- + New Debate
- Debate News
- About
- Debra AI More
frame
Best Fallacy Content
-
Why the repetitive STRIFE between Islam/the Muslim World and Israel?
Islam is representative of Satan in Time and the spiritual war between Satan and Elohim that was initiated before Time was created. Islam is a product of adultery between Abraham and Hagar while the child of promise is Isaac through Sarah, not Ishmael through Hagar; therefore, the struggle between Israel (Jacob, the son of Isaac) and Ishmael's descendants find its genesis in unfaithfulness and strife i.e., sin. The entirety of Scripture details this war between Satan and Elohim and expounds upon why the Messiah appeared in Time; specifically, to destroy the works of Satan through the Gospel (1 John 3:8b), a Gospel ordained "before Time began" (2 Timothy 1:8-10).Israel is the eschatological Land of promise through which Elohim will sum-up all things through Messiah, the Millennial Kingdom, the judgement of Satan (Revelation 20:10) and the judgment of unrepentant humanity (Revelation 20:11-15), the creation of a New Earth and New Heaven and the establishment of the New Jerusalem (Revelation 21-22); therefore, Israel will remain and will soon come under a nuclear attack initiated by the demonic coalition of Russia-China-Islam/Iran v. Jerusalem, Israel...this will initiate the 2nd-Advent of Messiah Jesus; therefore, Israel will remain irrespective of Allah's (Satan's) intent.
-
Why Can't 1.8 Billion Muslims Destroy Israel?
Islam is representative of Satan in Time and the spiritual war between Satan and Elohim that was initiated before Time was created. Islam is a product of adultery between Abraham and Hagar while the child of promise is Isaac through Sarah, not Ishmael through Hagar; therefore, the struggle between Israel (Jacob, the son of Isaac) and Ishmael's descendants find its genesis in unfaithfulness and strife i.e., sin. The entirety of Scripture details this war between Satan and Elohim and expounds upon why the Messiah appeared in Time; specifically, to destroy the works of Satan through the Gospel (1 John 3:8b), a Gospel ordained "before Time began" (2 Timothy 1:8-10).Israel is the eschatological Land of promise through which Elohim will sum-up all things through Messiah, the Millennial Kingdom, the judgement of Satan (Revelation 20:10) and the judgment of unrepentant humanity (Revelation 20:11-15), the creation of a New Earth and New Heaven and the establishment of the New Jerusalem (Revelation 21-22); therefore, Israel will remain and will soon come under a nuclear attack initiated by the demonic coalition of Russia-China-Islam/Iran v. Jerusalem, Israel...this will initiate the 2nd-Advent of Messiah Jesus; therefore, Israel will remain irrespective of Allah's (Satan's) intent.
-
Is Christianity a copy cat religion?
@21CenturyIconoclast ; Jesus did not literally mean that faith would move a mountain but that mountainous obstacles in one's life were most properly addressed by prayer and faith.
-
Should Israel Wage A Full Assault On Rafah?
@Factfinder
Arn't you Irish, Mr Factfinder? Ireland is now the laughing stock of the world. You wanted your sovereignty from the British, so you surrendered you sovereignty to Europe. Smart. Now you have illegal immigrants flooding your country and you can't do a damned thing about it. You are no longer a country, you are just a European a state. New Zealand and Ireland are two little mice that roar, even though they just bludge on everybody else for their defense. Do you even have an air force? Or, are you like New Zealand, without one? You are perfect examples of how people who think that they are safe and secure behind other people' defenses like to virtue signal to show how "superior" they are. All you show is how shallow and dependent you are.
-
Is Christianity a copy cat religion?
@Factfinder
That you believe is not evidence.
Correct, and a person's disbelieve does not alter the evidence either. One must examine the veracity of the evidence.
The bible says is not an attestation it's a claim. 1 Corinthians was written over 50 years ce and contains claims not proofs. Not evidence. https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Letter-of-Paul-to-the-Corinthians
The claim is not that the book of Corinthians was written by 35 AD but that the Christian creed that is stated in 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 was. 1 Corinthians was indeed written in the 50's in Ephesians based on Acts details.
The creed predates the writing of the book though. See:- The Oxford Companion to the Bible: “The earliest record of these appearances is to be found in 1 Corinthians 15:3-7, a tradition that Paul ‘received’ after his apostolic call, certainly not later than his visit to Jerusalem in 35 CE, when he saw Cephas (Peter) and James (Gal. 1:18-19), who, like him, were recipients of appearances.” [Eds. Metzer & Coogan (Oxford, 1993), 647.]
- Gerd Lüdemann (Atheist NT professor at Göttingen): “…the elements in the tradition are to be dated to the first two years after the crucifixion of Jesus…not later than three years… the formation of the appearance traditions mentioned in I Cor.15.3-8 falls into the time between 30 and 33 CE.” [The Resurrection of Jesus, trans. by Bowden (Fortress, 1994), 171-72.]
