Are you lawless?

Nope, again, just your opinion.

 

As is yours above.... however, my opinion is supported by the record of this thread, your opinion is not supported by the record of this thread.

 

Dude, this is so easy to explain how you're wrong that it's funny. This is what you said:

"It is irrefutable proof that you admitted that you cannot irrefutably prove that your statements are not in the category of 'false evidence'. If it is not irrefutable proof that you cannot, then your former statement would render you to be in the category of a 'liar'."

It isn't "irrefutable proof" that I admitted to such a thing. My account could've been hacked or else somebody could've been using my username. Right? Those are possibilities aren't they? Or I COULD be a liar. Those are options, which means that there is an ability to refute your so-called proof, making it not irrefutable.

 

That's cute, a book predicted something which was later fulfilled in the same book.

 

Answer me these two questions. 1.What do you expect that the enemy is going admit that it happened? 2.Would you entrust someone that hated you to take care of your affairs? If you have any evidence that Jesus never existed and that He was not crucified please put for your proof.

 

What does any of what you wrote have to do with what he said...?

 

God in His infinite wisdom saw fit to inspire his people and and entrust people who would be dedicated to preserving the scriptures. So in regards to my previous (two) questions how would you answer them?

 

I don't even know what your questions are relating to. They are incredibly vague.

 

It is related to what you said in #129.

 

That was Stagnant. I am not Stagnant, and I don't really agree with what he said to an extent. The Bible isn't one book, but yes, it would have been incredibly easy to look back and make Jesus fulfill the Messiah role (I mean, the Gospels make it clear that Jesus grabs a donkey to ride on TO fulfill the prophecy), and there is clearly evidence that the author of Matthew went back and simply made up prophecies, and misread and misquoted Scripture.

 

So how would it be easy to make an almost entire Nation turn against Jesus and have Him crucified? Jesus did a lot of good among them......He healed the sick, raise the dead and fed people. Remember, Pilate said he saw nothing that would worth Jesus being crucified for.....even his wife said the Jesus was a just man. How was Jesus able to convince Pilate to wash his hands off the whole matter and turn Jesus over to the Jews when he wanted to let Jesus go?

And why would Mathew be willing to suffer persecution for something that is false? Why would all these men be willing to suffer so much, when they could simply go back to fishing, which after Jesus was crucified did, until Jesus appeared to them on the beach with fish roasting on the open fire?

The problem is that you are unwilling to believe that it happened just they wrote it. Its not as if you have any evidence that they made it up, and it just does not make sense if it was made up. You read many things in the news paper, including things you have been told by the government some of it you chose to believe even though you were not there. Why do you believe some things you are told despite the fact you cannot substantiate the report, but question men who gave there life for what they reported to be true and were eye witness?

 

Thank You BF Smith for posting your question, ARE WE LAWLESS?.
I think most everyone have been guilty of not keeping our word.
And, you are correct, we must overcome that weakness.

And as part of our lawlessness, we are also murderers, because our lawlessness is the root of the murder of the Perfect Man.
We have all consented to murdering Him by our own lawlessness.
Sin is basically hatred of Him, His Creation and His Intention to fill the universe with Life, Love and Happiness.

If we want a place in that universe, we better overcome our lawlessness and conform our minds, hearts and actions to His Word, His Intent, His Desire, and His Pleasure.

 

Do you think crucifixion was rare or something? We're talking about the Roman Empire, they crucified people daily.

I have no idea if this story even occurred as portrayed in the Bible. And Jesus didn't convince Pilate to give himself to the crowd, so I'm not sure which Bible you're reading. He gave Jesus to be crucified because the crowds demanded it.

Matthew didn't write the book of Matthew.

Because maybe they actually believed in Jesus? Why were the people at Jonestown willing to kill themselves? Also, the Post-Resurrection stories of the Gospels are so varied that its impossible to nail down what happened or if something happened at all since they all contradict each other.

Actually, it makes perfect sense since the Gospels are incredibly contradictory in what they say, especially when we get to Post-Resurrection Jesus. Anyways, even if these Gospel accounts matched up incredibly well, which they don't, why would I automatically believe their stories? All of these authors obviously had personal agendas which shine through, and it isn't as if you believe other religious based myths. So, my question to you is why do you believe this story over the stories portrayed in other religious books?

First off, the authors weren't eyewitnesses, the Gospels themselves make this explicitly clear. Secondly, are you seriously saying I cannot substantiate the stories in a newspaper? Really?

- - - Updated - - -

...Yeah, I wasn't alive 2,000 years ago. I didn't kill him.

 

Thanks.

 

I'm talking about Jesus not other people.

I did not say that Jesus wanted to convince Pilate to give Himself to the crowd. I said that Pilate said he saw nothing worthy of Jesus to be crucified for. But you are not that familiar with the account, so I'm going to provide you with a few scriptures.

