How Jesus became god'... from not being one. Bart Ehrman.

[alang1216]

I agree about Jewish monotheism but not the rest.

More trivia from Ehrman: Christianity began as a minor cult of Judaism but it soon diverged into two opposing camps centered on the question of did Christians have to first become Jews. The Christians in Israel believed so, those of the diaspora said no. It was Roman pagans that decided the issue by wiping out the Christian Jews of Jerusalem when the Jews revolted.

You're just mixed up with your first statement. We had the ancient peoples including Jews before Moses and those after. The monotheist Jews came after Moses being given the Ten Commandments which is the start of the Bible. The Jews before Moses were polytheists. All the ancient peoples were. You don't even realize this. However, even a dolt like you recognizes the importance and power of the Bible with its conversion to the one Biblical God (capital 'G'), monotheism, and the rise of the Bible. What does Ehrman say about that? Does he only focus on the NT haha?

You shall have no other gods before Me. Odd the text doesn't say that there are no other gods, only that the Jews will worship only one god. There was a convent that is called Monolatry

 

[alang1216]

You think Stalin prayed? lol he was a sociopath, just smarter than his enemy sociopaths is all. You probably would think of him ans a hero. And I'm not surprised you missed my point.

Stalin was indeed a sociopath but he got nearly everything he wanted while many devoutly religious people were murdered by him.

Stalin was such a sociopath and megalomaniac that his own people, not just military, underneath him were afraid of crossing him. So your argument is glee that many devoutly religious people were murdered by him. One evil and cruel man rising to the highest level of power meant God had failed his devout followers. You would be one to blame such a God. However, we still have in the Bible with its prophecies that the second coming of Jesus would be of vengeance. The atheists are wrong about a "loving" God in that sense. He will be there and arrange it so all eyes can see from the past, present, and future. Everything will be settled on Earth and then final judgement. That's when Stalin gets his and the devoutly religious who suffered will see that their prayers were answered.

This started with prayers for ponies if I recall. There may be justice after death but I don't see a lot of justice in this life. Stalin was my example of an evil person getting a pony while devout believers go without.

 

[james bond]

But do you pray now and does god hear you? You already said that the holy spirit hears you and not god. Why? Lol do you also believe that god created your bicycle for you?

First, answer my question. What is the point of your question? It seems like something that becomes a ridiculous point. Many of your posts end up this way.

My point is you seem like a weirdo and one who is on meds to me. You'll appear rational in one post and then come out with a weird screech like "Lol do you also believe that god created your bicycle for you?" You like to talk about taking medications, so it's probably time for you take your prescribed meds.

 

[esalla]

Like Disraeli said, Christianity is completed Judaism. Jews didn't become monotheistic until Deutro-Isaiah, and since universalism is implicit in monotheism, Judaism became explicitly universal via Christianity.

I agree about Jewish monotheism but not the rest.

More trivia from Ehrman: Christianity began as a minor cult of Judaism but it soon diverged into two opposing camps centered on the question of did Christians have to first become Jews. The Christians in Israel believed so, those of the diaspora said no. It was Roman pagans that decided the issue by wiping out the Christian Jews of Jerusalem when the Jews revolted.

It was certainly trivial, since it's false. Few Christian Jews remained in Jerusalem by the time of the Revolt; they wer already scattered faer and wide, having been persecuted already, with most of them killed long before Paul was executed in Rome. The Jerusalem Jews themselves killed most of them, like his brother James and many others. The Second Jewish Revolt, the bar Kokhba revolt, finished the split and drove Christians out of the synagogues, also accompanied by massacres of Christians by Orthodox Jews and Pharisees, who made up most of the new 'Rabbis' running around. Christianity spread quickly and widely, as did most Jews who had converted.

You may be right about some of the timings since what I wrote was not just taken from Ehrman.

I think it is safe to say most Jews did not convert and became targets of Christians. Christianity grew by conversions of pagans. It was still a small minority of the Roman world until Constantine.