- James Dunn (Professor at Durham): “Despite uncertainties about the extent of tradition which Paul received (126), there is no reason to doubt that this information was communicated to Paul as part of his introductory catechesis (16.3) (127). He would have needed to be informed of precedents in order to make sense of what had happened to him. When he says, ‘I handed on (paredoka) to you as of first importance (en protois) what I also received (parelabon)’ (15.3), he assuredly does not imply that the tradition became important to him only at some subsequent date. More likely he indicates the importance of the tradition to himself from the start; that was why he made sure to pass it on to the Corinthians when they first believed (15.1-2) (128). This tradition, we can be entirely confident, was formulated as tradition within months of Jesus' death. [Jesus Remembered (Eerdmans, 2003) 854-55.]
- Michael Goulder (Atheist NT professor at Birmingham): “[It] goes back at least to what Paul was taught when he was converted, a couple of years after the crucifixion. [“The Baseless Fabric of a Vision,” in Gavin D’Costa, editor, Resurrection Reconsidered (Oneworld, 1996), 48.]
- A. J. M. Wedderburn (Non-Christian NT professor at Munich): “One is right to speak of ‘earliest times’ here, … most probably in the first half of the 30s.” [Beyond Resurrection (Hendrickson, 1999), 113-114.]
The bible says isn't evidence.
The Bible is a collection of books. Each book in the New Testament is a separate and distinct source of information. Each source must be considered individually. We see eye witness accounts from Matthew, John, James, and Peter. We see secondary confirming eye witness accounts from Mark (who may have also been a witness himself), Luke, and Paul. Luke, records that he wrote what eye witnesses told him. A historian would not disregard them because the sources were in the Bible, but would examine them individually for their content and merit.
Fabrications often are a large part of testimonials whether they helped the outcome of a tale or not. That women discovered an empty tomb is a biblical account and not evidence.
All four gospels mention women as the first witnesses. This means that 4 separate sources mention this detail - plus the numerous other early Christian writings. These sources were written in different places to different audiences. The detail is significant. Jewish tradition did not accept a woman's testimony in a court setting. It would be unlikely for someone to make up a story in that Jewish context and have women as the witnesses, because that issue, would then be used to dismiss the account. The fact that historians believe Mary Magdalene did live and testify to the resurrection is not seriously disputed.
Persecution of a particular religious sect are not an attestation of the claims of said sect...
True. Many will die for something they believe in. But no one dies for a lie they know to be false. Paul claims that James, Peter, and the disciples confirmed Jesus' resurrection to him. Luke records Peter preaching about his seeing the resurrected Christ. It seems odd that Peter would not speak up and say he was wrong or mistaken if he did not believe the resurrection happened.
The earliest evidence is found in John 21:18–19, which was written about 30 years after Peter’s death. atheist Bart Ehrman, in his book Peter, Paul, & Mary Magdalene: The Followers of Jesus in History and Legend, agrees that Peter is being told he will die as a martyr. Other evidence for Peter’s martyrdom can be found in early church fathers such as Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Dionysius of Corinth, Irenaeus, Tertullian and more. The early, consistent and unanimous testimony is that Peter died as a martyr.
To claim there is evidence almost entirely based on tradition is simply false.
Eye witness accounts are not just tradition. It is obvious that the tomb was empty. If it weren't then, someone would have produced the body and said 'see, here he is'. No one in antiquity, died that the tomb was empty. None of the eye witnesses changed their story. That seems relevant when you consider the persecution Christians endured under Nero according to non-Christian sources such as Suetonius and Tacitus.
The transformed lives of the apostles is also evidence of the truth of the resurrection. It seems unlikely that they would have left their homes and businesses to go and be persecuted for a story they didn't believe.
-
Is Christianity a copy cat religion?
@RickeyHoltsclaw
RICKEYHOLTSCLAW, the number one BIBLE FOOL of this Religion Forum,
YOUR BIBLE STU-PID RUNAWAY QUOTE FROM THE JUDEO-CHRISTIAN BIBLE RELATIVE TO MATTHEW 17:20: " Simply because you're an arrogant, vulgar, rude, atheist and you don't understand Scripture these attributes are no reason to be angry."
Rickey, the membership is WAITING for you to follow through on your alleged bible knowledge, whereas, your grade-school quote above does not answer the pertinent question, whereas you don't understand this simple proposition!
