God exists, and I Can Prove It.

Author: YouFound_Lxam

Posts

Total: 531
#181
rosends
rosends's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 806
3
2
6
rosends's avatar
rosends
3
2
6
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
This is flawed logic.
You are both trying to prove that Yahweh doesn't exist, but your using his supernatural power as evidence?
You are missing the point, possibly intentionally. I am using the account of his actions within the book YOU value to show you that according to YOUR definition, the religion is false. I don't have to stipulate to the factual nature of the account, just that YOU think it is factual so you have to accept the consequences.

If you learn Jewish law, you would know that, according to Jewish law, causing the harm (that is, the financial loss to the owner) even indirectly is theft which is liable to judicial action. If your solution to this is to blame demons, then no one needs to be responsible for actions because, hey, "demons."

He also cursed a fruit tree and it is a sin to cause damage to a fruit tree.

Jesus doesn't run by laws, he runs by morals. 
So no laws. Got it. He must be sinless then because he doesn't follow laws? Great...great.
#182
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,427
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
If a GOD created something, then it could not also witness the act.

For that, a GOD would have needed a witness.

The above statement (#156) was a tad silly.

Admirable devotion to biblical mythology, but a tad silly.

As I said God is ONE but God is also Trinity. 

Trinity is THREE persons.  Where there are two or three witnesses.  Calling it a tad silly is - well a little silly itself. 


Topic's author
#183
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
If you learn Jewish law, you would know that, according to Jewish law, causing the harm (that is, the financial loss to the owner) even indirectly is theft which is liable to judicial action. If your solution to this is to blame demons, then no one needs to be responsible for actions because, hey, "demons."

He also cursed a fruit tree and it is a sin to cause damage to a fruit tree.

I say again:
It isn't sin just because it is a law.

So no laws. Got it. He must be sinless then because he doesn't follow laws? Great...great.
Jesus didn't break all of the laws. He listened to the Lord, on what was right. 

Man's decisions on laws can't counter against the Lord.

You are missing the point, possibly intentionally. I am using the account of his actions within the book YOU value to show you that according to YOUR definition, the religion is false. I don't have to stipulate to the factual nature of the account, just that YOU think it is factual so you have to accept the consequences.
No, you are missing the point. 
If you are trying to prove to me that God doesn't exist, then you have to use evidence that you agree with, or else it's a contradiction.

And let's consider, that you do believe that. Even if you did, it wouldn't work.
It isn't stealing if you cast a demon into an animal, and that animal ran away.
That would be like me saying you shot a gun next to a herd of sheep, and those sheep ran away. 
Gun=Demons in this scenario.

Topic's author
#184
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
I can't believe that you even had to ask that. But here goes. He was crucified for crimes against Rome. He was entombed (not buried) to keep up the pretence of him being "dead".  If  it was known that he had survived, they would have simple rearrested him and made sure he didn't survive a second time. (unless of course there has been a bribe involved).
Actually, scholars have proven, that Jesus's injuries were not healable, with that time periods medicine. So even if what you said was true, he still would have had to supernaturally heal himself. But of course, that's not what happened.

Jesus died on the cross:
"Recent scholarship persuasively confirms that the four Gospels are based on eyewitness testimony. A leading scholar in this area, Richard Bauckham, concludes that the Gospels “embody the testimony of the eyewitness, not of course without editing and interpretation, but in a way that is substantially faithful to how the eyewitnesses themselves told it (Jesus and the Eyewitnesses). He shows that the Gospel writers were “in more or less direct contact with eyewitnesses.” Consider, for example, the prologue of St. Luke’s Gospel which resembles the style of ancient historiography:
Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things which have been accomplished among us, just as they were delivered to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word. (Luke 1:1-3)
Bauckham further argues that St. John’s Gospel was not merely based on firsthand testimony, but written by an eyewitness to the Crucifixion. This is suggested in John’s epilogue, where the evangelist confirms, “This is the disciple who is bearing witness to these things, and who has written these things” (John 21:24)."

 Ok. tell me. How many of Jesus. disciples witnessed a stone cold dead Jesus get up of his cold slab, change his tunic, roll away the stone and go mincing around the olive groves as if nothing had ever happened?
They saw his dead body buried, and then days later, they saw him alive again.

All very ambiguous then.
So how do you know when to take something literal or metaphorical? Did the  illiterate  superstitious Jews and early Christians understand metaphor and idioms? 
From what I have read even the disciples of Jesus didn't understand what he was talking about most of the time, so how can you claim that you understand what is meant by something spoken 2000 years ago, when the local goatherd and fisherman couldn't?
Well as everything is in the bible, it has a metaphorical take, or a literal take.
You can choose to believe either, as long as it lines up with the scriptures.