When was schizophrenia discovered

1908

Wrong, schizophrenia was discovered in 1809, however the term was coined around the time you quoted.

Sounds not plausible.

Again schizophrenia existed long before being named

Sure exists schizophrenia longer. But the word "schizophrenia" (=loss of the inner consistence of the processes of the soul) was used the first time in history from the Swiss doctor Eugen Bleuler in 1908 in medical research.

Have you ever been tested

 

[esalla]

Erhman has been refuted so many times it's a wonder anybody would run around claiming he's some great 'scholar'. Darrell Bock alone has shut him down literally every time Bock bothered to critique his books, as well as Elaine Pagels and the rest of the fake 'scholars' from the Gnostic revivalist scam. The Peanut Gallery can start with Bock's The Missing Gospels, a work explaining to lay people from a secular point of view why the various popular modern claims of the original orthodoxy being 'falsified' No is rubbish and nonsense by merely using textual analysis and historical records. From there it gets very easy to prove the Erhman claims are total rubbish.

.

- from a secular point of view why the various popular modern claims of the original orthodoxy being 'falsified' is rubbish and nonsense by merely using textual analysis and historical records.

there is no original orthodoxy from the 1st century the falsification is the orthodoxy made up in the 4th century.

the same example applies, sicko -

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
.
forgeries and fallacies brought to your attention previously. the same pattern for all three desert religions - the ten commandments etched by the Almighty never existed.

I don't know why so many people in the USA misunderstand this sentences. Only god - and no one else - speaks the final judgement. Jesus - the son of god - said "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." So not you, not I nor anyone else - only Jesus, true god from true god, is the one who is able to say: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.".

Example: "The philosopher" of Christians was for long centuries Aristotle, "the interpreter" (of the philosophy of Aristotle) was Averroes. Aristotle was a pagan "atheist" (the early Christians were also called "atheists"), Averroes was a Muslim. So who cared about? Truth is always true - independent from the person, who speaks out the truth. In case of Aristotle and Averroes we speak about the founder of all modern universities today.

Get medicated

no comment - but a question because of this "style": Are you a member of the organisation NRA?

No but my 45 is loaded with hollow points

Okay. You are indeed a member of the strange group of weapon fetishists, which started to grow since the 1960ies/70ies in the USA under the influence of the organisation NRA. This explains why you don't argue but try to "kill" the people, who make the mistake to speak with you.

I have never tried to kill anyone and if I did no weapon would be needed

I fear critical self reflection of weapon users leads only to their own death. What do you call a continously repeated "argument" like "get medicated"? I call such a behavior a stupid intrigant attack of an evil willing extremist, who has not any manners and not any idea what he tries to speak about. So let it be to speak with me furthermore. Comprende?

Get medicated.

Okay. You are not shy to show to everyone that you are an extremist idiot. Same is doing your president Donald Trump. What's wrong with your country?

If my country farts at your country you will never have been

 

[zaangalewa]

Erhman has been refuted so many times it's a wonder anybody would run around claiming he's some great 'scholar'. Darrell Bock alone has shut him down literally every time Bock bothered to critique his books, as well as Elaine Pagels and the rest of the fake 'scholars' from the Gnostic revivalist scam. The Peanut Gallery can start with Bock's The Missing Gospels, a work explaining to lay people from a secular point of view why the various popular modern claims of the original orthodoxy being 'falsified' is rubbish and nonsense by merely using textual analysis and historical records. From there it gets very easy to prove the Erhman claims are total rubbish.

.

- from a secular point of view why the various popular modern claims of the original orthodoxy being 'falsified' is rubbish and nonsense by merely using textual analysis and historical records.

there is no original orthodoxy from the 1st century the falsification is the orthodoxy made up in the 4th century.

the same example applies, sicko -

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
.
forgeries and fallacies brought to your attention previously. the same pattern for all three desert religions - the ten commandments etched by the Almighty never existed.

