Welcome, Guest: Join Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / New
Stats: 2,447,808 members, 5,514,199 topics. Date: Tuesday, 07 April 2020 at 02:52 AM

Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? - Religion (9) - Nairaland

Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? (4114 Views)

Is It A Sin To Return Empty Offering Envelope Back To The Church Offering Box? / Is It A Sin To Have Sex With Wife On Sunday? / Sex Stories: Is It A Sin To Read Them? (2) (3) (4)

(1) (2) (3) ... (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (Reply) (Go Down)

Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by johnw47: 12:23am On Mar 19
twisted hateful bigot, lord homo reed

your hateful bigotry is of the worst kind, it is against Almighty God and His word:



LordReed:


Blah, blah, blah, you who demonize the innocent there is no false accusation against you. You are puerile, hiding your hatred behind your fairytale Yahweh and his sidekick Satan. Given the chance I guess you'd act like the Taliban and kill homosexuals because your fairytale god Yahweh hates them and they are the spawn of his sidekick Satan. Hate in your heart is your accuser. Dickwad.






twisted reed, just a few of your repeated hateful bigotry comments, from many on just one page:


concerning God:
LordReed:


Oh but you are full of it! Full of hate for your fairytale Yahweh's enemies especially the ones living their lives not bothering you, hating them because they are different from you. Hateful bigot how grows thine hate?

LordReed:


Hey hateful bigot hiding behind fairytale Yahweh and his sidekick Satan, how grows the hate in thine heart?



concerning God's word:
LordReed:


Its called a fairytale and the excuse you use to hate. Hateful bigot how grows the hate in your heart?



such a twisted hateful bigot you are lewd reed, and wow, the hate in your posts
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by LordReed(m): 12:55am On Mar 19
johnw47:


twisted hateful bigot, lord homo reed

your hateful bigotry is of the worst kind, it is against Almighty God and His word:










twisted reed, just a few of your repeated hateful bigotry comments, from many on just one page:


concerning God:






concerning God's word:




such a twisted hateful bigot you are lewd reed, and wow, the hate in your posts
johnw47:


twisted lord homo reed

yes i am a bigot to your belief that it is okay for you to put other men's penis in your mouth
and in your bum hole
and yes i hate your perversions, they are of course of a sick and twisted mind

and you think it's natural(your words)
and you think you are normal, so deluded and sick

Lev 18:22  Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Rom 1:27  And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly,
johnw47:


twisted lord homo reed

poor coward, you cannot honestly reply to the truth written in any post

Rev_21:8  But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone:

Bwahahahahaha! Hateful bigot how grows the hate in your heart?
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by PervertProphet: 6:40pm On Mar 19
Professorcplus:

Lol grin If it means to be uneducated to accept your real historical character like Jesus, then I would rather remain uneducated to accept Santa Claus or Harry Potter to be real.

I claim they are not real hence they are frictional characters but you claim otherwise, hence the burden of proof is on you not me. So Sir, with due respect, proof that your Jesus is not a frictional character like Santa Claus

It's best you remain uneducated.

You wrote ".....not a frictional" instead of fictional...

If you can't recognise the simple difference between these two words. How are you ever going to understand all the historical facts about Jesus Christ from the 1st Century. Even Bart Erhman that opposes Jesus Christ so much never disputes that Jesus lived as a historical figure. Bart never even disputes HIS crucifixion.


Other modern scholars like William Lane Craig, Gary Habermas, etc all agree on these facts. Over 25,000 manuscripts to prove HIS existence plus other non-christian writings of HIS existence.

You had personal issues with your life and you felt the best is to make unfounded claims that Jesus Christ never existed.

It's crazy the crazy people in the world today. People who don't know anything despite the internet&the smart gadgets that they have got in
their hands. Gadgets obviously smarter than they the handlers.

1 Like 1 Share

Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by PervertProphet: 7:12pm On Mar 19
LordReed:


Yes I am ignorant thats why I am asking you since you know. Appeals to authority is a fallacy. I asked you for historical evidence for Jesus, not who says Jesus existed.
.

I won't spoon-feed you..


These facts about the Jesus Christ existing are all out there.
The onus is on you to give me credible facts that showed Jesus Christ never existed.

1 Like 1 Share

Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by LordReed(m): 7:18pm On Mar 19
PervertProphet:
.

I won't spoon-feed you..


These facts about the Jesus Christ existing are all out there.
The onus is on you to give me credible facts that showed Jesus Christ never existed.

You make a claim you can't support and here you are talking about spoon feeding. Do you have any facts or you are just mouthing off?

Where did I claim that Jesus didn't exist? When I make such a claim, ask me to defend it, not when I have made no such claim.
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by PervertProphet: 7:44pm On Mar 19
LordReed:


You make a claim you can't support and here you are talking about spoon feeding. Do you have any facts or you are just mouthing off?

Where did I claim that Jesus didn't exist? When I make such a claim, ask me to defend it, not when I have made no such claim.

Okay!

Since you didn't make than claim then let's shake hands. Peace!!

I just tried making it clear that Jesus Christ is a historical figure. No scholar for or against contests that fact. Hence, Jesus Christ should never be compared to fictional characters like Harry Potter, Santa Claus or Mythological figures like Krishna, Osiris, Sango, Amadioha, etc


There are over 25,000 ancient manuscripts with 99.9% aligning accuracy that prove that Jesus Christ existed, was crucified and resurrected.

No other figure has that much proof.

1 Like 1 Share

Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by LordReed(m): 7:50pm On Mar 19
PervertProphet:


Okay!

Since you didn't make than claim then let's check hands. Peace!!