Like obviously, in Matthew 5:29 when it states," And if thy right eye offends thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for. thee that one of thy members should perish, and. not that thy whole body should be cast into hell." It doesn't mean literally pluck out your eye, because the bible is against self-harm. 

To really understand the bible, you have to study it, like a lot of Christians as well as myself do.

And it is fascinating to me that Christians have had 2000 years to iron out these ambiguous half stories that make up the NT and with every new excuse for these biblical ambiguities comes new dilemmas and questions
Well, that's what science has done. 
Not Christianity.

Every time a very hard question is asked in science, that they can't answer, science says that they don't know, but not to worry about it.

Christianity on the other hand has answered every question that has come up and found more evidence supporting biblical claims.

Matthew 9:16-17 New International Version
“No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment, for the patch will pull away from the garment, making the tear worse. Neither do people pour new wine into old wineskins. If they do, the skins will burst; the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.”
This verse represents, that you can't just add good things to yourself, unless you have fixed the bad things in your life before.








#185
BrotherD.Thomas
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,145
3
3
7
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
BrotherD.Thomas
3
3
7
-->
@YouFound_Lxam

.
YouFound_Lxam, the RUNAWAY from biblical axioms,


YOUR REVEALING QUOTE ABOUT OUR SERIAL KILLER JESUS: "You can still have laws that are morally bad. Jesus doesn't run by laws, he runs by morals." 

Barring the fact within the scriptures that Jesus has given the Christian 613 laws to follow and that He wrote, you say He runs by morals, really? NOT!  Then in the following passage, it is immoral to be an accomplice to murdering His creation that do not want to follow Him, get it Bible fool? Huh?

JESUS SAID: "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” (Luke 19:27)

Just as Matthew’s Jesus declared, "He who is not with me is against me . . ." (Matthew 12:30), then Luke’s Jesus orders His people that were present  to MURDER those who reject his impending rule, and to do it in front of Him as well!  Therefore, Jesus is guilty of "Homicidal ideation" which is therefore IMMORAL and therefore Jesus does not run by morals, get it Bible fool? Huh? Maybe?



Listen up YouFound_Lxam, I will soon be taking over your pathetic thread like I had to do with the equally Bible dumbfounded of the Bible as you are named Shila, to prove Jesus as God, praise!  This is because your pathetic meanderings go severely wanting in the fact that you don't know which way is up on this discussion, where your comical opinions go in every direction at your embarrassment, understood? Good!


NEXT PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN BIBLE FOOL LIKE "YOUFOUND_LXAM" THAT USES HIS OPINIONS THAT GO IN ALL DIRECTIONS THAT HE CAN'T EVEN FOLLOW, INSTEAD OF THE DIRECT WORD OF JESUS IN THE BIBLE AS GOD, WILL BE ...?


.



Topic's author
#186
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
First of all, BrotherD.Thomas, I would love to answer all of your questions about the bible, given you know nothing about it, and you are only quoting scriptures that you have misread, but you need to take a chill pill on the CAPS.


JESUS SAID: "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” (Luke 19:27)
Well, if you actually read the chapter, you would have found out that, that verse is part of a parable.
Definition of Parable: "a simple story used to illustrate a moral or spiritual lesson, as told by Jesus in the Gospels:"

The story of this parable is:
"The Parable of the Ten Minas
11 While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once. 12 He said: “A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king and then to return. 13 So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas.[a] ‘Put this money to work,’ he said, ‘until I come back.’
14 “But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, ‘We don’t want this man to be our king.’
15 “He was made king, however, and returned home. Then he sent for the servants to whom he had given the money, in order to find out what they had gained with it.
16 “The first one came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned ten more.’
17 “‘Well done, my good servant!’ his master replied. ‘Because you have been trustworthy in a very small matter, take charge of ten cities.’
18 “The second came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned five more.’
19 “His master answered, ‘You take charge of five cities.’
20 “Then another servant came and said, ‘Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth. 21 I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow.’
22 “His master replied, ‘I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then didn’t you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?’
24 “Then he said to those standing by, ‘Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.’
25 “‘Sir,’ they said, ‘he already has ten!’
26 “He replied, ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what they have will be taken away. 27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’” (Luke 19:11-26 NIV).

