 2013
Whilst I deliberately do not capitalise god, jesus, christian, mohammed, allah, etc, but I find the careless writing nature of many fundies to be evidence of a larger problem.
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>On the previous page alone ... some real doozies. "Angle, alter, etches, tf and he'e". Add to those, the failure to begin sentences with a capitalized word, no capitalizing names, improper spacing and punctuation in far too many posts. It makes me sad to even witness it.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1389 May 16, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
http://www.truthbeknown.com/jo sephus.htm
Sorry it was Eusebius.
<quoted text>
it happens. as we get older the years kind of seem to blend together. what's a few hundred years anyway?

now seriously. there are no existing older copies that do not contain the Tf in one form or another. and there are no copies today that do not contain the TF. at least as far as i can find.
however there was recently a syriac copy found that contained a more neutral version of the TF. so now there is the thought that perhaps the TF was written by josephus and then altered later by a Christian scribe. whether the alteration was deliberate or just a cultural bias that influenced the translations who really knows?
the point is we don't have any evidence that the TF was not in some way written by josephus.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1390 May 16, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
It is amazing how thorough your early Genuine Christian Liars™ were, when it came to protecting their myths.
In fact? They would frequently put people to the torch, in order to protect their myths ... all too frequently it seems.
Sickening.
But typical of a hate-cult.
non of our people put anyone to the torch. attack the catholics and their protestrant children all you want but they are not my spiritual forefathers.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1391 May 16, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
A better question to ask, is HOW do scholars KNOW it's forgeries?
Easy: the word usage in the "jesus" bits.
In ALL the rest of Josephus' works, he uses a specific vocabulary, that agrees with the time he was alive.
The exception, is the "jesus" part-- which uses >>different<< vocabulary-- in fact? The vocabulary is much newer than when Josephus was alive.
So.
Unless Josephus has a Time Machine, and looked forward in time, and carefully selected future-vocabulary for ONLY that ONE section about Jesus?
Or?
Someone from a time LATER than when Josephus lived, added that bit, using their own contemporary vocabulary...
Which is it?
A Time Machine?
Or some, later Editor?
you're parroting someone else's opinion. you accept by faith that they know what they are talking about. others can show it differently. the syriac copy in no way fits or supports your argument.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1392 May 16, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
A better question to ask, is HOW do scholars KNOW it's forgeries?
Easy: the word usage in the "jesus" bits.
In ALL the rest of Josephus' works, he uses a specific vocabulary, that agrees with the time he was alive.
The exception, is the "jesus" part-- which uses >>different<< vocabulary-- in fact? The vocabulary is much newer than when Josephus was alive.
So.
Unless Josephus has a Time Machine, and looked forward in time, and carefully selected future-vocabulary for ONLY that ONE section about Jesus?
Or?
Someone from a time LATER than when Josephus lived, added that bit, using their own contemporary vocabulary...
Which is it?
A Time Machine?
Or some, later Editor?
there are a few passages in the Bible that are challenged as being authentic or as being added later. the reason that the challenges exist is because there are manuscripts that do not contain them while others do. so the question can be were they added or edited out of those manuscripts.
either way we know that something happened to them. in the case of the josephus TF question there are no existing manuscripts that do not contain the Tf in one form or another. in fact there are other references in the works of josephus that refer to james the brother of Jesus [book 20] and another that refers to john the baptist being put to death by herod [book 18]. these references are strangly ignored when the argument of language come sup. not many people doubt that josephus wrote these.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1393 May 16, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
What?
Are you saying that it IS JUST to let DESCENDENTS suffer for actions THEY HAD NO PART OF?
Wow....!
You >>ARE<< saying that!
This is why YOUR god is LESS JUST than modern humans!
We think that making DESCENDANTS suffer from the "sins" of their ancestors....
.... is ...
..... wrong.
Your god is a failure.
no, i'm saying that you made a claim, now prove that it says what you claim it says.

