No Show.

Author: Stephen

Posts

Total: 345
#301
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Barney
Disagree with topical ideas under discussion, rather than making insults toward the people with whom you are engaging in discussion.
I have no problem with this declaration. It should havce stopped there, but, you continued:

The mythological figure under discussion has no such protection; as an example, he could be accused of being a bad carpenter with no repercussions.
The identity of that person is not in doubt. Had you said, "I think the figure under discussion is a myth," or words to that effect, it is stating your point of view. To say it as said declares that it is the general point of view, and, being a myth, as if it is fait accomplis,  it's okay to accuse him of being a bad carpenter. No, that is doing the very thing you stated before, making insult. You can have your own beliefs. Allow others to have theirs. Take your stand, but don't assume everyone else agrees with you. That position is what has contributed to the toxicity.
#302
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@PGA2.0
you are doing is conflating all myths with Christianity. [underline added for emphasis]
Hardly. There are countless myths in the world, I haven't linked any mythology to Christianity other than Christianity itself. Which to avoid cherry-picking, we can use someone else's offered definition of mythology: "mythology is a collection of myths, or stories, belonging to a particular religious or cultural tradition used to explain a practice, belief, or natural ..."

Breaking it apart, does Jesus play a key role in any stories, partially belonging to some religious or cultural tradition? To prove I am wrong, the answer would have to be no; and to deny he appears in such stories, you would have to deny all accounts (aka stories) of him and his miracles.

As I said to someone else: The indignation over this, to me is akin to someone loving blue so taking offense if anyone dares demean it by calling it a color.
#303
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@Barney
@fauxlaw
The mythological figure under discussion has no such protection; as an example, he could be accused of being a bad carpenter with no repercussions.
The identity of that person is not in doubt. Had you said, "I think the figure under discussion is a myth," or words to that effect, it is stating your point of view. To say it as said declares that it is the general point of view, and, being a myth, as if it is fait accomplis,  it's okay to accuse him of being a bad carpenter. No, that is doing the very thing you stated before, making insult. You can have your own beliefs. Allow others to have theirs. Take your stand, but don't assume everyone else agrees with you. That position is what has contributed to the toxicity.
You are right! Ragnar was stating his opinion as fact. That is a bone of contention with me. How does He know Jesus is a mythical person? Yes, Jesus could be accused of being a bad carpenter, but where is the proof Jesus was a bad carpenter - a satirical video posted online? He fueled more myth about Jesus, ignoring the historical information from that time that states otherwise. 
#304
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@PGA2.0
you make a big assumption that the Bible is a bunch of stories 
You honestly think the bible contains no stories? It's a collection of stories! If you believe they are truth or fiction, does not change if they are or at not stories.
#305
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@PGA2.0
Thanks, that's about the size of it. Using a stick to beat us until morale improves.
#306
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@fauxlaw
Using a stick to beat us 
Conflating my accusations that Jesus appeared in the Bible, with me inflicting violence... Even as hyperbole, wow!
#307
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Barney
THB that a story declared as a myth is attempt to strip its portection. If you don't want to bear the burden of protection, best not strip it, because we will protect it.
#308
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,594
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
The Christ myth theory, also known as the Jesus myth theory, Jesus mythicism, or the Jesus ahistoricity theory, is described by Bart Ehrman paraphrasing Earl Doherty, as the position that "..the historical Jesus did not exist. Or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of Christianity." It includes the view that the story of Jesus is largely mythological, and has little basis in historical fact.
#309
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@Barney
you are doing is conflating all myths with Christianity. [underline added for emphasis]
Hardly. There are countless myths in the world, [a]  I haven't linked any mythology to Christianity other than Christianity itself. Which to avoid cherry-picking, we can use someone else's offered definition of mythology: [b] "mythology is a collection of myths, or stories, belonging to a particular religious or cultural tradition used to explain a practice, belief, or natural ..."
[a] That is the point; you are equating Christianity to myth, it Founder to myth, and your syllogism is a categorical syllogism. All S is P. 

[b]
noun
  • A traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, especially one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature.
  • Stories or matter of this kind: realm of myth.
  • Any invented story, idea, or concept: His account of the event is pure myth.
  • An imaginary or fictitious thing or person.
  • An unproved or false collective belief that is used to justify a social institution.

Prove Christianity is a legendary story/myth without a determinable fact base. You assert that it is. 
Prove it is an invented story. 
Prove Jesus is imaginary or fictitious. 

Breaking it apart, does Jesus play a key role in any stories, partially belonging to some religious or cultural tradition? To prove I am wrong, the answer would have to be no; and to deny he appears in such stories, you would have to deny all accounts (aka stories) of him and his miracles.
Christianity is not concerned with stories circulating about Jesus but the biblical accounts as true. The disciples/apostles and the church fought heresies and mythologies about Jesus; the one example I already mentioned --> Gnosticism. What happens apart from the Bible does not affect the biblical account as the blueprint for truth and our faith. 

Again, you continue to propagate the narrative and myth that all the Bible is capable of being is a story. You continue to believe because others created stories about Jesus or the Bible, it gives reason to reject the Bible as anything but a story. You are fueling a narrative of what you and others create. 
 
As I said to someone else: The indignation over this, to me is akin to someone loving blue so taking offense if anyone dares demean it by calling it a color.
No, the offence and indignation are over you colour coding something blue when it is green; of reasonable historical accounts, you deem myths. 

And I still invite you to engage in the theme of this thread, eschatology!!!
#310
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@Barney
you make a big assumption that the Bible is a bunch of stories 
You honestly think the bible contains no stories? It's a collection of stories! If you believe they are truth or fiction, does not change if they are or at not stories.
I never said it contains no stories. Parables are stories. The Bible is a collection of accounts, mainly of a particular people and God's covenantal dealings via prophets and leaders such as Moses (the Torah) in the OT and then the NT writers.
#311
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@PGA2.0
And a particular peoples particular GOD's covenantal dealings....True.

And an account thereof...True

No more, no less.
#312
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@fauxlaw
The Christ myth theory, also known as the Jesus myth theory, Jesus mythicism, or the Jesus ahistoricity theory, is described by Bart Ehrman paraphrasing Earl Doherty, as the position that "..the historical Jesus did not exist. Or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of Christianity." It includes the view that the story of Jesus is largely mythological, and has little basis in historical fact.
To understand the consequence of ideas, you have to understand how such ideas started to gain popularity. German Higher Criticism, IMO, particularly the Tiibingen school, had a lot to do with the current outlooks about Jesus. 

#313
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@zedvictor4
And a particular peoples particular GOD's covenantal dealings....True.
And an account thereof...True

No more, no less.

A historical account or narrative.

You underestimate the Bible and biblical God. 


#314
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@FLRW
The Christ myth theory, also known as the Jesus myth theory, Jesus mythicism, or the Jesus ahistoricity theory, is described by Bart Ehrman paraphrasing Earl Doherty, as the position that "..the historical Jesus did not exist. Or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of Christianity." It includes the view that the story of Jesus is largely mythological, and has little basis in historical fact.
Ehrman, a very seriously biased historian, IMO. I became aware of him and other liberal scholars while researching the Jesus Seminar. I'm speaking of Marcus Borg, John Dominic Crossan, John Shelby Spong and other highly prolific authors who saturated the market with their BS. 
#315
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@PGA2.0
I think the Jesus mythology began a lot earlier than the Germans. To wit: "If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread." The best road to mythology is to plant doubt in truth. Why not start with the very sonship of Jesus to God? Better to start the doubt in your target, first? Satan ko=nows exactly who Christ is, but is making the strong effort to plant doubt in Jesus that he may not be the Son of God, after all. The stones and bread are coincidental. Satan wants to plant doubt; therefore: "If..." If Jesus can be made to doubt who he is, you've got the whole program defeated before it begins.
#316
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@fauxlaw
I think the Jesus mythology began a lot earlier than the Germans. To wit: "If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread." The best road to mythology is to plant doubt in truth. Why not start with the very sonship of Jesus to God? Better to start the doubt in your target, first? Satan ko=nows exactly who Christ is, but is making the strong effort to plant doubt in Jesus that he may not be the Son of God, after all. The stones and bread are coincidental. Satan wants to plant doubt; therefore: "If..." If Jesus can be made to doubt who he is, you've got the whole program defeated before it begins.
No, you go against the biblical teaching to arrive at such speculation instead of what is written. (Good conspiracy theory!)