Luke 23:4 (ASV)
4 And Pilate said unto the chief priests and the multitudes, I find no fault in this man.


Matthew 27:24-25 (BBE)
24 So when Pilate saw that he was able to do nothing, but that trouble was working up, he took water and, washing his hands before the people, said, The blood of this upright man is not on my hands: you are responsible.
25 And all the people made answer and said, Let his blood be on us, and on our children.

So who are you claiming wrote it?

They knew Jesus more than anyone else.......they saw the miracles that He did (raising the dead, healing the sick, walked on water, casting out demons and so on) and therefore has more authority about what happened. So anyone who claims different are speaking from there opinion and to compare the Jonestown incident is silly.

What you stumble at can be easily explained if you are able to provide those scriptures.

I have yet to find one contradiction anywhere in the Bible.

Prove it.

- - - Updated - - -

That's what you think.

 

You think the Romans thought Jesus was special or something?

You actually did, re-read your post. You must just have mistyped it.

Lol, I'm not familiar with the account? Okay. I'm very familiar with all the Gospels, including the non-canonical ones.

I have no idea, I'm not claiming anybody specific wrote it, you are. The scholarship on the Gospels has revealed that the author of Matthew was likely a well educated Jew who relied heavily on the Gospel of Mark and likely the Q source.

Allegedly.

Uh, why? You seemed to think that it was important that they were willing to sacrifice their lives (which we have no idea who actually was martyred since those stories are almost all based on tradition). So are followers of almost any religion or cult. They weren't special in that regard.

If you're familiar with Scripture, I'd say let's skip this citation business because it is dull and takes too much time. Matthew has him appearing to the 11 apostles on a mountain in Galilee. Luke has him appearing to them in Jerusalem. John is vague about where they are but he apparently appears to 10 apostles instead of 11 (1 Corinthians has him appeared to 12 apostles, somehow). Mark doesn't even have an original post-resurrection appearance since Mark 16:9-20 is a later interpolation. And this is not even getting into what he said to his disciples, who he appeared to before the disciples gathered, etc.

Of course you haven't because apologetics have spent two millenia explaining away the contradictions with convoluted rebuttals.

Well, let's see, the author of Luke starts off explaining that he isn't an eyewitness. Even if Mark wrote his Gospel, he was one of the 70 Disciples and never met Jesus. The author of Matthew is clearly not an eyewitness since he relies so heavily on other accounts of what Jesus did (most notably Mark). The author of John is the ONLY author of the Gospels to claim he was an eyewitness, and I'm simply not convinced of that.

You think I was alive 2,000 years ago?

 

Of course not.

I know what I said and I did not say what you are claiming.

You don't know who wrote the book of Mathew but yet you know that it was not writing by Mathew that wrote it. LOL Why would Mathew need to rely on Mark when Mathew was just as much one of Jesus' disciples as Mark and would know all the things about the life of Jesus as much as Mathew?

Mathew, Mark, Luke and John for example did not say it was alleged......they spoke form their experience. So calling their account alleged does not make it an alleged, it just the you choose not to believe what they wrote.

So you are claiming that something that is a tradition means that it is not true? Does that also apply to American or any tradition that a Country has, or is it just limited to the Bible?

You say that all those account is inaccurate because you assume that they were all at the same place when Jesus appeared to them. The fact is they were not……..the resurrected Jesus is not bound by the laws of physics; Jesus can be in several places at the same time as 1 Corinthians 15:1-8 tells us and He did.

1 Corinthians 15:3-8 (KJV)
3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

I’m still waiting for you to show me a scripture that contradicts another scripture in the Bible.

Where is the scripture that said that?

Jesus died to save all people from there sin; past, present and future.

 

Then why point out that Jesus was not "other people"?

" How was Jesus able to convince Pilate to wash his hands off the whole matter and turn Jesus over to the Jews when he wanted to let Jesus go?"

Yeah, why is that so funny? If we found a book that claimed to be written by Socrates and yet we dated it to the Mid-10th Century BCE, obviously it wasn't written by Socrates. And yet we would not know conclusively who actually wrote it. Is that funny as well?

He wouldn't, which is why we know it wasn't written by Matthew.

Well, none of the authors except the author of John claimed to be eyewitnesses and Luke explicitly says he was NOT one...

No, it just doesn't mean that it IS true.

....Uh....Wow. It isn't an assumption, the Gospels SAY where the Disciples were and sometimes when he appeared to them.

Judas' death, Matthew telling us that Jesus somehow rode two donkeys into Jerusalem while the other Gospels, the genealogies of Matthew and Luke.

Do you seriously not know your Scripture? What specifically do you want me to cite?

And that means I killed him with my own two hands?

