jaephoenix:

Lol. And I thought I was discoursing with a cerebral guy.
1. Which historians said Jesus existed? The only record of his existence were from Christian scholars who had no evidence.
2. And even if he existed, there was no evidence he died and resurrected. No such events exist in world history

even if Jesus is fictional are his so called teachings evil and shouldn't be practiced?

Jashub:
Oga Jesus really existed and he was spoken about by non-christian historians who didn't have a bias towards the religion. Secondly, why would you say Jesus didn't rise from the dead when it's pretty obvious that more than 500 people who saw him and died on account of their testimony.

Forgeries.
Those books were unashamedly forged. No wonder there was no mention of Jesus in mainstream History.

Abstract
The passage about Jesus Christ in Jewish historian Josephus’s writings has been debated for
centuries, as concerns its authenticity totally, partially or not at all. This brief “testimonium” is
proffered by Christian apologists as the “best evidence” for the historicity of Jesus, but it has
been declared many times to be a forgery in toto. A recent study by a renowned linguist confirms
this analysis of the entire passage as an interpolation by a Christian scribe, likely during the
fourth century or later.
Contents
Introduction
Narrative Anomaly
Christians or Chrēstiansς
Mutilation or Partial Interpolation?
Backgrounding and Foregrounding
Pilate Episodes
Piety, Not History
Crucifixion Blame
Time and Temporality
Emplotment and Gospels
Genre Difference
Nicene Creed
Conclusion
Bibliography
Introduction
Over the centuries, a passage in the works of the ancient Jewish historian Josephus (Antiquities
18.3.3/63) has been held up as one of the few “proofs” of the biblical story of Jesus Christέ
During this time, numerous theologians, historians and other scholars have provided many
reasons to suspect that the passage—called the Testimonium Flavianum or “TF”—is a forgery or
interpolation either in part or wholly.

I have the complete pdfs if you're interested in reading.

gohf:
I never said nor did that

You have altered your Topic. But even at that, it is still insinuating atheism is a get out of jail card for sin

gohf:

answer me this does it really matter?
Have you ever seen a child who already knows morals without being taught?

We were all born atheists {Psalms 51:5} until someone teach us about God {Deuteronomy 6:6-7} but why do we need to be taught the things of God?

Well despite the fact that children don't have class among themselves nor discriminates as they continue to live with their imperfect parents they will begin to learn from them all the traits of imperfection in the flesh so by the time they're in their teens they would have developed a personality that's according to the evil deeds they're seeing around them for instance they would have noticed how someone was unjustly treated when nobody said anything and nothing happened.
So their minds are shaped according to the things they see around them.

That's why God told his own people:

These words that I am commanding you today must be on your heart, and you must inculcate them in your sons and speak of them when you sit in your house and when you walk on the road and when you lie down and when you get up. Tie them as a reminder on your hand, and they must be like a headband on your forehead! Deuteronomy 6:6-8

So that an average Israelite may know that morality doesn't come by chance people teach people!

gohf:
isn't there?
A child desire to set something on fire

I will ask you again is it right for the child to burn millions worth of hard currency that could be use for many things

Okay. Lets me say its wrong, what are you trying to prove

jaephoenix:

You have altered your Topic. But even at that, it is still insinuating atheism is a get out of jail card for sin

didn't alter it, just responded to queries and discuss

And lol, atheism can never be a "get out of jail card for sin" because no one can escape un-repented wickedness

gohf:
do they need help because they believe that if they do wrong they will be punished or they need help because they believe in doing the very good you claim to do?

They need help because its the promise of a punishment that is preventing them from sining

gohf:
everyone of His child knows Him

Youre just talking gibberish. What father are you talking about?