The whole NT gives the reader the window, type, shadow, spiritual truth, or picture of Jesus as God from the OT. Jesus Himself accepts worship and compares Himself to the Father (God). What is applied to, or said about, God in the OT is applied to and said of Jesus in the NT. You can't logically come away with another conclusion from the text of Scripture. Yet you certainly try. Yes, there have always been heresies, as Jesus promised. And what you do above is read into Scripture things not said, such as your wild theories about Satan and Jesus.
#317
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@PGA2.0
you go against the biblical teaching
To which biblical teaching, exactly, is my suggestion contrary? You ing=fer there is a specific teaching I've ignored. Did not Satan tempt Christ in the wilderness? What teaching dismisses the probability that, included with satisfying hunger - which would be contrary to Christ's purpose in using his divine nature and power to help others, not himself - he was also tempted by the same words of doubt, "If thou be the Son of God..." to impose on the angels his rescue before that of others. You cannot just make the claim and then not bother to cite how this is contrary to biblical teaching. I am perfectly happy to be educated, if, in fact, it is there to be taught. I have read the Holy Bible cover-to-cover in a few languages, including Greek, and I find no such obvious teaching as you claim.
Further, is not doubt one of Satan's most useful weapons? Did he not use it5 in tempting Adam & Eve with eating of the tree of knowledge? "No," he told them, "ypu shall not surely die..." What he didn't say is that God would not end their lives on the spot, even God had said it would happen "in that day," thus hiding the true nature of death. In the Hebrew, our English "day" is interpreted as both a single day as we know it: one full Earth rotation, but also as a longer period of time. What is time to God? To him, it is virtually non-existent. What better weapon is there to convince us that a little sin here, a little one there, will matter little? But, they pile up, don't they, from that doubt that sin is no big deal. Then resulting doubt takes us further and further from God until he is dismissed out of hand, as many on this site contend. 
#318
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@PGA2.0
A historical account or narrative.....True

Perhaps you overestimate it.
Topic's author
#319
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,615
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@fauxlaw
THB that a story declared as a myth is attempt to strip its portection. If you don't want to bear the burden of protection, best not strip it, because we will protect it.

 Protect what exactly? Against what or whom?
#320
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
@Stephen

Why bother asking me a direct question when you refuse to receive a direct answer? The answer is given in the comment to which you refer. If you would stop cherry-picking and read the entire comment, it might sink in. But, you will not. Repetition will only prove the point.
Topic's author
#321
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,615
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@fauxlaw

THB that a Why  is attempt to strip its portection. If you don't want to bear the burden of protection, best not strip it, because we will protect it.

 Protect what exactly? Against what or whom?


Why bother asking me a direct question when you refuse to receive a direct answer?

I see. So you are just talking shite for the sake of talking shite.  I should have guessed.

And you  speak of "myth" above .  At least our "new "member is clear on what his own intentions are. 





Timid8967  Religion is one of those institutions which cause inequality and ought to be stamped out. 

This is why non-religious need to take the bull by the horns - for our children, for our principles, for our future survival. #153



 So why give air to a subject that ought to be closed down? It seems to me - the more you bring this sort of stuff up - the more air time and the larger the myth becomes.  #16


religion should be "cancelled"#18 

the Jesus story is a "myth"#240 and that the bible,  a book that he says in a mess of confusing contradictions, #186should be destroyed by fire #8.

Yes, you have found a lovely tolerant "non theist" to share your faith and  beliefs with haven't you.  And if he gets his way and all atheists and "non theists"  agree with his opinions, religion will be on the way to being eradicated. 