VERSE IN QUESTION: JESUS SAID: " He replied, 'Because you have so little faith. Truly I tell you, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.” (Matthew 17:20)
Thererfore, you are to prove beyond any doubt with BIBLICAL CITATIONS, and not some insipid apologetic hearsay jabberwockey nonsense that you spew forth ad infinitum when you are wrong, then where in the Bible does it say that when Jesus speaks literally as he did in Matthew 17:20 as shown above, that pseudo-christians like YOU can move mountains literally if you have faith and believe, means something else not relative to moving said mountains in a literal form!BEGIN:
iF YOU CAN'T "BIBLICALLY PROVE" YOUR NOTION ABOVE, THEN YOU ARE CALLING JESUS A LIAR IN MATTHEW 17:20 WHERE GOD CANNOT LIE AS SHOWN IN THE VERSE BELOW:
"So that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us.” (Hebrews 6:18)
WE WILL AWAIT YOUR ANSWER TO THE ABOVE BIBLICAL PROPOSITION ABOVE BECAUSE JESUS IS WATCHING YOU (HEBREWS 4:13) IN CALLING HIM A LIAR AT THIS POINT UNTIL YOU PROVE OTHERWISE BIBLE FOOL, UNDERSTOOD?!
.
-
Is Christianity a copy cat religion?
The holy spirit is another way of saying you hear voices in your head because the fallacies in scripture isn't convincing alone. Are you on meds?RickeyHoltsclaw said:@Barnardot ; You will believe what the Holy Spirit has provided you in the Canon of Scripture and find life in Jesus as your Messiah - or - you'll reject the Words of Life and die in Hell. The choice is yours. Have you read the New Testament for yourself? -
Is Christianity a copy cat religion?
@just_sayin
I believe there is evidence of Jesus' resurrection:
That you believe is not evidence.
1) There is a very early attestation of the event, no later than 18 months after the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:3-7). That's very early attestation for ancient historical events.
The bible says is not an attestation it's a claim. 1 Corinthians was written over 50 years ce and contains claims not proofs. Not evidence. https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Letter-of-Paul-to-the-Corinthians
2) Multiple witness accounts - The resurrection is supported by eye witness accounts such as Peter, James, John, Matthew, and secondary evidence from interviews with eye witnesses from Mark, Luke, and Paul. You also have lots of early Christian witnesses who confirm that the initial witnesses did in fact claim that they saw the physical resurrection of Jesus.
The bible says isn't evidence.
3) The historical documents contain embarrassing details which fabricated stories would not have included - such as Jesus' crucifixion and the fact that women were the first witnesses of the resurrection. This gives the testimonies a ring of truth because these kinds of embarrassing details would not have been beneficial to the account.
Fabrications often are a large part of testimonials whether they helped the outcome of a tale or not. That women discovered an empty tomb is a biblical account and not evidence.
4) The conversion of Paul. Paul was known as an executioner of Christians for the Sanhedrin. It is hard to explain how someone who was so anti-Christian, became one, if he had not been convinced that the resurrection of Jesus was true.
The bible says isn't evidence.
5) The devoted lives of the eye witnesses, many of which were martyred for their faith. It is hard to explain the transformation of the first witnesses if they did not believe they had seen Jesus.
Persecution of a particular religious sect are not an attestation of the claims of said sect...
According to the 18th-century historian Edward Gibbon, early Christians (second half of the second century and first half of the third century) believed that only Peter, Paul, and James, son of Zebedee, were martyred. The remainder, or even all, of the claims of martyred apostles do not rely upon historical or biblical evidence, but only on late legends
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles_in_the_New_Testament
To claim there is no evidence is simply a false claim.
To claim there is evidence almost entirely based on tradition is simply false.
-
Is Christianity a copy cat religion?
@Barnardot ; You will believe what the Holy Spirit has provided you in the Canon of Scripture and find life in Jesus as your Messiah - or - you'll reject the Words of Life and die in Hell. The choice is yours. Have you read the New Testament for yourself?
-
Is Christianity a copy cat religion?
I believe there is evidence of Jesus' resurrection:Barnardot said:@just_sayin ;I believe there is strong evidence that the claims of Jesus death and resurrection are true.
You might believe that crap all right but it’s just that your totally deluded and the thing about being deluded is that you don’t know myth from realty and in your case right from wrong which is why you lie so much. The fact is is that there is not one peace of evidence about Jesus and resurrection let a lone strong evidence.
1) There is a very early attestation of the event, no later than 18 months after the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:3-7). That's very early attestation for ancient historical events.
2) Multiple witness accounts - The resurrection is supported by eye witness accounts such as Peter, James, John, Matthew, and secondary evidence from interviews with eye witnesses from Mark, Luke, and Paul. You also have lots of early Christian witnesses who confirm that the initial witnesses did in fact claim that they saw the physical resurrection of Jesus.
3) The historical documents contain embarrassing details which fabricated stories would not have included - such as Jesus' crucifixion and the fact that women were the first witnesses of the resurrection. This gives the testimonies a ring of truth because these kinds of embarrassing details would not have been beneficial to the account.
4) The conversion of Paul. Paul was known as an executioner of Christians for the Sanhedrin. It is hard to explain how someone who was so anti-Christian, became one, if he had not been convinced that the resurrection of Jesus was true.
5) The devoted lives of the eye witnesses, many of which were martyred for their faith. It is hard to explain the transformation of the first witnesses if they did not believe they had seen Jesus.
To claim there is no evidence is simply a false claim.