I asked you to do this one simple thing: "now show where the Bible says that no one should suffer for the sins of their ancestors [fathers]"

however you now seem to be mocking the reality of life. if you are a drunk and spend all your money on booze then your children will suffer. if you rob a bank and go to jail then your children will suffer. if you are a lair and a cheat, your children will suffer. if you are lazy and don't work then your children will suffer. and your children's children will suffer also.

now the Bible talks about this so i guess in your mind it can't be true. however we all know that it is a reality of life.
the children do suffer for and from the sins of their ancestors whether you believe in God or not.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1394 May 16, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
<laughing out loud here>
You are sounding quite ... desperate....!!!
<still laughing>
I do not care, doofus! You are welcome to your delusions.
i noticed that there was an absence of any links...
barry wrote:
<quoted text>we all know the quotes in question concerning Jesus. however why don't you show us or link for us the quotes in question concerning hercules and zeus? i'll bet we find a different picture than what you are trying to illustrate.

keep on laughing. it's all you have.
Patriot

Antioch, TN

#1395 May 16, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Your analogy fails.
Jesus was, according to you-- a GOD.
He either is a god, or he's a fake.
If he's a god? He has unlimited power--right there on the label.
If his power is limited?
He's not a god.
QED.
Fail.
The Word(which was not known as Jesus until he came to earth)WAS God and was With God from the beginning, but had an "identity" of his own. John 1:1-3 , John 10:30 "I and my Father are one"
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1396 May 16, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
You are: you cherry-pick EVERY TIME YOU POST.
Here's proof:
Have you stoned your neighbor for working on a Saturday (Sabbath) as commanded in the bible? Or do you CHERRY-PICK to IGNORE that command?
Have you stoned your back-talking children, as commanded by the bible? Or do you CHERRY-PICK to IGNORE that command?
Have you sold ALL that you own, and given it to the poor, and gone to live in a synagog, as COMMANDED by your Jesus?
Or do you CHERRY-PICK to IGNORE that command?
I bet you cherry-pick-- it's what ALL you hypocrites (christians) do.
here's proof? who did God give that law to? it certain ly wasn't me i am not jewish. nor is my neighbor jewish.

Nehemiah 10:31
And if the people of the land bring ware or any victuals on the sabbath day to sell, that we would not buy it of them on the sabbath, or on the holy day:

Nehemiah 13
16 There dwelt men of Tyre also therein, which brought fish, and all manner of ware, and sold on the sabbath unto the children of Judah, and in Jerusalem.
17 Then I contended with the nobles of Judah, and said unto them, What evil thing is this that ye do, and profane the sabbath day?
18 Did not your fathers thus, and did not our God bring all this evil upon us, and upon this city? yet ye bring more wrath upon Israel by profaning the sabbath.

the condemnation only pertained to the Jews. not the gentiles who worked or sought to sell to the Jews.

barry

Rainsville, AL

#1397 May 16, 2013
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>Valid point, you have there. What do you think god's angle was?
his angle as some one pointed out was to use the word angel.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1398 May 16, 2013
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>On the previous page alone ... some real doozies. "Angle, alter, etches, tf and he'e". Add to those, the failure to begin sentences with a capitalized word, no capitalizing names, improper spacing and punctuation in far too many posts. It makes me sad to even witness it.
wow, you must have a degree in english. if you do then you know that the rules that governed english in your parent's day are not the same rules that we go by today. if you are bi-lingual then you know that punctuation and capitalization rules are not universal.
and since i am surrounded by people with advanced degrees in languages it is my statement of rebellion that i choose to not capitalize unless the word demands some respect such as God or America.
now i never really was a good speller. so, if my computer does't put that squiggly red line under the word i may miss the error.
that being said not all those errors are mine so i'm glad that you are an equal opportunity grammar police.
the "tf" however refers to the "Testimonium Flavianum". sometimes i capitalize it, most of the time not. anyone reading in the context of the conversation would know what it meant.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1399 May 16, 2013
I see you didn't read the link as expected. Actually origin also verifies my position.