A parable is a way that Jesus taught his followers about the bible, and what God wants for them, through story's.
So no, God did not command anyone to be killed.
You are literally false when you said:
JESUS SAID: "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” (Luke 19:27)
Because Jesus did not say that. 
Well now who's the uninformed one?

Just as Matthew’s Jesus declared, "He who is not with me is against me . . ." (Matthew 12:30),
Again, if you would actually read the scripture, instead of google searching "Bad things that Jesus said" then you would see the flaws in your argument.

The scripture you are pertaining to actually states:
“Or again, how can anyone enter a strong man’s house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man? Then he can plunder his house.
30 “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. 31 And so I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven." (Matthew 12:29-31 NIV).

This scripture pertains to the fact that if you don't accept God as your lord and savior, then you won't be able to enter the kingdom of heaven by their own decision.

Listen up YouFound_Lxam, I will soon be taking over your pathetic thread like I had to do with the equally Bible dumbfounded of the Bible as you are named Shila, to prove Jesus as God, praise!  This is because your pathetic meanderings go severely wanting in the fact that you don't know which way is up on this discussion, where your comical opinions go in every direction at your embarrassment, understood? Good!
Ehhh...I think that your low knowledge about the Bible and its teachings, will stop this from happening.

NEXT PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN BIBLE FOOL LIKE "YOUFOUND_LXAM" THAT USES HIS OPINIONS THAT GO IN ALL DIRECTIONS THAT HE CAN'T EVEN FOLLOW, INSTEAD OF THE DIRECT WORD OF JESUS IN THE BIBLE AS GOD, WILL BE ...?
I love how you always end your posts like a game show announcer, announcing the winner. 

Topic's author
#187
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
Now reply to this post with factual evidence, or you will be the one who is the runaway bible fool.
#188
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,004
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
Trinity is just theistic gobbledegook.


Or, are you're saying that three GODS created the Universe.

In the beginning GODS created the heavens and the Earth.

Ah, someone missed the S off in translation.

I see.

Do you know which one created which bit, and who witnessed who's bit?

Does it say in the BOOK?


#189
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@YouFound_Lxam


1: His testimony about himself.
Now I know what you're thinking. Gods' testimony about himself isn't evidence. But you would be wrong.
- I wouldn't. It's literally circular. From that Logic, anyone who testifies about himself to be God is God... 


"But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer. Again, the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”
“I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” (Mark 14:62 NIV).
"Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” (John 8:58 NIV).
"But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”
Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” (Matthew 16:15-16 NIV).
"My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all[a]; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.” (John 10:29-30 NIV).
“You call me ‘Teacher’ and ‘Lord,’ and rightly so, for that is what I am." (John 13:13 NIV).
"Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really know me, you will know[a] my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”
Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.”
Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?" (John 14:6-9 NIV).
- To justify your case you must first disprove all the following:
1 The necessary being that is God & the contingent being that is Jesus do not concur;
2 Your argument of self-testimony is circular;
3 The source of your aforementioned quotes is inauthentic;
4 Jesus (pbuh) did not say he is God;
5 The above sayings are naturally understood in their context without resorting to Jesus claiming to be God;
6  Quotes which show the opposite of your claim are found in your source; [e.g. "Then a certain ruler asked Him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 19“Why do you call Me good?” Jesus replied “No one is good except God alone." (Luke 18:19)]


All of these examples show God telling us that he is God, which someone who isn't God wouldn't do.
- I am God. There, done.


In the wise words of C.S. Lewis," Someone who claims to be God is either a liar, a lunatic, or the Lord." (C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity Book III, Chapter 3).
- There was no claims of God to begin with. & anyone who claims to be God is necessarily lying, for God can not be a body, for God is the necessary being not contingent on space or time or form.


So, let's pick one of those. If he's claiming to be God and isn't, then he isn't just a great moral teacher, he is either a liar, lunatic, or the Lord.
- Since the last one is metaphysically impossible, then NO. This is equivalent to someone claiming to be a married bachelor.


2: The Eyewitness Testimony of those who Knew Him.
Consider this:
Jesus disciples abandon their occupations and their families to spread the news that Jesus Christ, the son of God, rose from the dead. And they were willing to be beaten, tortured, starved, jailed, and killed for sharing that message.
- Regardless of the authenticity of this narrative, willing to die for something does in no way inform the Truth of that something. People were willing to die for Slavery...


Now those kinds of things have happened in other religious traditions too, but the difference is this:
These people were actual eyewitnesses to what they were claiming.
- The authors of the Gospels are anonymous. The names John, Luke, Matthew...etc are conventional -decided a century after the fact, & not of the actual disciples of Jesus (pbuh).