I don't know why so many people in the USA misunderstand this sentences. Only god - and no one else - speaks the final judgement. Jesus - the son of god - said "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." So not you, not I nor anyone else - only Jesus, true god from true god, is the one who is able to say: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.".

Example: "The philosopher" of Christians was for long centuries Aristotle, "the interpreter" (of the philosophy of Aristotle) was Averroes. Aristotle was a pagan "atheist" (the early Christians were also called "atheists"), Averroes was a Muslim. So who cared about? Truth is always true - independent from the person, who speaks out the truth. In case of Aristotle and Averroes we speak about the founder of all modern universities today.

.

only Jesus, true god from true god, is the one who is able to say: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.".

.
there is no evidence the 1st century religious itinerant ever claimed to be the biological son of the Almighty

There is no evidence that Chrisitians existed at all in the 1st century. Nevertheless this is plausible.

- the above is a forgery written in the 4th century to elicit their religion of the roman empire as irrefutable as they have accomplished in your regard.
.
“Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani”
.
again the words of a dying man prior to his immediate death. the closing scene of the 1st century and of the spoken religion of antiquity - how you think otherwise is your issue - you impose on those that know better.

I don't have any idea what you try to tell me. What say this words to you yourselve? What do you think I should learn from this words?

Christians are followers of Christ, they existed in Christ time and still do

?

Are you Breezewood?

I am what I am

A drugged and drunken weapon fetishist, who tries to use words like swords?

 

[zaangalewa]

Erhman has been refuted so many times it's a wonder anybody would run around claiming he's some great 'scholar'. Darrell Bock alone has shut him down literally every time Bock bothered to critique his books, as well as Elaine Pagels and the rest of the fake 'scholars' from the Gnostic revivalist scam. The Peanut Gallery can start with Bock's The Missing Gospels, a work explaining to lay people from a secular point of view why the various popular modern claims of the original orthodoxy being 'falsified' No is rubbish and nonsense by merely using textual analysis and historical records. From there it gets very easy to prove the Erhman claims are total rubbish.

.

- from a secular point of view why the various popular modern claims of the original orthodoxy being 'falsified' is rubbish and nonsense by merely using textual analysis and historical records.

there is no original orthodoxy from the 1st century the falsification is the orthodoxy made up in the 4th century.

the same example applies, sicko -

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
.
forgeries and fallacies brought to your attention previously. the same pattern for all three desert religions - the ten commandments etched by the Almighty never existed.

I don't know why so many people in the USA misunderstand this sentences. Only god - and no one else - speaks the final judgement. Jesus - the son of god - said "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." So not you, not I nor anyone else - only Jesus, true god from true god, is the one who is able to say: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.".

Example: "The philosopher" of Christians was for long centuries Aristotle, "the interpreter" (of the philosophy of Aristotle) was Averroes. Aristotle was a pagan "atheist" (the early Christians were also called "atheists"), Averroes was a Muslim. So who cared about? Truth is always true - independent from the person, who speaks out the truth. In case of Aristotle and Averroes we speak about the founder of all modern universities today.

Get medicated

no comment - but a question because of this "style": Are you a member of the organisation NRA?

No but my 45 is loaded with hollow points

Okay. You are indeed a member of the strange group of weapon fetishists, which started to grow since the 1960ies/70ies in the USA under the influence of the organisation NRA. This explains why you don't argue but try to "kill" the people, who make the mistake to speak with you.

I have never tried to kill anyone and if I did no weapon would be needed

I fear critical self reflection of weapon users leads only to their own death. What do you call a continously repeated "argument" like "get medicated"? I call such a behavior a stupid intrigant attack of an evil willing extremist, who has not any manners and not any idea what he tries to speak about. So let it be to speak with me furthermore. Comprende?

Get medicated.

Okay. You are not shy to show to everyone that you are an extremist idiot. Same is doing your president Donald Trump. What's wrong with your country?