FxMasterz:
■ At the first bolded, please note that the Holy Spirit is a very gentle Spirit. He doesn't take control over you as stated in your experience.
■ The Bible enjoins us to try all spirits. Not all spirits are of God but all satanic spirits would pretend to be Godly spirits. If you've blasphemed God and His Holy Spirit during your days in Atheism, you're already possessed by a spirit of hell. You'll need deliverance to be free.
■ The spirit you saw was already in you. It simply manifested to block your chances of completely turning yourself in to Christ. He still uses you today to turn away many people from the way of truth. It's that spirit that's responsible for the grievous heresies for which you've been known on this forum. I'm not saying this to attack your person. I'm only pointing you to the reality of your experience so that you can look inwards and make possible amends before it's too late.
■ This my position is further confirmed by the second bolded. You never even believed in Jesus before having that experience. A simple faith or belief in Christ is the first and most important thing that must happen before you can have any Godly experience whatsoever. Whatsoever you do in relation to God without faith is sin.
■ How can anyone be possessed with the Holy Spirit while still in absolute unbelief? The Holy Spirit would first convince you, help you build faith, afterwards, other divine encounters would follow. Faith itself is the foundation. There's no other foundation for encounters with the Spirit of God except the foundation of faith in Christ Jesus. Such a spirit that manifested without the foundation of faith in Christ Jesus is very questionable. And, judging from the fruits you bear, our fears are confirmed. Seek deliverance my brother. May God have mercy on your soul. Many Atheists are possessed without knowing it. Some have already reached a stage of no return. The only option before them is eternal damnation.

1. I mentioned being born-again - born of water and born of the spirit -, and Jesus Christ said absolutely nothing relating nothing, so explain to me how you came about connecting what I said to the Holy Spirit.

2. According to Jesus Christ, only those who are born-again - who belong in the Kingdom of God — who in fact have the Holy Spirit in them can blaspheme Him. So, explain how one who does not even believe in God — an atheist — is able to circumvent the rule as set by Jesus Christ Himself in order to blaspheme the Holy Spirit?

3. According to the teachings of Jesus Christ in Matthew 15 vs 1 - 14 & Mark 7 vs 1 - 13, it is instead the doctrines and traditions of men that drive people away from the Truth of God and nullifies the power of God in the lives of people rendering their worship of God meaningless. But here you are suggesting instead that by continuously teaching the Truth of God as spoken by Jesus Christ, I turn people away from the Truth of Jesus Christ. How is that possible? Are you insinuating that Jesus Christ got it wrong in His Gospel teachings? Or do you instead confuse the doctrines and traditions of men which I speak against with the Truth of God?

4. Demons also believe(mentally acknowledgment kind) in Jesus Christ, so are we then to conclude by your assertion that they are saved by Him? Look, Jesus Christ taught you in clear words that those who love Him are those who obey His teachings and commandments.

15 “If you love me, you will do what I command.
16 I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper[a] to be with you forever.
17 The Helper is the Spirit of truth. The people of the world cannot accept him, because they don’t see him or know him. But you know him. He lives with you, and he will be in you. - [b]John 14 vs 15 - 17

Saying with your mouth and in your head that you believe(mental acknowledgment) in Jesus Christ mean absolutely nothing where Jesus Christ, and God, is concerned. So, any kind of faith you claim to have that is not preceded by the obedience of His teachings and commandments amounts to absolutely nothing where God is concerned.

9 “I have loved you as the Father has loved me. Now continue in my love.
10 I have obeyed my Father’s commands, and he continues to love me. In the same way, if you obey my commands, I will continue to love you.
11 I have told you these things so that you can have the true happiness that I have. I want you to be completely happy.
12 This is what I command you: Love each other as I have loved you.
13 The greatest love people can show is to die for their friends.
14 You are my friends if you do what I tell you to do. - John 15 vs 9 - 15

In the Kingdom of God, obedience is the Key for without obedience, it is impossible to please God or even know God.

5. Again, you would need to explain why you keep pointing at the Holy Spirit when
■ Jesus Christ never said that you get the Holy Spirit when you become born-again
■ I never mentioned getting the Holy Spirit when I became born-again either

Kobojunkie:
1. Good observation! At first, I was concerned about being controlled by a spirit and all, and in those early days, I went from one psychiatrist to the other trying to figure out what happened to me but every one of them gave me a clean bill of health telling me that I was just stressing over stuff. They even took me off meds I had been on for many years because they figured there was no problem left to resolve. It was a hilarious time in my life too because never in a million years could I have figured that what Jesus Christ meant by being born of spirit, a part of the born-again process meant allowing oneself to be possessed by, not of, a spirit. And this spirit is always there with me, 24/7, only no one else can tell unless he begins, what has become a sort of regular routine.
So, anyone who tells you he/she is born-again but is not possessed by some sort of spirit, is a liar!

