Jesus is The Christ, not the messiah. The Romans defeated Israel

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: stonerwilliam

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: stonerwilliam
a reply to: chr0naut

I cannot see a carpenter getting so close to the priests back then and turning over tables in anger and getting away with it



was Yoshua a Rabbi one wonders ?

He wasn't near the priests then, He was in the outer courts of the Temple, which had been turned into a marketplace = public access.

He was called rabbi (teacher) by his followers according to the gospels.

... and a carpenter back then did more than woodwork. Carpenters did house building and all sorts of construction work, including stonework.

When all knowledge back in the day was controled by the church and even posetion of a book or bible was punishable by death and much blood was spilled in the council of Nicea , when gods word was much edited and fought over en.wikipedia.org...

Please read the Wikipedia link you provided with attention to the section called misconceptions. Basically nothing that you have just said in the previous paragraph is correct.

The First Council of Nicea was non-violent and no changes were made to any scriptures.

The council, its aims, proceedings and conclusions are a matter of historical record.

for on a time when a cardinall Bembus did move a question out of the Gospell, the Pope gave him a very contemptuouse aunswere saiying: All ages can testifie enough howe profitable that fable of Christe hath ben to us and our companie:

tektonics.org...

39 STEPS with this kid

As per your link, Pope Leo X never said that.

Your link traces the saying back to a satiric play called "The Pageant of Popes" (on pages 179-180) written by a John Bale (1495-1563), an English ex-Carmelite Protestant, to satirise the Catholic Church.

You should read the content of your links.

I don't really know what you guys are talking about but Catholics have been murdering people over opinions since AT LEAST Constantine, who was known to mutilate Jews, cut off ears tortue. The Sadistic Patriarch of the RCC "Saint" Constantine.

70,000 Muslims, Jews, Christians just in Jerusalem were slaughtered because they saw how advanced Islamic civilization was (the source of most modern science).

1492 Spain massacred after 800 years of Jewish-Christian-Muslim peace. But read European historians and WE ARE THE SAVAGES.

Ottoman Empire took in survivors, the Muslims all killed or converted by the sword

Like every inhabited continent.. converted by force to Catholicism.

Before you embarrass yourself trying to say Islam practiced forced conversion it's forbidden in the Qur'an:

2:256 There is no compulsion of any sort in matters of religion for the right way stands clearly distinguished from the way of error.

And if you want to prevent me refuting your sloppy attempt to argue against the truth you haven't a clue regarding, know, I have sources, and I will provide them. When I get back. Should you think another round of (losing a) debate is fun though, go ahead! I will be ready.

Watch what you say in the meantime. I am watching. I don't like people who pretend to know everything and know nothing but think everyone also knows as little as you and you can get away with it.

Herod the Nabatean!

If you attempt Crusade apologetics I will unleash a fury OF WESTERN HISTORIAN citations, quotes, so watch your lip sugar pop.lp

a reply to: coomba98

Umm

I am ok with debating wannabe know it alls, but you seem like someone disturbed and on the brink. You probably deserve Mercy.

At least until you figure out your problems and deal...

If you want to act like...not the creepiest person on the internet...

I don't see that happening but IF you can manage to say something Intellectual and worthy of my words, fine.

Why would you act like a weirdo creep to a complete stranger? That's mental illness.

Really. You don't look cool. Respectable. You look a typical twerp talking to some guy he doesn't know like he does.

I would say you need an appt.

Get help.

originally posted by: coomba98
a reply to: Padawan #1 now aka Disturbinatti

Padawan #1, your a fuit loop dude. Get some air, some real life in ya.

Yeshi is the One... Christian wise. Yeshi mannn!!

Master Coomba

Yesha? Do you NOT HONESTLY SEE the irony of who said the above accusing anyone, even a clinically insane person, loopy?

I literally know schizophrenics with better manners that don't pretend they know anonymous internet users identity.

That's a delusion of grandeur, you know that right?

Either you have a weird obsession with someone or thing and imagine people are it/they or you are just a really lonely unpopular guy with nothing better to do than randomly insult someone on the internet who you have no reason to.

THAT'S FREAKING NUTS!

Who calls THEMSELF "Master?"

A SERIOUSLY delusional person is who.

Who calls THEMSELF Coomba? What is that?

I think you need to lay of the Lord of the Rings or something.

Pardon me if your words are laughed off by me as the words of an inconsequential @#$_&-.

Because that's what happening.

a reply to: Padawan Disturbinatti

Lol. Snaged ya.

Blah blah blah blah blah.

Listen to the crazyman.

Yeshi is Yeshi man. Yeshi!

Master Coomba ohh Padawan SethTsaddik, Gnosisfaith... aka Padawan #1.

I wish to comment further on the inventor of Christ-ianity, when it would have sufficed and been more honest if they just transliterated Messiah from Aramaic to Greek.