If my country farts at your country you will never have been

If your country farts then it stinks - or what do you think why we wear masks in Germany?

 

[esalla]

But do you pray now and does god hear you? You already said that the holy spirit hears you and not god. Why? Lol do you also believe that god created your bicycle for you?

First, answer my question. What is the point of your question? It seems like something that becomes a ridiculous point. Many of your posts end up this way.

My point is you seem like a weirdo and one who is on meds to me. You'll appear rational in one post and then come out with a weird screech like "Lol do you also believe that god created your bicycle for you?" You like to talk about taking medications, so it's probably time for you take your prescribed meds.

You have a problem with screech owls

 

[james bond]

You shall have no other gods before Me. Odd the text doesn't say that there are no other gods, only that the Jews will worship only one god. There was a convent that is called Monolatry

You still miss the point. Monolatry would've still been a sin of paganism. Besides, you didn't say that. You said monotheism.

You do realize that paganism is the opposite of atheism don't you?

Here's a bit of trivia I read in one of Ehrman's books. Pagans used to refer to early Christians as 'atheists' because there were so many gods that Christians didn't believe in.

Haha. Got a link to show paganism is the opposite of atheism? It just shows that you are a simpleton asf.

Same with using Ehrman to back up your claim?

Biblical
"I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not yield my glory to another or my praise to idols." Isaiah 42:8

Etymyology
paganism (n.)
"religious beliefs and practices of pagans," early 15c., paganisme, from Church Latin paganismus, from paganus (see pagan). Alternative paganity is from 1540s; pagandom is from 1739.

pagan

pagan | Etymology of pagan by etymonline

"person of non-Christian or non-Jewish faith," from Late Latin paganus "pagan," in… See origin and meaning of pagan.

www.etymonline.com

"The origin of the term Pagan is an interesting word study that has taken a few twists and turns along the way. Today we generally hear the word used to refer to the worship of something other than God, such as polytheism, witchcraft, nature worship, or some other form of idolatry. However, the term once had a much broader meaning."

...

"Paganism, Atheism, and Agnosticism Contrast with Christianity

These three belief systems, though different and unique, stand in stark contrast to Christianity in that they are devoid of any hope or joy beyond the here and now. Where Christianity urges patience in trials, love for enemies, and faith in God when we cannot see Him working, these three are simply built outside of faith and hope."

What Is the Difference between Pagan, Agnostic, and Atheist?

As we stack these systems next to one another we see three very distinct worldviews emerge: Paganism’s belief in the supernatural outside of Christianity, Atheism’s belief in no supernatural whatsoever, and Agnosticism’s assertion that we have no...

www.crosswalk.com

Why do I get the feeling you know as much about paganism as you do about evolution?

"These three belief systems, though different and unique, stand in stark contrast to Christianity in that they are devoid of any hope or joy beyond the here and now."

There is no heaven or hell for atheists while agnostics are just on the fence. Just because they believe in many gods, that doesn't mean pagans don't envision an afterlife. Many pagan cultures built burial mounds that included items to be used in the next world. Egyptians built huge pyramids to ensure a comfortable post-death experience.

There is a good case to be made that there is little difference between Christianity and paganism. Pagans have big gods (God), little gods (Satan), demigods (god-mortal offspring, like Jesus), and heros with divine help (Samson).

alang1216 : "There is a good case to be made that there is little difference between Christianity and paganism. Pagans have big gods (God), little gods (Satan), demigods (god-mortal offspring, like Jesus), and heros with divine help (Samson)."

This makes no sense at all. You're just making stuff up in your own head to back up what you said before about, " paganism is the opposite of atheism." I caught you in your lie, so asked for a simple link. You don't have one, so you make up a ridiculous example. Now, that's circular reasoning .

From your last sentence, you STILL DO NOT KNOW ABOUT PAGANISM even after given Biblical, etymyological, and a Christian blog links for it. You don't have anything from Ehrman because he isn't stupid.