So how likely is it that all of them would sacrifice so much, for something they knew to be untrue?
- Assuming this is the case, the truth of their testimony has no bearing on the truth of the statements they witnessed. It may be true that I claimed to be a "married bachelor", but am I really a married bachelor? It may be true that Jesus (pbuh) claimed to be God, but is he really?


3: The Resurrection
The Resurrection was when Jesus rose from the dead in front of hundreds of people. Now that is not something a normal person can do.
Now I know that a lot of people will ask for proof that the resurrection really happened?
The argument for the actual historicity of the resurrection, comes from this man:
Professor Gary Habermas.
He studied more that 2000 academic sources, and identified several pieces of evidence, on which the vast majority of scholars believe.
Scholars who were both Atheist, and Christian, believed him and his evidence.
Almost all biblical experts agree to this historical timeline.
- This means absolutely nothing. The testimony of a witness claiming to have seen an event he claim was witnessed by others is still a testimony of one person. We haven't heard anything from the other supposed hundreds of witnesses, now have we? I could as easily claim to witness something & claim a million people saw it. – Regardless, assuming resurrection did occur, this has no relevance to the subject.


"Almost all Biblical experts agree that:
1. Jesus died by crucifixion.
2. He was buried.
3. His death caused the disciples to despair and lost hope.
4. The tomb was later found empty after his interment.
     (accepted by 75% of scholars)
5. The disciples had experiences which they believed were literal appearances of the risen Jesus.
6. The disciples were transformed from doubters to bold proclaimers.
7. The proclamation of the resurrection took place at the very beginning of the church.
8. They preached the message of Jesus's resurrection in Jerusalem, where Jesus had been crucified and buried. 
9. The gospel message centered on the death and resurrection of Jesus.
10.  Orthodox Jews who believed in Christ made Sunday their primary day of worship. 
11. James, a family skeptic, was converted to the faith, when he believed he saw the resurrected Christ.
12. Saul (Paul) was converted to the faith because he believed he saw the risen Jesus."
- Almost all the above isn't true, but assuming it is. How does an empty tomb entail resurrection? Probably dozens of empty tombs are found everyday around the world, are we to assume they resurrected? – If you say, it is because he appeared after death. Well, appearance of the dead to their relatives is a common occurrence. Do we assume all these are gods? – Assuming the above, how does being resurrected from the dead a proof of Godhood? According to your Bible others have risen from the dead & we will all be resurrected after death, does that make us all divine too? 
 

Gary Habermas, The Risen Jesus & Future Hope, 2003, pp. 9-10.
Now let me ask you this:
If an overwhelming majority of experts agree that these things actually occurred, then what other theory explains these facts?
And If Jesus really did resurrect from the dead, then was he really just a man?
- Yes. God doesn't die...

#190
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@Tradesecret
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.  

It is not an argument. It is a statement of fact.   

A statement of fact testified to by the only witness who was there.  God.  
- This is circular. How do I know God indeed said that?

#191
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,004
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Yassine
Indeed you don't.
#192
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,595
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Yassine
@Tradesecret
Now those kinds of things have happened in other religious traditions too, but the difference is this:
These people were actual eyewitnesses to what they were claiming.
- The authors of the Gospels are anonymous. The names John, Luke, Matthew...etc are conventional -decided a century after the fact, & not of the actual disciples of Jesus (pbuh)

I'm quite surprised one of these claimed gospel authors wasn't name Simon. Simon's were everywhere in Jesus' day according to Tradesecret. They were more common than donkey shite.

Tradesecret wrot; In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.  

It is not an argument. It is a statement of fact.   

A statement of fact testified to by the only witness who was there.  God.  
Yassine- This is circular. How do I know God indeed said that?
If it came from the mouth of Tradesecret, then you can guarantee that it is a lie.
#193
BrotherD.Thomas
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,145
3
3
7
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
BrotherD.Thomas
3
3
7
-->
@YouFound_Lxam


.
YouFound_Lxam, who LIES about the Bible in the name of Satan,

YOUR DUMBFOUNDED BIBLE IGNORANT QUOTE RELATIVE TO LUKE 19:27: "A parable is a way that Jesus taught his followers about the bible, and what God wants for them, through story's. So no, God did not command anyone to be killed. You are literally false when you said:"Because Jesus did not say that. 
Well now who's the uninformed one?"

Like I have said before, your outright Bible stupidity and ignorance has absolutely no bounds!!!