Paul never knew Jesus (p), admitted he was a liar "If my FALSEHOODS abound to God's glory..."

And as I said, for certain Christ was no Greek.

For certain he was no God. The Bible is entirely clear about this, I just have to quote the Greatest Commandment to disprove Trinity, "Of my own power I can do nothing" to demolish the doctrine of equality with his and our "Father in Heaven" our "One Fathe..."

"Our God" to prove he HAS a God. God doesn't. It's common sense and proves not just ignorance of actual contents and teachings of the Bible on behalf of anyone who denies plain facts.

"God is ONE God."

Is EXACTLY what the Messiah (p) says.

What seperates east from west, Europe from Asia?

Europeans invent bogus, insulting reasons to justify mass slaughter and plunder and convince their dumbest citizens it's actually the fault of the invaded population that they got invaded.

Eastern people, if not traitors to the Western-Israeli union from Gehenna between the most deceptively evil people to ever exist, are actually peaceful.

The Europeans will murder your family expect you to thank them.

Say have weapons you don't, committed crimes you didn't, and invade you, tell the UN to have a seat, "We the People" of the United Sabbateans of America have it under control.

Bomb civilians, children, women.

I don't see any difference between the old Crusades and the new. Because the reason is still plunder and mischeif to guarantee that the Middle East never unites again, they hin every country puppet rulers, always a hated (for good reason usually) minority so as to maintain instable government, enforce secular ideology knowing it's going to lead to endless conflict and make sure the world forgets the superiority of the Ottoman Empire and Muslim Caliphate in governing compared to the West, make sure everyone thinks that it was a barbarian culture and since people don't actually like to read or learn about history they accept total fictions as fact.

All the while ignoring the worlds biggest genocide (Native Americans) the evil of Colonialism, Catholic Europe, Protestant England, the Spanish Inquisition, Spanish genocide and theft of the Muslim/Jewish/Christian modern society with the first Universities in Europe, Hospitals, greatest architchture and Metropolitan civilization, civil in the strictest sense for most of it's 800 year history.

1492, Colon set sail for "India" and Europe descended on the multi religous Muslim part of the Iberian peninsula, which actually gets it's name from Eber/Iber.

European Colonialism was born.

Today it's called '"Invading and occupying."

Well it's not called that. But it is that. Never justified but people have been deprived of intelligence from drugs and trying to be gangsters, even if your a white kid from suburbia, people are really dumb today.

Arguing about if Issa (p) is the Messiah.

Really? Going on the internet to be a creep, and apparently enjoying it.

This is exactly why I am not a Christian.

No sense whatsoever. It literally makes minds feeble. Just look at the thread!

So 2,000 years ago the Romans won, big woop. Christianity killed the Western Roman Empire and sunk it into Dark Ages squalor.

Not so with Byzantium.

Byzantium didn't collapses until much later, although shrunk as time progressed, but the Crusaders also attacked Byzantium, whatever issues Islam had with Byzantium because they were "People of the Book" they wanted them to prevail over Persia.

Muslims treated Christians better than Catholics. They had/have if any are left, a great relationship with Syrian Christians, all throughout the Middle East they have always gotten along, with Jews, Magians, Drusis, Ismailis. Sabaeans, Mandaeans, there has never been a more diverse Abrahamic predominant civilization, or a more peaceful one.

Issa al Masih is al Masih/Messiah (p) because he is Muslim, and in Arabic that's the word for Messiah.

I don't think he would tell people "Worship HIM", God, and then NOT get mad at people for calling him "trinity", "God."

He was never a Christian. Never will be with Paul. The only religion that properly honors him (p), his mother (p), is Islam. And the Unitarians. I know they can't rip Paul out, but they at least acknowledge the book says Issa (p) is not God.

It's not hard. It is just admitting the truth. Well I guess that's hard for some.

a reply to: Disturbinatti

"Our God" to prove he HAS a God. God doesn't. It's common sense and proves not just ignorance of actual contents and teachings of the Bible on behalf of anyone who denies plain facts. "God is ONE God."

Most certainly God is one God. Just as the United States is one nation but has many members. Even though it has many members is not to say that it is not one nation and even though God is one God is not to deny that He also has many members.

Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Who was God talking to as He said "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness?" Was not God talking to His Only Begotten Son? If you say no then tell us who participated in the creation of man or are you implying that the scriptures are wrong?

And if you insist that the scriptures mean to say that God was talking to the angels, as the Jews profess, then are you implying that God created the heavenly host and had need to then have the heavenly host assist Him in further creation? If so then how can God be one? Has God then shared His creative power with His heavenly creation? If so than God is not one is He? How ridiculous you seem to be.

a reply to: Seede


Yes, God is ONE God.

And not 3.

I am glad you came around!

Now learn that Jesus (p) can do nothing of his "own power", is obviously then dependant upon the God who created him and you are close to truth!

"Of my own power I can do NOTHING!"