I just tried making it clear that Jesus Christ is a historical figure. No scholar for or against contests that fact. Hence, Jesus Christ should never be compared to fictional characters like Harry Potter, Santa Claus or Mythological figures like Krishna, Osiris, Sango, Amadioha, etc


There are over 25,000 ancient manuscripts with 99.9% aligning accuracy that prove that Jesus Christ existed, crucified and resurrected.

No other figure has that much proof.

Correction look up Dr Richard Carrier, there are quite a handful of scholars who oppose the historicity of Jesus.

Which manuscripts are you referring to, bible manuscripts?
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by PervertProphet: 8:26pm On Mar 19
LordReed:


Correction look up Dr Richard Carrier, there are quite a handful of scholars who oppose the historicity of Jesus.

Which manuscripts are you referring to, bible manuscripts?


Same way you say I should look up Dr. Richard Carrier. I will do that but also look up Gary Habermas, Dr. Williams Lane Craig, John Lennox, etcetera. Even Bart Erhman that opposes the Bible and the Christian faith in general never disputes the historicity of Jesus Christ. No scholar does that. They might dispute things about Jesus or make some other claims about Jesus but no true scholar whether secular or Christian ever doubts that Jesus Christ existed.

Everything and everyone testifies of Jesus Christ existing. If Richard Carrier is a true scholar then he would never dispute that Jesus Christ ever existed. The evidence tilts against his claims. Scholars before him have tried that but none has succeeded with that and it is regarded as a rejected myth by anyone who claims that Jesus never existed. Check out what Scholars of antiquity have to say about this. People like Michael Grant.

We even have writings by non-christian sources like that of Tacitus, a Roman Senator who wrote about Jesus. We have others. We have the Jewish additional corrupt books like the Mishnah also referring to Jesus existence even though they speak derogatory of Jesus. Also, the Jewish Talmud speaks of Jesus crucifixion albeit in derogatory manner.

The scholars might dispute about certain details of Jesus life but I repeat no true scholar disputes the baptism and crucifixion of Jesus so it calls into question the credibility of the Richard Carrier guy that you ask I check out. I will still check him out. You also check out the scholars I mentioned.

1 Like 1 Share

Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by LordReed(m): 8:42pm On Mar 19
PervertProphet:



Same way you say I should look up Dr. Richard Carrier. I will do that but also look up Gary Habermas, Dr. Williams Lane Craig, John Lennox, etcetera. Even Bart Erhman that opposes the Bible and the Christian faith in general never disputes the historicity of Jesus Christ. No scholar does that. They might dispute things about Jesus or make some other claims about Jesus but no true scholar whether secular or Christian ever doubts that Jesus Christ existed.

Everything and everyone testifies of Jesus Christ existing. If Richard Carrier is a true scholar then he would never dispute that Jesus Christ ever existed. The evidence tilts against his claims. Scholars before him have tried that but none has succeeded with that and it is regarded as a rejected myth by anyone who claims that Jesus never existed. Check out what Scholars of antiquity have to say about this. People like Michael Grant.

I merely pointed out the error of saying no scholars oppose the historicity of Jesus. And it's a "No True Scotsman" fallacy to claim no true scholar will oppose it. You present the facts and not malign the people. Which is why I asked you to present facts.


We even have writings by non-christian sources like that of Tacitus, a Roman Senator who wrote about Jesus. We have others. We have the Jewish additional corrupt books like the Mishnah also referring to Jesus existence even though they speak derogatory of Jesus. Also, the Jewish Talmud speaks of Jesus crucifixion albeit in derogatory manner.

The scholars might dispute about certain details of Jesus life but I repeat no true scholar disputes the baptism and crucifixion of Jesus so it calls into question the credibility of the Richard Carrier guy that you ask I check out. I will still check him out. You also check out the scholars I mentioned.

You didn't answer the question I posed previously, are the manuscripts you are referring to Bible manuscripts?

Tacitus didn't write about Jesus, he wrote about Christian belief in Jesus, that is quite different.

Are you aware there are no contemporary sources for anyone of Jesus stature given the things the Bible claims about him? Are you aware that none of the gospel books where written by eye witnesses, the authors are considered anonymous? Are you aware that none of the books was written earlier than 20years after Jesus' purported death?
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by PervertProphet: 10:07pm On Mar 19
LordReed:
I merely pointed out the error of saying no scholars oppose the historicity of Jesus. And it's a "No True Scotsman" fallacy to claim no true scholar will oppose it. You present the facts and not malign the people. Which is why I asked you to present facts.


Now, this is a Straw man. You and I both know that no true Scholar whether for or against Jesus Christ ever disputes HIS baptism and crucifixion and if no true Scholar disputes that then that settles the fact that HE truly existed.


LordReed:
You didn't answer the question I posed previously, are the manuscripts you are referring to Bible manuscripts?



This will take the whole year. Take for example just Isaiah 53 written 700 years before the physical manifestation of Jesus Christ. Isaiah 53 was a vivid prophetic exact description of what Jesus Christ would do and his crucifixion bearing the sins of all mankind. Jesus came 700 years later and fulfilled this Isaiah 53 exactly and ascended with an empty tomb to prove that till today. What happens 2700 years after this.

In 1947, several jars containing over 900 manuscripts now known as the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered under in a cave by a Shepherd boy. We now know via Archeology how this was exactly same as the one we have in our Bibles today. That's just one fact. My brother, it will be dishonest denying just how amazing that this is. I have not even touched on others and also the New Testament facts.



LordReed:
Tacitus didn't write about Jesus, he wrote about Christian belief in Jesus, that is quite different.