 

[esalla]

Erhman has been refuted so many times it's a wonder anybody would run around claiming he's some great 'scholar'. Darrell Bock alone has shut him down literally every time Bock bothered to critique his books, as well as Elaine Pagels and the rest of the fake 'scholars' from the Gnostic revivalist scam. The Peanut Gallery can start with Bock's The Missing Gospels, a work explaining to lay people from a secular point of view why the various popular modern claims of the original orthodoxy being 'falsified' is rubbish and nonsense by merely using textual analysis and historical records. From there it gets very easy to prove the Erhman claims are total rubbish.

.

- from a secular point of view why the various popular modern claims of the original orthodoxy being 'falsified' is rubbish and nonsense by merely using textual analysis and historical records.

there is no original orthodoxy from the 1st century the falsification is the orthodoxy made up in the 4th century.

the same example applies, sicko -

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
.
forgeries and fallacies brought to your attention previously. the same pattern for all three desert religions - the ten commandments etched by the Almighty never existed.

I don't know why so many people in the USA misunderstand this sentences. Only god - and no one else - speaks the final judgement. Jesus - the son of god - said "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." So not you, not I nor anyone else - only Jesus, true god from true god, is the one who is able to say: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.".

Example: "The philosopher" of Christians was for long centuries Aristotle, "the interpreter" (of the philosophy of Aristotle) was Averroes. Aristotle was a pagan "atheist" (the early Christians were also called "atheists"), Averroes was a Muslim. So who cared about? Truth is always true - independent from the person, who speaks out the truth. In case of Aristotle and Averroes we speak about the founder of all modern universities today.

.

only Jesus, true god from true god, is the one who is able to say: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.".

.
there is no evidence the 1st century religious itinerant ever claimed to be the biological son of the Almighty

There is no evidence that Chrisitians existed at all in the 1st century. Nevertheless this is plausible.

- the above is a forgery written in the 4th century to elicit their religion of the roman empire as irrefutable as they have accomplished in your regard.
.
“Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani”
.
again the words of a dying man prior to his immediate death. the closing scene of the 1st century and of the spoken religion of antiquity - how you think otherwise is your issue - you impose on those that know better.

I don't have any idea what you try to tell me. What say this words to you yourselve? What do you think I should learn from this words?

Christians are followers of Christ, they existed in Christ time and still do

?

Are you Breezewood?

I am what I am

A drugged and drunken weapon fetishist, who tries to use words like swords?

At what I try, I succeed. Except for the time I tried to jump off the 7th step when I was a kid and rolled, and ended up splitting my head on an end table. My mom ran out of the house screaming because she thought I poked out my eye. Evil Knievel sent me an autographed cast and said good job kid.

The wonder years

 

[james bond]

This started with prayers for ponies if I recall. There may be justice after death but I don't see a lot of justice in this life. Stalin was my example of an evil person getting a pony while devout believers go without.

We don't always have justice in this life because God isn't in this universe. Instead, we have Satan "as the god of the world and prince of the power of the air." He exists, but you never ask for proof of him nor admit he is the one who does not provide justice in this life. Instead, you just blame God. God would try to provide justice and answer our prayers for justice. How he tries to provide justice is through just people, but they aren't always there nor in a position to render justice. Thus, we see that God does provide justice, but it's a constant battle with Satan.

 

[esalla]

This started with prayers for ponies if I recall. There may be justice after death but I don't see a lot of justice in this life. Stalin was my example of an evil person getting a pony while devout believers go without.

We don't always have justice in this life because God isn't in this universe. Instead, we have Satan "as the god of the world and prince of the power of the air." He exists, but you never ask for proof of him nor admit he is the one who does not provide justice in this life. Instead, you just blame God. God would try to provide justice and answer our prayers for justice. How he tries to provide justice is through just people, but they aren't always there nor in a position to render justice. Thus, we see that God does provide justice, but it's a constant battle with Satan.

