Why Is Judas Isacriot Considered To Be Evil?

[dacontinent]

You don't know this because the chance was never given for this to come to pass. You're just speculating and going in circles. In the process, you continue to admit that the fictional Judas character was a mere tool who could've been replaced by another proxy if he hadn't followed the script.

Like I said from the beginning, had there been no Judas, then Jesus would have been betrayed by someone else.

I agree. I just posted for mere speculation and to show how nonsensical and fictional the story is. LOL!!
Still though, you never provided any evidence that Judas existed. You totally evaded the question.

A confession. Your purpose for this thread is nonsense. It took 75 posts to get to this conclusion. There was no question to evade.

No you didn't. Nowhere in the Old Testament is Judas' name specifically mentioned. Judas had no idea that he would be the betrayer until the evening of the incident.

Nowhere in the OT is the Jesus' name mentioned either. We know He is Messiah by the life He lives.

If you can't provided extra-biblical evidence, you're merely speculating that Judas actually existed. As far as the second is concerned, you finally got it right. It's hypothetical which is akin to speculation, not evidence.

Another confession of you speculating. So, based on the story, I got it right. Thanks.

In what culture is a newborn baby considered a soldier? You continue to just make up stuff with nothing to support it. Nevermind how illogical it sounds. Newborn babies in the military?! Nothing you post or say can justify the mass murdering of newborn babies and children. It's ashame that you'd even try to do so.

I have relatives whose remains lie in their graves in our cemetery because babies were used in the military in Korea and in Iraq. They have thousands of peers and I have thousands of other families like mine. It is insulting that you are not consciously aware of these types of situations. That is no speculation, sir. Those are facts and truth WITH evidence.

Again, no evidence, only speculation. How many times are you going to make statements with no supporting evidence? Each time you do this, your credibility continues to wane.
It's insulting that you expected me to believe that the Jesus character came in person to your friends to promise them riches and heaven. It's good that you've corrected and backtracked from such thinking.

The evidence is right in the Scriptures and it speaks to you every time that you read it. The choice of accepting the invitation is entirely yours. That you refuse does not invalidate the truth.

The reason I can't see it is because it's not there in Zechariah. This is why there are at least 31,000 different denominations in the Christian religion, all with differing beliefs and not on the same page.
Folks read and misinterpret simple English and don't even know it.
Who is the evil shepherd mentioned in Zechariah 11?

The evil shepherd is the by-product of the Roman Empire. He is not named, but given a label. What label is that, sir?

In other words, you have nothing concrete and factual to support your post about a book of Jeremiah which is supposed to list the writings of several prophets.
If one can't back up what he says, one shouldn't say it. That's called fabrication.

I have placed both information and opportunity before you. You have chosen not to pursue it. That is called laziness.

So if you're biased, that tells me you're not a "just" person when it comes to the bible. It's a good thing you're not a court judge. Your admitted personal and biased attitude would certainly cloud the balances of justice in a court of law.

That tells the casual Bible reader that you don't know what Jesus did to make me "just". It's just ignorance on your part. Furthermore, the Bible is not on trial in a US court of law. If I were a court judge, then my bias would be irrelevent anyway.


]

So him being god is supposed to explain away contradicting verses? The Jesus character is the very one who said that "no man hath seen god AT ANY TIME", so how could he BE god if he claimed that no man hath seen him at anytime?
If he was on earth for several years, then folks did SEE him. Why would he even make the statement IF he was god?

Dacon, you can twist and try to make it fit, but fact of the matter is that the two passages still contradict each other regardless how much you try to explain it away.

Again, you prove exactly what He said. You don't see Him just like they didn't see Him. Pity.

You walked right past the oldest trick in the book. As a matter of fact, you walked right past the oldest trick in most Western religions.
Say something is there when in all actuality, it's not. For example, one of the things hoped for could be heaven. Heaven is not here, so one has to have "faith" that there is such a place as described in the bible where the biblical god resides on his throne.
This is the kind of faith that's mentioned in Hebrew. There's no evidence, but one's belief is counted as evidence. How can one lose with such massive deception and slight of hand tricks? Just believe and it's counted as evidence.

Only in religion....ONLY in religion could one be enticed to believe that an "ass" spoke Hebrew or that a massive river split in two to allow 2-3 million people to cross it or that the sun stopped in midstream. All without factual and supporting evidence. That's why it's called "faith".

Thanks for validating Christianity as being eastern. That might have something to do with why you don't get it. I have no need to hope for heaven. Eternity is now. I am merely waiting for its dispensations.

There is no medical evidence showing that evil spirits are the cause of diseases. The bible makes claim that evil spirits DO cause diseases. The burden of proof is on the party making the claim. You seem to keep running away from this claim by trying to put the burden of proof on me.
Is my asking you to show evidence of such a thing too hard of a task for you to do? All I'm asking is that you present evidence proving that evil spirits cause diseases. It's as simple as that. The burden of proof is on the one making the affirmative claim. Please remember this.
By the way, pagan shamans of Africa and Asia believe the same as you do about evil spirits. Strange bedfellows indeed.

Those are not bedfellows of Christianity. They have no basis in Christ. But, you already knew that before you typed that. The burden of proof is with the Scriptures.

Christianity is founded by the writers of the New Testament, who in turn used the Old Testament (and previous religions) as a foundation in helping to create the religion of Christianity. The Jesus character just happens to be the major actor in the story similar to Kristna being the major actor in the Hindu religion.

Your conclusion is a delusion. Christianity is founded by Christ: who authored the OT, NT, pre-T, and post-T. :read:

Over the past two years, I've willingly posted dozens of verified resources supporting my posts much more than you have.
For example, I've posted resources from credible and world renowned archaeologists proving that the exodus never occurred. I'm sure you remember the article and the information in that article.
What extra-biblical evidence have you posted that's credible and reliable? Nothing.

Not one single archeologist, scientist, nor historian has produced any EVIDENCE that any one of the ancient documents was copied or plagiarized from another. No such original documents have been produced. It's kind of like your pagan shamans of Africa and Asia that you mentioned above sharing some similar concepts but having completely different origins.

Should I remind you about the bogused article you posted about the African preacher supposedly raising a man from the dead? LOL!! That article was found to be a sham and was supported only by the preacher's sheer imagination, but you took it and ran with it only to find out the hard way that the article and story wasn't true.

I posted no article about an African preacher raising a man from the dead. I have posted an article about an African preacher being raised from the dead...and I have met the EVIDENCE. Nice guy.

For the most part, scientist are more objective than religious folks. Why? Because they require a product called "evidence" and it has to be peer reviewed by independent parties.
On the other hand, eligion requires something which falls far short of evidence. It's called "faith".

Already invalidated by the Scripture that defines faith. Nice try.

 

[JayRob]

A confession. Your purpose for this thread is nonsense. It took 75 posts to get to this conclusion. There was no question to evade.

What confession? By reading my posts years ago, you should've known my stance by now.
As far as evasion is concerned, you're becoming an expert at this craft. Outside of the bible, where's the evidence of Judas' existence?

Nowhere in the OT is the Jesus' name mentioned either. We know He is Messiah by the life He lives.