This is a poorly scripted lie. I understand that you hate Jesus Christ and have given up on HIM but to lie this is way is really disappointing and heartbreaking. Cornelius Tacitus (56-120AD) was known for his analysis and examination of historical documents and is among the most trusted of ancient historians. He was a senator under Emperor Vespasian and was also proconsul of Asia. In his “Annals’ of 116AD, he describes Emperor Nero’s response to the great fire in Rome and Nero’s claim that the Christians were to blame:

“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.”

In this account, Tacitus confirms several historical elements of the Biblical narrative: Jesus lived in Judea, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and had followers who were persecuted for their faith in Christ.

Christus=Christ which is Jesus Christ.

LordReed:
Are you aware there are no contemporary sources for anyone of Jesus stature given the things the Bible claims about him? Are you aware that none of the gospel books where written by eye witnesses, the authors are considered anonymous? Are you aware that none of the books was written earlier than 20years after Jesus' purported death?

Now this is another big lie that if I should write on this. It will take the whole day. You have to be careful what you accept as fact. Euclid regarded as the founder of Geometry in Mathematics. Nobody knows exactly when he was born or when exactly he died and his biography was written almost 500 years after his death and it's even sketchy unlike Jesus Christ that we have so much of what HE, Jesus Christ said and did. Nobody in their remotest mind disputes Euclid ever existed despite the sketchy details of his life....

Nobody knows when Shakespeare was actually born and this is thousand of years after Jesus Christ had ascended. A biography of Shakespeare was written in 2004: Will in the World by Stephen Greenblatt. Check out how many years that is from Shakespeare's death till 2004 and even that is not up to Jesus Christ's time. Life should have improved more in Shakespeare's time than in Jesus time but still you and I don't ever dispute that Shakespeare did exist. The same can be said of Muhammad. The first mention and write-up of Muhammad was 200 years after which infers about 800 years plus after Jesus had ascended. Understand that in the 7th century by Muhammad's time. Life is supposed to have improved a bit more than Jesus's time but still it took over 200 years before the first mention of Muhammad even though Muhammad lied against the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Even when all the historians hundreds of years before and after Muhammad never disputes the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Not even the Jews that got it started dispute the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. The qur'an stands alone in the lie that Jesus Christ was never crucified. No other old book/document of antiquity ever makes that claim or confirms the qur'an on that but still you never doubt that Muhammad ever existed, right?!!

1.7 billion Muslims still believe the lie that Jesus Christ was never crucified but accept a partial truth of Jesus ascended.

Same can be said for Alexandra the Great. No one disputes their existence but the hypocrisy of you lots to dispute the existence of Jesus Christ who was written about within the earliest of 20 years after his ascension by eyewitnesses of Jesus Christ. You guys do all to reject this embodiment of truth and grace who lived a perfect life. Even the qur'an says he lived a Sinless life. There are people who hate the Jews so much today. Some white Neo-Nazis and Supremacists, some are Islamists who deny that there was never a holocaust of Six million Jews by Hitler. This happened some hundred years back but you and I know that this happened for real so even when this purported Jew hating people deny this historical fact about the massacre of 6million Jews. Are you and I going to accept that lie and crap even if it is a White Professor who is white supremacist or Islamist that writes that down? Are you going to accept that silly talk when other historical fact don't collaborate their hate conspiracy?

You have to ask yourself if you have thoroughly investigated the facts and you are not just basing your denial and rejection of Jesus Christ which will lead to the condemnation of your soul if you die in that state based on what some few misguided individuals with no true knowledge are telling you. This is no joke. It is when you hit the soil and your spirit rises out of your body that you would understand how serious this reproach you heaped on Jesus Christ is. I pray you won't die in that state.


You have to check if you have really investigated the claims you make.

I have investigated many faiths, claims, so called founders and pathways to God or the lack of it (Atheism, Grail Message, Eckanar, Islam, J.w, etc) and I have come to the conclusion that only in Jesus Christ can we find solace and eternal life of God. Anything outside. You are lost for all of eternity especially if you die in that state.

1 Like 1 Share

Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by LordReed(m): 11:28pm On Mar 19
PervertProphet:



Now this is a Straw man. You and I both know that no true Scholar whether for or against Jesus Christ ever disputes HIS baptism and crucifixion and if no true Scholar disputes that then that settles the fact that HE truly existed.

Before you use words look up their meanings if you are not sure what they mean. I didn't make a strawman. I state your argument precisely and tell you that you are wrong, that is not what a strawman means.

It is fallacious to claim no "true" scholars would oppose the historicity when indeed there are scholars who do so. Richard Carrier has a doctorate in ancient history so to malign him as not being a true scholar is just rubbish talk. The appropriate thing to do is evaluate their claims and evidence not dismiss them out hand simple because they oppose the narrative you hold dear to your heart.

Let me be clear once again. I don't say Jesus never existed. I say let's look at the evidence for his existence. If you have it bring it, I don't accept arguments from authority. Bring your evidence.






This will take the whole year. Take for example just Isaiah 53 written 700 years before the physical manifestation of Jesus Christ. Isaiah 53 was a vivid prophetic exact description of what Jesus Christ would do and his crucifixion bearing the sins of all mankind. Jesus came 700 years later and fulfilled this Isaiah 53 exactly and ascended. An empty tomb to prove that till today.
What happens 2700 years after this.

In 1947, several jars containing over 900 manuscripts now known as the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered under in a cave by a Shepherd boy. We now know via Archeology how this was exactly same as the one we have in our Bibles today. That's just one fact. My brother, it will be dishonest denying just how amazing that this is. I have not even touched on others and also the New Testament facts.

Why can't people just answer a simple question with simple answers. You mentioned 25,000 manuscripts and I ask you are these bible manuscripts? How has what you've written above answered this simple question for Pete's sake?






