Should Billy Graham's legacy be rescued?

There are 20 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.

barry

Rainsville, AL

#856 Apr 4, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
If you're gonna try to QUOTE someone? It would help if you used THAT PERSON'S ACTUAL WORDS.
I would never have said "Christian dispensation supersedes the law"--- specifically, I'd not have stated "dispensation" at all. Not a word I'd use.
So your attempt at FALSE WITNESS is exposed for the lie that it is.
In any case, Jewsus specifically intended (by your NT, but exclusive of the heretic Paul) everyone to convert to Judaism.
It was only later, that the heretic Paul absolved that-- when he re-wrote 99% of christianity into his own particular delusions. He saw that most folk were unwilling to follow through, and realized he'd soon be out of a job, and have to make a REAL living, instead of the con he was running.
So the heretic paul, who started out as anti-Jewsus-cult, re-imaged himself in a Donald Trump move, and re-wrote the rules to suit his new con.
And you bought into that con.
Sad for you.
hey bob, did you or did you not post these words in post #715;

"Okay. Read these and... weep. Here's 5. I got more... lots and lots and LOTS more...
From my favorite bible-debunking site: www.evilbible.com
__________

108. Christ is equal with God
John 10:30/ Phil 2:5
Christ is not equal with God
John 14:28/ Matt 24:36
109. Jesus was all-powerful
Matt 28:18/ John 3:35
Jesus was not all-powerful
Mark 6:5
110. The law was superseded by the Christian dispensation
Luke 16:16/ Eph 2:15/ Rom 7:6
The law was not superseded by the Christian dispensation"

oops, there it is, "DISPENSATION".... you said it alright.

but then you do have problems remembering what you said and understanding the difference between....

it really is an honor to be called a liar or "FALSE WITNESS" by you, lol.

oh, and i see that you haven't found that verse yet where Jesus supposedly wishes or desires everyone to convert to judaism.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#857 Apr 4, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
How could they have confirmed?
Hard to believe but you just sounded dumber! Best stop while you're ahead chump, you are way out of your league.
<quoted text>
by using phrases common to the NT, expressing ideas common to the NT. some would even say that specific verses are referenced without credit. we have a specific time frame that those DSS were written in and they therefore confirm that some of the NT was also in existence at that time. or at least they are witnesses that confirm the authenticity of the NT.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#858 Apr 4, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh! I get it now-- you are using the word "confirmed" in a brand-new way that nobody on Earth understands apart from... you.
LOL!
well seeing that you don't know the difference between a tax deduction and a tax credit, seeing that you confuse japa with japhia, seeing that you can't remember what you said in a post. seeing that your math gets a little fuzzy, seeing that you post links that actually contradict your point... well the list goes on and on, it is clearly understandable that you would not know anyone who would have a broader understanding of the word "confirmed" than what you understand it to mean.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#859 Apr 4, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>did he 'fulfill' the part where god said it is OK to own slaves? that was always one of my favorite parts of the cult...
how does a god say it is Ok to own another human?
God claims that he sent his own people into captivity/slavery so i guess it was ok with him. now your question is really a little ridiculous.

your emphasis on "own" is also a telling characteristic of your attempt to make a point.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#860 Apr 4, 2013
Benjamin Frankly wrote:
<quoted text>
"that's funny" so are you...
"the point is they didn't need his approval to stone her. he said go ahead if you can but they didn't did they." Because Jesus said that the man without sin may throw the first stone, how can you say that Jesus wanted to make them seek his consent when making criteria such as the above implies you wish to limit something? I have to say you can’t.
"Jesus was not he proper authority" well thats not news to me... but this is "they didn't even bother to take her to the authorities now did they?" read it again...“The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery” http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...
The Pharisees and the teachers of law are the authorities, it wasn’t some mob that dragged the woman to Jesus it was the authorities them self’s.
#1 the proper Jewish authority was the sanhedrin. however
#2 Israel was subject to rome and had no authority to execute anyone. only rome could approve the execution. so they didn't take her to the "authorities" now did they?

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#861 Apr 4, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>so, you have no reference where Jesus commands us to be "good jews"
not even a reference where he said we had to follow all the OT commandments.
I referenced what I >>thought<< would be very a familiar passage to someone of your self-proclaimed ... "knowledge" of your own book.

Silly me-- I presumed that you knew your own book.