Jesus does not appear in older versions of his work, it is an obvious Christian forgery.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>it happens. as we get older the years kind of seem to blend together. what's a few hundred years anyway?
.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1400 May 16, 2013
First you'll have to demonstrate god actually exists before you can assign attributes and deeds to him.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>here's proof? who did God give that law to? it certain ly wasn't me i am not jewish. nor is my neighbor jewish.

Nehemiah 10:31
And if the people of the land bring ware or any victuals on the sabbath day to sell, that we would not buy it of them on the sabbath, or on the holy day:

Nehemiah 13
16 There dwelt men of Tyre also therein, which brought fish, and all manner of ware, and sold on the sabbath unto the children of Judah, and in Jerusalem.
17 Then I contended with the nobles of Judah, and said unto them, What evil thing is this that ye do, and profane the sabbath day?
18 Did not your fathers thus, and did not our God bring all this evil upon us, and upon this city? yet ye bring more wrath upon Israel by profaning the sabbath.

the condemnation only pertained to the Jews. not the gentiles who worked or sought to sell to the Jews.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1401 May 16, 2013
Lmfao! Wow you ignorant c@cks@ckers make me laugh so hard!

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha !
barry wrote:
<quoted text>his angle as some one pointed out was to use the word angel.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1402 May 16, 2013
By a few you must mean hundreds in the NT alone.

Now throw in the NT books that were done later and are complete forgeries and that number skyrockets.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>there are a few passages in the Bible that are challenged as being authentic or as being added later. the reason that the challenges exist is because there are manuscripts that do not contain them while others do. so the question can be were they added or edited out of those manuscripts.
either way we know that something happened to them. in the case of the josephus TF question there are no existing manuscripts that do not contain the Tf in one form or another. in fact there are other references in the works of josephus that refer to james the brother of Jesus [book 20] and another that refers to john the baptist being put to death by herod [book 18]. these references are strangly ignored when the argument of language come sup. not many people doubt that josephus wrote these.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1403 May 16, 2013
Non? Wasn't that the villain in superman 2?

Jephthah made his daughter into a burnt offering but perhaps he used something else to ignite her?
barry wrote:
<quoted text>non of our people put anyone to the torch. attack the catholics and their protestrant children all you want but they are not my spiritual forefathers.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1404 May 16, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
I see you didn't read the link as expected. Actually origin also verifies my position.
Jesus does not appear in older versions of his work, it is an obvious Christian forgery.
<quoted text>
nio, i like "archaya" she is a fun read although not very up to date on her thinking. so yes i read it. i've read it in the past and i'm sure i'll read her stuff again.

origen does not verify your position as;
#1 he states what we all knew anyway that josephus was not a Christian.
#2 he never quotes or refers to anything from the book that contains the TF so perhaps it is evidence that he did not have that book available to him.
and #3 he does refer to the reference of "james the brother of Jesus" so yes, he does refer to Jesus. in fact he disagrees with josephus's opinion.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1405 May 16, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
First you'll have to demonstrate god actually exists before you can assign attributes and deeds to him.
<quoted text>
fine, you and i were not having this discussion. bob was the one who tried to drag the sabbath into the conversation by accusing me of not following the Law.
you at least are consistent.

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
Evangelicals with gay children challenging church 56 min Cujo 17
Same-sex marriage could increase Minnesota's an... 1 hr Liberal Lover 6
How to Witness to a Jehovah's Witness Ray Comfo... 3 hr Tutor 73
Our recommendation: Springboro voters should sa... (Feb '08) 5 hr Just Asking 31,423
BC denies accreditation to anti-Gay Christian l... 5 hr Reverend Alan 80
Gay couples exchange vows in Montana after ruling 7 hr Sneaky Pete 22
Proof Even Jennifer Aniston's Friends Have No I... 15 hr Benny 1

Wedding People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE