• Don't want to see ads? Install an adblocker like uBlock Origin or use a Europe-based privacy-friendly browser like Vivaldi or Mullvad.

Religion Jesus could not be the SOG(Son of God)

Yes, Tsuyoiko, there are many extra-biblical references to Jesus, but as the site says, all of them are just hearsay-- there are no eyewitness accounts. I would hardly consider these references "disputed" at all; they are simply not valid for proving anything, period.
 
Thank you for your consideration and your more detailed side of the matter, strongvoicesforward san. I am grateful that you are willing to consider the healthiness of the discussion here, in this sub-forum. Honestly, I do thank you !! I am not, by any means a scheming type person--although for the moment, I can only ask that you trust these words since you do not yet know me. (nor can, hardly, through the net alone) I am being honest.

I am guilty, strongvoicesforward san, of not having read all the posts here on this thread as I had originally started out to do, nor all those on the 'Bible not WOG' thread either. I have no information on any other threads on which you and sabro may have been talking--I only know what has started these threads, here, and what has transpired since I had become more involved after having come back to Japan.

Please do direct the points that you feel I have wronged you on to me by PM (since usually on the thread is not such a good place) and we can handle them there. For now, I will apologize for missing that apology that you had made earlier--it could be that it did pass before my eyes, without my having stopped there. I'm sorry strongvoicesforward san, I do want to be fair !! I do want to help out all parties participating in the discussion.

And just in case my wording had been poor, I most certainly do hope that you keep posting right along with the rest of us in this big forum family.
I will talk to you later by PM again, since this is not really the place for it here. I just wanted to answer to you, and felt that it would possibly be better this way at first. I thank you strongvoicesforward san for being an active part in this discussion, and for your efforts, shown in your post above, to at least start off on the right foot. ???肪?Ƃ? :cool: :-)
 
kumo said:
Yes, Tsuyoiko, there are many extra-biblical references to Jesus, but as the site says, all of them are just hearsay-- there are no eyewitness accounts. I would hardly consider these references "disputed" at all; they are simply not valid for proving anything, period.
I agree. So can we safely say that there are no reliable accounts of Jesus outside of the Bible? Can we all agree on that?
 
Mars Man, I have not made any decision yet regarding my posting style until there is some honest acknowledgement by the regular visitors to this forum about the issues I brought up. While I do appreciate your attitude to what I said, the forum participants are more than you and I am not going to dance around Sabro`s sensitivities so long as the others are not going to be fair in their "rebuking" and judgement in retrospective of their actions and Sabro`s.

As for PMs, Sabro has taught me they are anything but private, so I tend to use them only when complementing someone, rather than using them to discuss areas of dissent or disagreement. So, sorry, I will not PM on these issues of contentions.

Now, I doubt anyone, or all the regular people on this forum will publicly take Brother Sabro to task for forwarding someone`s PM to others when the permission was not given and it was meant to ridicule and bring in partners against a rival in a forum debate.
 
I understand the charge, strongvoicesforward san. I agree that it would be wrong to forward a Private Message from one, to another, unless permission or clear enough insinuation of permission were given. I would hope that wrongs of this nature could be atoned for.

I would also hope, please, that 'forum' user names could be used as are, without undue additions--unless they are agreed on.

I think I'm gonna hafta hit the bed, it's getting pretty late now, and I do have to go to school in the morning, do private lessons tomorrow--it's gonna be an 11 and a half hour day.:relief:
 
Since I am a regular, and SVF feels I am showing favoritism to Sabro, I will put down how I percieve this.

As to the witticisms, you yourself said witticisms were supposed to be funny, and disarming to the opponent. I do not see how some of your 'witticisms' were disarming at all to those of the Christian faith, but rather it did the exact opposite. Were I to insert the kind of witticisms you were into an abortions debate, I am quite certain a few pro-choicers would have an urge to carve my liver out with a spoon (that's of course a bit exaggerated).

I also saw a lot of generalities being made, such as 'Sabro is intolerant due to the nature of his faith'. It was a generality with no reasoning behind it, and as I saw it, as simple goad. Sabro and a few others, including I also objected to these, but you SVF were quite adamant about not tiptoeing around any of our sensitivities, and Maciamo supported you in your debate style.

It was after this time that you placed an out-of-context quote in your sig, and at least I really did feel that was going too far. As to you and Sabro's fight, I have for the most part stayed out of it, only attempting to negate any especially negative generalities about Christianity, or their practitioners. What goes on and went on between you and Sabro seemed to begin in a thread that I never read, and has continued on other threads that I also do not look at so often.

The PMs I remember reading something about them, but since they are PMs, and I don't think are related to the subforum that I take an interest in, I don't see any reason for me to comment on that.

SVF, I am going to be dead straight here. It seems obvious that very few, if any other posters get into quite so many conflicts as you do. I understand you have strong views, but were I you, I would consider a change in something. As I can remember off the top of my head, you are currently butting heads with Sabro, Nurizeko, Bossel, and prior to that, with Reiku, and perhaps a few others. Others a little less confrotational, or people who would rather not simply butt heads have commented that you should change your debating style.

Sabro has to my knowledge, and excluding you, has never gotten into any conflicts with anyone, and is generally well liked. That doesn't excuse him for some of the things that he has said, and he has apologized for some of it, but in part, I saw his becoming snide as his next defense, when his objections weren't truly heard. After the generalities and 'witticisms' I thought he was doing just what most people would do, and that is to return barbs for barbs.

All that is just how I perceive it, and I thought I should be dead honest in how I felt.
 
Mars Man said:
I would hope that wrongs of this nature could be atoned for.

If so, I don`t want some cowardly fase saving way from embarrassment to do so by doing it in a PM. It can be public. But, I am doubting those who should be offering some atonement will take you up on atoning. I am not holding my breath. In fact, I am bracing for a barage of snide comments on the issue.
 
Revenant said:
I also saw a lot of generalities being made, such as 'Sabro is intolerant due to the nature of his faith'.

Whoa! Stop right there, Revenant. My comment to that nature was stated after Sabro began throwing the "intolerant" and "bigot" word around. Go back and look. If you find I am wrong in my memory of the point, I will apologise for this post. Until then, it stands on record as me saying you are down right wrong or deceptive in how the threads transpired from the beginning.

Go back to the WOG thread and you will even see I let Sabro make three posts in the thread before I began engaging him. In those three posts he is the one who starts scooting the thread towards hostility. I come back in at around post #21 to engage his remarks.

Furthermore, Revenant, I even offered to Sabro to just not post to me, to in effect ignore me -- and for us to do so mutually. He did not take me up on that. Why are you refusing to acknowledge such a simple thing as that? -- a simple solution that he could have accepted.
 
Would it not be wiser to take a more open, wait and see attitude before becoming negative about it?

I appreciate your opening up, Revenant san, and sharing your thoughts and knowledge.
 
Revenant said:
SVF, I am going to be dead straight here. It seems obvious that very few, if any other posters get into quite so many conflicts as you do. I understand you have strong views, but were I you, I would consider a change in something. As I can remember off the top of my head, you are currently butting heads with Sabro, Nurizeko, Bossel, and prior to that, with Reiku, and perhaps a few others. Others a little less confrotational, or people who would rather not simply butt heads have commented that you should change your debating style.

My butting heads with bossel, comes from him deciding to make a comment about English as a 1st language. Prior to that, the discussion us posturing over what was going to be in the discussion. It never got to the level as Sabro's and mine. Though, I did notice, that whenever Sabro saw I had posted in there or went against someone in there, he saw it as an opportunity to pile on with encouraging "rebuking."

Nurizeko, she is prone to just calling people "loony" and just telling people "to go away."