Issa al Masih p

There is neither might nor power but with Allah And Allah/God is ONE God.

And 1is 1.


As in NOT 3!

Trinity comes along about 150 years after Ascension, isn't in the Bible. Just because the "Father, son, Holy Spirit" are mentioned im succession is no reason to conclude they are 3&1&3&1&3&1&3& ad infitum.

That's insanity, plus confusing if you try making sense out of it.

"God is not the author of confusion."

Says PAUL!

Who, heretical scumbag though he was, never said "Trinity" or God is 3.

Why Christians can't let go of paganism is because it involves admitting that 2,000 years went by with people believing what the Church said without knowing it was made up b.s.

Trinity is paganism, because you worship a man, Issa (p).

Polytheism because of "Tri"-nity.

Father God, Son God, Spirit God.

So is God NOT a Holy Spirit without dividing him by 2 or 3?

God and the Holy Spirit are either synonymous or two entities with one God, one not.

This is common sense. The type that angers people and drops the veil on the "pious Christian" ruse if they aren't actually pious.

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: Disturbinatti

"Our God" to prove he HAS a God. God doesn't. It's common sense and proves not just ignorance of actual contents and teachings of the Bible on behalf of anyone who denies plain facts. "God is ONE God."

Most certainly God is one God. Just as the United States is one nation but has many members. Even though it has many members is not to say that it is not one nation and even though God is one God is not to deny that He also has many members.

Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Who was God talking to as He said "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness?" Was not God talking to His Only Begotten Son? If you say no then tell us who participated in the creation of man or are you implying that the scriptures are wrong?

And if you insist that the scriptures mean to say that God was talking to the angels, as the Jews profess, then are you implying that God created the heavenly host and had need to then have the heavenly host assist Him in further creation? If so then how can God be one? Has God then shared His creative power with His heavenly creation? If so than God is not one is He? How ridiculous you seem to be.

BTW...

If I was the type to get angry because people know how to easily refute the lies of my religous ancestors about God, I would change religions.

Because you are mad A LOT! Always when I say something true that nevertheless theologians ignore in Christianity too!

But I am not wrong about anything and your anger exposes hypocrisy, you have nothing in common with the Messiah (p)...

Know better than him who HE is, meaning he denies equality with God and being God by extension and again independent of that denial of Independent Power, in the "Greatest (and most ignored) Commandment."

So if you try Trinitarian apologetics you have to admit you believe adverse to what Issa (p) himself is recorded to have uttered.

Clearly too. It's not ambiguous to say "God" as in "OUR God" meaning Jesus (p) has a God, God, "is ONE God, WORSHIP HIM."

What's baffling is why Christians took the route they did and lapsed into pagan idolatry, when it's clear from reading it that the Bible is anti-Trinitariain cover to cover.

If truth angers you and causes you to insult people for having more knowledge than you, I would change your ways.

Get on the "Straight Way", the "Narrow road."

And off the path of anger, the results of listening to flatterers without conscience, who know what I am telling you but don't tell you.

You thought before that Yaqub al Sadiq/James the Zaddik/Just was a president of the Sanhedrin, a ''Nasi."

Why I haven't a clue. This wasn't ever claimed this about him before recent Judaizers decided to start flattering Christians with lies to lead them astray, continuing the Pauline tradition of "FALSEHOODS abound to God's glory..."

But Yaqub al Sadiq was, in Hebrew, a Zaddik of the Zaddikim, THE Zaddik, the Righteous One.

Nasi means "Prince (of Sanhedrin)."

You have no credibility after that baffling slandering of Yaqub/James, who wasn't even ON the Sanhedrin.

Forget prince of it.

Like Judah ha-Nasi was in the Talmud which actually has Yaqub in it almost converting a Rabbi to a Nazarene.

It also features Paul/Acher/Elijah ben Abuya, says he saw Metatron, thought it was another god (blasphemy!), because Metatron happened to be sitting.

It's actually interesting because Rabbi Meir never gives up trying to redeem "Acher."

Acher means "other."

Which is interesting because in the Visio Pauli, Rev. of Paul, he is taken to the Acherusian lake of Hellenistic mythological origins, the Lake of Fire.

Weird is his teachings are all rebuked throughout the Apocryphon, as if it was meant to.

originally posted by: Disturbinatti

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Disturbinatti

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: chr0naut

yeah, his priority is to spread falsehoods and confusions not truth.

No. But your priority and m.o. IS slander.

I have spoken no falsehoods, evidenced by the absence of specific quote of said falsehood, not 1.

If you or anyone else is confused, it's not because of me spreading it, "confusion", as you say.

I would be happy to explain so you understand better though even though you are a slanderer, as I have not done what you say I do, implying that I do something I don't and more than once without proof is not different than what the opposite of truth is called (a lie, in case that was confusing, is what you said about me personally which is further evidence you are disreputable and untrustworthy).