But you have no problem with him and will put up his aggressive stance against the Christian religion as long as he is here disagreeing with me while he displays all  being constantly  inconsistent, contradictory , and displays all the tendencies of a compulsive liar.. You will make for good theological bedfellows, I'm sure.

Why bother asking me a direct question when you refuse to receive a direct answer?

Yes terrible isn't it? And  all rather cowardly isn't it?  You have yourself to thank for that.  Because it is also happens to be  a bad cowardly habit that I picked up directly from YOU!


#322
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@PGA2.0
You are having to do massive cherry picking to justify that you're triggered at the notion of Jesus having appeared in the bible (a collection of stories; religious ones to be precise).

If I understand you right, you are offended that anyone declares Jesus came back from the dead, as that is a mythological story; therefore offensive to accuse him of such things. Heck, that he got his feet washed one time is similarly a story about him, thus hurtful to your sentiments that Jesus must be kept in a safe space and never talked about.

Even by your own offered primary definition for myth, they include ones with a determinable basis of fact:
"A traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, especially one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature." [changed bolding and underlining for emphasis]
My words are chosen carefully. I have precisely used "mythological" and walked you through the meaning. I did not use "fictional," or "just a myth." To which I would understand strong disagreement (even then not this level of outrage; I mean someone else said this is physically violent of me! Physically violent to use one set of words instead of another with the same meaning...).

In this thread I have similarly accused George Washington and L. Ron Hubbard of being mythological figures. Do you honestly think I believe they never existed? In the case of George Washington, that would mean that the United States (the country in which I live) does not exist (or at least its own basic history is a complete fabrication).
#323
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
@ Stephen

So you are just talking shite for the sake of talking shite.  I should have guessed.
Assume as you will. I'll tell you, in my regards, you are wrong; your assumption is wrong, but, it is your assumption and your limitation. I can do nothing about that, and will not try.

Timid8967  Religion is one of those institutions which cause inequality and ought to be stamped out. 
Whatever Timid's religion is, is his to settle. That you criticize it is an obvious insult to him. Why? It is his to embrace or reject. You have naught to say about it, and should not.


a bad cowardly habit that I picked up directly from YOU!
A habit, you will notice, I recognized was a wrong attitude, And I corrected. Tag.
Topic's author
#324
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,615
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@fauxlaw
Timid8967  Religion is one of those institutions which cause inequality and ought to be stamped out. 
Whatever Timid's religion is, is his to settle. That you criticize it is an obvious insult to him.
Does he have a religion?  I ask YOU this  specifically  because I recall he told YOU directly that he certainly wasn't a christian#111.  Yet he knew how Christians "think"#139

Obviously y'all  have been giving him a pass on his opinions and what he believes about YOUR religion in particular. He calls it among other things " a cancer"#153  . That aught to be "cancelled"#18   that should never be give a single atom of "oxygen".  Is that a religion then?

 And I don't doubt for a second that you will ignore this from our "new" member:

"Timid8967 wrote:  History shows how dangerous it is.  Do you have any conception of how dangerous religion is and in particular christianity?"#153

"Timid8967 wrote: No wonder we see so much weirdness in the Christian movement. "#141

"Timid8967 wrote:  I think the best place for the bible is on a burning pile of books #8



But he is more than entitled to his opinion. And  haven't criticised it.   And you cannot shown me where I have. If fact I believe dimtim8967 to be overly anti anything religious especially the Christians and the Christian  religion. He went as far as to suggest Marx was correct yet  wishes me "good luck in my witch hunting"#215

 "I don't have to be consistent.  Marx is correct.  Religion is one of those institutions which cause inequality and ought to be stamped out". #153  Timid8967

Didn't Marx say that religion was ""the soul of soulless conditions" or the "opium of the people" 

But y'all prefer to  ignore Timid8967 's zeal for the eradication of your religion that he abhors  totally  simply because you don't want to disagree with him while he is arguing with me.  Cutting off  y'all's nose to spite the face, leaps off the page.   How fkn childish. How cowardly.