If you're going to make statements about a person, specifically Judas, those statements must be supported by clear and unequivocal evidence. Up to this point, you've provided none and it's highly doubtful that you ever will.

Another confession of you speculating. So, based on the story, I got it right. Thanks.

If you were living in a bubble, of course you'd have it right, but you're not. When you make statements that can't be substantiated, you'll be called out on them.
You're being given multiple chances to provide evidence of your Judas theory and each time, you've come up short.

I have relatives whose remains lie in their graves in our cemetery because babies were used in the military in Korea and in Iraq. They have thousands of peers and I have thousands of other families like mine. It is insulting that you are not consciously aware of these types of situations. That is no speculation, sir. Those are facts and truth WITH evidence.

Babies being used in Korea is irrelevant. Koreans don't claim to be our "loving" god as does the biblical god, so one can't hold them to the same standards as a god who claims to love children and babies, who says "suffer the little children to come unto me"; who says "if anyone harms a little one, it's better that a millstone be tied around his neck and thrown into the sea." What happened to this loving god when babies and children were ordered to be hacked to pieces by his people?

Fact of the matter is that, with a straight face, you're trying to justify the fact that the biblical god ordered the mass murder of thousands of innocent babies and children who through no fault of their own, just happened to be born a certain race and lived in a certain culture.
It's unfathomable that you could even fix your fingers to try and justify this, but due to your religion, you seem to have no problem with it. That's a terrible shame.

The evidence is right in the Scriptures and it speaks to you every time that you read it. The choice of accepting the invitation is entirely yours. That you refuse does not invalidate the truth.

You claimed that your friends were visited by Jesus and promised riches beyond their imagination, then you claim that your evidence is in the scriptures? This is getting more and more laughable. Where are the names of those friends you mentioned found in scripture?

The evil shepherd is the by-product of the Roman Empire. He is not named, but given a label. What label is that, sir?

You claimed the chapter was about Jesus? No evidence substantiates this. Now you claim that the evil shepherd was someone from the Roman Empire?! /Are you serious? LOL!! Still no evidence to show that there is a smidget of truth to this, only mere speculation as usual.

I have placed both information and opportunity before you. You have chosen not to pursue it. That is called laziness.

You made the statement. All I did was ask for evidence. It's your responsibility to provide supporting evidence. Since it's obvious that you can't, perhaps it's you who are the lazy one.
You can't show one shred of evidence showing that a book of Jeremiah, with listings of the writings of several Old Testament prophets, ever existed.
Since being called out on it, you can't even provide a mere website of all the millions and millions of "google sites" to substantiate your statement. All you have is an un-named rabbi source who nobody knows but you, yet you claim that's providing evidence? You can do better than that I know. For your credibility's sake, you need to post that evidence.

That tells the casual Bible reader that you don't know what Jesus did to make me "just". It's just ignorance on your part. Furthermore, the Bible is not on trial in a US court of law. If I were a court judge, then my bias would be irrelevent anyway.

I don't have many debates with the "casual" bible reader. It's too easy and it's like taking candy from a baby. The average casual bible reader don't know the content of 95-99 percent of the bible.

Whether you use the name of Jesus or not, being a "just" person is just that. One doesn't need a Jesus to make him "just". He must decide for himself whether he wants to be just or not.
Even with the help of the Jesus character, you virtually admitted that you're biased. How can you be a "just" person and be biased at the same time? That's called an oxymoron.

Again, you prove exactly what He said. You don't see Him just like they didn't see Him. Pity.

Dacon, the Jesus character was talking about physical sight, not some ethereal "knowing" him in a spiritual way as you're trying to lay claim to. That's the ONLY alternative you have to try and wiggle your way out of this contradiction.
The bible clearly says, "no man hath seen god at any time".
In case you didn't know, by making such a statement, the Jesus character didn't consider himself to be god. He called himself "the son of man" and hinted that the "son of man" declared about god, he didn't claim to be god. More biblical contradiction.

Thanks for validating Christianity as being eastern. That might have something to do with why you don't get it. I have no need to hope for heaven. Eternity is now. I am merely waiting for its dispensations.

This response has nothing to do with my post. You evaded talking about faith and evidence because you know that faith is merely a belief. Just face it, due to mere faith, you're stuck believing that the sun stopped....with no supporting evidence; you're stuck with believing that an ass spoke Hebrew....with no evidence; and you're stuck with believing that a large river was split in two, so 2-3 million people could cross it.....with no evidence. That's what faith is all about, believing something happened....with NO evidence.

As far as eternity is concerned, human spirits don't die, so there's no need to wait for a dispensation. Only the physical body dies, but the spirit of the person remains. It's sad that most Christians have lost this knowledge and are waiting for a fictional resurrection that's never going to happen.

Those are not bedfellows of Christianity. They have no basis in Christ. But, you already knew that before you typed that. The burden of proof is with the Scriptures.

In this particular case and on this particular subject, Christianity and shamans are in the same boat. If one is to believe that evil spirits cause diseases, as mention in both the Old and New Testament, one is forced to admit that Christianity and shamans have similar beliefs. There's no getting around this no matter how one tries.

As far as the burden of proof is concerned, you're exactly right, it's on the scriptures to prove that evil spirits cause diseases. The bible has yet to prove such a thing and you surely can't do it or you would've done so the first time I asked you to.

Your conclusion is a delusion. Christianity is founded by Christ: who authored the OT, NT, pre-T, and post-T.

How could the the biblical god be the author of pre-Old Testament material when no one wrote about such a god before 1500 BC? That's fact.
You seem to have a habit of posting unsubstantiated information and believing that just because you posted it, that's supposed to be evidence.
Again, you haven't a shred of extra-biblical evidence even showing that monotheism existed before 1500 BC.

Not one single archeologist, scientist, nor historian has produced any EVIDENCE that any one of the ancient documents was copied or plagiarized from another. No such original documents have been produced. It's kind of like your pagan shamans of Africa and Asia that you mentioned above sharing some similar concepts but having completely different origins.

What documents are you referring to? If you're referring to the bible, that book has been shown to be full of inconsistencies, contradictions, untrue statements, plagiarized information, unscientific documention and unreliable. That's not even to be debated. It didn't even mention one thing about micro-organisms that are invisible to the naked eye.

The article I posted was verified by archaeologists on the scene who conducted intensive research throughout the Middle East and around the Dead Sea. Those archaeologists and geologists came to the conclusion that the story of the exodus as being unsubstantiated.
I'll post it again just in case you've forgotten:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/03/world/africa/03exodus.html
Here are a few quotes from the article:
--"Really, it’s a myth,â€￾ Dr. Hawass said of the story of the Exodus, as he stood at the foot of a wall built during what is called the New Kingdom.
--“If they get upset, I don’t care,â€￾ Dr. Hawass said. “This is my career as an archaeologist. I should tell them the truth. If the people are upset, that is not my problem.â€￾
--“Sometimes as archaeologists we have to say that never happened because there is no historical evidence,â€￾ Dr. Hawass said, as he led the journalists across a rutted field of stiff and rocky sand.

I posted no article about an African preacher raising a man from the dead. I have posted an article about an African preacher being raised from the dead...and I have met the EVIDENCE. Nice guy.

