Community > Posts By > Nubby

 
Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 07:50 AM


Yes its a fact Jesus existed. I believe Jesus is who his biographies claim him to be. So yes, I believe He loves me. As far as faith goes, with out faith it is impossible to please God. It is important to the christian.


"Nubby" that you "believe" that Jesus existed means you don't "know" if he in fact did exist

to believe is to doubt...funches 3:16

to believe as "truth" that someone 2000 years ago loves you and that you only "believe" they existed ....is ..er..how can I put this nicely.....delusional




Try telling that to the majority of modern scholarship. Its a fact.

Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 07:40 AM




so I guess you're not going to answer the "why you need faith question" ..

but anyway

so "Nubby" are you saying that you love Jesus and that you know that Jesus loves you?

So I guess you're not going to answer his question? Or mine?


Yes


Whenever he can’t over a rebuttal, he just ignores the question and denies it ever being submitted in the first place. That has been his modus operandi.


sorry, I will try and do better.

Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 07:39 AM




so I guess you're not going to answer the "why you need faith question" ..

but anyway

so "Nubby" are you saying that you love Jesus and that you know that Jesus loves you?

So I guess you're not going to answer his question? Or mine?


Yes


"Nubby" ..yes to what...you are being very evasive

yes you will answer the question ...or yes that you love Jesus and you know for a fact that Jesus someone that lived 2000 years before your existence loves you because you read it in a book





Yes its a fact Jesus existed. I believe Jesus is who his biographies claim him to be. So yes, I believe He loves me. As far as faith goes, with out faith it is impossible to please God. It is important to the christian.

Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 07:31 AM


so I guess you're not going to answer the "why you need faith question" ..

but anyway

so "Nubby" are you saying that you love Jesus and that you know that Jesus loves you?

So I guess you're not going to answer his question? Or mine?


Yes

Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 07:15 AM
It takes faith to be an atheist.

Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 07:12 AM




Why dont we talk about the argument. I use scholarship to strengthen my faith, there is nothing wrong with that.


"Nubby" ...it is something wrong with that if you are arguing first cause

because if God exist why do you need to strenghten your faith that he does




I study to strengthen my faith.


"Nubby" ...and you need faith ...why?

is it because you can't prove God's existence?


Does it bother you that I believe in Jesus Christ?

Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 07:09 AM




Why dont we talk about the argument. I use scholarship to strengthen my faith, there is nothing wrong with that.


"Nubby" ...it is something wrong with that if you are arguing first cause

because if God exist why do you need to strenghten your faith that he does




I study to strengthen my faith.


Really? I thought you argued on internet forums all day in order to affirm your faith. Silly me. :tongue:



Silly you.

Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 07:04 AM


Why dont we talk about the argument. I use scholarship to strengthen my faith, there is nothing wrong with that.


"Nubby" ...it is something wrong with that if you are arguing first cause

because if God exist why do you need to strenghten your faith that he does




I study to strengthen my faith.

Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 06:25 AM


I like taco argument that krimsa presented. I am going to start to use that.


"Nubby" that may be the problem ..you keep using everyone's argument but your own

come on ...use your own thoughts...it's scary at first ...but you gotta have faith ...oops I meant go for it



Why dont we talk about the argument. I use scholarship to strengthen my faith, there is nothing wrong with that.

Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 06:07 AM


God by definition is uncaused, timeless, changeless. Premise #1 calls for everything that begins to exist.


"Nubby" ...a definition of something doesn't prove existence....

you're not debating.. you're preaching

it appears your first cause is the "google cut and paste" for the bible


God does not apply to the argument because by definition He is uncaused.

Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 06:05 AM



That was all refuted from what I recall on another thread.



No it was not. A video was pulled up from you tube that most people pry do not understand. I cant respond to that video, I will leave that to the scholars who defend the argument.


That sounds like a cop out.


May be so, I am not a scholar.

Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 06:04 AM
I like taco argument that krimsa presented. I am going to start to use that.

Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 05:56 AM

That was all refuted from what I recall on another thread.



No it was not. A video was pulled up from you tube that most people pry do not understand. I cant respond to that video, I will leave that to the scholars who defend the argument.

Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 05:50 AM

There is no "proof" that Jesus rose from anywhere. There is nothing to substantiate the premise behind reanimation of dead flesh. There is some evidence to indicate that they simply went back to the wrong tomb. All those caves looked similar and people have been known to make mistakes.







The best explanation for the four facts I presented is Jesus rose from the dead.

Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 05:49 AM




" God makes sense of the origin of the universe. Have you ever asked yourself where the universe came from? Why everything exists instead of just nothing?


"Nubby" ..if you say that the universe couldn't have just pop out of nothingness and therefore have to had been created

then do the same logic apply to the existence of God ...

if not then could you explain in a brief synopsis rationally why not ...


There must be a fist cause, the cosmological argument asks for anything that BEGINS to exist must have a cause.

double post


God by definition is uncaused, timeless, changeless. Premise #1 calls for everything that begins to exist.

Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 12:03 AM
Points 21,22,23, are solid.

Nubby's photo
Fri 01/23/09 12:00 AM

22. Fact # 1: On the Sunday following his crucifixion, Jesus' tomb was found empty by a group of his women followers. According to Jacob Kremer, an Austrian scholar who has specialized in the study of the resurrection, "By far most scholars hold firmly to the reliability of the Biblical statements about the empty tomb."{14} According to the New Testament critic, D.H. van Daalen, it is extremely difficult to object to the empty tomb on historical grounds; those who deny it do so on the basis of theological or philosophical assumptions.

23. Fact # 2: On separate occasions different individuals and groups saw appearances of Jesus alive after his death. According to the prominent, skeptical German New Testament critic Gerd Ludemann, "It may be taken as historically certain that...the disciples had experiences after Jesus' death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ."{15} These appearances were witnessed not only by believers, but also by unbelievers, skeptics, and even enemies.

24. Fact # 3: The original disciples suddenly came to believe in the resurrection of Jesus despite having every predisposition to the contrary. Jews had no belief in a dying, much less a rising, Messiah, and Jewish beliefs about the afterlife precluded anyone's rising from the dead prior to the end of the world. Luke Johnson, a New Testament scholar at Emory University, muses, "Some sort of powerful, transformative experience is required to generate the sort of movement earliest Christianity was..."{16} N. T. Wright, an eminent British scholar, concludes, "That is why, as an historian, I cannot explain the rise of early Christianity unless Jesus rose again, leaving an empty tomb behind him."{17}


On the first page you asked Abra for his best argument. If you can support the above FACTS with anything historical, other than scripture, one might attempt to argue. Until then, your FACTS are not fact accredited. Arguing over over something invalid is futile attempt to pass time that might be spent learning something more beneficial.




I am using the best liberal and conservative scholarship I can find.

Nubby's photo
Thu 01/22/09 11:58 PM


The argument of a First Cause is logically flawed, where did you study philosophy? You believe in g-d as an individual phenomenological experience from what I can gather. this is how most people come to believe in g-d. Not everyone believes in the Xian g-d.


I agree ...first cause can only apply to that which existence is not questionable ...

God's existence rely on faith and is therefore questionable which is why first cause cannot be applied



Is Premise 1 correct?

Nubby's photo
Thu 01/22/09 11:58 PM

The argument of a First Cause is logically flawed, where did you study philosophy? You believe in g-d as an individual phenomenological experience from what I can gather. this is how most people come to believe in g-d. Not everyone believes in the Xian g-d.


Why is it logically flawed? May be you can explain.

Nubby's photo
Thu 01/22/09 01:04 PM
Give me one question at a time. I want your best. I wont do this for long. Now is your chance.