Why? It is his to embrace or reject. You have naught to say about it, and should not.


I have criticized him for many things, but having a religion as you believe he does have, isn't one of them.

Because everything he proposes is anti religion, anti bible, anti Christ and anti god..  You need to  get your boneheaded facts correct and all your ducks in a row before you start to defending such an anti religious Marxist as dimtim8967.  You are simply a hypocrite that can't defend your scriptures,your god, your belief , your faith or your own corner. 


a bad cowardly habit that I picked up directly from YOU!
A habit, you will notice, I recognized was a wrong attitude, And I corrected. Tag.

Indeed it took you almost 18 months  and a spell of being ignored to realise your attitude was cowardly and uncalled for. At least I had a good reason.

 And I still believe it to be wrong and cowardly,but bad habits, as you should know, are hard to shake. 

#325
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
@ Stephen


But he is more than entitled to his opinion. And  haven't criticised it. 
No? From your #275:

dimtim couldn't hold himself together too long could he?

He came onto the religion forum, bumped up some 30+ threads - while stating we shouldn't " give oxygen to" things we don't even believe and "should be closed down"#16    and then homed in on me and my threads with niceties.  #141  Timid8967  and he is that thick that he believed I fell for his shite. 
Note that I said in my #323 that "whatever Timid's religion is..."  and that includes bot having one.  By the way...

Indeed it took you almost 18 months  and a spell of being ignored to realise your attitude was cowardly and uncalled for. At least I had a good reason.
Curious that I have been a member of DArt for just 14 months, and did not tag you until 13 months ago in your topic: "Thou shalt not kill?" So, where you get that I've been around for 18 months must be from your imagination, alone. 
Topic's author
#326
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,615
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@fauxlaw
But he is more than entitled to his opinion. And  haven't criticised it. 
No? From your #275:

dimtim couldn't hold himself together too long could he?

He came onto the religion forum, bumped up some 30+ threads - while stating we shouldn't " give oxygen to" things we don't even believe and "should be closed down"#16    and then homed in on me and my threads with niceties.  #141  Timid8967  and he is that thick that he believed I fell for his shite. 
I said I hadn't criticised him for his beliefs (as  zealous and radical as they are), which is what you accused me of,  and what I was referring to. FFS keep up. 

And he is thick and stupid if he believes I fell for his introductory soft soap arse licking bull shit.  I notice you over looked his post calling me a "freak faced, that likes animal pussy". But I am not surprised that you did when  you have given  a pass on everything that goes against even your own devout beliefs. Like I have said ;  Cutting off  y'all's nose to spite the face, leaps off the page.    How fkn childish. How cowardly.


So, where you get that I've been around for 18 months must be from your imagination, alone. 

 Yes my mistake.  It was 13 months of the 14 months that you have been here  which is one year and one month. 10/10 for maths. Shame you don't pay as much attention to scripture...in any fkn language.

So staying with the theme of my thread,  Do you accept PGA 2.0's  version of events concerning Jesus' return in 66-70 AD. Or are you of the belief that Jesus failed to return when he promised or are you of the belief that his return is imminent? 


THB that a story declared as a myth is attempt to strip its portection. If you don't want to bear the burden of protection, best not strip it, because we will protect it.

 Protect what exactly?

#327
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
@Stephen:
There is a curious, but obvious difference in what people think is the distinction between belief and opinion, to wit:

"An opinion is a judgment based on facts, an honest attempt to draw a reasonable conclusion from factual evidence. ... Unlike an opinion, a belief is a conviction based on cultural or personal faith, morality, or values."  - https://writing.colostate.edu/guides/teaching/co300man/pop12d.cfm

"There are no similarities between belief and knowledge. They are opposites to one another, as two sides of the same coin. The basis of belief is conjecture, an individual's personal opinion of their seemingly most probable choice." - https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-and-similarity-between-knowledge-and-belief

Two random selections from Google, demonstrating, first, that few things share universal acceptance, and, second, the few people actually consult a dictionary.
And, just to consult one [OED]:

Belief:  "The mental action, condition, or habit of trusting to or having confidence in a person or thing; trust, dependence, reliance, confidence, faith."