You seem to have no problem posting information that can't be substantiated. HBO conducted a documentary on the subject and it was found to be bogused. Why you refuse to believe that it wasn't shows how biased and how far you'll go just to hold on to your religious beliefs, no matter how outlandish.

Please post the article again. Nevermind, I'll post it.
http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/bonnke2.html
"Raised From The Dead" by Reinhard Bonnke. Oh Really?
by Sandy Simpson

Please don't overlook the glaring flaws shown at the end of the article and the questionable autopsy.
I guess those flaws don't matter to educated folks when it comes to religion, especially religious fanaticism in parts of uneducated Africa.

Already invalidated by the Scripture that defines faith. Nice try.

Again, no evidence, just a mere statement. That's what faith will do for you. All you need is a belief.

 

[dacontinent]

Babies being used in Korea is irrelevant. Koreans don't claim to be our "loving" god as does the biblical god, so one can't hold them to the same standards as a god who claims to love children and babies, who says "suffer the little children to come unto me"; who says "if anyone harms a little one, it's better that a millstone be tied around his neck and thrown into the sea." What happened to this loving god when babies and children were ordered to be hacked to pieces by his people?

Fact of the matter is that, with a straight face, you're trying to justify the fact that the biblical god ordered the mass murder of thousands of innocent babies and children who through no fault of their own, just happened to be born a certain race and lived in a certain culture.
It's unfathomable that you could even fix your fingers to try and justify this, but due to your religion, you seem to have no problem with it. That's a terrible shame.

Nothing to justify. It has been a part of Eastern culture before Abraham was born. We saw it in Korea. We still see it in Afghanastan, Iraq, and the United States.

You claimed that your friends were visited by Jesus and promised riches beyond their imagination, then you claim that your evidence is in the scriptures? This is getting more and more laughable. Where are the names of those friends you mentioned found in scripture?

Right next to yours.

You claimed the chapter was about Jesus? No evidence substantiates this. Now you claim that the evil shepherd was someone from the Roman Empire?! /Are you serious? LOL!! Still no evidence to show that there is a smidget of truth to this, only mere speculation as usual.

Inaccurate. I said that prophecy was about Jesus and the activities of Jeremiah were a foreshadowing of the same. If you understand the Scriptures, it is easy to see.

You made the statement. All I did was ask for evidence. It's your responsibility to provide supporting evidence. Since it's obvious that you can't, perhaps it's you who are the lazy one.
You can't show one shred of evidence showing that a book of Jeremiah, with listings of the writings of several Old Testament prophets, ever existed.
Since being called out on it, you can't even provide a mere website of all the millions and millions of "google sites" to substantiate your statement. All you have is an un-named rabbi source who nobody knows but you, yet you claim that's providing evidence? You can do better than that I know. For your credibility's sake, you need to post that evidence.

I did not get the information from any website. I don't know if it is on the web at all and I have no need to look for it. I suggested that you do what I did: talk to a rabbi, who might actually have a copy of the text in the form that I mentioned. You might even get to touch it with your own hands. The internet is a great collection point for resources, but not everything is there.

I don't have many debates with the "casual" bible reader. It's too easy and it's like taking candy from a baby. The average casual bible reader don't know the content of 95-99 percent of the bible.

Whether you use the name of Jesus or not, being a "just" person is just that. One doesn't need a Jesus to make him "just". He must decide for himself whether he wants to be just or not.
Even with the help of the Jesus character, you virtually admitted that you're biased. How can you be a "just" person and be biased at the same time? That's called an oxymoron.
...

Dacon, the Jesus character was talking about physical sight, not some ethereal "knowing" him in a spiritual way as you're trying to lay claim to. That's the ONLY alternative you have to try and wiggle your way out of this contradiction.
The bible clearly says, "no man hath seen god at any time".
In case you didn't know, by making such a statement, the Jesus character didn't consider himself to be god. He called himself "the son of man" and hinted that the "son of man" declared about god, he didn't claim to be god. More biblical contradiction.

I was obtuse when I should have been more direct. So, here it is: You are, at best, a casual Bible reader. So, it is not surprising that you struggle to understand that ONLY Jesus makes us just.

No Biblical contradition. Only more JayRob ignorance.

This response has nothing to do with my post. You evaded talking about faith and evidence because you know that faith is merely a belief. Just face it, due to mere faith, you're stuck believing that the sun stopped....with no supporting evidence; you're stuck with believing that an ass spoke Hebrew....with no evidence; and you're stuck with believing that a large river was split in two, so 2-3 million people could cross it.....with no evidence. That's what faith is all about, believing something happened....with NO evidence

As far as eternity is concerned, human spirits don't die, so there's no need to wait for a dispensation. Only the physical body dies, but the spirit of the person remains. It's sad that most Christians have lost this knowledge and are waiting for a fictional resurrection that's never going to happen.
...
Again, no evidence, just a mere statement. That's what faith will do for you. All you need is a belief.

I pointed you to the Scripture depicts faith as evidence - the very thing you asked for. If faith were merely belief then we would virtually stop eulogising. We would just will people to live. Nah, there is more to faith than just believing.

It is clear that you don't know what most Christians know about this. But, being that casual Bible reader that you are, this is not surprising.

In this particular case and on this particular subject, Christianity and shamans are in the same boat. If one is to believe that evil spirits cause diseases, as mention in both the Old and New Testament, one is forced to admit that Christianity and shamans have similar beliefs. There's no getting around this no matter how one tries.

You further substantiate what I said earlier.

As far as the burden of proof is concerned, you're exactly right, it's on the scriptures to prove that evil spirits cause diseases. The bible has yet to prove such a thing and you surely can't do it or you would've done so the first time I asked you to.

We've been over them before. I will just give you one (1) this time and I will be done with it. Matthew 12:22

How could the the biblical god be the author of pre-Old Testament material when no one wrote about such a god before 1500 BC? That's fact.
You seem to have a habit of posting unsubstantiated information and believing that just because you posted it, that's supposed to be evidence.
Again, you haven't a shred of extra-biblical evidence even showing that monotheism existed before 1500 BC.

1500 years BC is about right for the Abrahamic path. So, how is it you are still lost on authorship, casual Bible reader?

What documents are you referring to? If you're referring to the bible, that book has been shown to be full of inconsistencies, contradictions, untrue statements, plagiarized information, unscientific documention and unreliable. That's not even to be debated. It didn't even mention one thing about micro-organisms that are invisible to the naked eye.

The article I posted was verified by archaeologists on the scene who conducted intensive research throughout the Middle East and around the Dead Sea. Those archaeologists and geologists came to the conclusion that the story of the exodus as being unsubstantiated.
I'll post it again just in case you've forgotten:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/03/world/africa/03exodus.html
Here are a few quotes from the article:
--"Really, it’s a myth,â€￾ Dr. Hawass said of the story of the Exodus, as he stood at the foot of a wall built during what is called the New Kingdom.
--“If they get upset, I don’t care,â€￾ Dr. Hawass said. “This is my career as an archaeologist. I should tell them the truth. If the people are upset, that is not my problem.â€￾
--“Sometimes as archaeologists we have to say that never happened because there is no historical evidence,â€￾ Dr. Hawass said, as he led the journalists across a rutted field of stiff and rocky sand.