Making it about my person, not Jesus (p), is because you are unable to refute my person with fact, you must resort to fiction, slandering of a person who spoke no word of a lie makes you the liar and spreader of confusion. It won't matter to me ever but you will have to face God one day and "Though shall not lie" IS Law.

What you said about me, it's not true and you didn't even offer a quote as evidence because you know it. You are gossiping with a person whom I have been correcting because hasn't been correct and think two wrong people makes two right so long as they pretend they are and talk about the person who is and dishonestly at that.

One thing I have been thinking about when I have read the book of Job. Is that Job is a suffering servant of God who goes through some real trying time, in the end, he gets back everything plus more, and if I am not wrong (of course I could be) God resurrected his 7 sons and 3 daughters.

But I saw Israel in tribulation and in the end God restores them and resurrects them to serve him forever.

DisturbiGnostic, You make assertions, about things which are purely speculative, as if they are true.

You quote from small snippets of history and the Bible, out of context and apply meanings clearly unintended by the writers.

You act as though you have some superior knowledge to the millions of people over thousands of years who have questioned the same things and found resolution by examining further the content and context.

If someone makes a statement that can be proven false, it is a falsehood by definition. It doesn't matter how deeply it is believed. Proven false = it is a falsehood.

No amount of repetition of the falsehood or character assassination of those who point out its invalidity makes it any less false.

There is nothing wrong with questioning fundamental beliefs, but when others provide simple and rational answers that explain the true sense of what is meant, by reference to rationality and by clarification from context, it is not a valid response to disclaim it by yet another speculative interpretation, or to accuse the respondents of ignorance, or to say that they are liars.

If we are wrong, convince us with factual third party support of your interpretation.

Name calling is childish.

Why don't you go ahead and read where the tribes were taken into exile and explain how if only Judah and Levi returned Benjamin shows up as a tribe for a century or so.

Why don't you read Nehemiah, who was the one tasked with overseeing the rebuilding of Jerusalem after the exile. Specifically the bit where he lists the leaders he selected from each tribal group of returnees, listing their names and their antecedents as proof of their right to lead their tribe.

Nehemiah 11:1-2 The Israeli officials were living in Jerusalem, the Holy City, at this time; but now a tenth of the people from the other cities and towns of Judah and Benjamin were selected by lot to live there too. Some who moved to Jerusalem at this time were volunteers, and they were highly honoured.

Nehemiah 11-7:9 Leaders from the tribe of Benjamin: Sallu (son of Meshullam, son of Joed, son of Pedaiah, son of Kolaiah, son of Maaseiah, son of Ithiel, son of Jeshaiah). The 968 descendants of Gabbai and Sallai. Their chief was Joel, son of Zichri, who was assisted by Judah, son of Hassenuah.

Then why Epiphanius tells us of a sect of people who, misinterpreting the Shiloh prophecy, took Herod as a Messiah as the first non Israelite Jewish King?

Which makes him, Herod, being a Benjaminite laughable, I've clearly explained it to you, you are "grasping at straws" because you erroneously claimed Herod the Idumean (Ashkelon slave of the Appollo Temple tradition is rejected by scholars) was a Nabatean.

I don't know what to make of people like you. Obviously your Biblical knowledge is sub par at best.

One more time:

Herod Arche-laus, the Herod I first mentioned, is an obvious anagram.

Herod Arche-laus
Herod Acher-Saul, "Other Saul."

Saul, King Saul, was a Benjaminite, hence a Herodian Judahite was called a Benjaminite, due to loyalty to or nationality shared possibly.

There weren't any Benjaminites after Babylon aren't today. You have Sephardic Judahites and non Semitic Ashkenazi from Europe who converted in the 8th century under King Bulon.

Follow me here now so it doesn't confuse you.

Herod the Idumean wasn't an Israelite. Herod Archelaus wasn't either.

So what on Earth leads you to the erroneous conclusion that he was of a legitimate Israelite?

I never said that any Herod was an Israelite.

You said, regarding Paul, that in the 1st Century being called a Benjamite was equivalent to being called a Herodian, which I disputed.

He was a convert, and even a convert to Judaism is not Israelite unless they change religions often and convert BACK.

I am simply amazed how arrogant you are in easily observable defeat. The facts beat you, I just said them. Factually speaking Arche-laus is an anagram for Acher-Saul, regardless of your opinion regarding why and your subsequent confused (mis) explanation of whatever you randomly use to try and say it's a coincidence (my guess is you will use translation/literation as an excuse, but doubt you know Koine Greek so it should be funny to see).

originally posted by: Disturbinatti
I wish to comment further on the inventor of Christ-ianity, when it would have sufficed and been more honest if they just transliterated Messiah from Aramaic to Greek.

Paul never knew Jesus (p)

Do you know Jesus? Not know about Him, know him as a friend, a person?