Are mosquitos really satan?

 

[esalla]

Erhman has been refuted so many times it's a wonder anybody would run around claiming he's some great 'scholar'. Darrell Bock alone has shut him down literally every time Bock bothered to critique his books, as well as Elaine Pagels and the rest of the fake 'scholars' from the Gnostic revivalist scam. The Peanut Gallery can start with Bock's The Missing Gospels, a work explaining to lay people from a secular point of view why the various popular modern claims of the original orthodoxy being 'falsified' No is rubbish and nonsense by merely using textual analysis and historical records. From there it gets very easy to prove the Erhman claims are total rubbish.

.

- from a secular point of view why the various popular modern claims of the original orthodoxy being 'falsified' is rubbish and nonsense by merely using textual analysis and historical records.

there is no original orthodoxy from the 1st century the falsification is the orthodoxy made up in the 4th century.

the same example applies, sicko -

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
.
forgeries and fallacies brought to your attention previously. the same pattern for all three desert religions - the ten commandments etched by the Almighty never existed.

I don't know why so many people in the USA misunderstand this sentences. Only god - and no one else - speaks the final judgement. Jesus - the son of god - said "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." So not you, not I nor anyone else - only Jesus, true god from true god, is the one who is able to say: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.".

Example: "The philosopher" of Christians was for long centuries Aristotle, "the interpreter" (of the philosophy of Aristotle) was Averroes. Aristotle was a pagan "atheist" (the early Christians were also called "atheists"), Averroes was a Muslim. So who cared about? Truth is always true - independent from the person, who speaks out the truth. In case of Aristotle and Averroes we speak about the founder of all modern universities today.

Get medicated

no comment - but a question because of this "style": Are you a member of the organisation NRA?

No but my 45 is loaded with hollow points

Okay. You are indeed a member of the strange group of weapon fetishists, which started to grow since the 1960ies/70ies in the USA under the influence of the organisation NRA. This explains why you don't argue but try to "kill" the people, who make the mistake to speak with you.

I have never tried to kill anyone and if I did no weapon would be needed

I fear critical self reflection of weapon users leads only to their own death. What do you call a continously repeated "argument" like "get medicated"? I call such a behavior a stupid intrigant attack of an evil willing extremist, who has not any manners and not any idea what he tries to speak about. So let it be to speak with me furthermore. Comprende?

Get medicated.

Okay. You are not shy to show to everyone that you are an extremist idiot. Same is doing your president Donald Trump. What's wrong with your country?

If my country farts at your country you will never have been

If your country farts then it stinks - or what do you think why we wear masks in Germany?

Let me guess, angela pukel didn't shower

 

[ding]

Am I criticizing anyone? Am I saying I was better? Am I suggesting it should have been done differently? No.

Your judgement is to accept genocide, pain, and suffering. That is your right.

In my judgement, those things are wrong. Is there a good reason that is the only way things can be designed to be? None that I can see. Now do you understand?

Holy shit, there you go again with your dishonest arguments.

No, I don't understand. You start with an argument you don't believe to arrive at what you do believe. Totally illogical. Doesn't make any sense at all. It's a self fulfilling prophecy that ass fucks logic and reason.

P.S. and you are still judging God. So just to be clear, you believe you know better than the creator of existence, right?

Assuming God exists (do I always have to start off with that?) and He is perfect, I certainly see lots of imperfection in this world. I'd judge He's not living up to his potential. Would creation fall apart if there were no viruses?

Your judgments don't seem to assume God is perfect. Your judgments seem to assume God is imperfect.

So is your assumption that if God is perfect (whatever that means) that what He created should be perfect too? There are a couple of ways I can approach this.