The documents that I was referring to are those of ancient religions. Isn't that what is at issue when one speaks of copying and plagiarism?

Thank you, Dr. Hawass. That was an excellent qualification of a conclusion.

You seem to have no problem posting information that can't be substantiated. HBO conducted a documentary on the subject and it was found to be bogused. Why you refuse to believe that it wasn't shows how biased and how far you'll go just to hold on to your religious beliefs, no matter how outlandish.

Please post the article again. Nevermind, I'll post it.
http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/bonnke2.html
"Raised From The Dead" by Reinhard Bonnke. Oh Really?
by Sandy Simpson

Please don't overlook the glaring flaws shown at the end of the article and the questionable autopsy.
I guess those flaws don't matter to educated folks when it comes to religion, especially religious fanaticism in parts of uneducated Africa

Just one question: Where is the EVIDENCE that the article shows that the man was not dead?

 

[JayRob]

Nothing to justify. It has been a part of Eastern culture before Abraham was born. We saw it in Korea. We still see it in Afghanastan, Iraq, and the United States.

Again, you divert. This has nothing to do with Eastern culture. What happened to "suffer the little children to come unto me" and "if anyone harms one of these little ones, it's better that a millstone be tied around his neck"? Seems to me that you're choosing to ignore the mass murdering of children by the same god who claims to love them.

Right next to yours.

So again, you can't present evidence of the Jesus figure ever visiting any of your friends? You continue to make statements with no substance.

Inaccurate. I said that prophecy was about Jesus and the activities of Jeremiah were a foreshadowing of the same. If you understand the Scriptures, it is easy to see.

There's no duality in Jeremiah. The verses have nothing to do with any messiah nor does it have anything to do with a Roman official. The verses clearly were about Zechariah and a future evil shepherd whose un-named who could be anyone.

I did not get the information from any website. I don't know if it is on the web at all and I have no need to look for it. I suggested that you do what I did: talk to a rabbi, who might actually have a copy of the text in the form that I mentioned. You might even get to touch it with your own hands. The internet is a great collection point for resources, but not everything is there.

Again, am I to trust a rabbi I know nothing about? You brought up this Jeremiah book theory, so the burden is on you to present substance to support what you said. Up to this point, you haven't done so.
You continue to push me to find evidence of your statement when it's on you to do so.

I was obtuse when I should have been more direct. So, here it is: You are, at best, a casual Bible reader. So, it is not surprising that you struggle to understand that ONLY Jesus makes us just.

Typical resorting to placing labels on someone when you can't explain how two simple verses contradict each other. Instead of admitting it, you'd rather take the elementary road and belittle the person asking a simple question.
If you can't explain it, be honest enough to admit it.
As far as being just is concerned, only in a fictional book can a fictional Jesus person make someone "just". Do you consider the killing thousands of innocent children and babies IN THE BIBLE as being "just"?

No Biblical contradition. Only more JayRob ignorance.

It's your unwillingness to admit outright biblical contradiction. That seems to be your theme when you can't explain verses that contradict each other. Instead of humbly admitting such, it seems you'd rather ignore clear contradictions, joke about it, belittle the messenger or make it worse by trying to explain away the contradiction.
The Jesus character stated that "no man hath seen god at any time, but the son of man has declared him". In this verse alone, he's claiming that he's not god. He calls himself, "the son of man". He then mentions the one he considers to be god.

I pointed you to the Scripture depicts faith as evidence - the very thing you asked for. If faith were merely belief then we would virtually stop eulogising. We would just will people to live. Nah, there is more to faith than just believing.

Again your statement is flawed. Didn't the Jesus character state that if one had faith, he could move mountains?
Seems to me that you're calling him a liar. I'd have to agree with you. Just believing that a mountain could move just because one asks it to is ludricous and nonsensical.

Faith is merely believing. In real life, works is just as important as faith, so Hebrews 11 is flawed.
James is more accurate than Hebrews when it comes to the real world of getting things done. Belief, coupled with one's works or efforts is what gets things done and accomplished, not merely believing.

It is clear that you don't know what most Christians know about this. But, being that casual Bible reader that you are, this is not surprising.

It's mighty interesting that this so-called casual reader of the bible asks simple questions that you can't seem to find the answers to, so you divert, give wrong answers or simply ignore the questions altogether.

You further substantiate what I said earlier.

Like I said, when you can't honestly answer, you either ignore it or divert. When it comes to the belief that evil spirits cause diseases, shamans and Christians have similar beliefs. You don't have to admit it eventhough it's the truth because scriptures in the bible clearly show this.

We've been over them before. I will just give you one (1) this time and I will be done with it. Matthew 12:22

How is this proof? The bible claims that a donkey talked? Does that make it true? Did the sun stop in midstream in the middle of the day just because the bible says it did? Just posting a verse is evidence of nothing other than words on a piece of paper.

1500 years BC is about right for the Abrahamic path. So, how is it you are still lost on authorship, casual Bible reader?

You claimed that the biblical god was author of PRE-Old Testament material? What pre-OT material are you referring to?

The documents that I was referring to are those of ancient religions. Isn't that what is at issue when one speaks of copying and plagiarism?

Biblical writers copied and plagiarized from Egyptian and other religions and other cultures when it comes to the introduction of animal sacrificing, temple worship, holy day observances, god/man deities, Epic of Gilgamesh plagiarisms and so forth. Pagan religious writers, prior to the Old and New Testament, plagiarized from prior religions as well. This is what religious writers have always done and this is what ALL world religions are guilty of, copying from previous religions.

Thank you, Dr. Hawass. That was an excellent qualification of a conclusion.

Dr. Hawass' conclusion is mixed with scientific research and evidence, unlike those who support the exodus theory. There's a difference just in case you didn't know.

Just one question: Where is the EVIDENCE that the article shows that the man was not dead?

That's not for one to prove. If the person or persons can prove that the African man was actually dead (which they can't), there would be no need to prove that he wasn't dead. No legitimate autopsy was ever conducted by a qualified offical or technological device to determine complete flatline.

You keep forgetting the main theme of evidence. The burden of proof is on the one making the affirmative claim.
In this particular case, the burden of proof is on the minister making the claim, not on the people doubting the claim.
Just go ahead and admit that the article has mulitple flaws and is questionable to say the least.

 

[dacontinent]

Again, you divert. This has nothing to do with Eastern culture. What happened to "suffer the little children to come unto me" and "if anyone harms one of these little ones, it's better that a millstone be tied around his neck"? Seems to me that you're choosing to ignore the mass murdering of children by the same god who claims to love them.
...

So again, you can't present evidence of the Jesus figure ever visiting any of your friends? You continue to make statements with no substance.
...
There's no duality in Jeremiah. The verses have nothing to do with any messiah nor does it have anything to do with a Roman official. The verses clearly were about Zechariah and a future evil shepherd whose un-named who could be anyone.

These three points that you made exhibit the clear ignorance you have of the Scriptures. It is the difference between casual Bible reading and reading by one who is being transformed by the renewing of his mind.