, admitted he was a liar "If my FALSEHOODS abound to God's glory..."

Please read Romans 3 in context. Paul was talking generally about sin and God's forgiveness.and talking about he contrast between "our" injustice and God's justness.

But even if you choose to interpret what Paul said as a confession, it is only an honest self assessment. Remember, "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God". Even when Peter denied knowing Jesus, wasn't that a lie?

And as I said, for certain Christ was no Greek.

For certain he was no God. The Bible is entirely clear about this, I just have to quote the Greatest Commandment to disprove Trinity, "Of my own power I can do nothing" to demolish the doctrine of equality with his and our "Father in Heaven" our "One Fathe..."

"Our God" to prove he HAS a God. God doesn't. It's common sense and proves not just ignorance of actual contents and teachings of the Bible on behalf of anyone who denies plain facts.

"God is ONE God."

Is EXACTLY what the Messiah (p) says.

What seperates east from west, Europe from Asia?

Europeans invent bogus, insulting reasons to justify mass slaughter and plunder and convince their dumbest citizens it's actually the fault of the invaded population that they got invaded.

Eastern people, if not traitors to the Western-Israeli union from Gehenna between the most deceptively evil people to ever exist, are actually peaceful.

The Europeans will murder your family expect you to thank them.

Say have weapons you don't, committed crimes you didn't, and invade you, tell the UN to have a seat, "We the People" of the United Sabbateans of America have it under control.

Bomb civilians, children, women.

I don't see any difference between the old Crusades and the new. Because the reason is still plunder and mischeif to guarantee that the Middle East never unites again, they hin every country puppet rulers, always a hated (for good reason usually) minority so as to maintain instable government, enforce secular ideology knowing it's going to lead to endless conflict and make sure the world forgets the superiority of the Ottoman Empire and Muslim Caliphate in governing compared to the West, make sure everyone thinks that it was a barbarian culture and since people don't actually like to read or learn about history they accept total fictions as fact.

All the while ignoring the worlds biggest genocide (Native Americans) the evil of Colonialism, Catholic Europe, Protestant England, the Spanish Inquisition, Spanish genocide and theft of the Muslim/Jewish/Christian modern society with the first Universities in Europe, Hospitals, greatest architchture and Metropolitan civilization, civil in the strictest sense for most of it's 800 year history.

1492, Colon set sail for "India" and Europe descended on the multi religous Muslim part of the Iberian peninsula, which actually gets it's name from Eber/Iber.

European Colonialism was born.

Today it's called '"Invading and occupying."

Well it's not called that. But it is that. Never justified but people have been deprived of intelligence from drugs and trying to be gangsters, even if your a white kid from suburbia, people are really dumb today.

Arguing about if Issa (p) is the Messiah.

Really? Going on the internet to be a creep, and apparently enjoying it.

This is exactly why I am not a Christian.

No sense whatsoever. It literally makes minds feeble. Just look at the thread!

I bless you with a true revelation of God, with wisdom, with peace, with forgiveness, with clarity of insight, with the touch of the Holy Spirit and freedom from guilt.

a reply to: chr0naut

Remember Padawan Disturbinatti was originally a Christian. But got kicked out of church for being violent to the point of the church hired Police to be body guards.

His beliefs change with his 150+ ATS accounts. Now his a Muslim!! Scary no?

Constantly calling people angry and liers when he himself is.

Guess thats what someone who is a jobless government handout society bludger is. A duce.

Coomba98

originally posted by: Disturbinatti

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: stonerwilliam

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: stonerwilliam
a reply to: chr0naut

I cannot see a carpenter getting so close to the priests back then and turning over tables in anger and getting away with it



was Yoshua a Rabbi one wonders ?

He wasn't near the priests then, He was in the outer courts of the Temple, which had been turned into a marketplace = public access.

He was called rabbi (teacher) by his followers according to the gospels.

... and a carpenter back then did more than woodwork. Carpenters did house building and all sorts of construction work, including stonework.

When all knowledge back in the day was controled by the church and even posetion of a book or bible was punishable by death and much blood was spilled in the council of Nicea , when gods word was much edited and fought over en.wikipedia.org...

Please read the Wikipedia link you provided with attention to the section called misconceptions. Basically nothing that you have just said in the previous paragraph is correct.

The First Council of Nicea was non-violent and no changes were made to any scriptures.

The council, its aims, proceedings and conclusions are a matter of historical record.

for on a time when a cardinall Bembus did move a question out of the Gospell, the Pope gave him a very contemptuouse aunswere saiying: All ages can testifie enough howe profitable that fable of Christe hath ben to us and our companie:

tektonics.org...

39 STEPS with this kid

As per your link, Pope Leo X never said that.

Your link traces the saying back to a satiric play called "The Pageant of Popes" (on pages 179-180) written by a John Bale (1495-1563), an English ex-Carmelite Protestant, to satirise the Catholic Church.

You should read the content of your links.