What God created is perfect for its purpose and objective which is the Catholic thought.
That with infinite wisdom and goodness God freely willed to create a world "in a state of journeying" towards its ultimate perfection. In God's plan this process of becoming involves the appearance of certain beings and the disappearance of others, the existence of the more perfect alongside the less perfect, both constructive and destructive forces of nature. With physical good there exists also physical evil as long as creation has not reached perfection. For almighty God. . ., because he is supremely good, would never allow any evil whatsoever to exist in his works if he were not so all-powerful and good as to cause good to emerge from evil itself.

Or Jewish thought that whatever imperfections which exist are imperfections of matter and consequence of free will. That whatever is formed of any matter receives the most perfect form possible in that species of matter: in each individual case the defects are in accordance with the defects of that individual matter and that these are very few and rare. Such that is cannot be said that God directly creates evil, or He has the direct intention to produce evil. That God only produces existence, and all existence is good. That the great evils which men cause to each other because of certain intentions, desires, opinions, or religious principles, originate in ignorance, which is absence of wisdom. The numerous evils to which individual persons are exposed are due to the defects existing in the persons themselves. We suffer from the evils which we, by our own free will, inflict on ourselves and ascribe them to God, who is far from being connected with them. Man himself is the author of this class of evils. The error of the ignorant goes so far as to say that God's power is insufficient, because He has given to this Universe the properties which they imagine cause these great evils.

But what struck me most about your post was your description that God is supposed to be perfect. Perfect what and what exactly does that mean to you? Because I think it is your misguided and biased perception of God which has you confused.

 

[ding]

The only solution to the first cause is the incorporeal. Matter and energy cannot be an eternal source. That should be obvious.

I might agree if I had ever seen either being created.

Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff. It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.

Which pill did you take?

There is more than enough evidence that proves matter and energy were created from nothing. It is the accepted scientific belief in cosmology and physics. The universe existing forever theory was abandoned almost 100 years ago. If the universe is expanding it must have had a beginning. It really is that simple.

I took the honesty pill. You should try it.

 

[irosie91]

I agree about Jewish monotheism but not the rest.

More trivia from Ehrman: Christianity began as a minor cult of Judaism but it soon diverged into two opposing camps centered on the question of did Christians have to first become Jews. The Christians in Israel believed so, those of the diaspora said no. It was Roman pagans that decided the issue by wiping out the Christian Jews of Jerusalem when the Jews revolted.

You're just mixed up with your first statement. We had the ancient peoples including Jews before Moses and those after. The monotheist Jews came after Moses being given the Ten Commandments which is the start of the Bible. The Jews before Moses were polytheists. All the ancient peoples were. You don't even realize this. However, even a dolt like you recognizes the importance and power of the Bible with its conversion to the one Biblical God (capital 'G'), monotheism, and the rise of the Bible. What does Ehrman say about that? Does he only focus on the NT haha?

You shall have no other gods before Me. Odd the text doesn't say that there are no other gods, only that the Jews will worship only one god. There was a convent that is called Monolatry

wrong----you're citing a translation. The actual
meaning of the line does indicate that there are
no other "gods" It is the "before" word that does
not convey the actual meaning of "AL PNE' "
(approximate phonetic thing) It really conveys
the notion that THERE ARE NO OTHERS----it's a
different language

 

[ding]

Laws are logical. They exist for reasons. One of which is to establish order from chaos.

I think you have it backwards, you've reversed cause and effect. Establishing order from chaos is the effect of the laws, it is not the cause. Laws exist and because they do they create order from chaos.

No. I haven't got it backwards. Establishing order from chaos is the effect of the laws. See no reversing cause and effect. Order from chaos is the reason the laws exist. Their purpose is to produce beings that know and create.

.

No. I haven't got it backwards. Establishing order from chaos is the effect of the laws. See no reversing cause and effect. Order from chaos is the reason the laws exist. Their purpose is to produce beings that know and create.

.
that's because cyclical events establish the laws - big bang.
.

Their purpose is to produce beings that know and create.

.
- all beings know and create.

The only time you have ever been right about anything is when you realized you were wrong about everything.

.

The only time you have ever been right about anything is when you realized you were wrong about everything.