And yes, it wasn't necessarily the spirit that drove me to then pursue Jesus Christ with vigor after that, but instead the fact that I had started on that path of my own before he showed up in my life, a sort of confirmation that I was on the right path. So, it made sense for me to continue along that path to get closer to that promised by Jesus Christ.

2. I don't think at that point where I gained access into the Kingdom of God that there was any Holy spirit in the picture. Jesus Christ never mentioned a Holy Spirit in the context of John 3 vs 1 - 8 so it always upsets me when so-called Christians automatically assume being born of spirit is about the Holy spirit. It couldn't though since instead what Jesus Christ said is that one is able to gain access into the Kingdom of God via either of two gates, the Broad gate which leads to destruction(Hellfire) at the end, or the Narrow gate which leads to true life(Heaven) at its end - Matthew 7 vs 13 - 14 & Luke 13 vs 22 -30. This means that all those who will end up in Hellfire will all also be born-again. Surely, they couldn't have been born of the Holy Spirit only to have an end in Hell - how can the Holy Spirit end up in Hellfire?

3. Yeah, I started on a path of obedience BEFORE I became born-again. So, when people say they somehow need the Holy Spirit to come to hold their hand before they can then obey God, I know for sure that those folks are lying.

Actually youre right to an extent. Christianity is a mental illness which should be eradicated. It makes some people susceptible to delusions of grandeur, persecutions, audio visual hallucinations etc

jaephoenix:

Forgeries.
Those books were unashamedly forged. No wonder there was no mention of Jesus in mainstream History.

Abstract
The passage about Jesus Christ in Jewish historian Josephus’s writings has been debated for
centuries, as concerns its authenticity totally, partially or not at all. This brief “testimonium” is
proffered by Christian apologists as the “best evidence” for the historicity of Jesus, but it has
been declared many times to be a forgery in toto. A recent study by a renowned linguist confirms
this analysis of the entire passage as an interpolation by a Christian scribe, likely during the
fourth century or later.
Contents
Introduction
Narrative Anomaly
Christians or Chrēstiansς
Mutilation or Partial Interpolation?
Backgrounding and Foregrounding
Pilate Episodes
Piety, Not History
Crucifixion Blame
Time and Temporality
Emplotment and Gospels
Genre Difference
Nicene Creed
Conclusion
Bibliography
Introduction
Over the centuries, a passage in the works of the ancient Jewish historian Josephus (Antiquities
18.3.3/63) has been held up as one of the few “proofs” of the biblical story of Jesus Christέ
During this time, numerous theologians, historians and other scholars have provided many
reasons to suspect that the passage—called the Testimonium Flavianum or “TF”—is a forgery or
interpolation either in part or wholly.

I have the complete pdfs if you're interested in reading.

Josephus was a jew, not a Christian...so his writings couldn't have been in favor of any Christian doctrine because that would be heresy under Jewish law . Secondly , let's assume he were wrong ...and he was biased, but what about Tacticus and his accounts ...? Would you say he was biased too?

jaephoenix:

Youre just talking gibberish. What father are you talking about?

the very first Father of all

jaephoenix:

They need help because its the promise of a punishment that is preventing them from sining

and what would that help be?

Get them to do what is wrong and not care who suffers for it

Hmm how pathetic its like one who can move on their own two feet saying they would help the one who moves with a wheelchair by removing the wheelchair without healing them. So if the wheelchair doesn't hurt anyone why remove it?

jaephoenix:

Okay. Lets me its wrong, what are you trying to prove

trying to explain a portrait to the blind would be easier if by now you still lack understanding of what you have read

jaephoenix:

Actually youre right to an extent. Christianity is a mental illness which should be eradicated. It makes some people susceptible to delusions of grandeur, persecutions, audio visual hallucinations etc

and in what way those that "illness" affect your life

gohf:
I wonder what an orphan child would say...

the problem with showing you is the clause, without holiness it is impossible to see God, the pure in heart are blessed to see God. Are you qualified to see Him, that should be your thought.

You should think if a president that does exist in flesh is hard to see, how much a God.

Asking for God that interacts as your earthly parents is like asking for a president that will interact with you like a lover. Not impossible but still the odds. If you don't see the problem in your request you can as well as ask for the sun to rise in your room.