I don't really know what you guys are talking about but Catholics have been murdering people over opinions since AT LEAST Constantine, who was known to mutilate Jews, cut off ears tortue. The Sadistic Patriarch of the RCC "Saint" Constantine.

70,000 Muslims, Jews, Christians just in Jerusalem were slaughtered because they saw how advanced Islamic civilization was (the source of most modern science).

Not to denigrate Muslim and pre-Muslim Arabic scholars and scientists, but when I think of the founders of modern science, I note that they were from very many nations and faiths, but were predominantly Christian.

Specifically, England seems to punch much above its weight in numbers of early scientists and the codification of scientific method which I believe is because of the establishment of universities, colleges and the Royal Society.

1492 Spain massacred after 800 years of Jewish-Christian-Muslim peace. But read European historians and WE ARE THE SAVAGES.

Ottoman Empire took in survivors, the Muslims all killed or converted by the sword

The Ottoman Empire was Muslim. They implemented a practice called the devşirme–janissary system, where they enslaved an estimated 500,000 to one million non–Muslim adolescent males, forcing them to convert to Islam and fight for the Sultan.

Like every inhabited continent.. converted by force to Catholicism.

That's a bit over the top: Australia wasn't. The Eastern European nations weren't, Africa wasn't. China and South East Asia weren't. India wasn't. Japan wasn't.

Before you embarrass yourself trying to say Islam practiced forced conversion it's forbidden in the Qur'an:

2:256 There is no compulsion of any sort in matters of religion for the right way stands clearly distinguished from the way of error.

Despite the Quranic injunction against forced conversions to Islam, it has happened historically, beginning with the wars of Ridda in May 632 AD, under caliph Abu Bakr, the deputy of Mohammed (who was too ill at the time to participate and died a month after suggesting the military action), and is still happening today with the likes of Islamic State.

And if you want to prevent me refuting your sloppy attempt to argue against the truth you haven't a clue regarding, know, I have sources, and I will provide them. When I get back. Should you think another round of (losing a) debate is fun though, go ahead! I will be ready.

Watch what you say in the meantime. I am watching. I don't like people who pretend to know everything and know nothing but think everyone also knows as little as you and you can get away with it.

Herod the Nabatean!

If you attempt Crusade apologetics I will unleash a fury OF WESTERN HISTORIAN citations, quotes, so watch your lip sugar pop.lp

Although I don't wish to excuse the Crusades, I have requested that you support your ranting with historical and appropriately credentialled details. So please, do not feel restrained. Let fly...

... and I'm far more of a curmudgeon than a sugar pop, darling.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Disturbinatti

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: stonerwilliam

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: stonerwilliam
a reply to: chr0naut

I cannot see a carpenter getting so close to the priests back then and turning over tables in anger and getting away with it



was Yoshua a Rabbi one wonders ?

He wasn't near the priests then, He was in the outer courts of the Temple, which had been turned into a marketplace = public access.

He was called rabbi (teacher) by his followers according to the gospels.

... and a carpenter back then did more than woodwork. Carpenters did house building and all sorts of construction work, including stonework.

When all knowledge back in the day was controled by the church and even posetion of a book or bible was punishable by death and much blood was spilled in the council of Nicea , when gods word was much edited and fought over en.wikipedia.org...

Please read the Wikipedia link you provided with attention to the section called misconceptions. Basically nothing that you have just said in the previous paragraph is correct.

The First Council of Nicea was non-violent and no changes were made to any scriptures.

The council, its aims, proceedings and conclusions are a matter of historical record.

for on a time when a cardinall Bembus did move a question out of the Gospell, the Pope gave him a very contemptuouse aunswere saiying: All ages can testifie enough howe profitable that fable of Christe hath ben to us and our companie:

tektonics.org...

39 STEPS with this kid

As per your link, Pope Leo X never said that.

Your link traces the saying back to a satiric play called "The Pageant of Popes" (on pages 179-180) written by a John Bale (1495-1563), an English ex-Carmelite Protestant, to satirise the Catholic Church.

You should read the content of your links.

I don't really know what you guys are talking about but Catholics have been murdering people over opinions since AT LEAST Constantine, who was known to mutilate Jews, cut off ears tortue. The Sadistic Patriarch of the RCC "Saint" Constantine.

70,000 Muslims, Jews, Christians just in Jerusalem were slaughtered because they saw how advanced Islamic civilization was (the source of most modern science).

1492 Spain massacred after 800 years of Jewish-Christian-Muslim peace. But read European historians and WE ARE THE SAVAGES.

Ottoman Empire took in survivors, the Muslims all killed or converted by the sword

Like every inhabited continent.. converted by force to Catholicism.

Before you embarrass yourself trying to say Islam practiced forced conversion it's forbidden in the Qur'an:

2:256 There is no compulsion of any sort in matters of religion for the right way stands clearly distinguished from the way of error.