The scripture in question as written within the Bible:

“He replied, ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what they have will be taken away. But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me." After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem." (Luke 19:26-28)

1. The passages of Luke 19:26-28 is attributed to Jesus!
2. The passage above is stated by Jesus, as in "After Jesus had said this," Luke 19:28, GET IT BIBLE FOOL?!
3. The passage above is therefore showing Jesus as a serial killer!
4. The passage above does not show Jesus as ever loving and forgiving, by the pure nature of what he said, period!
5. The passages are a parable and relate to Jesus' 2nd coming in the book of Revelation where He will bring 2 million angels to brutally murder those that did not want Him to rule over them, GET YOU OUTRIGHT BIBLE FOOL?!


Now you see why Jesus and I need to take over your pathetic LYING thread, because you make a mockery of the TRUE Jesus the Christ in trying so hard to not show His killing ways, where the TRUE Christian like myself has learned to just accept this killing MO of our serial killing Jesus!


NEXT PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN BIBLE FOOL THAT TRIES IN VAIN TO REWRITE THE SCRIPTURES THROUGH HIS LIES LIKE "YOUFOUND_LXAM DOES, WILL BE ...?
.

#194
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,595
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
YouFound_Lxam; Wrote: A parable is a way that Jesus taught his followers about the bible, and what God wants for them, through story's.
So no, God did not command anyone to be killed.
You are literally false when you said:
JESUS SAID: "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” (Luke 19:27)


Because Jesus did not say that.

Well the bible states that he did say those words. It is Jesus saying those words and no one else. He was speaking of those Jews that wouldn't listen to him or accept him as king or messiah.

Yes indeed, there was a very nasty side to your "turn the other cheek son of god", once you understand what is going on in these scriptures and what was going on in Palestine at the time.


Well now who's the uninformed one?
  
You are. You are denying what the bible actually states. And what it means. It is a embarrassingly bad habit of Christians to deny what is actually written in the bible when having to face a few truths as to the real nature of Jesus the man.

#195
BrotherD.Thomas
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,145
3
3
7
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
BrotherD.Thomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret
@YouFound_Lxam


.
YouFound_Lxam, vying to take over Miss Dr. Tradesecret's position of being the #1 Bible fool of this Religion Forum,

Subsequent to you making an outright Bible fool of yourself in your pitiful and LYING response to Luke 19:26-28 in your post #186, and then when I buried your Bible ignorance in said post with my true godly response in my post #93, you DO NOT have the wherewithal to even think about opening a thread in this esteemed religion forum because you embarrass Christianity by your Bible Stupidism®️!

Furthermore, since you had to RUNAWAY from the links below that I gave you in outright showing you again to be a Bible stupid fool like Miss Dr. Tradesecret is, then like Jesus and I did with the now bible ignorant Shila in her thread, where she was so embarrassed of her Bible ineptness, she left this forum, we will have to take over this thread of yours herein to prove that Jesus is God, where you are failing miserably in "trying" to perform this act!  LOL!



YouFound_Lxam RUNAWAY posts that I gave him within this thread are shown below at his embarrassment:

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/8271/post-links/360126
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/8271/post-links/360127
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/8271/post-links/360128
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/8271/post-links/360129
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/8271/post-links/360131
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/8271/post-links/360134
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/8271/post-links/360146


Jesus and I will let you know when we take over your LYING about Jesus the Christ thread, where with Jesus’ true words, I will show you the real Jesus, understood you totally Bible inept dumbfounded fool?!


NEXT UNBELIEVABLE BIBLE STUPID FOOL LIKE "YOUFOUND_LXAM" THAT HAS ABSOLUTELY NO BUSINESS IN BEING WITHIN THIS PRESTIGIOUS FORUM, WILL BE …?
#196
BrotherD.Thomas
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,145
3
3
7
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
BrotherD.Thomas
3
3
7
-->
@Stephen
@YouFound_Lxam

.
Stephen,

Yes, the poor Bible inept YouFound_Lxam doesn't understand that when Luke 19:28 said "After Jesus had said this"  it was referring to Jesus wanting His enemies to be brought before Him and KILLED (Luke 19:27), plain and simple!

How many times have we seen these pseudo-christians like the Bible stupid YouFound_Lxam try in vain to rewrite the the Bible to take away Jesus' true modus operandi?  We can only gain solace in knowing that upon Judgment Day, YouFound_Lxam and the like, will be burning in the sulfur lakes of hell, praise Jesus revenge upon LIARS!

