Raf

First, to DWBH, please, let's keep it about content and not about people. And in that vein...I for one don't care one whit about what TLC might see or think on the matter. I only care about the actual quality of the argument and contribution to the discussion. [The bulk of this post was deleted as soon as I realized it was off topic. The following replaces what I originally wrote. If you saw what I originally wrote: I stand by it. But it's off topic.] Jesus specifically commissioned the 12 to preach the gospel to the gentiles. They didn't do it. THEN Jesus goes to Paul. Seems to me that if the apostles had done what Jesus told them to do, he would not have needed to commission Paul to do something as specific as the very thing he told the 12 to do. That is an explanation that is completely consistent with what the Bible teaches on every level. It does not insert an extraneous subtext of "first Israel, then etc. It's really not even a little complicated. This is what the Bible shows and tells. Why am I the only one quoting Jesus in this conversation? P.S. To TLC: I have twisted NOTHING and I am sick of you LYING about that. You are NOT entitled to LIE about other posters, so STOP LYING. You keep saying that I'm twisting your words when I am merely holding a mirror up to the weaknesses of your arguments. That you should constantly resort to false accusations against me is becoming tiresome. it only shows how little you have to contribute to the dialogue here.

It's amazing some people even need a Bible with their higher reasoning taking precedence over what the d- book actually f-ing says.

It was a number one song. Not by the Beatles, who had long broken up by then [only 3 were alive at most]

It's peppy. that's not a lyric. It's a description of the song.

You have so many relationships in this lifeOnly one or two will lastYou go through all the pain and strifeThen you turn your back and they're gone so fast...Oh, so hold on the ones who really careIn the end they'll be the only ones thereAnd when you get old and start losing your hairCan you tell me who will still care?

I won a wha?

You have so many relationships in this life. Only one or two will last.

I said LESS tragic. Good night everybody! I'm here all week. #NoPolitics

Whether I believe it happened or not is really not the issue. You believe it did, and you STILL deny it, which is hysterical. You asked for a verse where Jesus commissions the 12 to preach the gospel to the gentiles. I showed you a verse where Jesus tells the 12 to preach the gospel to the gentiles. And you're so butthurt about having an atheist point out such an obvious verse that you would rather deny Jesus said it than admit you were wrong. I'm not the one twisting the scripture into a knot to get Jesus to NOT say what the scripture records him saying to conform to my preconceived notions about what happened next.

The five crosses in a cemetery photo was not a depiction of Calvary. Bullinger left that part out. It's really funny how we were taught not to have our doctrine influenced by works of art, only to have a work of art produced in the 18th century presented as evidence of a conspiracy to keep the truth of how many were crucified a secret from the masses!

Ok. Now that THAT's settled. Thanks for playing along, everyone. I started the first countdown thread in 2005, and we lost. I forget what worthy story won, but we were a finalist for our coverage of the busy 2004 hurricane season. We were finalists again the following year, for the busy 2005 hurricane season, but we had no expectation of winning that one (once again Florida was hit by four hurricanes, but one of them was named Katrina, which did a little bit more damage elsewhere -- New Orleans won that year). Since then our paper won its first Pulitzer in 2013 for an entry written by a few specific people. This one was different in that it was a massive undertaking by the entire staff. It just means more to us as a group. Anyway, enough about it. Just, thank you for playing along with the countdown. Maybe we get to do it again next year, for a less tragic reason. Cheers.

not sure drew was in poltergeist

Sorry, got distracted thinking of Jamie Gertz. Damn she's gorgeous. The Lost Boys

Less Than Zero Jamie Gertz

Baby Love Supremes Sally Field. Just kidding. But Baby Love

I'm not really trying to get anyone to change his mind as much as I am trying to expose the embarrassing condescension behind the notion that God did not provide adequate evidence for the resurrection because he didn't want smart people to have an unfair advantage, a proposition that, by the way, can be found nowhere in scripture. Honestly, i would be embarrassed if someone defended my belief system by proclaiming it ran counter to how smart people would interpret the evidence. Nothing in the Bible even hints at the suggestion that objective evidence is the enemy of the gospel. It's only when you recognize the evidence leads to an embarrassing conclusion that people suddenly try to claim there's a natural dichotomy between faith and evidence when it comes to the resurrection. The apostles would be humiliated by the argument, as would Paul and his 500 unnamed witnesses the gospel writers never bothered to document [because it never f-ing happened]. The whole point of the gospels and Acts is to demonstrate that the evidence favors the resurrection. How embarrassed would the writers be to discover, 2000 years later, their defenders admitting the actual evidence is not on their side. Claims are not evidence. The gospels and Acts are not evidence. They are claims that do not stand the test of objective scrutiny.

Romancing the Stone Michael Douglas Disclosure And no, I cannot say with confidence that Kurt Russell was ever in Sally Field.

Oh!!!

???

Kurt Russell Guardians of the Galaxy 2 Zoe Saldana

When we were having the Great SIT Debate, I noticed that I was able to change minds by sticking to the facts and evidence while others resorted to wishful thinking and distortion of expert testimony. That's how I feel about this excuse for a debate. People are reading, and if they are being honest, they know who is presenting evidence and who is presenting excuses. But I appreciate your input, DWBH. You certainly have a point.

The problem is that there were historians who recorded events of the time, and there was no tradition in which Pilate released prisoners because of Passover. The gospels give every indication that this happened every year. History gives no indication that it happened any year. Ever. It is a lie. Pointing to the gospels as evidence for Barabbas is like pointing to the work of Tom Clancy as evidence Jack Ryan was a CIA analyst who became President of the USA after terrorists obliterated Congress. Yes, Congress exists. Yes, The USA exists, and the head of state is called the president. But Jack Ryan, like Barabbas, is a fictional character.

Actually I provided significant facts that lead a reasonable person to conclude that scripture is not "evidence" but a CLAIM. Joseph Smith had three witnesses sign a document swearing that they had seen the golden tablets from which the book of Mormon were translated. They were actual people who signed their documents, unlike the gospel writers, and yet we all rightly discount them as bullsh*t lies. By what standard do you deny their testimony but accept the error-laden testimony of cowards who won't sign their names to what they wrote and were wrong about every claim they made that could be cross-referenced? Like the timing of Jesus' birth, the Quirinian census that required people to register where they did not live, the [non existent] slaughter of the innocents, Pilate's Passover traditions? If I got that many facts wrong I would be fired, not defended as "God-breathed."

point of agreement: you are not fooling anyone

The point is seeking the truth, not merely doctrine. Because if there's a distinction between doctrine and truth, then doctrine is a lie.