I was clearly wrong about that-- your ignorance is ... unfortunate.

But it's hardly unique, is it? The majority of True Believers™ are equally as ignorant of your own book.

Sad, really.

But on to the lesson:

__________

Matthew 22:36-40 King James Version (KJV)

36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

__________

Let us examine this closely, especially verse 40:

"On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."

The very words of your prophet, Jesus.

Let me repeat: "On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."

Look at this part: "hang all the law"

Clearly? Your Jesus intends you to FOLLOW ALL THE LAWS.

If he did not?

He'd have likely said: "but never-mind those old laws" or similar...

So you lose this one, Oh Most Ignorant One.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#862 Apr 4, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>hey bob, did you or did you not post these words in post #715;
"Okay. Read these and... weep. Here's 5. I got more... lots and lots and LOTS more...
From my favorite bible-debunking site: www.evilbible.com
__________
108. Christ is equal with God
John 10:30/ Phil 2:5
Christ is not equal with God
John 14:28/ Matt 24:36
109. Jesus was all-powerful
Matt 28:18/ John 3:35
Jesus was not all-powerful
Mark 6:5
110. The law was superseded by the Christian dispensation
Luke 16:16/ Eph 2:15/ Rom 7:6
The law was not superseded by the Christian dispensation"
oops, there it is, "DISPENSATION".... you said it alright.
but then you do have problems remembering what you said and understanding the difference between....
it really is an honor to be called a liar or "FALSE WITNESS" by you, lol.
oh, and i see that you haven't found that verse yet where Jesus supposedly wishes or desires everyone to convert to judaism.
Nope.

You LIE once more-- I was QUOTING SOMEONE ELSE.

So I was quite correct: I don't use the word "dispensation" in my own speech.

However, I might QUOTE someone ELSE who does.

Wow.

You just LOVE to lie, don't you?

LOL!

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#863 Apr 4, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>well seeing that you don't know the difference between a tax deduction and a tax credit, seeing that you confuse japa with japhia, seeing that you can't remember what you said in a post. seeing that your math gets a little fuzzy, seeing that you post links that actually contradict your point... well the list goes on and on, it is clearly understandable that you would not know anyone who would have a broader understanding of the word "confirmed" than what you understand it to mean.
Blah, blah, blah.

I just SCHOOLED you in your own ugly bible, a couple of posts back.

You lose.

Again.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#864 Apr 4, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>God claims that he sent his own people into captivity/slavery so i guess it was ok with him. now your question is really a little ridiculous.
your emphasis on "own" is also a telling characteristic of your attempt to make a point.
So you freely admit the ugly god you worship like a mind-slug, is JUST FINE with human slavery?

Is that about it?

Wow.

You are seriously depraved.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#865 Apr 4, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>#1 the proper Jewish authority was the sanhedrin. however
#2 Israel was subject to rome and had no authority to execute anyone. only rome could approve the execution. so they didn't take her to the "authorities" now did they?
Really?

Where do you get this definitive "information"?

Did you just make it up (as you have from the start)?

LMAO!

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#866 Apr 4, 2013
:sigh: Smh

Should I be the one to point out how he just shot himself in the foot of just sit back and enjoy the fail hemorrhaging!

Decisions decisions.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>if we are arguing over the term Pharisee then you are right it was a name given to them.
however there is old evidence of them and they are referred to by other names. for example h&#259;bûrâ or the Perisha or Assidaeans. the name pharisee may have come from the aramaic "perisayya" which means seperated. so it actually may have been a name given to them by their detractors which they in turn embraced with pride as they called for a holy separated life.

" They called their members "&#7717;aberim" (brothers), while they passed under the name of "Perishaya," or "Perushim." Though originally identical with the &#7716;asidim, they reserved the title of "&#7717;asid" for former generations ("&#7717;asidim ha-rishonim"; see Essenes), retaining, however, the name "Perishut" (='&#913;&#956;&#9 53;&#958;&#943;&#9 45; = "separation," in contradistinction to '&#917;&#960;&#953 ;&#956;&#953;&#958 ;&#943;&#945; = "intermingling") "
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/12...

if that is the case then they are traced by their practices and doctrines. a dog is still a dog no matter what his pedigree. no pun intended.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#867 Apr 4, 2013
....... Uh.... Well....

......

.....