.
what being other than yourself does not - know and create ... after all your instances you must have at least one example. surly.

How many other beings - besides humans - are capable of abstract thought?

.

How many other beings - besides humans - are capable of abstract thought?

.
all beings are "capable" and have abstract thought -
.
View attachment 387284
.
what really in your religion refutes the obvious you delude yourself into thinking otherwise if it is genesis do yourself a favor and rewrite the forgery and fallacy it's sending you to hades as it is while living on Earth. or for the sake of those forced in your presence.

No. They don't stop being foolish.

I wouldn't expect a liberation theory believer to see Christianity in a good light. I am happy for that too.

 

[Baron]

Startlingly, a lecture at the Atheist org.. Freedom From Religion Foundation/FFRF.. by one of thee most Renowned professor's of Religious Studies, Bart Ehrman.
One of the world's foremost experts on Christianity/NT.
Can't say he doesn't know his topic.
99% of the time he is invited to speak to religious groups.
But, as it turns out, he's an "Agnostic and an Atheist."
A good bit of the youtube on his 'new' book, 'How Jesus became God' [2014]
I've seen him several times on PBS'/other religious documentaries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_D._Ehrman

Bart D. Ehrman (1955) is an American New Testament scholar, currently the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.​

​

According to the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, he is one of North America's Leading scholars in his field, having written and edited 27 books, including three college textbooks.​

He has also achieved acclaim at the popular level, authoring five New York Times bestsellers.​

Ehrman's work focuses on textual criticism of the New Testament, the historical Jesus, and the development of early Christianity.​

[.....]​

`

Interesting why this jewfish 'professor' curses and moke Christianity only, never his Jewish religion.

 

[irosie91]

Startlingly, a lecture at the Atheist org.. Freedom From Religion Foundation/FFRF.. by one of thee most Renowned professor's of Religious Studies, Bart Ehrman.
One of the world's foremost experts on Christianity/NT.
Can't say he doesn't know his topic.
99% of the time he is invited to speak to religious groups.
But, as it turns out, he's an "Agnostic and an Atheist."
A good bit of the youtube on his 'new' book, 'How Jesus became God' [2014]
I've seen him several times on PBS'/other religious documentaries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_D._Ehrman

Bart D. Ehrman (1955) is an American New Testament scholar, currently the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.​

​

According to the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, he is one of North America's Leading scholars in his field, having written and edited 27 books, including three college textbooks.​

He has also achieved acclaim at the popular level, authoring five New York Times bestsellers.​

Ehrman's work focuses on textual criticism of the New Testament, the historical Jesus, and the development of early Christianity.​

[.....]​

`

Interesting why this jewfish 'professor' curses and moke Christianity only, never his Jewish religion.

bart ehrman is jewish? I did not know-----his hebrew seems excellent

 

[Baron]

Startlingly, a lecture at the Atheist org.. Freedom From Religion Foundation/FFRF.. by one of thee most Renowned professor's of Religious Studies, Bart Ehrman.
One of the world's foremost experts on Christianity/NT.
Can't say he doesn't know his topic.
99% of the time he is invited to speak to religious groups.
But, as it turns out, he's an "Agnostic and an Atheist."
A good bit of the youtube on his 'new' book, 'How Jesus became God' [2014]
I've seen him several times on PBS'/other religious documentaries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_D._Ehrman

Bart D. Ehrman (1955) is an American New Testament scholar, currently the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.​

​

According to the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, he is one of North America's Leading scholars in his field, having written and edited 27 books, including three college textbooks.​

He has also achieved acclaim at the popular level, authoring five New York Times bestsellers.​

Ehrman's work focuses on textual criticism of the New Testament, the historical Jesus, and the development of early Christianity.​

[.....]​

`

Interesting why this jewfish 'professor' curses and moke Christianity only, never his Jewish religion.

bart ehrman is jewish? I did not know-----his hebrew seems excellent

Google opens all secrets