And if you want to prevent me refuting your sloppy attempt to argue against the truth you haven't a clue regarding, know, I have sources, and I will provide them. When I get back. Should you think another round of (losing a) debate is fun though, go ahead! I will be ready.

Watch what you say in the meantime. I am watching. I don't like people who pretend to know everything and know nothing but think everyone also knows as little as you and you can get away with it.

Herod the Nabatean!

If you attempt Crusade apologetics I will unleash a fury OF WESTERN HISTORIAN citations, quotes, so watch your lip sugar pop.lp

Although I don't wish to excuse the Crusades, I have requested that you support your ranting with historical and appropriately credentialled details. So please, do not feel restrained. Let fly...

... and I'm far more of a curmudgeon than a sugar pop, darling.

Awesome! Salaam.

originally posted by: Disturbinatti

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Disturbinatti

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: stonerwilliam

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: stonerwilliam
a reply to: chr0naut

I cannot see a carpenter getting so close to the priests back then and turning over tables in anger and getting away with it



was Yoshua a Rabbi one wonders ?

He wasn't near the priests then, He was in the outer courts of the Temple, which had been turned into a marketplace = public access.

He was called rabbi (teacher) by his followers according to the gospels.

... and a carpenter back then did more than woodwork. Carpenters did house building and all sorts of construction work, including stonework.

When all knowledge back in the day was controled by the church and even posetion of a book or bible was punishable by death and much blood was spilled in the council of Nicea , when gods word was much edited and fought over en.wikipedia.org...

Please read the Wikipedia link you provided with attention to the section called misconceptions. Basically nothing that you have just said in the previous paragraph is correct.

The First Council of Nicea was non-violent and no changes were made to any scriptures.

The council, its aims, proceedings and conclusions are a matter of historical record.

for on a time when a cardinall Bembus did move a question out of the Gospell, the Pope gave him a very contemptuouse aunswere saiying: All ages can testifie enough howe profitable that fable of Christe hath ben to us and our companie:

tektonics.org...

39 STEPS with this kid

As per your link, Pope Leo X never said that.

Your link traces the saying back to a satiric play called "The Pageant of Popes" (on pages 179-180) written by a John Bale (1495-1563), an English ex-Carmelite Protestant, to satirise the Catholic Church.

You should read the content of your links.

I don't really know what you guys are talking about but Catholics have been murdering people over opinions since AT LEAST Constantine, who was known to mutilate Jews, cut off ears tortue. The Sadistic Patriarch of the RCC "Saint" Constantine.

70,000 Muslims, Jews, Christians just in Jerusalem were slaughtered because they saw how advanced Islamic civilization was (the source of most modern science).

1492 Spain massacred after 800 years of Jewish-Christian-Muslim peace. But read European historians and WE ARE THE SAVAGES.

Ottoman Empire took in survivors, the Muslims all killed or converted by the sword

Like every inhabited continent.. converted by force to Catholicism.

Before you embarrass yourself trying to say Islam practiced forced conversion it's forbidden in the Qur'an:

2:256 There is no compulsion of any sort in matters of religion for the right way stands clearly distinguished from the way of error.

And if you want to prevent me refuting your sloppy attempt to argue against the truth you haven't a clue regarding, know, I have sources, and I will provide them. When I get back. Should you think another round of (losing a) debate is fun though, go ahead! I will be ready.

Watch what you say in the meantime. I am watching. I don't like people who pretend to know everything and know nothing but think everyone also knows as little as you and you can get away with it.

Herod the Nabatean!

If you attempt Crusade apologetics I will unleash a fury OF WESTERN HISTORIAN citations, quotes, so watch your lip sugar pop.lp

Although I don't wish to excuse the Crusades, I have requested that you support your ranting with historical and appropriately credentialled details. So please, do not feel restrained. Let fly...

... and I'm far more of a curmudgeon than a sugar pop, darling.

Awesome! Salaam.

And plural back at you... (but is salaami halal?)

a reply to: chr0naut


Awesome! Salaam.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Disturbinatti

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Disturbinatti

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: stonerwilliam

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: stonerwilliam
a reply to: chr0naut

I cannot see a carpenter getting so close to the priests back then and turning over tables in anger and getting away with it



was Yoshua a Rabbi one wonders ?

He wasn't near the priests then, He was in the outer courts of the Temple, which had been turned into a marketplace = public access.

He was called rabbi (teacher) by his followers according to the gospels.

... and a carpenter back then did more than woodwork. Carpenters did house building and all sorts of construction work, including stonework.

When all knowledge back in the day was controled by the church and even posetion of a book or bible was punishable by death and much blood was spilled in the council of Nicea , when gods word was much edited and fought over en.wikipedia.org...

Please read the Wikipedia link you provided with attention to the section called misconceptions. Basically nothing that you have just said in the previous paragraph is correct.