Opinion:  What or how one thinks about something; judgement or belief.

Not a lot to parse there, is there? nd, just to put a cherry on it, you just said:

And he is thick and stupid if he believes I fell for his introductory soft soap arse licking bull shit. 
See, even you don't distinguish between the two terms, yet you claim it.  Want to revise?

So staying with the theme of my thread,  Do you accept PGA 2.0's  version of events concerning Jesus' return in 66-70 AD
Nope. Here's my thinking [from my comment in the debate https://www.debateart.com/debates/2975-jesus-was-a-false-prophet.  [David v. PeanutHut.  Comments [#4]:

"It is argued that Matt 24: 34 is a difficult verse to interpret. Yes, it is when one attempts to do so by cherry-picking the verse on its own. But the set up begins verses earlier, specifically at verse 3, when the entire discussion begins at the Mount of Olives, and many signs are given of the [second] coming of the Lord. We still await some of those signs, such as the sun darkening in concert with the moon turning red. Typically, a red moon is caused by a lunar eclipse, the result of being in Earth's shadow, but that is not the only cause of a red moon. It can also turn red when Earth's atmosphere's air molecules scatter blue light more than usual. If that occurs in conjunction with a darkening sun [it can], then we have the sign foretold. Hasn't happened, yet. Other signs are given, that haven't happened, yet, either. It is THIS [that is, that still future generation] the "difficult" verse speaks of, not the generation of the first century C.E.
"All the effort of defining the Greek term γενεά (genea), was a red herring argument. As usual, cherry picking solves very little and is the primary reason that some say verse 34 is difficult to interpret. Words mean things, yes, but context, such as including the previous 31 verses to capture the whole story, is just as important, if not more so."

And that is what I have and will protect.
#328
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@fauxlaw
I think the Jesus mythology began a lot earlier than the Germans. To wit: "If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread." The best road to mythology is to plant doubt in truth. Why not start with the very sonship of Jesus to God? Better to start the doubt in your target, first? Satan knows exactly who Christ is, but is making the strong effort to plant doubt in Jesus that he may not be the Son of God, after all. The stones and bread are coincidental. Satan wants to plant doubt; therefore: "If..." If Jesus can be made to doubt who he is, you've got the whole program defeated before it begins.
Undoubtedly, Satan aimed to usurp and destroy belief in Jesus, and mythologies were used and built upon to deny the historical Jesus by those who did not stick to the biblical narrative. The early church fathers addressed these mths. But, with German Higher Criticism, the focus shifted from the historical Jesus to a mythical Jesus as the more common view. In the last few hundred years, a historical attack and revision have been happening concerning Jesus. John had a caveat against mythologizing Jesus, as some were doing,

By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God;

#329
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@PGA2.0
[audible sigh]

And that, my friend, is why I so oppose the citation of single verses, which inevitably draws them out of context. What is the whole of the fourth chapter all about? When is the context of every mention of Jesus and his words to the disciples and apostles, and, virtually all within the sound of his mortal voice, before his crucifixion and accomplishment of his propitiation for mankind? During his mortal life, not by his second coming allegedly to have already happened. No. His mortal existence, brief as it was among them. We still await his coming in the flesh again, as he promised numerous times, but has yet to fulfill.

Try reading Mathew 24, the entire chapter, once again, and get the feel of that chapter's context in time. Don't begin at verse 34, ignoring all that precedes it. That verse speaks to "this generation," and everyone assumes Jesus speaks of that first century CE generation. No, it is not. The previous verses, from verse 3, describe another generation, a future generation. It has not yet happened, even now; we still await the signs...
#330
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@zedvictor4
A historical account or narrative.....True

Perhaps you overestimate it.
I'm not sure how to take your comment. Your first sentence can be taken in two ways.