Um… This is an atheist site. Most of us don’t believe anything at all the bible (lower case intended) has to say. Why would we care about this minutia? You have put yourself in the same position as a Christian apologist. Please explain to my why I should care about anything the bible says. (This is the question I would ask them, and now it is the question I am asking you? What’s the point?)
3 Likes
Am I missing something, only your profile says atheist?
jamessmith
james
I am an/a: Atheist
1 Like
I will direct you to my little series on the myriad of sects, cults and interpretations of the various gospels, new gospels etc abounding in the 1st to 5th centuries CE, HERE . You might find some parallels and probably some enlightenment. Pay particular attention to where “John” references the Logos of Philo and also in the Ophites meaning.
1 Like
the belief in Jesus as God is central to mainstream Christianity but is not accepted in many other religious and philosophical traditions. The statement reflects a complex and deeply nuanced area of religious belief and theology.
1 Like
Thank you, Captain Obvious. I love you in the Simpsons.
1 Like
1 Like
There was no one named “Jesus” until about 1630 AD. When a couple of guys revised the Bible they gave the major characters more user-friendly names and they started using “J” words.
1 Like
Do you mean that was when they anglicised the Hebrew name? Only your assertion seems a little vague?
the J letter was in use about 929CE. However the identity of the Jesus/Joshua/Yeshua character as described in the gospels, epistles of Paul/Saul and later writings is obscure.
1 Like
Hi! No he’s not he is a prophet of the Elohim alive and well on the eternal life planet.
2 Likes
oh, along with the Thetans?
3 Likes
His posts suggest he has zero interest in any form of debate, he just drops in every few days and squeezes out another vapplatitude, devoid of context, explanation or evidence, he might as well be listing his favourite letters of the alphabet for all the meaning one can derive.
His assertions have all the intellectual gravitas of an annoying radio jingle. Even comparing them to debate, is like comparing a full car wash, wax and valet, with someone reeking of booze and dressed in smelly rags, running over while you’re parked at the lights, and smearing a dirty rag all over your windscreen. Then presenting you with a toothless grin and an outstretched hand you wouldn’t touch even if it was skimmed to you across a lake of disinfectant.
On the one hand you feel some empathy and sympathy for them, but on the other hand it is annoying that they’ve rendered a perfectly clean windscreen useless without a thorough wash, grinning as if they’ve done you a service.
1 Like
Along with his brother, Satan, no doubt. (Courtesy of LDS)
2 Likes
Damnit, you beat me to it.
It had to have been the life planet-soiling Demons preventing me from checking the forum in time.
1 Like
"Well, it seems to me* @FILECABENET is a bit out ruds because of being a PTP with his second dynamic. Likely due to some bypassed charge having to do with his MEST at his apartment. When he was given his last R-factor I thought we were in ARC about it, but lately he seems to have gone a bit PTS. I recommended he see the MAA at the AO to blow some charge and get his ethics in. I think he gave him a review to F/N and VGIs but he did a roller coaster, so I think there’s an SP somewhere on his lines. I tried to audit him myself but he had a dirty needle and BIs. He was acting really 1.1 so I finally sent him to Qual to spot the entheta on his lines. Other than that, everything seems to be fine. We can expect the same shit from him until he clears.
1 Like
Do you mean that was when they anglicised the Hebrew name? Only your assertion seems a little vague?
You are an intelligent adult but you aren’t using your intelligence.
“John Wycliffe (1380s) used the spelling Ihesus and also used Ihesu (‘J’ was then a swash glyph variant of ‘I’, not considered to be a separate letter until the 1629 Cambridge 1st Revision King James Bible where “Jesus” first appeared) in oblique cases, and also in the accusative, and sometimes, apparently without motivation, even for the nominative.”
20(1380s)%20used%20the,accusative%2C%20and%20sometimes%2C%20apparently%20without motivation, even for the nominative."
1 Like
Well, this argument of yours about the letter J seems, well, silly to me. Do you really think how this character’s name is/was spelled is critical? Toe-may-toe, toe-mah-toe, eh? It’s minutia and sure doesn’t seem to me to make a shitload of difference.
2 Likes
I agree Cyber, lets call the whole thing off…
2 Likes
Okay, now that was funny!
1 Like
Well, this argument of yours about the letter J seems, well, silly to me. Do you really think how this character’s name is/was spelled is critical? Toe-may-toe, toe-mah-toe, eh? It’s minutia and sure doesn’t seem to me to make a shitload of difference.
Remember, the character’s name was supposed to have been Emmanuel. That name is used just once in the New Testament.
1 Like