The First Council of Nicea was non-violent and no changes were made to any scriptures.

The council, its aims, proceedings and conclusions are a matter of historical record.

for on a time when a cardinall Bembus did move a question out of the Gospell, the Pope gave him a very contemptuouse aunswere saiying: All ages can testifie enough howe profitable that fable of Christe hath ben to us and our companie:

tektonics.org...

39 STEPS with this kid

As per your link, Pope Leo X never said that.

Your link traces the saying back to a satiric play called "The Pageant of Popes" (on pages 179-180) written by a John Bale (1495-1563), an English ex-Carmelite Protestant, to satirise the Catholic Church.

You should read the content of your links.

I don't really know what you guys are talking about but Catholics have been murdering people over opinions since AT LEAST Constantine, who was known to mutilate Jews, cut off ears tortue. The Sadistic Patriarch of the RCC "Saint" Constantine.

70,000 Muslims, Jews, Christians just in Jerusalem were slaughtered because they saw how advanced Islamic civilization was (the source of most modern science).

1492 Spain massacred after 800 years of Jewish-Christian-Muslim peace. But read European historians and WE ARE THE SAVAGES.

Ottoman Empire took in survivors, the Muslims all killed or converted by the sword

Like every inhabited continent.. converted by force to Catholicism.

Before you embarrass yourself trying to say Islam practiced forced conversion it's forbidden in the Qur'an:

2:256 There is no compulsion of any sort in matters of religion for the right way stands clearly distinguished from the way of error.

And if you want to prevent me refuting your sloppy attempt to argue against the truth you haven't a clue regarding, know, I have sources, and I will provide them. When I get back. Should you think another round of (losing a) debate is fun though, go ahead! I will be ready.

Watch what you say in the meantime. I am watching. I don't like people who pretend to know everything and know nothing but think everyone also knows as little as you and you can get away with it.

Herod the Nabatean!

If you attempt Crusade apologetics I will unleash a fury OF WESTERN HISTORIAN citations, quotes, so watch your lip sugar pop.lp

Although I don't wish to excuse the Crusades, I have requested that you support your ranting with historical and appropriately credentialled details. So please, do not feel restrained. Let fly...

... and I'm far more of a curmudgeon than a sugar pop, darling.

Awesome! Salaam.

And plural back at you... (but is salaami halal?)

I don't think you know what Salaam means, it's not food.

Plus that's an Italian word...

Salaam is Arabic for peace and either you are a terrible comedian or incredibly destitute of knowledge.

It is not like saying "Is salami" the food "halal"? as in acceptable is a quality bit of humor.

The alternative isn't better, if you don't know what Salaam means and that it's not food...if you do and thought that a good joke...

You are something...

Plural back at you would be "Salaams" if we are speaking English and about food.

Because I said "Salaam" you wish to make it thinking it food, plural, and that's not how you would make Salami the food plural because it's one of those words that is the same plural or singular.

"Let's go get some salami for us to share."

"Let's go get some salamis for us to share."

Unless you meant where Epiphanius was from, Salamis, but you didn't.

originally posted by: Disturbinatti


Why Christians can't let go of paganism is because it involves admitting that 2,000 years went by with people believing what the Church said without knowing it was made up b.s.

Trinity is paganism, because you worship a man, Issa (p).

What was Mohammed?

The guy's dead but you still invoke his name with all sort of reverent suffixes.

Mohammed also instructed people to worship him and pray to him to intercede on their behalf to Allah:

'714 An-Nu'man ibn Bashir reported that the Prophet said, "Supplication is worship." Then he recited, "Call on Me and I will answer you".' (Bewley, Al-Adab al-Mufrad al-Bukhari, XXX. Supplication).

Polytheism because of "Tri"-nity.

Father God, Son God, Spirit God.

So is God NOT a Holy Spirit without dividing him by 2 or 3?

God and the Holy Spirit are either synonymous or two entities with one God, one not.

This is common sense. The type that angers people and drops the veil on the "pious Christian" ruse if they aren't actually pious.

The Trinity is the one God, but revealed in three persons.

The Kabbalistic Sephirot divides God into 10 'emanations' and yet they are still the one God.

It isn't so hard to conceive.

God is so overarchingly great that we can only perceive aspects of God at one time and each of these aspects are so great that they appear to us as complete persons.

There is no disunity in God.

God has chosen to reveal aspects of himself that particularly fit our human comprehension, yet each of these aspects has a completeness of being that appears to us to be a person in its own right.

It is surprising to see such ignorant behavior from the pious Christians of ATS who don't mind pretending to kwhat 70 Judahites wrote in 300BC in MSS. not extant...

Or saying genius things like "Jesus isn't the Messiah because Rome won."

Well that is not true exactly.

I am quite used to unlearned Christians reacting angrily and/or mockingly when forced to face reality re: the fact that they can't support their theology without lying.

But it ain't my fault (did I do that!)