“But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” (Revelation 21:8)


.
Topic's author
#197
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
Ok, BrotherD.Thomas, yes Jesus did say that.
But you are reading it wrong still.

Jesus was telling a story/parable, and he told the story of other people.

Your argument is just as stupid as your knowledge about the Bible.

That would be like saying if I read you a bedtime story about the monster in your closet and said a line from the book from the monster, therefore, I am the monster.
How does that make sense.
Topic's author
#198
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
 I wouldn't. It's literally circular. From that Logic, anyone who testifies about himself to be God is God... 
It isn't valid proof; it is just saying that God wouldn't be God if he didn't call himself God. That doesn't go for everyone, this links with the rest of the evidence.

  Quotes which show the opposite of your claim are found in your source; [e.g. "Then a certain ruler asked Him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 19“Why do you call Me good?” Jesus replied “No one is good except God alone." (Luke 18:19)]
Yes, no one is fully good, with no sin in their hearts, except for God. God is only telling the ruler that he is good, in what he was doing, not a fully good person.

All of these examples show God telling us that he is God, which someone who isn't God wouldn't do.
- I am God. There, done.
Probably should have worded that better, I'm sorry about that, but what I was trying to say, was that, If God never said that he was God in the bible, then that would disprove that he was God.

So, let's pick one of those. If he's claiming to be God and isn't, then he isn't just a great moral teacher, he is either a liar, lunatic, or the Lord.
- Since the last one is metaphysically impossible, then NO. This is equivalent to someone claiming to be a married bachelor.

Well, what I was trying to point out here, was this question:

Is God a liar? No
Is God a lunatic? No
So, he must be the Lord.

 Regardless of the authenticity of this narrative, willing to die for something does in no way inform the Truth of that something. People were willing to die for Slavery...
This has nothing to do with what I said at all. What I am saying, is that those free disciples, who could have lived fruitful lives, instead decided to risk their own lives, all of them, for something they claimed to be true. Why would they leave their homes and families, to be tortured and killed if it was not true. 

- The authors of the Gospels are anonymous. The names John, Luke, Matthew...etc are conventional -decided a century after the fact, & not of the actual disciples of Jesus (pbuh).
Well, if you use my provided research, then you will find this statement false.

This means absolutely nothing. The testimony of a witness claiming to have seen an event he claim was witnessed by others is still a testimony of one person. We haven't heard anything from the other supposed hundreds of witnesses, now have we? I could as easily claim to witness something & claim a million people saw it. – Regardless, assuming resurrection did occur, this has no relevance to the subject.
Yes, it does. It literally provides evidence for the eyewitness testimonies of all of those people. They didn't claim a million people saw it. They claimed what they saw. 
If you actually used the research, then you would again find this statement false.

- Almost all the above isn't true, but assuming it is. How does an empty tomb entail resurrection? Probably dozens of empty tombs are found everyday around the world, are we to assume they resurrected? – If you say, it is because he appeared after death. Well, appearance of the dead to their relatives is a common occurrence. Do we assume all these are gods? – Assuming the above, how does being resurrected from the dead a proof of Godhood? According to your Bible others have risen from the dead & we will all be resurrected after death, does that make us all divine too? 
How is this untrue? Prove that its untrue. I have provided evidence proving otherwise, now show yours. 

Yes, dozens of tombs are found empty, but using historical evidence, we learn that no one was buried there to begin with.

And they weren't relatives. And let's just say for a minute your right. How is it possible that all of those people saw the exact same thing at the exact same time?
I wouldn't call that a fake appearance of the dead.

No, we won't be resurrected. Our souls will be resurrected. Not our body's, like Jesus's were.

- Yes. God doesn't die...
No Jesus died and was resurrected. Not God. There is a difference.



Topic's author
#199
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
where the TRUE Christian like myself has learned to just accept this killing MO 
Well, if you believe that Jesus just kills people, then you're contradicting yourself. Because then you can't believe any of the scriptures that say murder is wrong. Because you believe Jesus does it too. Which is false.
Topic's author
#200
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
Yes, the poor Bible inept YouFound_Lxam doesn't understand that when Luke 19:28 said "After Jesus had said this"  it was referring to Jesus wanting His enemies to be brought before Him and KILLED (Luke 19:27), plain and simple!
No, it didn't. Jesus didn't say this, he was telling a PARABLE.

Now I'm not going to call you a liar, even though you've done your fair share of that, I'm just going to call you uninformed. 