Revanant, you are not looking at the source when you are commenting. If you are not going to look at the source, don`t you think you could be in error in your perceptions? Why don`t you dig a little deeper? Would you like me to take you back on a guided tour to where each point derailed?

As for Reiku, he was outright rude in calling me Hitler and hoping I was torn to pieces and eaten alive by animals. Even Sabro thought he had gone too far -- but then he just couldn`t resist complementing the post that the flaming was in -- once again showing his Christian hypocracy of "brotherly love" <snicker snicker ...yeah right!>.

Sabro has to my knowledge, and excluding you, has never gotten into any conflicts with anyone, and is generally well liked. That doesn't excuse him for some of the things that he has said, and he has apologized for some of it, but in part, I saw his becoming snide as his next defense, when his objections weren't truly heard. After the generalities and 'witticisms' I thought he was doing just what most people would do, and that is to return barbs for barbs.

All that is just how I perceive it, and I thought I should be dead honest in how I felt.

Your thought and perspective are wrong. And if you like, I could take you on a guided tour to point it out.
 
You could be easily viewed as being 'intolerant' and being 'bigoted'. You clearly demonstrate a strong dislike for anything Christian, and have continued to post insults based on Sabro's faith (i.e. bad math, etc, etc). I don't think if he had added 'being' to 'intolerant' and 'bigoted' there would have been such a fuss about it. He was pointing out something about you, you were attacking an entire group of people with a generality.

It's also kind of hard for Sabro to ignore your posts when you are attempting to trash his faith. He would of course feel a desire to say something, so I don't see your offer as being reasonable. Sabro has been posting in this forum for quite some time, and takes an interest in it.
 
Mars Man said:
Would it not be wiser to take a more open, wait and see attitude before becoming negative about it?
I appreciate your opening up, Revenant san, and sharing your thoughts and knowledge.

Her knowledge is wrong on the issue. And, I will be happy to guide him or you Mars Man through the threads to find the beginning points of where things started going. The key word is "beginning."
 
I did not see Rieku's post, and I haven't read near to much in the Whaling thread. I can of course hear your side of the story here, but what I am not hearing is Nurizeko's nor Bossel's side of the story.

Is it just a coincident that you are butting heads with quite a few people, when no one else that I can see is?

Strongvoicesforward, I do not see that comment of 'Sabro's Christian hypocrisy' as adding anything to the discussion. It is in part for that very reason that I do not enjoy reading your posts.

Could we also have a guided tour by Nurizeko, Sabro, and Bossel?

EDIT: I am also going to bed, so I will continue this sometime tommorow.
 
Revenant said:
You could be easily viewed as being 'intolerant' and being 'bigoted'. You clearly demonstrate a strong dislike for anything Christian, and have continued to post insults based on Sabro's faith (i.e. bad math, etc, etc). I don't think if he had added 'being' to 'intolerant' and 'bigoted' there would have been such a fuss about it. He was pointing out something about you, you were attacking an entire group of people with a generality.
It's also kind of hard for Sabro to ignore your posts when you are attempting to trash his faith. He would of course feel a desire to say something, so I don't see you're offer as being reasonable. Sabro has been posting in this forum for quite some time, and takes an interest in it.

Here we go in circles Revenant if you are not going to look at the source of the beginning.

You can`t talk about me being 'intolerant' when I had never said a person does not have the right to believe in what they want or should not be allowed to post. Did I ever say that?

You and Sabro use the word to imply that harsh criticism of the Bible is not warranted which is hypocritical when the Bible itself has intolerance built into it. Furthermore, 'intolerance' has been a hallmark of Xtian history.

I was on the issue of the Bible, while Sabro tried to turn the issue onto the person putting forth the isssue. It was the classic, "kill the messenger" rather than address the message.

What is hard for Sabro to do or whether he has been coming to this forum for a long time is irrelevant. His own Book tells him to turn the other cheek but he can`t even live up to that which he extolls.
 