Again, am I to trust a rabbi I know nothing about? You brought up this Jeremiah book theory, so the burden is on you to present substance to support what you said. Up to this point, you haven't done so.
You continue to push me to find evidence of your statement when it's on you to do so.

Surely you jest! How many times have you posted information from people that you know nothing about because you felt it supported your position. C'mon, man.

Typical resorting to placing labels on someone when you can't explain how two simple verses contradict each other. Instead of admitting it, you'd rather take the elementary road and belittle the person asking a simple question.
If you can't explain it, be honest enough to admit it.
As far as being just is concerned, only in a fictional book can a fictional Jesus person make someone "just". Do you consider the killing thousands of innocent children and babies IN THE BIBLE as being "just"?

God is just. Removing

It's your unwillingness to admit outright biblical contradiction. That seems to be your theme when you can't explain verses that contradict each other. Instead of humbly admitting such, it seems you'd rather ignore clear contradictions, joke about it, belittle the messenger or make it worse by trying to explain away the contradiction.
The Jesus character stated that "no man hath seen god at any time, but the son of man has declared him". In this verse alone, he's claiming that he's not god. He calls himself, "the son of man". He then mentions the one he considers to be god.

Again your statement is flawed. Didn't the Jesus character state that if one had faith, he could move mountains?
Seems to me that you're calling him a liar. I'd have to agree with you. Just believing that a mountain could move just because one asks it to is ludricous and nonsensical.

Exactly. Which is why I told you that there is more to faith than just believing. Maybe you ARE catching on...

Faith is merely believing. In real life, works is just as important as faith, so Hebrews 11 is flawed.
James is more accurate than Hebrews when it comes to the real world of getting things done. Belief, coupled with one's works or efforts is what gets things done and accomplished, not merely believing.

...then again, you go right back and contradict your own position.

It's mighty interesting that this so-called casual reader of the bible asks simple questions that you can't seem to find the answers to, so you divert, give wrong answers or simply ignore the questions altogether.

It probably is interesting to the casual Bible reader. He doesn't believe what he reads. He doesn't want to know the truth. Simple answers elude him because he doesn't want to believe them.

Like I said, when you can't honestly answer, you either ignore it or divert. When it comes to the belief that evil spirits cause diseases, shamans and Christians have similar beliefs. You don't have to admit it eventhough it's the truth because scriptures in the bible clearly show this.

Similar is not same. The origins are completely different and you know it.

How is this proof? The bible claims that a donkey talked? Does that make it true? Did the sun stop in midstream in the middle of the day just because the bible says it did? Just posting a verse is evidence of nothing other than words on a piece of paper.

Another simple answer to your simple question that you refuse to believe. It is a simple matter that you don't want to be helped.

You claimed that the biblical god was author of PRE-Old Testament material? What pre-OT material are you referring to?

Here is another simple answer in two steps:

1. Go back and read what I wrote. You will see I that it is different from what you CLAIM that I wrote.
2. Read Ephesians 1.

Biblical writers copied and plagiarized from Egyptian and other religions and other cultures when it comes to the introduction of animal sacrificing, temple worship, holy day observances, god/man deities, Epic of Gilgamesh plagiarisms and so forth. Pagan religious writers, prior to the Old and New Testament, plagiarized from prior religions as well. This is what religious writers have always done and this is what ALL world religions are guilty of, copying from previous religions.

Nicely written...but where is your EVIDENCE????

Dr. Hawass' conclusion is mixed with scientific research and evidence, unlike those who support the exodus theory. There's a difference just in case you didn't know.

Dr. Hawass has as much EVIDENCE as you do.

That's not for one to prove. If the person or persons can prove that the African man was actually dead (which they can't), there would be no need to prove that he wasn't dead. No legitimate autopsy was ever conducted by a qualified offical or technological device to determine complete flatline.
...
You keep forgetting the main theme of evidence. The burden of proof is on the one making the affirmative claim.
In this particular case, the burden of proof is on the minister making the claim, not on the people doubting the claim.
Just go ahead and admit that the article has mulitple flaws and is questionable to say the least.

Diversion. Make up your mind. If he was not dead when he was declared dead by the medical professional, you claimed that he would have been dead when injected with the formaldahide (sp?). So, if the accident did not kill him, then science says that the embalmer did. Either way, he was dead ... but now he lives. How simple is that?

 

[CEE DOG]

Satan you are something else. Don't worry though, hell is waiting on you. :devil2:

The Jesus character prophesied that Judas would betray him. Why didn't the Jesus character save Judas from doing this by voluntarily turning himself over to the Jews? That would've been the epitome of giving yourself up for your friends.
The Jesus character didn't do this. Instead, he let Judas fall right into the trap set for him long before he ever knew it.

 

[Blacknbengal]

Satan you are something else. Don't worry though, hell is waiting on you. :devil2:

:tup:

 

[dacontinent]

Y'all need to stop that. JayRob is going to think you are referring to him.

 

[JayRob]

These three points that you made exhibit the clear ignorance you have of the Scriptures. It is the difference between casual Bible reading and reading by one who is being transformed by the renewing of his mind.

I see that you don't deny that the biblical god murdered innocent babies and children, instead you just try and explain it away....something you can try to do but you just can't.

Surely you jest! How many times have you posted information from people that you know nothing about because you felt it supported your position. C'mon, man.

That's it, I at least post a website. You didn't even do that. You post a supposed quote by a mysterious rabbi you can't even name nor give a simple website on and expect me to believe only that? Please.
It's been over a two weeks now, and you still can't post verification of this Jeremiah book you spoke of. If the Jewish folks used this book, surely there'd be evidence or talk of such a book but there isn't.
In short, you'll look better if you'd just humble yourself and simply admit that you goofed and that there's no such book.

God is just. Removing

Can you not answer a simple yes or no? If you believe the bible with all your heart, there's no need to be ashamed of answering the following question with an emphatic "yes". The question is: "Do you consider the killing thousands of innocent children and babies IN THE BIBLE as being "just?"

Exactly. Which is why I told you that there is more to faith than just believing. Maybe you ARE catching on...

So you are calling the Jesus character a liar?! Wow!!
Earlier you stated that all one need is "faith". Now you're back-tracking and adding "works" to the equation. Perhaps it's you who are catching on.

The previous post you skipped over asked you to explain how the two verses aren't contradictory. The bible first claims that "god was seen by a man". Hundreds of years later, the Jesus and god of the Old Testament claimed that "no man hath seen god at anytime". How is that not contradictory? Please explain.

...then again, you go right back and contradict your own position.

What position am I contradicting? I don't believe either one of the bible's stances, however in real life circumstances, I have common sense enough to know that in order for a jobless person to get a job, faith alone won't get him that job. He'll not only have to believe that he will get a job, he must get out and look for one. That's called faith AND works.

You on the other hand, were claiming that all one needs is faith. You didn't mention works, you only mentioned faith and works AFTER I mentioned both of them. A casual reader wouldn't know that much about faith and works.

It probably is interesting to the casual Bible reader. He doesn't believe what he reads. He doesn't want to know the truth. Simple answers elude him because he doesn't want to believe them.