#201
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,595
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
@YouFound_Lxam
Brother D. Thomas wrote:  Stephen, How many times have we seen these pseudo-christians like the Bible stupid YouFound_Lxam try in vain to rewrite the the Bible to take away Jesus' true modus operandi?

Many times, Brother D.   Tradesecret does it every other post when he is on the backfoot after painting himself into a corner. 

YouFound_Lxam wrote: Ok, BrotherD.Thomas, yes Jesus did say that.  
But you are reading it wrong still.
First you outright deny Jesus spoke those words and now that you have been shown to be completely wrong, you have moved the goal post and claim it is not being read correctly!?
 It's always the other person that is reading it wrong and doesn't understand, with you lot. Have you ever once stopped to consider that you don't have a clue what is going on in the New Testamant? And that  it is you that could be "reading it all wrong"?

You keep telling me that I should study the bible. How do you know I haven't? And the verse in question is not a parable. It is a clear order to bring any dissenters to him to be killed especially those that had deserted the movement.
In fact it comes directly after the parable  of ten minas  if you'd studied it closely. And he uses it to justify his intended violent actions. Or should I say the author of Luke gospel used it to justify the intended actions of his hero. 

So I think you need a little more bible study. 

Tradesecret is a Tutor in all things biblical and theological.

He tutors and teaches students at Universities in Australia, or India? Or is it New Zealand? He has memorised the bible from a very early age and knows it backwards and forwards, and reads it in ancient Hebrew and Greek.  He also reads these ancient languages and translates them into English. And he is a qualified and accredited Pastor with a large congregation and is a Chaplain to his countries Armed Forces. 

Just what you need I should think.
Topic's author
#202
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
You keep telling me that I should study the bible. How do you know I haven't?
We'll, have you? Because from the claims that you are making, it is safe to assume that you are not.

And the verse in question is not a parable. It is a clear order to bring any dissenters to him to be killed especially those that had deserted the movement.
"The Parable of the Ten Minas
11 While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once. 12 He said: “A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king and then to return. 13 So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas.[a] ‘Put this money to work,’ he said, ‘until I come back.’
14 “But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, ‘We don’t want this man to be our king.’
15 “He was made king, however, and returned home. Then he sent for the servants to whom he had given the money, in order to find out what they had gained with it.
16 “The first one came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned ten more.’
17 “‘Well done, my good servant!’ his master replied. ‘Because you have been trustworthy in a very small matter, take charge of ten cities.’
18 “The second came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned five more.’
19 “His master answered, ‘You take charge of five cities.’
20 “Then another servant came and said, ‘Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth. 21 I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow.’
22 “His master replied, ‘I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then didn’t you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?’
24 “Then he said to those standing by, ‘Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.’
25 “‘Sir,’ they said, ‘he already has ten!’
26 “He replied, ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what they have will be taken away. 27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’” (Luke 19:11-26 NIV).

Read the title buddy. 
Oh, do I need to define parable again?

Parable: "a simple story used to illustrate a moral or spiritual lesson, as told by Jesus in the Gospels."

In fact it comes directly after the parable  of ten minas  if you'd studied it closely. And he uses it to justify his intended violent actions. Or should I say the author of Luke gospel used it to justify the intended actions of his hero. 
Actually, the parable comes directly after the story of Zacchaeus. And after that parable, it is the story of how Jesus came to Jerusalem.
"Jesus Comes to Jerusalem as King
28 After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem. 29 As he approached Bethphage and Bethany at the hill called the Mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples, saying to them, 30 “Go to the village ahead of you, and as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden. Untie it and bring it here. 31 If anyone asks you, ‘Why are you untying it?’ say, ‘The Lord needs it.’”
32 Those who were sent ahead went and found it just as he had told them. 33 As they were untying the colt, its owners asked them, “Why are you untying the colt?”
34 They replied, “The Lord needs it.”
35 They brought it to Jesus, threw their cloaks on the colt and put Jesus on it. 36 As he went along, people spread their cloaks on the road.
37 When he came near the place where the road goes down the Mount of Olives, the whole crowd of disciples began joyfully to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen:
38 “Blessed is the king who comes in the name of the Lord!”[b]
“Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!”
39 Some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to Jesus, “Teacher, rebuke your disciples!”
40 “I tell you,” he replied, “if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out.”
41 As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it 42 and said, “If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace—but now it is hidden from your eyes. 43 The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. 44 They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God’s coming to you.”

So I think you need a little more bible study. 
I would beg to differ. 

#203
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,595
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2


Oh, do I need to define parable again?

No. But you do need to know the difference between what is a parable and a clear statement made by Jesus.