 

Because He was not.....He was not a lawless man.....He never tried to cause insurrection and as I said, Pilate said he saw no reason for Jesus to be crucified. Jesus was innocent of all the accusations that the Jews made against Him but despite that and the fact that Pilate believed Jesus was innocent Jesus was crucified anyway, according to the scripture.

That is not a statement it is a question that I asked you......you seem to be suggesting that that it was planned by someone; either Jesus Himself or whomever to make it look like Jesus is the Messiah.

Since when is dating something that is fool proof?

You know??? that's a laugh.Like I said, is dating foolproof? How many times have the so-called "experts" been wrong about a lot of things when it comes to the Bible?

That's a silly way of coming to a conclusion. The fact that they spoke about what is written in those books is proof that they were. And show me chapter and verse where Luke said He was not?

Show me one evidence that proves it is not true.....I'm not asking you for your opinion but proof.

So far you have only made claims but you have not provided any chapter and verse to back up your claim. But I have shown you that Jesus did appear to His the individual disciples where ever they were at the same time.

Judas' death is very easily to answer, but I not answer it until you provide me with chapter and verse of all the other ones you mentioned.

How about the one you say supports what you claim?

Do you think you have to literally kill a person with your two hands to be responsible for the person's death?

 

No, that is what your question is suggesting. Your question asked me how Jesus was able to convince Pilate.

Who said it was?

We know to a pretty darn good extent. If the author of the Gospel of Matthew was an eyewitness, there is no reason, as YOU YOURSELF POINTED OUT, that he would have to rely on others' testimony.

So, I'm clearly speaking to a novice in terms of knowledge of Scripture. Literally, it's the first lines of Luke.

"Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled[a] among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word."

Shifting of the burden of proof, very immature.

That's because I figured you were knowledgeable about your own holy book, but apparently you aren't.

No, you've provided another piece of contradictory Scripture.

Do you really not know where the verses are? Am I seriously that much more educated in Scripture than you?

So, no, you don't know your Scripture.

"Judas' death, Matthew telling us that Jesus somehow rode two donkeys into Jerusalem while the other Gospels, the genealogies of Matthew and Luke."

Which one of these things do you want me to cite?

No, but I think I would have to be ALIVE at the time.

 

This is a waste of my time you obviously think you know what I meant than I do........so no matter what I say you are going believe what you want to believe.

You obviously are relaying heavily on it though.

You have not provided any proof that Mathew was not an eye witness......its just your opinion nothing more.......Mathew was one of Jesus' disciples and is spoken of in the other books in the New testament.

Lol. Where in that verse does it say he was not an eyewitness and why could you not simply ad the chapter and verse where that scripture is at? All Luke 1:1 said was "Many" have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled......notice also it says "Fulfilled. among us" He is including himself among those who saw the that things that was fulfilled....he said us.

You are the one making the claim so put forth your proof.

From my experience when critics make claim that the Bible say this or that it turns out not to be what they claim when they e-v-e-n-t-u-a-l-y show me the scripture......its like pulling teeth to get some of them to present the scripture.

Because I know how the Bible works......it was to trip up the unbeliever. The Bible is like a jigsaw puzzle that all the pieces must be put together to get a full picture.......take one or two pieces by itself and you will come to a faulty conclusion the same way if you did that with a literal jigsaw puzzle.

I'm wondering why is it so hard for you to provide the scripture(chapter and verse) since you know it so well?

Provide all the scriptures of what I highlighted above and then I will explain the seemingly contradiction of Judas' death.

Not from where God is sitting.

 

It has nothing to do with me knowing more than what you meant, but what you SAID is blatantly obvious and in front of us. You asked me "How was JESUS able to convince PILATE..." Do you need a grammar lesson? "able to convince" is a transitive verb phrase, and the direct object of that phrase is Pilate. Who is convincing Pilate? Jesus. I already told you that you probably just mistyped this; is it really that hard to just admit you made a mistake and move on?

If there is very good evidence that something is from a certain time, why would I not rely on that evidence?

It apparently wasn't just my opinion since you yourself admitted that this made no sense. It is also the consensus among most Biblical scholars.

Where the heck did I say I was just talking about Luke 1:1? I said the first lines of Luke, which I quoted. You quoted the first line and then left out the next line where he states: "just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses". He flat out admits that he is just recollecting stories from the eyewitnesses. You do know that Luke wasn't an apostle of Jesus, right? That he was a companion to Paul?

No, I am rebutting your claim that tradition is correct.

Or you're just ignorant of what Scripture says since this is pretty basic stuff I'm relaying.

I'm pretty sure that the real problem is that you're working under the assumption that the Bible is inerrant and therefore there can't be a contradiction present.

Because it's a tedious task if both people know their Scripture.

Donkey - Matthew 21:2-7, Mark 11:2-7, Luke 19:30.
Genealogies - Luke 3:23-38, Mathew 1:1-17.