This is a poorly scripted lie. I understand that you hate Jesus Christ and have given up on HIM but to lie this is way is really disappointing and heartbreaking. Cornelius Tacitus (56-120AD) was known for his analysis and examination of historical documents and is among the most trusted of ancient historians. He was a senator under Emperor Vespasian and was also proconsul of Asia. In his “Annals’ of 116AD, he describes Emperor Nero’s response to the great fire in Rome and Nero’s claim that the Christians were to blame:

“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.”

In this account, Tacitus confirms several historical elements of the Biblical narrative: Jesus lived in Judea, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and had followers who were persecuted for their faith in Christ.

Christus=Christ which is Jesus Christ.

Either you have a poor grasp of English or you are being dishonest. You seem to want to read opposition to Jesus in everything. Pointing out that Tacitus was not writing about Jesus but about Christians puts in your mind the spectre that I am saying Tacitus is denying that Jesus existed. I usually give people a leeway when they take this dumb route for a time but don't continue down this road. If you do not understand the point I am making, ask me to clarify.

To clarify, Tacitus was writing about Christians, the conditions they were facing with a reference to how the name came about. He was not writing specifically about Jesus. He doesn't go into any detail about Jesus. That should clue you in. A historian mentions only in passing the fate of the founder of a religion. Nothing else about his life or his work, just that he died at the hands of Romans. How then do you say he was writing ABOUT Jesus?

Also, this passing comment on Jesus while establishing the manner of his death does nothing to confirm any supernatural claims of resurrection, godship, miracle working powers or anything of the like.



Now this is another big lie that if I should write on this. It will take the whole day. You have to be careful what you accept as fact. Nobody knows when Shakespeare was actually born and this is thousand of years after Jesus Christ had ascended. A biography of Shakespeare was written in 2004: Will in the World by Stephen Greenblatt. Check out how many years that is from Shakespeare's death till 2004 and even that is not up to Jesus Christ's time. Life should have improved more in Shakespeare's time than in Jesus time but still you and I don't ever dispute that Shakespeare doesn't exist. The same can be said of Muhammad. The first mention and write-up of Muhammad was 200 years after. 600 years plus after Jesus had ascended and in the 7th century by Muhammad's time. Life is supposed to have improved a bit more than Jesus's time but still it took over 200 years before the first mention of Muhammad even though Muhammad lied against the crucifixion of Jesus Christ even when all the historians hundreds of years before and after Muhammad never dispute the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Not even the Jews that got it started dispute the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. The qur'an stands alone in the lie that Jesus Christ was never crucified. No other old book/document of antiquity ever makes that claim or confirms the qur'an on that but still you never doubt that Muhammad ever existed. 1.7 billion Muslims still believe the lie of Jesus Christ never crucified but accept a partial truth of Jesus ascended.

Same can be said for Alexandra the Great. No one disputes their existence but the hypocrisy of you lots to dispute the existence of Jesus Christ who was written about within the earliest of 20 years after his ascension by eyewitnesses of Jesus Christ. You guys do all to reject this embodiment of truth and grace who lived a perfect life. Even the qur'an says he lived a Sinless life. There are people who hate the Jews so much today. Some white Neo-Nazis and Supremacists, some are Islamists who deny that there was ever a holocaust of Six million Jews by Hitler. This happened some hundred years back but you and I know that this happened for real so even when this purported Jew hating people deny this historical fact about the massacre of 6million Jews. Are you and I going to accept that lie and crap even if it is a White Professor who is white supremacist or Islamist that writes that down? Are you going to accept that silly talk when other historical fact don't collaborate their hate conspiracy?

You have to ask yourself if you have thoroughly investigated the facts and you are not just basing your denial and rejection of Jesus Christ which will lead to the condemnation of your soul if you die in that state based on what some few misguided individuals with no true knowledge are telling you. This is no joke. It is when you hit the soil and your spirit rises out of your body that you would understand how serious this reproach you heaped on Jesus Christ is. I pray you won't die in that state.

This is just silly. You don't answer the questions asked instead you segue into all manner of rubbish that has nothing to do with the question then you round it up with more rubbish about spirits and what not. Why can't you focus on the subject and leave nonsense tales for those interested. Let us face the questions at hand, bring your evidence that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John wrote those books.


You have to check if you have really investigated the claims you make.

I have investigated many faiths, claims, so called founders and pathways to God or the lack of it (Atheism, Grail Message, Eckanar, Islam, J.w, etc) and I have come to the conclusion that only in Jesus Christ can we find solace and eternal life of God. Anything outside. You are lost for all of eternity especially if you die in that state.

Who cares the volume of religions you've investigated? Support your claims with evidence and stop beating around the bush.
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by johnw47: 11:45pm On Mar 19
LordReed:


Bwahahahahaha! Hateful bigot how grows the hate in your heart?







johnw47:


why do you think that you queers having oral and anal sex with each other is not twisted?





LordReed:


Because it is natural.


oh most unnatural lord homo reed

even the most dummest know it's not natural for a man to have another man's penis in his poohey bum hole
even the most dummest know it's not natural for a man to have another man's penis in his mouth

such a depraved twisted queer you are
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by LordReed(m): 12:09am On Mar 20
johnw47:














oh most unnatural lord homo reed

even the most dummest know it's not natural for a man to have another man's penis in his poohey bum hole
even the most dummest know it's not natural for a man to have another man's penis in his mouth

such a depraved twisted queer you are

Hateful bigot, how grows the hate in your heart?
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by PervertProphet: 1:34am On Mar 20
LordReed:
Before you use words look up their meanings if you are not sure what they mean. I didn't make a strawman. I state your argument precisely and tell you that you are wrong, that is not what a strawman means.