Tell me, why did Jesus use parables? 
Keeping in mind that Jesus says this:

Matthew 13:13
 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.


Mark 4:34

 He did not say anything to them without using a parable. But when he was alone with his own disciples, he explained everything.



Topic's author
#204
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
-->
@Stephen
Stephen......it's a story. 

Yes, Jesus did tell the story. But he didn't say those things in the context you are thinking.
That line is part of the story. 

 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
Yes, that means that he explains Gods rules, in story's, to make it more clear to them.

 He did not say anything to them without using a parable. But when he was alone with his own disciples, he explained everything.
Yes, because his disciples were his close followers, and he could explain things better with them. 
Topic's author
#205
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
-->
@Stephen
I think you need to learn the difference between a story, and a statement that Jesus legitimately said.
#206
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,004
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Yep, it's all a story.
#207
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,595
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@YouFound_Lxam


 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
Yes, that means that he explains Gods rules, in story's, to make it more clear to them.

Nope. He spoke in parables so they WOULDN'T understand him. I keep telling you. You have to understand the situation in Palestine at the time and how dangerous it was for any rabble-rouser, especially for someone that had a following that posed a threat to the status quo.

 Even his own disciples were in the dark and did not understand. They were forever asking Jesus to explain the parables to them. For which he would use yet another parable.

“And when He was alone, they that were about Him with the twelve asked of Him the parable.  And He said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God, but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables.
“That seeing they may see, and not perceived: and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted and their sins should be forgiven them.  And He said unto them, Know ye not this parable? And how then will you know all parables?”  Mark 4:10-13

“And the disciples came, and said unto Him, Why do you speak unto them in parables?  He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto YOU to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but unto them it is NOT given.”  Matt 13:10-1

It was a case of "calling the many" but "choosing the few".






Topic's author
#208
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
-->
@Stephen
......Do you not know the definition of a parable? 
Like....it's pretty self-explanatory, 

 He spoke in parables so they WOULDN'T understand him. I keep telling you. You have to understand the situation in Palestine at the time and how dangerous it was for any rabble-rouser, especially for someone that had a following that posed a threat to the status quo.
No, he spread gods message through story's, to give examples of what God's word means when it says certain things.

You really need to read the Bible more. 


#209
rosends
rosends's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 806
3
2
6
rosends's avatar
rosends
3
2
6
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
I say again:
It isn't sin just because it is a law.
In Judaism, and remember, Jesus was supposedly Jewish, breaking a law IS a sin.

If you are trying to prove to me that God doesn't exist, then you have to use evidence that you agree with, or else it's a contradiction.
and who said that that's what I'm trying to do?


That would be like me saying you shot a gun next to a herd of sheep, and those sheep ran away. 
Gun=Demons in this scenario.
And in Jewish law, you would be liable as a sinner for having done that.

Topic's author
#210
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
I have to explain every detail to you guys, but I won't repeat myself again.

In Judaism, and remember, Jesus was supposedly Jewish, breaking a law IS a sin.
Jesus was not part of Judaism. He follows the Christian religion, because his death, and resurrection, started it.

If you look in the Bible, you will actually see Jesus going against the Judaist high priests. He came to earth not to follow the laws of Judaism, but to spread Gods word. 

It might have been a sin in Judaism, but not in Christianity.

In fact, it was some of the high priests, who got him arrested, because he was proving them wrong, and they were losing control of the people.

Where in the Bible does it say one has to abide by laws made by man, to not sin.

Jesus followed what God said to do, and everything God said to do, was without sin. 

"Not far away there was a large herd of pigs feeding. 31 So the demons begged Jesus, "If you are going to drive us out, send us into that herd of pigs." 32 "Go," Jesus told them; so they left and went off into the pigs. The whole herd rushed down the side of the cliff into the lake and was drowned. 33 The men who had been taking care of the pigs ran away and went into the town, where they told the whole story and what had happened to the men with the demons."  Matthew 8:30-33.
The demons begged Jesus to let them into the pigs, and Jesus did. He cast them unto the pigs, and the demons caused the pigs to run away.
If you are going to call this stealing, then give me one example of Judaist law, that states that standing next to a herd of pigs, casting demons unto them and them running away is breaking the law. 

Jesus was Jewish, but does that mean that he was supposed to abide by Judaist law? No, that would be like saying, that someone who is Chinese, has to abide by Chinese law always. Well, what if they move to America? Now they don't have to follow the same laws.

and who said that that's what I'm trying to do?
I said if you are, not you are definitely doing that thing.