Morality doesn't change, good is good, good will not become evil. Good is good, because it is not selfish nor self serving. Now the only kind of fake morality that changes is the king that caters to those in power who's needs are ever changing and never satisfied. To those whom been pleased is what is good irrespective of how it affects others or life or the earth.

We teach our children what has been taught to us, and no matter how far you wish to dig, it all begins with God no matter what name He is called in different religions or culture.

You can live in the illusion that morality is human determined but wake up the reality that humans would burn banks because of a lit displeasure or police stations or fuel stations. Question is, where did that source of morality you claimed human possess go. Did the very originators of so called morality let go of it and becomes animals.

You amuse me, you look at men and believe they are the source of morality 😂😂😂😂

An orphan will have to have morality taught to them by some means usually another person. Not sure why you think that is something remarkable.

Again I have evidence for presidents or any other human in a job you want to use as analogy, I don't have evidence for your god. Analogies are not evidence.

Morality must change because human society changes. Even religious dictates change.

Nothing in evidence points to any god starting anything and especially not morality.

You are the one living in the illusion that your morality is determined by a god. You are certainly welcome to live in that illusion but the reality is even right before your eyes morality is being determined by the humans all around you. At some point most societies thought slavery was morally acceptable but now we no longer see it that way. It wasn't any god that instituted slavery nor was it any god that ended it.

The joke is on you who thinks a god is directing morals from anywhere.

LordReed:


An orphan will have to have morality taught to them by some means usually another person. Not sure why you think that is something remarkable.

Again I have evidence for presidents or any other human in a job you want to use as analogy, I don't have evidence for your god. Analogies are not evidence.

Morality must change because human society changes. Even religious dictates change.

Nothing in evidence points to any god starting anything and especially not morality.

You are the one living in the illusion that your morality is determined by a god. You are certainly welcome to live in that illusion but the reality is even right before your eyes morality is being determined by the humans all around you. At some point most societies thought slavery was morally acceptable but now we no longer see it that way. It wasn't any god that instituted slavery nor was it any god that ended it.

The joke is on you who thinks a god is directing morals from anywhere.

I didn't give you analogies as evidence but to help your understanding. You have evidence of what you believe in, those who believe in God have their evidences. Now does that mean you're right and they are wrong?

Morality doesn't have to change because "society" changes. What exactly is changing? Definitely not the basis of a society, except one changes what makes up a society and keeps people together.

The terms of morality might improve to address more issues to help those with weaker understanding address new challenging tasks.

Be kind to your neighbor that's morality, right. The means of kindness might change or improve but that doesn't change the kindness. You can go about it how ever way you wish, even ignore whatever evidences have been shown you all through your life.

But then to you is it moral to laugh at what another believes?

Of it isn't then you are wrong and immoral to laugh at others but if it is then you are a joke as well. 😊

gohf:
very well fine
A child doesn't know the value of what he is about to burn or is burning, so obviously there isn't a feeling of having done wrong in anyway. In fact such child would feel they are right to do whatever they wanted because they could do it, and justify doing it. That in no way makes it right

But an adult, or using your words, one of higher standard and understanding, who knows the value of those papers would know that that child has done wrong.

If God sets a standard and rule that values life is because he knows the value of it. The child like those sinners, did whatever they did out of their own understanding, pleasure or desire.

Morality cannot originate from an ignorant mind, is has to come from higher intelligent and one with high understanding and values.

The way that child sees that bag of paper and the way an adult sees it will always be different even though they are both living beings

What you're doing here is what is called The slothful induction fallacy

And people use the slothful induction fallacy when they ignore substantial evidence and make their claim based on a coincidence or something entirely irrelevant. With this kind of argument, there is research or evidence that clearly indicates that something is true. The person making their argument may choose or fail to acknowledge this.

Here is an example:

Person A: "I was excited to see that our onboarding process increased our employee retention rates. When I interviewed our employees last week, 98% of them said they are still with the company because of the support they got when they first started."

Person B: "I think the real reason everyone likes it here is that we allow dogs in the office."

From the above, your correlation of using a burning paper to counter my argument does not even make sense or have a relation to what is being discussed

gohf:
I didn't give you analogies as evidence but to help your understanding. You have evidence of what you believe in, those who believe in God have their evidences. Now does that mean you're right and they are wrong?

Morality doesn't have to change because "society" changes. What exactly is changing? Definitely not the basis of a society, except one changes what makes up a society and keeps people together.