It is fallacious to claim no "true" scholars would oppose the historicity when indeed there are scholars who do so. Richard Carrier has a doctorate in ancient history so to malign him as not being a true scholar is just rubbish talk. The appropriate thing to do is evaluate their claims and evidence not dismiss them out hand simple because they oppose the narrative you hold dear to your heart.

Let me be clear once again. I don't say Jesus never existed. I say let's look at the evidence for his existence. If you have it bring it, I don't accept arguments from authority. Bring your evidence.

I am all for civil and polite discussion but I can also be very rude if I start noticing you are becoming very silly. When I first saw you state that it's a "No True Scotsman" fallacy. I had to ask myself if you understand the context of the words you use or if you are just trying to "front" as usual like you really know what exactly you are talking about.

A quick read through Richard Carrier's profile shows that you are not to be taken serious just the same way Richard Carrier despite a Ph.D in Ancient History. His theories are not really taken serious by his peers. (Screenshot attached below).

The crux of our argument was if Jesus existed or not and since you agree that Jesus Christ existed then the rest of what you say are all rubbish and no wonder you would demand in your own words
"I say let's look at the evidence for his existence. If you have it bring it, I don't accept arguments from authority. Bring your evidence"

This above is just silly chidish talk. You don't accept arguments from authority. Okay, let's play your silly game "I don't accept your parents gave birth to you. Even if you present me with all the evidences like your birth certificate, etc. Nope! You must bring your own evidence from thin air, from your ass"...

Very silly talk. Discussion is over with that silliness. You won't accept what the credible documents of antiquity have to say. You won't accept what 99% of the scholars say. You won't accept the Bible that has archeology backing the records as true. I gave you one example out of numerous that are available today. I gave you Isaiah 53 which 2700 years after the Dead Sea Scrolls found, the originals at Israel museum backing it up but nope you won't accept nothing reasonable and factual. You just want to make baseless claims with no historical facts supporting your claims.



[quote author=LordReed post=87594589]Why can't people just answer a simple question with simple answers. You mentioned 25,000 manuscripts and I ask you are these bible manuscripts? How has what you've written above answered this simple question for Pete's sake?


Either you have a poor grasp of English or you are being dishonest. You seem to want to read opposition to Jesus in everything. Pointing out that Tacitus was not writing about Jesus but about Christians puts in your mind the spectre that I am saying Tacitus is denying that Jesus existed. I usually give people a leeway when they take this dumb route for a time but don't continue down this road. If you do not understand the point I am making, ask me to clarify.

To clarify, Tacitus was writing about Christians, the conditions they were facing with a reference to how the name came about. He was not writing specifically about Jesus. He doesn't go into any detail about Jesus. That should clue you in. A historian mentions only in passing the fate of the founder of a religion. Nothing else about his life or his work, just that he died at the hands of Romans. How then do you say he was writing ABOUT Jesus?

Also, this passing comment on Jesus while establishing the manner of his death does nothing to confirm any supernatural claims of resurrection, godship, miracle working powers or anything of the like.


This is just silly. You don't answer the questions asked instead you segue into all manner of rubbish that has nothing to do with the question then you round it up with more rubbish about spirits and what not. Why can't you focus on the subject and leave nonsense tales for those interested. Let us face the questions at hand, bring your evidence that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John wrote those books.


Who cares the volume of religions you've investigated? Support your claims with evidence and stop beating around the bush



Look! I see you are just been chidish the same way Richard Carrier is. First, you lie that Tacitus never mentioned or wrote about Jesus. I hit you with a write-up of Tacitus where he specifically wrote the name Christus which is Christ Jesus and now you have started talking silly talk, switching up and flip-flopping about Tacitus not talking about the details as regards Jesus. You knew that at first and you lied that Tacitus didn't mention Jesus Christ at all. Such blatant liar and please what other details do you need about Jesus Christ from Tacitus, a man who is a Roman Senator and not a believer in Jesus Christ?!! A man who is not a Christian but who wrote clearly informing us of the death of Jesus Christ at the hands of one of their own-Pointus Pilate. What other details do you want different from this amazing historical recording that collaborates the Bible to be true and confirms that Jesus Christ was indeed crucified by the Romans?!!!
Silly boy trying to ask something akin to the Pope writing about the details of Islam in Mecca. You want Tacitus to start talking about the teachings of Jesus Christ as if he was a follower of Jesus Christ or how many cups of water Jesus Christ drank.

Are you slow or you just want to appear as a dishonest illiterate?!

The problem with you and guys like Richard Carrier is that most of the times. You can't seem to handle your personal lives just exactly how Richard Carrier was an adulterer with his marriage and a host of other silly issues that this lead him leaving the Christian faith and in other to feel some sort of self-importance. He has to go against Jesus Christ.

Yeah! Every inch like rebellious children who go on to misbehave just because they were not given what they wanted. An excuse for you both to indulge in mostly sexual perversion like extramarital affairs, etc so you both have to hate on the such high standard and pure morality that Jesus Christ represents. This is same thing I have noticed with Bart Erhman and a bunch of many Atheists.

Richard Carrier is not even a tolerant Atheist. Something he is criticised for by other Atheists. I see same trait with you. If other Atheists can criticise Richard Carrier as being intolerant and he is your mentor. Seriously, why should I take you any serious?!!

Who cares giving you other evidences again when the ones I have given you like Isaiah 53. You don't accept it like you claimed "you don't accept evidences from authority". Pull it out your ass, silly kid. What's the need reasoning with someone like that who thinks this way. It is a waste of productive, valuable time. I would rather do other things. If you have got any logical reasoning left in you then you would understand that if Jesus truly had been crucified as confirmed by both Christian and non-christian sources and we have an empty tomb today then all his Godly claims, miracles, etcetera were true.