Bible truth and pure evidence-based truth are not the same. It's as close as fiction is to non-fiction.
Truth according to the bible is in the eye of the religious beholder. Evidence-based truth can stand on it's own, but what's considered to be biblical truth more times than not, can't stand on it's own.
For example, there's no evidence that the sun stopped in midstream as mentioned by Joshua. There's no truth to this at all.
There's no truth that a donkey spoke Hebrew in real life as stated in the Old Testament. These are only a few of the hundreds of so-called truths that are mentioned in the bible. When such tales are put to the test by science, geology, archaeology, historical documentation, etc., those so-called truths fail miserably, yet folks go on believing them as if they are truth.

Similar is not same. The origins are completely different and you know it.

I could've used the word "same" and would also have been correct. Both shamans and fundamentalist Christians believe that evil spirits cause diseases meaning that both believe the same.

Another simple answer to your simple question that you refuse to believe. It is a simple matter that you don't want to be helped.

You didn't even bother trying to answer the questions. Instead, you simply ignored both, which is your usual modus operandi.

Here is another simple answer in two steps:
[*]Go back and read what I wrote. You will see I that it is different from what you CLAIM that I wrote.
[*]Read Ephesians 1.

It's not different. You claimed that the OT god wrote material that pre-dated the Old Testament. If you didn't want me to think that way, you might want to review what you type before pressing the "reply" button.

Nicely written...but where is your EVIDENCE????

This question is mighty funny coming from you. Where's your evidence when I ask you? All you do is post words from the bible, followed by no evidence at all.
Now you have the nerve to ask me to post evidence, when that's what I have a habit of doing far more than you?
As far as this evidence you ask for, that's already been posted on multiple occasions, including most recently.
It's you who need to get into the habit of posting pure evidence, not verses backed up by nothing.

Dr. Hawass has as much EVIDENCE as you do.

You ask me to post verification, so I post evidence by a world renowned archaeologists and researcher.
When I do, you discard it without as much of a refutation. Why? Because you CAN'T refute it. All you can do is weakly shrug it off or try to play it off as if the material wasn't important or credible. That's your prerogative though, eventhough it's to your own embarassing detriment.
I challenge you to counter what this archaeologist, Dr. Hawass, says by posting your own extra-biblical evidence from a reputable archaeologist. Put up or shut up.

Diversion. Make up your mind. If he was not dead when he was declared dead by the medical professional, you claimed that he would have been dead when injected with the formaldahide (sp?). So, if the accident did not kill him, then science says that the embalmer did. Either way, he was dead ... but now he lives. How simple is that?

Dacon please. The article pokes so many holes in this story, it's embarassing that you're even trying to defend it. It just shows how desperate one is to try and prove that this man rose from the dead and it shows how easily one can be fooled into believing something if one only professes that "the god of the bible did it".

As far as formaldehyde and it's dosage is concerned, there's no evidence that it was ever given to him.
You're merely guessing that it was. No post- blood tests were ever given to this man proving that he was given formaldehyde or any other drug. Why is that?
In fact, there's not a shred of evidence to show that this man was fully dead. There were no marks, bruises or head scars....no nothing.
What makes the case even more laughable is photo of the size of the coffin in comparison to the man's size whose standing right next to the coffin. If anyone believes that a man of his size could fit inside that baby-sized coffin, they're desperately delusional.

 

[JayRob]

Satan you are something else. Don't worry though, hell is waiting on you. :devil2:

Dude please. As much filth you post on tspn about your personal life, you need to be thankful that there isn't a hell because based on those posts, you'd bust it wide open.
In short, sweep around your own front door before you try to sweep around mine.

 

[JayRob]

Y'all need to stop that. JayRob is going to think you are referring to him.

Who else would they be posting about? LOL!!

 

[CEE DOG]

Shows how country you and judgmental folks like you who read this board are. I have never posted anything about my personal life on this board. You can not find a post that is about my personal life on this board. Thanks come again Satan.

Dude please. As much filth you post on tspn about your personal life, you need to be thankful that there isn't a hell because based on those posts, you'd bust it wide open.
In short, sweep around your own front door before you try to sweep around mine.

 

[Kendrick]

Shows how country you and judgmental folks like you who read this board are. I have never posted anything about my personal life on this board. You can not find a post that is about my personal life on this board. Thanks come again Satan.

Well, you did post about your poodle, though. LOL

 

[dacontinent]

Who else would they be posting about? LOL!!

Satan, of course.

 

[dacontinent]

I see that you don't deny that the biblical god murdered innocent babies and children, instead you just try and explain it away....something you can try to do but you just can't.

Babies, children, women, men, horses, cattle, cats, dogs of opposing nations. Its all right there in the history books.

That's it, I at least post a website. You didn't even do that. You post a supposed quote by a mysterious rabbi you can't even name nor give a simple website on and expect me to believe only that? Please.
It's been over a two weeks now, and you still can't post verification of this Jeremiah book you spoke of. If the Jewish folks used this book, surely there'd be evidence or talk of such a book but there isn't.
In short, you'll look better if you'd just humble yourself and simply admit that you goofed and that there's no such book.

There is plenty of verification AND EVIDENCE right where I told you that you would find it.

Can you not answer a simple yes or no? If you believe the bible with all your heart, there's no need to be ashamed of answering the following question with an emphatic "yes". The question is: "Do you consider the killing thousands of innocent children and babies IN THE BIBLE as being "just?"

I have answered it repeatedly and unequivocably. Here it is again: Yes! God is just.

You didn't like the response in other threads. I suspect that you won't like it here. That won't change my answer.

So you are calling the Jesus character a liar?! Wow!!
Earlier you stated that all one need is "faith". Now you're back-tracking and adding "works" to the equation. Perhaps it's you who are catching on.

The previous post you skipped over asked you to explain how the two verses aren't contradictory. The bible first claims that "god was seen by a man". Hundreds of years later, the Jesus and god of the Old Testament claimed that "no man hath seen god at anytime". How is that not contradictory? Please explain.

I'm not calling Jesus a liar. Rather, I am still calling you ignorant. Even though I never said that "all one needs is faith", I did say faith is more than just believing.

John 1:1 says that Jesus is God. Jesus says that the Father is God and the Holy Spirit are God. Genesis says that Elohim is God. We have covered all of this before, but you don't seem to be able to put it all together.

What position am I contradicting? I don't believe either one of the bible's stances, however in real life circumstances, I have common sense enough to know that in order for a jobless person to get a job, faith alone won't get him that job. He'll not only have to believe that he will get a job, he must get out and look for one. That's called faith AND works.

You on the other hand, were claiming that all one needs is faith. You didn't mention works, you only mentioned faith and works AFTER I mentioned both of them. A casual reader wouldn't know that much about faith and works.

I hightlighted your contraditions for you. Just read.

Casual readers don't understand that faith requires work. You showed yourself as casual once again.

Bible truth and pure evidence-based truth are not the same. It's as close as fiction is to non-fiction.
Truth according to the bible is in the eye of the religious beholder. Evidence-based truth can stand on it's own, but what's considered to be biblical truth more times than not, can't stand on it's own.
For example, there's no evidence that the sun stopped in midstream as mentioned by Joshua. There's no truth to this at all.
There's no truth that a donkey spoke Hebrew in real life as stated in the Old Testament. These are only a few of the hundreds of so-called truths that are mentioned in the bible. When such tales are put to the test by science, geology, archaeology, historical documentation, etc., those so-called truths fail miserably, yet folks go on believing them as if they are truth.