The terms of morality might improve to address more issues to help those with weaker understanding address new challenging tasks.

Be kind to your neighbor that's morality, right. The means of kindness might change or improve but that doesn't change the kindness. You can go about it how ever way you wish, even ignore whatever evidences have been shown you all through your life.

But then to you is it moral to laugh at what another believes?

Of it isn't then you are wrong and immoral to laugh at others but if it is then you are a joke as well. 😊

Where did I say anything about anyone being right or wrong about a god existing? I said I don't have evidence for any god, simple.

Can you tell me the reason you think slavery ending is not a change of moral stance.

There is nothing immoral about laughing at people's beliefs especially when such beliefs are unreasonable.

Are you getting salty because I said jokes on you? LoLz. The same you who said: 'You amuse me', Bwahahahahaha!

LordReed:


Where did I say anything about anyone being right or wrong about a god existing? I said I don't have evidence for any god, simple.

Can you tell me the reason you think slavery ending is not a change of moral stance.

There is nothing immoral about laughing at people's beliefs especially when such beliefs are unreasonable.

Are you getting salty because I said jokes on you? LoLz. The same you who said: 'You amuse me', Bwahahahahaha!

😑 u seriously don't know the person that championed the end of slavery in UK? That the person believed strongly in God 😳

Lol which yeye change of moral stand changed slavery, oya educate us, and show how it was not connected to God or the gospel in anyway

gohf:
😑 u seriously don't know the person that championed the end of slavery in UK? That the person believed strongly in God 😳

Lol which yeye change of moral stand changed slavery, oya educate us, and show how it was not connected to God or the gospel in anyway

LoLz, answer the question I posed to you first then you can ask me a question in return, that's how conversations work.

gohf:
very well fine
A child doesn't know the value of what he is about to burn or is burning, so obviously there isn't a feeling of having done wrong in anyway. In fact such child would feel they are right to do whatever they wanted because they could do it, and justify doing it. That in no way makes it right

But an adult, or using your words, one of higher standard and understanding, who knows the value of those papers would know that that child has done wrong.

If God sets a standard and rule that values life is because he knows the value of it. The child like those sinners, did whatever they did out of their own understanding, pleasure or desire.

Morality cannot originate from an ignorant mind, is has to come from higher intelligent and one with high understanding and values.

The way that child sees that bag of paper and the way an adult sees it will always be different even though they are both living beings

Did you read any of my posts?

gohf:

You said children don't know enough but we who claim to be adults know enough? Someone asks about the source of morals as if a child could develop such in isolation.

so why is it wrong to compare us to children in the face of vast knowledge of the earth, even in the face of history not to mention God Almighty and yet we who are but mere infants would claim to be the origin of morals denying the existence of a Father, a God above us and before us.

Do we know enough of this world to claim there is no God or judgement after death. Or claim we are the only existence and after death is nothing. Even with limitation knowledge the arrogance to attempt to explain away supernatural or things beyond human understanding just to deny the fact that there is a God.

Children is the best analogy to show how arrogant adults can be in the face of God.

You said the goal of a parent is to educate, does it then sound wrong to say God as a Father of men, strove to educate them?

And yes being an atheists is not an excuse to be wicked in anyway.

What supernatural events are we struggling to explain away?

gohf:
jaephoenix have you heard

Heard what?

gohf:
even if it is a lie would you admit it or remove it

So we don't have criminals here masquerading as Christians?

jaephoenix:

So we don't have criminals here masquerading as Christians?

everywhere not just here

LordReed:


LoLz, answer the question I posed to you first then you can ask me a question in return, that's how conversations work.

is that your moral standard of having a conversation 😁

In what I wrote is my answer to you

jaephoenix:

What supernatural events are we struggling to explain away?

the fact you're smarter than a monkey but still feel you are related to them and call them your ancestors because its so hard to accept God accepting monkeys is way better 😂😂

gohf:
is that your moral standard of having a conversation 😁

In what I wrote is my answer to you

In decent conversations you don't jumping in with a question when another question has been asked.

My question again: Can you tell me the reason you think slavery ending is not a change of moral stance.

gohf:
everywhere not just here

Why is it more in Nigeria/Africa

gohf:
are they? Or you are afraid to accept the answers and explanations they give you.

Not afraid. Question is, is it true?