What your thick skull don't understand is that why Christianity continues to this day is simply because of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. If that had not happened then Christianity would have been useless and there would be no need for it. Christianity doesn't need to prove anything else to stupid skeptics like you who only hold up the mirror of foolishness and no true knowledge.

Thank God from Richard Carrier's profile that he debated Dr. Williams Lane Craig and was defeated. I loved how Richard Carrier wanted first that they debate about the reliability of the gospel writings before discussing if Jesus Christ rose from the dead. Dr. Williams Lane Craig has debated that severally with him and with many other top Atheists that I don't need to waste my time discussing that with you. You simply quit been lazy and go check out the several works and debates of Dr. Williams Lane Craig as regards that and also other Scholars I gave you. I have more important things to do than to waste my time discussing that with you.

You never would accept them even if I waste my time presenting the facts to you.

1 Share

Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by LordReed(m): 6:48am On Mar 20
PervertProphet:


I am all for civil and polite discussion but I can also be very rude if I start noticing you are becoming very silly. When I first saw you state that it's a "No True Scotsman" fallacy. I had to ask myself if you understand the context of the words you use or if you are just trying to "front" as usual like you really know what exactly you are talking about.

A quick read through Richard Carrier's profile shows that you are not to be taken serious just the same way Richard Carrier despite a Ph.D in Ancient History. His theories are not really taken serious by his peers. (Screenshot attached below).

The crux of our argument was if Jesus existed or not and since you agree that Jesus Christ existed then the rest of what you say are all rubbish and no wonder you would demand in your own words
"I say let's look at the evidence for his existence. If you have it bring it, I don't accept arguments from authority. Bring your evidence"

This above is just silly chidish talk. You don't accept arguments from authority. Okay, let's play your silly game "I don't accept your parents gave birth to you. Even if you present me with all the evidences like your birth certificate, etc. Nope! You must bring your own evidence from thin air, from your ass"...

Very silly talk. Discussion is over with that silliness. You won't accept what the credible documents of antiquity have to say. You won't accept what 99% of the scholars say. You won't accept the Bible that has archeology backing the records as true. I gave you one example out of numerous that are available today. I gave you Isaiah 53 which 2700 years after the Dead Sea Scrolls found, the originals at Israel museum backing it up but nope you won't accept nothing reasonable and factual. You just want to make baseless claims with no historical facts supporting your claims.




Its obvious you are a dullard because I repeated several times that this is not about denying the existence of Jesus but about presenting facts that support your position. You decided you will conflate questions that challenge your position with denying Jesus existed, that is a sign you are just looking to be offended even where no offense exists.

Yes discussion over because you can't keep on track like the dullard you are.
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by PervertProphet: 7:24am On Mar 20
[quote author=LordReed post=87597592]

Its obvious you are a dullard because I repeated several times that this is not about denying the existence of Jesus but about presenting facts that support your position. You decided you will conflate questions that challenge your position with denying Jesus existed, that is a sign you are just looking to be offended even where no offense exists.

Yes discussion over because you can't keep on track like the dullard you are



You are an airhead and also thickheaded.

I am the one not you that can't keep up track with a dolt like you.

I have given you Dead Sea Scroll proof 700 years even before Jesus Christ and also after Jesus Christ while you have not given any fact.

Stupid!!

What exactly are you arguing?!! You said that you do not accept Richard Carrier's obvious fringe claims that Jesus Christ never existed. You said you agreed that Jesus Christ existed. You also in same breath give us Carrier's false claims and also say next that you don't "accept evidences from authority".

Are you suffering from bi-polar disorder or something?!!

Dr. Williams Lane Craig has hundreds of works on the reliability of the New Testament scriptures and he has debated your man, Richard Carrier. Look up the works of Dr. Williams Lane Craig as regards this. I can't waste my time typing up something that is solid proof when you have got Google in your hands. Get the soft copy of his works and read them.
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by LordReed(m): 7:46am On Mar 20
PervertProphet:
You are an airhead and also thickheaded.

I am the one not you that can't keep up track with a dolt like you.

I have given you Dead Sea Scroll proof 700 years even before Jesus Christ and also after Jesus Christ while you have not given any fact.

Stupid!!

What exactly are you arguing?!! You said that you do not accept Richard Carrier's obvious fringe claims that Jesus Christ never existed. You said you agreed that Jesus Christ existed. You also in same breath give us Carrier's false claims and also say next that you don't "accept evidences from authority".

Are you suffering from bi-polar disorder or something?!!

Dr. Williams Lane Craig has hundreds of works on the reliability of the New Testament scriptures and he has debated your man, Richard Carrier. Look up the works of Dr. Williams Lane Craig as regards this. I can't waste my time typing up something that is solid proof when you have got Google in your hands. Get the soft copy of his works and read them.

Yeah dullard how many times did I repeat that I am not denying Jesus existed. But dunce shit for brains like you without 2 brain cells to rub together, can't keep focus.

Produce evidence for the historicity of Jesus got you into a frenzy of nonsense. It shows you have no idea of the things you say and simply rely on authorities, shouting about how scholars did this and didn't do that. Have you bothered to actually understand the evidence they present or you just interested in parroting what you've heard? An honest person would have gone ahead to present evidence not attempt to deflect to all the nonsense you went through.

You remain stùpid because you refuse to focus on facts.
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by PervertProphet: 8:47am On Mar 20
[quote author=LordReed post=87598791]

Yeah dullard how many times did I repeat that I am not denying Jesus existed. But dunce shit for brains like you without 2 brain cells to rub together, can't keep focus.

Produce evidence for the historicity of Jesus got you into a frenzy of nonsense. It shows you have no idea of the things you say and simply rely on authorities, shouting about how scholars did this and didn't do that. Have you bothered to actually understand the evidence they present or you just interested in parroting what you've heard? An honest person would have gone ahead to present evidence not attempt to deflect to all the nonsense you went through.