I know you would like to paint the other side as 'in the wrong', and not even consider that you might have also added to the problem. I do not think we can continue this. I am considering taking a haitus from this forum.
 
Revenant said:
Is it just a coincident that you are butting heads with quite a few people, when no one else that I can see is?

Revenant, you are suggesting the "majority" is right argument. That is a weak one indeed. Indeed, it was the majority at the time which crucified your God. He seemed to have been butting heads with all of the other Jews. Was that just a coincidence or are you going to give Him special favoritism? Your argument is not logical. Right is right, wrong is wrong. The numbers in the disagreement on different sides are irrelevant.

Strongvoicesforward, I do not see that comment of 'Sabro's Christian hypocrisy' as adding anything to the discussion. It is in part for that very reason that I do not enjoy reading your posts.

I disagree. It illustrates quite well.

Revenant, then don`t read my posts if you don`t enjoy them. I won`t miss your replies or the thought of knowing you aren`t reading my posts.
 
This has gone away from the topic, and is becoming instead people commenting on other people's relationships with various posters. :okashii:
 
Tsuyoiko said:
I agree. So can we safely say that there are no reliable accounts of Jesus outside of the Bible? Can we all agree on that?
Looks like my attempt to get us back on topic fell on deaf ears, so here's another try. Is Jesus the son of god? I think we first need to establish if Jesus existed, since it's pointless discussing whose son he was if he's fictional! Do we agree that there are no extra-biblical sources? Assuming we do, what reasons do we have for accepting (or not) the biblical accounts as historical?

This argument from Philosophy Forums is not a logical one, but I find it quite compelling nonetheless:
philw said:
what perhaps convinces me of Christianity the most is the person of Christ in the Gospels. The sense I got when I first read them was that was that of a definite and strong character, and also a unique character. That someone who acted this way, said the things He said, and did the things He supposedly did, was amazing to me on so many different levels. It didn't seem possible that (as I had previously supposed) any human mind could have invented this character and the things that happened to Him--from what I know of the human imagination, people simply don't have the capacity to invent such a fiction. I became convinced that the Gospels had to be historical, and moreover that the most reasonable explanation for the behavior of Jesus and the things that happened to Him was that He was exactly what He said He was, that is, Jesus was God.
While I don't accept the conclusion that Christianity is true or that Jesus is god, I have always felt that the portrayal of Jesus is solid. He seems like a real person - complete with character flaws, favouritisms, passion, wisdom and conviction. Not a good argument I admit, but it feels right.

BTW, I think there's another thread here for discussing posting styles.
 
strongvoicesforward said:
As for PMs, Sabro has taught me they are anything but private, so I tend to use them only when complementing someone, rather than using them to discuss areas of dissent or disagreement. So, sorry, I will not PM on these issues of contentions.
No, PMs are a 100% private and it's impossible for even administrators to read it. Sabro probably confused it with Reputation points, which can be read by moderators in special cases to prevent people from abusing it. So please, let's just keep on topic. If you have any personal problems use PMs to resolve it.
 
Tsuyoiko said:
Looks like my attempt to get us back on topic fell on deaf ears, so here's another try. Is Jesus the son of god? I think we first need to establish if Jesus existed, since it's pointless discussing whose son he was if he's fictional! Do we agree that there are no extra-biblical sources? Assuming we do, what reasons do we have for accepting (or not) the biblical accounts as historical?
I know that lack of evidence is not evidence of absence, but considering how great and important Jesus supposedly was, it's seems next to impossible that absolutely no documents were written about him. What about the people he supposedly cured? Or his supposed involvement in the local religious and political matters? The fact that no one even cared to write about him leaves me to only two possible interpretations:
-he never existed in the first place.
-he was not even remotely as important and great for his time as the bible's accounts would make you believe.
I think the second case is more likely. It would seem as if Jesus was just a randomly choosed non-important historical person, attributed
with things he never said or done. A mere allegory to explain the new religion ideals, and at the same time give it some kind of credibility.
 
Back
Top