Then that God is an idiot. How can you hold somebody culpable for the death of somebody who lived 2,000 years before their time?

 

I'm done with you on this.....I know what I meant and that's what's important to me.

I've heard that before about many things the so-called critics were saying against some of the things spoken of in the Bible, until evidence proved them wrong and they had to eat crow.

Here are just a few things the Bible proved the "Experts" wrong.

1)They did not believe that Moses wrote the Bible; they claimed that writing was unknown back then.......wrong.

2)They claimed that the Hittites never existed......wrong.

2)They claimed that Belshazzar never existed......wrong.

You are trying to put words in my mouth? I meant this discussion make no sense.......its a waste of time because you will continue to believe whatever you want to believe.

Haven't I been asking you to provide the scriptures but you refuse to do so? You lift me no choice but to try and figure out for myself what scripture you were talking about. Luke was speaking about the prophecies about Jesus that the prophets wrote in the Torah/Old Testament that was handed down to them and they became eye witness of the fulfillment of those prophecies.

I can see that but you have presented no proof that it is not correct. Anybody can rebut anything but its another thing to prove that your rebuttal is correct.

An incorrect opinion since you don't know me.

You have no idea.......just grasping at straws.

If you think you are correct it should not be a problem.

I don't see any contradiction in those verse.......the fact is Jesus need only one donkey, and its the prerogative of the writer to be as detailed or not as detail as they want......if one choose to not mention something, that is just his choice not to. This only proves that the account was not concocted because if it was word for word, then the critics would have that to find fault with. Have you ever read the news paper and the news on TV and all of them say the exact same thing about a particular event?


Matthew 21:2-7 (KJV)
2 Saying unto them, Go into the village over against you, and straightway ye shall find an ass tied, and a colt with her: loose them, and bring them unto me.
3 And if any man say ought unto you, ye shall say, The Lord hath need of them; and straightway he will send them.
4 All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying,
5 Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass.
6 And the disciples went, and did as Jesus commanded them,
7 And brought the ass, and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set him thereon.

Mark 11:2-7 (KJV)
2 And saith unto them, Go your way into the village over against you: and as soon as ye be entered into it, ye shall find a colt tied, whereon never man sat; loose him, and bring him.
3 And if any man say unto you, Why do ye this? say ye that the Lord hath need of him; and straightway he will send him hither.
4 And they went their way, and found the colt tied by the door without in a place where two ways met; and they loose him.
5 And certain of them that stood there said unto them, What do ye, loosing the colt?
6 And they said unto them even as Jesus had commanded: and they let them go.
7 And they brought the colt to Jesus, and cast their garments on him; and he sat upon him.

Luke 19:30 (KJV)
30 Saying, Go ye into the village over against you; in the which at your entering ye shall find a colt tied, whereon yet never man sat: loose him, and bring him hither.

This is an old question.......one genealogy is of Mary and the other is Joseph........both of them are of the line of David. Because of the custom of the culture back then what was of Mary is automatically becomes that of Joseph. The Bible is not an American book about American traditions........try and learn about the culture back then before you make judgment.


Now as for Judas, this is also an old one; he hung himself, but whatever he used was not strong enough to hold his weight up and it broke and he fell and hit something that caused his body to be ripped open.

Because like everybody all people have sinned and Jesus paid the penalty for sin, so that all who repent will not have to die permanently.

 

As long as it is not important to you that you communicate well on an internet forum, you are in good shape.

 

I was done with it the minute you said it, but you insisted on saying you hadn't said what you did.

Who are these experts?

You didn't say this: " Why would Mathew need to rely on Mark when Mathew was just as much one of Jesus' disciples as Mark "?

I could make the same claim about you, but I'd rather have some hope.

I specifically said the first lines of Luke, so you're either lying or you missed when I said that.

WHAT? Where did you pull that from? Specifically what lines are talking about the Old Testament prophets?

LUKE did? He was a companion of Paul, why the heck would you imagine him to be a witness to Jesus' ministry and resurrection when Paul himself wasn't?

That isn't the responsibility of the rebutter, that is the responsibility of the CLAIMAINT, why YOU are because you're claiming that tradition is correct.

Well, since you're the one asking for citations for every little thing I say....

Then why did the author of Matthew going into detail about Jesus getting TWO donkeys?

Wow, this is seriously the poorest excuse I ever have read. Since the accounts are different instead of the same, that gives them MORE credibility? Wow, just wow.

Yeah, it is an old question, one that you answered with the same old tired argument.

And yet apparently the authors of the Gospels thought it pertinent to leave out any explanation.

Yes, I know they're all old ones, and you're using the same old apologetics, as well.

All who repent and then accept Jesus as their savior. Seems like an unnecessary step to be made beyond repentence.