You remain stùpid because you refuse to focus on facts.


One word for you: Mumu.

I doubt you even know the meaning of the word "evidence".

I have given you evidence from historians of antiquity like Tacitus. There are others like Pliny the younger (61-113AD), Suetonius (69-140AD), and many more. On the Jewish side. I have given you evidences from the Mishnah, Talmud. The qur'an although not entirely accurate 800-900 years after the Bible is long being used in Churches said Jesus Christ existed and is forever alive with God now. Even the Muslims are waiting on HIS return to fight the Dajjal.

In the Bible itself. Hundreds of evidences of those who witnessed Jesus Christ but stupid dolt like you don't want none of these evidences.

2700 years and more after the resurrection and ascension of Jesus. No true modern Scholar doubts the Baptism and Crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Scholars like Dr. Williams Lane Craig, etc has debated several individuals and the truth about Jesus Christ still stands till today.


Top Schools like Harvard, Oxford, etc all have countless of studies and departments dedicated solely to Jesus Christ alone much more than any other figure on Earth. None of these Schools dedicates that amount of research on Santa Claus, Harry Potter, etcetera. If Jesus was never a historical figure. They won't do such. These are Schools, Colleges and Universities with Brains and not an empty airhead/nincompoop like you.

The Original Dead Sea Scrolls in Israel's Museum bears evidence. The Septuagint, Text Receptus, Cordexes, etc all bear evidences to the truth of this Jesus Christ. Even the Masoretic texts.


You have not even given me ½ evidence of yours that prove against the historicity of Jesus Christ. You agree that Jesus Christ was indeed a historical figure. Mumu, Since you agree that Jesus Christ existed then the Bible claims are correct. Then it means HIS Godly claims were correct. Then it means HIS Miracles were correct. Then it means HIS empty tomb to this day all correct. Who gave birth to an idiot like you? You deserve to be whipped. Even Richard Carrier that you provided me. His baseless works are not considered Convincing and Valid by his own peers (Professors, Historians, Scholars, Archeologists of repute, etc). They have compared his works against Historical evidences and have seen that he is just a petty adulterer who wants to further his philanderous ways by telling baseless lies against Jesus Christ.

99.9% of historicity is against you and you ask me to provide you personal evidences. Do you really know the meaning of the word "evidence"?!!

You are like a stupid child who refuses to accept Gravity because that was discovered by a Scientist of Faith. Hence, climbs to a Top rise building to take a jump. You would land on your bones. Arrow! That's the journey you are on. You have nothing called Knowledge. Not even an ounce of it.

How can you know better than all these Secular and Christian Scholars, Top Universities, Ancient Historians that lived in times closer to Jesus Christ.

You wey no go better school. You wey na Oturugbeke Community School wey you go. I should take your stupid unfounded claims in 2020 serious as against over 2000 years of scholarly works by various Scholars about the Historicity of Jesus Christ before and after Jesus. God forbid bad thing.

I never even mentioned to you the Church fathers some of whom were Africans who wrote about Jesus Christ. I should leave all these and take your own claims. Didinrin like you wey no know book. Na im make I support. You can only play these games with Ignorant individuals and Christians. Not with individuals like me who have investigated all these and if you want insults. I would dish them out to you till next year if you so wish. I am not one of those Nairalanders that backs down easily. Go check my records. I am knowledgeable about these facts and I am a crazy person both online and offline. So get ready for more putting you in your place.

I spit on you. Tuaah!!!!

You are not even worthy of conversation with my dog at home.
You are an ignoramus Oaf.

1 Like 1 Share

Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by PervertProphet: 9:34am On Mar 20
alicestockings:


you have bought into the lies of the archons, they control you with their corrupted "holy" text...

you are not serving the god of gods, but the demiurge. that irreverent child of sophia that sought to mimic the monad and vomited out his own creation, the twisted plane of the material, as a corrupted mirror of the spiritual.

seek gnosis, wayward child. cast the blinders off your eyes and wake up. eliminate that wicked hatred from your heart by casting off the chains of the archons that play with you like a puppet.

You smoke some pretty good weed, you know.
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by LordReed(m): 9:41am On Mar 20
PervertProphet:
.

Dummies like you keep fighting imaginary enemies. Shit for brains repeat for the last time stùpido I am not denying Jesus historicity. I hope the single brain cell and the half dead one you still possess can process that simple statement. Dry shit for brains.
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by PervertProphet: 10:05am On Mar 20
[quote author=LordReed post=87601807]

Dummies like you keep fighting imaginary enemies. Shit for brains repeat for the last time stùpido I am not denying Jesus historicity. I hope the single brain cell and the half dead one you still possess can process that simple statement. Dry shit for brains.

Pea-brain Cretin Spoony Shit for brains Coot.

Just go investigate all the evidences I have given you.

Wooden Head a.k.a run-of-the-mill Reed a.k.a Peasant Reed.

I doubt you even know what exactly you are arguing.

"I am not denying Jesus historicity" and next provides me with a man who is in denial of Jesus Christ's historicity.

Are you normal?!!

What exactly are you then arguing?!!

"I don't accept evidences from authority". Next, you ask I provide you evidences from thin air as against all the ones from Authority that I have provided you.


"Tacitus didn't mention Christ Jesus"
Boom! Next, I give you how Tacitus mentions Christ Jesus and even of his crucifixion by one of their Roman Ruler- Pilate. You starting talking next with spittle dribbling than your loud stinking unbrushed mouth about how Tacitus, a Roman Senator should have written "Details&Epistles" about Jesus Christ like he was a follower of Jesus Christ. Even if Tacitus had written epistles like Matthew, Luke, etc did. You would still come up with another silly excuse of him not talking about how Jesus Christ drank water and what cup Jesus used and how it is not reliable.