He took all this time working out his argument and this is the best he is able to muster?

Wow... I almost feel sorry for him.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>when you refer to the name pharisee being replaced by the term rabbi you fail to acknowledge the evolution of the term. at that time it was an honorary title for the scribes. today it is used out of respect for anyone who would stand to read in the jewish houses of worship.

"RABBI, a Hebrew word meaning "my master," "my teacher." It is derived from the adjective rab (in Aramaic, and frequently also in Hebrew, "great"), which acquired in modern Hebrew the signification of "lord," in relation to servants or slaves, and of "teacher," "master," in relation to the disciple. The master was addressed by his pupils with the word rabbi (" my teacher"), or rabbenu (" our teacher"). It became customary to speak of Moses as Moshe rabbenu ("our teacher Moses"). http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Rabbi

jewish proselytizers were sent out to make twelve disciples and to teach them so that they could be sent out as apostles. sound familiar? guess what those disciples called their teacher? why it would be teacher/rabbi. we don't do that so much anymore here in America but if you travel to mexico the profesors are called "profi" so it would not be unusual or unheard of for a "rab" to be called a "rabbi" simply because it was recognized that he had a group of disciples.

so there is all kinds of documentation of the word existing even befor the time of Christ, it just wasn't really used as a title that was restricted to an honored position held by a distinct class of people.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#868 Apr 4, 2013
Your answer in no way shape or form dealt with my comment.

Keep failing though, how are those NT books in the Dead Sea scrolls doing again?

Lol!:))
barry wrote:
<quoted text>by using phrases common to the NT, expressing ideas common to the NT. some would even say that specific verses are referenced without credit. we have a specific time frame that those DSS were written in and they therefore confirm that some of the NT was also in existence at that time. or at least they are witnesses that confirm the authenticity of the NT.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#869 Apr 4, 2013
Barry don't try to debate with RP, just don't. You are so far out of your league, best to just sit and listen and thank her for her time.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>because they were only "pivotal" to those present. the greater significance is why he wrote in the dirt. they being students of the "law" completely understood that by doing so he was actually keeping the law while condemning them. they themselves actually were trapped as being the law breakers.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#870 Apr 4, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
....... Uh.... Well....
......
.....
He took all this time working out his argument and this is the best he is able to muster?
Wow... I almost feel sorry for him.
<quoted text>
He's not the brightest candle on the mantle, is he?

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#871 Apr 5, 2013
Bob seriously I wonder if they really are this stupid or are they putting us on?
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>He's not the brightest candle on the mantle, is he?

“you must not give faith”

Since: Jul 12

Nottingham, UK

#872 Apr 5, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>#1 the proper Jewish authority was the sanhedrin. however
#2 Israel was subject to rome and had no authority to execute anyone. only rome could approve the execution. so they didn't take her to the "authorities" now did they?
If you were a Jew in those times, who would you respect more the teachers of the law that was ordained by God or a roman with paganism? Cleary one would prefer to go to your God. And no the Pharisees were a authority the “Pharisees claimed prophetic or Mosaic authority for their interpretation[2] of Jewish laws”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharisees

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#873 Apr 5, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Bob seriously I wonder if they really are this stupid or are they putting us on?
<quoted text>
Sadly, I don't think this one is a poe...

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#874 Apr 5, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>because they were only "pivotal" to those present. the greater significance is why he wrote in the dirt. they being students of the "law" completely understood that by doing so he was actually keeping the law while condemning them. they themselves actually were trapped as being the law breakers.
How nice. It was only for those to whom he was speaking. He really didn't have a message for any one, except the Jewish people who he was speaking to. You are a gentile right? One he considered "as dogs"?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#875 Apr 5, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>God claims that he sent his own people into captivity/slavery so i guess it was ok with him. now your question is really a little ridiculous.
your emphasis on "own" is also a telling characteristic of your attempt to make a point.
yeah, nice god... any god that would condone owning another human is not one i would use as a moral guide... surprised anyone would...

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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 9 min Uncle Sam 238,333
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 33 min Denisova 18,848
why Atheists believe in incest,pedophilia and b... 17 hr Amused 25
News Confessions of a black atheist 17 hr thetruth 465
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) Sun thetruth 6,124
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) Sun thetruth 2,094
News The Consequences of Atheism Sat Koala_Gums 1,340
More from around the web