Where in the Bible does it claim that truth is in the eye of some religious beholder? Where is your EVIDENCE of these Biblical truths being anything less than fully accurate?

I could've used the word "same" and would also have been correct. Both shamans and fundamentalist Christians believe that evil spirits cause diseases meaning that both believe the same.

How could they be the same when the spirits to which they refer are diametrically opposed?

You didn't even bother trying to answer the questions. Instead, you simply ignored both, which is your usual modus operandi.

Sorry. Yes. Yes.

It's not different. You claimed that the OT god wrote material that pre-dated the Old Testament. If you didn't want me to think that way, you might want to review what you type before pressing the "reply" button.

It is, therefore, my guess that you did not follow the steps given to you.

This question is mighty funny coming from you. Where's your evidence when I ask you? All you do is post words from the bible, followed by no evidence at all.
Now you have the nerve to ask me to post evidence, when that's what I have a habit of doing far more than you?
As far as this evidence you ask for, that's already been posted on multiple occasions, including most recently.
It's you who need to get into the habit of posting pure evidence, not verses backed up by nothing.

I have asked you for evidence throughout this thread. You have produced none.

You ask me to post verification, so I post evidence by a world renowned archaeologists and researcher.
When I do, you discard it without as much of a refutation. Why? Because you CAN'T refute it. All you can do is weakly shrug it off or try to play it off as if the material wasn't important or credible. That's your prerogative though, eventhough it's to your own embarassing detriment.
I challenge you to counter what this archaeologist, Dr. Hawass, says by posting your own extra-biblical evidence from a reputable archaeologist. Put up or shut up.

I did not ask you for verification. I asked you for EVIDENCE. You nor Dr. Hawass produced any. At least he is quoted as saying so.

Dacon please. The article pokes so many holes in this story, it's embarassing that you're even trying to defend it. It just shows how desperate one is to try and prove that this man rose from the dead and it shows how easily one can be fooled into believing something if one only professes that "the god of the bible did it".

As far as formaldehyde and it's dosage is concerned, there's no evidence that it was ever given to him.
You're merely guessing that it was. No post- blood tests were ever given to this man proving that he was given formaldehyde or any other drug. Why is that?
In fact, there's not a shred of evidence to show that this man was fully dead. There were no marks, bruises or head scars....no nothing.
What makes the case even more laughable is photo of the size of the coffin in comparison to the man's size whose standing right next to the coffin. If anyone believes that a man of his size could fit inside that baby-sized coffin, they're desperately delusional.

The article claims that formaldehyde would have killed him. Is the article wrong? If that is wrong, what else is wrong in the article. Don't throw rocks and then try to hide your hand.

 

[JayRob]

Babies, children, women, men, horses, cattle, cats, dogs of opposing nations. Its all right there in the history books.

Uhhh Dacon, we're not talking about cats, cattle or dogs. We're talking about innocent babies and children.
Is the biblical god responsible for the murder of thousands of humans which include innocent babies and children? Yes or no?

There is plenty of verification AND EVIDENCE right where I told you that you would find it.

If there's evidence, then post it. Don't tell me about it, post it. That's all I've been asking for over the last two weeks. You can't because there's no such thing as this Jeremiah book theory that you concocted.

I have answered it repeatedly and unequivocably. Here it is again: Yes! God is just.
You didn't like the response in other threads. I suspect that you won't like it here. That won't change my answer.

So you admit that the biblical god is responsible for ordering the killing of thousands of innocent babies and children by having them hacked to pieces?! Then you have the nerve to call him "JUST"? WOW!! That's very telling indeed and very sickening.

Seems that if one is a fundamentalist Christian, outright murdering of the innocent is fine. This is why I'm so thankful I don't believe such nonsense and pure evil. In the name of the biblical god, one can kill innocent people and it not hurt his conscience. This is a form of psychotic and psychological evil reserved only for mass murderers and serial killers.
Only a person with a sick and confused mind would label such a god as being "loving" and "caring" after ordering the hacking to death of thousands of innocent babies and children who did nothing to deserve such treatment.

I'm not calling Jesus a liar. Rather, I am still calling you ignorant. Even though I never said that "all one needs is faith", I did say faith is more than just believing.
John 1:1 says that Jesus is God. Jesus says that the Father is God and the Holy Spirit are God. Genesis says that Elohim is God. We have covered all of this before, but you don't seem to be able to put it all together.

You can call JayRob whatever you will. That's not the issue. The issue is that the so-called god of the New Testament named Jesus stated that no man hath seen god AT ANY TIME. If Jesus was god, why did he say this? Instead of answering the question, the best you can do is call me ignorant? You can do better than this, I know you can.

Not one time have you logically explained the obvious contradiction of the verses mentioned in previous posts.
In the book of John, there are obvious contradictions that Jesus is or isn't god.
If he was god, why did he claim that no man hath seen god? I asked you to explain but you can't.

I hightlighted your contraditions for you. Just read.
Casual readers don't understand that faith requires work. You showed yourself as casual once again.

There you go backtracking again. Instead of admitting that you were mistaken, you'd rather try and cover it up or not admit it at all.
Faith in no wise means works. You can try and make the word "faith" mean "works" but that dog won't hunt. Faith means to believe. Works means to put forth physical effort and energy.
This is why James uses BOTH words, "faith" and "works" separately. If the word faith meant both works and believing, James wouldn't have mentioned both terms. He said faith AND works. Faith meant faith and works meant works.

Where in the Bible does it claim that truth is in the eye of some religious beholder? Where is your EVIDENCE of these Biblical truths being anything less than fully accurate?

I didn't say that was a biblical definition. Based on the 31,000 Christian denominations, truth IS in the eye of the religious beholder.
Each denomination claims to have the truth. That's what I meant when I said that "truth is in the eye of the religious beholder". Each denomination has it's own version of what's truth and what isn't truth and there are at least 31,000 differing versions of the truth in Christianity.

How could they be the same when the spirits to which they refer are diametrically opposed?

One religion could have certain practices that are similar to practices of another religion. For example, Egyptians used the word "Amen" (an Egyptian god) at the end of their prayers. Christians practice the same ritual today. They used "Amen" as well.
Christians and shamans share similar beliefs about evil spirits as being the cause of diseases eventhough they claim different gods. It's just that simple.

Sorry. Yes. Yes.

So you, a supposedly educated person actually believe that one: the sun stopped in midstream and two: a donkey spoke Hebrew??!! Like I said, only in religion folks.....only in religion would educated folks believe such nonsense....minus evidence proving otherwise.

It is, therefore, my guess that you did not follow the steps given to you.

Dacon please. Either you can post whatever evidence you have or you can try and filibuster until I move on to another subject. Due to obvious pride issues, I see you've chosen the latter.

I have asked you for evidence throughout this thread. You have produced none.

So exact words from world renowned and respected archaeologists isn't evidence enough? What have you presented to counter what I've posted other than mere words from the bible? I again challenge you to post more credible evidence proving the Egyptian exodus.