Hahahaha!!
You are hopeless oh!
And you are mentally sick.
You just don't know it.
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by LordReed(m): 10:14am On Mar 20
PervertProphet:
.

Apparently the 2 brain cells are dead. You are so stupid you don't understand simple English any more. I said to you it is fallacious to say everybody agrees Jesus is a historical figure then you interpret it as I am saying Jesus is not a historical figure. See how dumb you are? Of course one can't have a proper discussion with a dry shit ffor brains like you.

You are merely looking for who to fight, as you believe you have unseen enemies. Good luck with that shit.
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by PervertProphet: 10:54am On Mar 20
[quote author=LordReed post=87602820]

Apparently the 2 brain cells are dead. You are so stupid you don't understand simple English any more.

Peasant Reed a.k.a Wooden Head. I swear you are the trinity of stupidity: Nitwit, Dimwit and a Halfwit. I swear me discussing with you is doing you a big favour today. You really need help. To show that you are an illiterate.

What do you mean by 2 brain cells?!! You don't even know Science also?!!
Olodo, who told you that the brain is made of 2 cells. No wonder you can't comprehend anything factual. Hahahaha! That's because your brain was made of only 2 cells. I see why you are really hopeless and why you brain can't power up properly.

Uneducated numbskull. Each Brain made by Jesus Christ and in any normal human being is made of an average 100 billion cells. This is why we as humans can make this so much advancement. This is why we are smarter than any other kind of Specie on Earth.

I swear you are an under-developed midget.


I said to you it is fallacious to say everybody agrees Jesus is a historical figure then you interpret it as I am saying Jesus is not a historical figure. See how dumb you are? Of course one can't have a proper discussion with a dry shit ffor brains like you.

You are merely looking for who to fight, as you believe you have unseen enemies. Good luck with that shit.


That is not how we started our argument. Your conversation keeps bending with each post you make. You even asked I gave you evidence of the Historicity of Jesus Christ different from what history recorded about HIM as you won't be accepting any from authority and you made claims to suggest that the Gospel scriptures are not reliable.

You are a snake but I will easily crush you, Snake Head.
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by LordReed(m): 12:22pm On Mar 20
PervertProphet:
.

Bwahahahahahaha! I can't even. Look at who is calling someone a dimwit, trying to take 2 brain cells literally. OMFD! What a stupid, dull, cretinous, dipshit. LMFAO! No wonder, you don't understand English. I have been wasting time with a simpering simpleton idiot.

You are dullard and not worth anymore time. Adios idiota.
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by PervertProphet: 2:50pm On Mar 20
[quote author=LordReed post=87606480]

Bwahahahahahaha! I can't even. Look at who is calling someone a dimwit, trying to take 2 brain cells literally. OMFD! What a stupid, dull, cretinous, dipshit. LMFAO! No wonder, you don't understand English. I have been wasting time with a simpering simpleton idiot.

You are dullard and not worth anymore time. Adios idiota



Birdbrain a.k.a Wooden Head a.k.a Peasant Reed.

Ninny Meathead. Empty Numbskull. You are just realising that you are a nonentity that wasted my time. Olodo, that doesn't know anything. You a Baboon. Dingbat.

You are not worth my feaces in the toilet.
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by johnw47: 11:18pm On Mar 20
LordReed:


Hateful bigot, how grows the hate in your heart?

Lev_20:13  If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death;

^^^ it shows how seriously God takes the evils of homosexuality

but you twisted hateful bigot, lord homo reed
think it's natural for you to have other men's penis in your mouth and in your bum hole

2Co_4:4  In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by LordReed(m): 12:39am On Mar 21
johnw47:


Lev_20:13  If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death;

^^^ it shows how seriously God takes the evils of homosexuality

but you twisted hateful bigot, lord homo reed
think it's natural for you to have other men's penis in your mouth and in your bum hole

2Co_4:4  In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

Hateful bigot, how grows the hate in your heart?
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by johnw47: 12:42am On Mar 22
LordReed:


Hateful bigot, how grows the hate in your heart?

twisted hateful bigot, lord homo reed

even your demons know who Jesus is:

Mar 1:24  Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God.
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by LordReed(m): 12:45am On Mar 22
johnw47:


twisted hateful bigot, lord homo reed

even your demons know who Jesus is:

Mar 1:24  Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God.

Hateful bigot, how grows the hate in your heart?
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by johnw47: 12:58am On Mar 22
LordReed:


Hateful bigot, how grows the hate in your heart?

1Jn 3:8  He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by LordReed(m): 4:24am On Mar 22
johnw47:


1Jn 3:8  He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

Hateful bigot, how grows the hate in your heart?
Re: Isn't A Sin To Insult Satan? by sonmvayina(m): 6:12pm On Mar 22
MuttleyLaff:





I am, but I just hope you do too, lol

Of course you've set off on the wrong foot here, but hey, let me indulge you. To start with:
#1/ Who do you reckon is speaking in Jeremiah 50:2, hmm, lol?
#2/ Who again, what's the name you said is the creator of all and was the Lord of the OT, lol, hmm?

I want to post translation from Cyrus cylindrical seal now at the British museum..

(1) (2) (3) ... (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (Reply)

Jehovah Witness Dating Nigeria Facebook / One Small Question For Anti-catholics / Nollywood Actress Camillia Mberekpe Visits Christ Mercyland Deliverance Ministry

(Go Up)

Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health
religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket

Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2020 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 429
Disclaimer: Every Nairaland member is solely responsible for anything that he/she posts or uploads on Nairaland.