Originally posted by JS357Jewish Smewish, Isaiah 53 is only one of over four hundred messianic prophecies
Be careful: "In 1263 at the Disputation of Barcelona, Nahmanides expressed the Jewish viewpoint of Isaiah 53 and other matters regarding Christian belief about Jesus's role in Hebrew Scripture. The disputation was awarded in his favor by James I of Aragon, and as a result the Dominican Order compelled him to flee from his home country for the remainder of hi ...[text shortened]...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaiah_53
Worth a look, for an alternative interpretation.
contained in scripture, that the Jews are willing to interpret it differently is hardly
significant nor particularly relevant, they have, after all, denied that Christ was the
Messiah, despite overwhelming scriptural evidence to the contrary.
Originally posted by Proper Knobgood dear Noobster, you will have had time to reflect on the text, in case you are unaware, i was engaged in an utterly futile debate with Agers. I am a human.
I'm still waiting on a reply as to what next after i read John 1-12. I read it 24hrs ago!!
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonI am in complete agreement!
My reasoning is OBVIOUSLY:
1, There is no evidence that there is a teacup orbiting Mars therefore there is no rational reason to believe that there is a teacup orbiting Mars therefore I do not believe that there is a teacup orbiting Mars.
Using the same logic as above:
2, There is no evidence that there is a god therefore there is no rati ...[text shortened]... that there is a god.
-which is why I do not believe there is a god -THAT is what I am saying.
The only reason people identify with a God is that man invented a new word which had rules attached to it, to scaremonger and gain some power (c.f. the men who invented the word).
I could invent a new word now, and attach critical rules to it which, if not followed, could cause catastrophic events in human life. I doubt the educated of today's day would believe a word of it. Just shows how 'thick' and 'dense' people were in general way back when they were inventing wheels and bricks etc. but were still able to indoctrinate new generations through their own irrational fears! Oh! How it carried! What a mess. 😀
-m.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIsaiah 53 is not prophetic at all, it is simply an account of earlier events which show some parallels with the life of Jesus as related in later scripture. These guys (Vadim Cherny, Nikolay Bondarchuk) are able to do something which your faith forbids, robbie - they can reject old interpretations and objectively analyse and translate the (as near as possible) original text.
you noobs have not even attempted to explain Isaiah chapter 53, you scardy cats!
http://anarcho.net/on_religion/Ieshayahu%2053.htm
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieFutile!??? Oh no no. As surely you have learn't, playing the same game as yourself, following fundamentalist rules of logic and reasoning; any proposition, no matter how ludicrous (so long as unfalsifiable) is just as defensible as your literal interpretation of the Bible. You have learnt that my `beliefs' cannot be disproven any more than your belief in a twinkle dust garden with magic fruits and talking serpents.
good dear Noobster, you will have had time to reflect on the text, in case you are unaware, i was engaged in an utterly futile debate with Agers. I am a human.
Originally posted by avalanchethecatmore mere opinion, is there no one telling what is true? oh Jaywill return and vanquish
Isaiah 53 is not prophetic at all, it is simply an account of earlier events which show some parallels with the life of Jesus as related in later scripture. These guys (Vadim Cherny, Nikolay Bondarchuk) are able to do something which your faith forbids, robbie - they can reject old interpretations and objectively analyse and translate the (as near as possible) original text.
http://anarcho.net/on_religion/Ieshayahu%2053.htm
these heathen infidels!
1 edit
Originally posted by Agergnope, it was utterly futile, indeed it has proven beyond a doubt, why all debates
Futile!??? Oh no no. As surely you have learn't, playing the same game as yourself, following fundamentalist rules of logic and reasoning; any proposition, no matter how ludicrous (so long as unfalsifiable) is just as defensible as your literal interpretation of the Bible. You have learnt that my `beliefs' cannot be disproven any more than your belief in a twinkle dust garden with magic fruits and talking serpents.
regarding the existence of God as opposed to his non existence are utterly futile,
atheists cannot state that anything is impossible, all they can state is that its
improbable and this is the difference which separates the theist from the atheist, for
we are concerned with truth and you noobs with plausibility. Whether the Garden of Eden
existed is neither here nor there, for it throws up universal principles and
teachings regardless of whether it really existed, the same with Jesus Christ, whether
he really existed is utterly inconsequential , for the teachings exist. Thus in your
attempts to base you arguments on the existence of these entities has utterly failed
Agers, for it matters not one way or the other, for the principles and teachings exist
regardless and it is these which form the basis of our faith. Let it be a lesson to you
.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI don't think it matters how long i reflect on the text, water into wine?...........Mmmmmm............??!!!!
good dear Noobster, you will have had time to reflect on the text, in case you are unaware, i was engaged in an utterly futile debate with Agers. I am a human.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBut equally you cannot prove that Gandalf *didn't* magic away middle earth as I claim he did. You can only say it's implausible. Indeed your interpretation of the Bible carries as much weight as my interpretation of Tolkein. 😵
nope, it was utterly futile, indeed it has proven beyond a doubt, why all debates
regarding the existence of God as opposed to his non existence are utterly futile,
atheists cannot state that anything is impossible, all they can state is that its
improbable and this is the difference which separates the theist from the atheist, for
we are concerned with truth and you noobs with plausibility.
I say you don't subscribe to "truth" ;]
1 edit
Originally posted by Agergwell then you live your life by the principles found in your scared text and Ill live mine
But equally you cannot prove that Gandalf *didn't* magic away middle earth as I claim he did. You can only say it's implausible. Indeed your interpretation of the Bible carries as much weight as my interpretation of Tolkein. 😵
I say you don't subscribe to "truth" ;]
by the ones in mine. In fact, as i stated before, wisdom is proven righteous by its
works, as far as i can tell, you have not provided any principles from your text which
can be described as either wise nor which lead to the right thing to do. In other words,
its an empty facade, a form of godly devotion having no real power to help the
adherent in any way whatsoever, this in itself proves its fallacious nature.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieNo Robbie, as I've told you many times - what principles are contained within a belief system have no bearing on how true that system is. I could assert I believe in the demonic god Hkawjek who enjoys torturing people, and if my belief was correct your so called principles would have zero merit with respect to whether your belief was true or not.
well then you live your life by the principles found in your scared text and Ill live mine
by the ones in mine. In fact, as i stated before, wisdom is proven righteous by its
works, as far as i can tell, you have not provided any principles from your text which
can be described as either wise nor which lead to the right thing to do. In other ...[text shortened]... power to help the
adherent in any way whatsoever, this in itself proves its fallacious nature.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThere's no rush, but i do find it rather curious that you were complaining/pointing out that the forum was being over run with what you termed 'non-spirituality'. I accepted your challenge reading scripture which gave you the opportunity to talk about something which you deem to be 'spiritual', yet over 36hrs later you haven't replied, but have yet managed to write 64 posts (yep, i counted) regarding 'non-spirituality'.
im busy at the moment dear Noobster, i am just taking a break from fitting an aerial to digi box, be patient.
Admit it, you love it, and if all us atheists left you wouldn't know what to do with yourself.