I did not ask you for verification. I asked you for EVIDENCE. You nor Dr. Hawass produced any. At least he is quoted as saying so.

Dacon you can post all the semantics you care to post to try and evade the fact that there's not one shred of evidence to corroborate an exodus of 2-3 million people from Egypt thousands of years ago. Not only is there no evidence in Egyptian history of such an exodus, there's not a shred of evidence in the history of Egypt's surrounding enemy nations.
They would've loved nothing more than to post such a history about their most hated enemy being overcome by a band of ragtag slaves defeating the great Egyptian army. The Egyptian army would've been the laughingstock of the known world at that time.
Guess what, there's not a shred of history in ANY credible historical document proving that the so-called exodus ever occurred.

The article claims that formaldehyde would have killed him. Is the article wrong? If that is wrong, what else is wrong in the article. Don't throw rocks and then try to hide your hand.

You can limit this to just formaldehyde all you want. The totality of the article is what should be the primary issue at hand. There's no way that big man could fit in that little box called a casket.
For you to even think that he could shows how desperate you are. That's only one of the smoking guns proving that this was a farce from the beginning.

As far as formaldehyde is concerned, small doses of formaldehyde don't kill humans. Small babies take formaldehyde all the time and don't die, so there goes your formaldehyde theory....right out the window.

 

[JayRob]

Shows how country you and judgmental folks like you who read this board are. I have never posted anything about my personal life on this board. You can not find a post that is about my personal life on this board. Thanks come again Satan.

You call me "judgemental", yet you're the very one labeling me as satan? Sounds hypocritical to me. You DO know what that word means don't you?

As far as you posting "personal" info, it's on you to admit whether or not you posted info on the type of women you like and the kind of female conquests you've alleged.
I'll leave that up to you (and others) to determine whether or not you posted any of that info on tspn.

 

[Justin]

The convicted will alwasy go down fighting.

 

[JagHammer]

JayRob is handling himself well.

 

[dacontinent]

Uhhh Dacon, we're not talking about cats, cattle or dogs. We're talking about innocent babies and children.
Is the biblical god responsible for the murder of thousands of humans which include innocent babies and children? Yes or no?

...[yadda-yadda-yadda]
As far as formaldehyde is concerned, small doses of formaldehyde don't kill humans. Small babies take formaldehyde all the time and don't die, so there goes your formaldehyde theory....right out the window.

• Babies and Seniors, animal life and property - God gave Israel orders on multiple occasions to destroy those that opposed Him and his people. Some of them who were destroyed were of Israel.
• You are very selective in choosing what you read and understand.
• You seem to fail to read what you write:
  

  Truth according to the bible is in the eye of the religious beholder.

  And then deny it.
  

  I didn't say that was a biblical definition.

• I give you the same logical explanation about man seeing God and not seeing God that I give to my elementary (ages 6-8) Sunday Schoolers. They understand and you don't.
• The religion of JayRobism has its own truth that seems to never get counted.
• My education is certified on multiple levels by several august bodies that are recognized regionally, nationally, and internationally. Yes, I do believe the Biblical accounts of natural abnormalities.
• I have posted sources for your research that are not found on the internet. Somehow you discredit them without even investigating them at all. That's not very scientific of you.
• Spend a little time reading James and you will logically understand that faith without works does not exist; it's just hot air.
• When your world reknown archeologist tell you in what you posted that it is just his opinion and not evidence, how is it that you make it into evidence?
• You clearly do not have the experiences in mortuary SCIENCE that I have. Otherwise you would not be suggesting that formaldehyde would be administred to a corpse in small quantities.

 

[Kendrick]

• Babies and Seniors, animal life and property - God gave Israel orders on multiple occasions to destroy those that opposed Him and his people. Some of them who were destroyed were of Israel.
• You are very selective in choosing what you read and understand.
• You seem to fail to read what you write:
  
  
  ​
  And then deny it.
  
  ​
• I give you the same logical explanation about man seeing God and not seeing God that I give to my elementary (ages 6-8) Sunday Schoolers. They understand and you don't.
• The religion of JayRobism has its own truth that seems to never get counted.
• My education is certified on multiple levels by several august bodies that are recognized regionally, nationally, and internationally. Yes, I do believe the Biblical accounts of natural abnormalities.
• I have posted sources for your research that are not found on the internet. Somehow you discredit them without even investigating them at all. That's not very scientific of you.
• Spend a little time reading James and you will logically understand that faith without works does not exist; it's just hot air.
• When your world reknown archeologist tell you in what you posted that it is just his opinion and not evidence, how is it that you make it into evidence?
• You clearly do not have the experiences in mortuary SCIENCE that I have. Otherwise you would not be suggesting that formaldehyde would be administred to a corpse in small quantities.

And that, people, is how you do it.

 

[CEE DOG]

Come on JayRob, it is not judging you. You are the devil and you know it. Look don't be ashamed of your daddy Satan. I guess we should call you Satan Jr. :devil2: Also please learn stuff on this board is jokes. Only your kind thinks it is real, I guess because you don't want heaven to be real. Don't worry, Hell has no fury like for JayRob. :emlaugh:

You call me "judgemental", yet you're the very one labeling me as satan? Sounds hypocritical to me. You DO know what that word means don't you?

As far as you posting "personal" info, it's on you to admit whether or not you posted info on the type of women you like and the kind of female conquests you've alleged.
I'll leave that up to you (and others) to determine whether or not you posted any of that info on tspn.

 

[CEE DOG]

JayRob is handling himself well.

So you don't believe in heaven or hell either?

 

[JagHammer]

So you don't believe in heaven or hell either?

I used to ferverently until I thought one day, "what if I was born into another religion, and never heard of Jesus Christ or Christianity?" What if I died the year before Jesus was born, or was born hundreds of thousands of years ago? Would I be condemned to something I had no knowledge about? Being that I do have knowledge, who says it's right? Is it right because someone threatens me with 'hellfire,' knowing that them nor I have witnessed no one come back and tell us how the afterlife is? I can not prove that neither exist or not, but if it does, it goes beyond our comprehension. I cherish this life I have now, and I treat everybody the same. This is regardless of what they believe, or where they're from, or their orientation, or their race and gender. I live my life to the best of my ability, and do good just because it's the right thing to do, not for a reward I honestly have no idea that I would receive. This is what Jesus would have done and have done so.

 

[CEE DOG]

I can respect that. Actually I have no problem with JayRob belief either, I just like poking fun at him. He always has a come back. :lol:

I used to ferverently until I thought one day, "what if I was born into another religion, and never heard of Jesus Christ or Christianity?" What if I died the year before Jesus was born, or was born hundreds of thousands of years ago? Would I be condemned to something I had no knowledge about? Being that I do have knowledge, who says it's right? Is it right because someone threatens me with 'hellfire,' knowing that them nor I have witnessed no one come back and tell us how the afterlife is? I can not prove that neither exist or not, but if it does, it goes beyond our comprehension. I cherish this life I have now, and I treat everybody the same. This is regardless of what they believe, or where they're from, or their orientation, or their race and gender. I live my life to the best of my ability, and do good just because it's the right thing to do, not for a reward I honestly have no idea that I would receive. This is what Jesus would have done and have done so.