Does anyone know why Punisher1984 was banned yesterday?

[fool]

Moving a stone isn't that difficult, they had to get it there some how right?

 

[Nick M]

Fool, what were the guards doing while the disciples stole the body? Sleeping? So, who rolled it away.

 

[fool]

Fool, what were the guards doing while the disciples stole the body? Sleeping? So, who rolled it away.

Union Masons, on double time.

 

[Count Iblis]

Which begs the question, who rolled away the stone. I left out what the Bible says happened, because you don't believe it. The historian Josephus reported on these events, as I have shown you. The missing piece is up to you. Becareful with Josephus, there are interpolations in his writing. They are kind of obvious to people that study his writing. To me that sounds like it was done to discredit his writing.

Now answer the million dollar question with some sort of evidence.

You do realize that the gospels are fictional right? :duh:

 

[Delmar]

You can get banned around here for disagreeing with a moderator's opinion.

You do realize that the gospels are fictional right? :duh:

So I guess you are expecting to be banned?

 

[Frank Ernest]

Wow! Another one bit the ToL dust.

Merry Christmas, Del! May you, Mrs. Delmar, and the Delmarlets continue in the blessings and mercies of our Holy Saviour.

 

[Stuu]

Which begs the question, who rolled away the stone. I left out what the Bible says happened, because you don't believe it. The historian Josephus reported on these events, as I have shown you. The missing piece is up to you. Becareful with Josephus, there are interpolations in his writing. They are kind of obvious to people that study his writing. To me that sounds like it was done to discredit his writing.

Now answer the million dollar question with some sort of evidence.

Would you care to show us where in Josephus' writing he 'reported on' any details of the alleged resurrection of this alleged Jesus?

Stuart

 

[fdpatterson]

Does my thinking that God/Jesus/Holy Spirit are not real qualify as blasphemy enough to be banned? How does an atheist contribue to this forum if the very essence of their thinking might be considered blasphemious?

I think that is what they are getting at. Since Christianity, with it's trinity and Man-God-Hero myth as the core of it's foundation, is by definition a herasey towards G-d, any truth spoken about it is going to be considered blasphemy.

Maybe I'm wrong, we'll see what happens to this post. :sigh:

 

[Shai Gar]

I'd say argue what you will but keep your insults, personal attacks, and other general disrespect limited to people and not the sacrosanct and you should be just fine :thumb:

No one is going to ban you for being an atheist and espousing atheist positions. That said, calling the apostle Paul an "old Roman cult leader" and using the word "damn" in an inappropriate way all in the same sentence may be overstepping the lines of propriety, as Punisher recently learned.

Uhhh, he was...

He was old
He was Roman
He was a cult leader.

That's what christianity was in its early years. It didn't become a real religion until it was taken on as the roman state religion.

Perhaps you're misunderstanding the nature of a cult.

 

[fdpatterson]

Uhhh, he was... He was old He was Roman He was a cult leader. That's what christianity was in its early years. It didn't become a real religion until it was taken on as the roman state religion. Perhaps you're misunderstanding the nature of a cult.

Not having an understanding of the word cult, in its classical sense, which arises out of the Latin "cultus", but in its modern day sense of being a group of weirdos, is certainly not unusual for Christian fundamentalism. As James Barr said in his 1977 classic, "Fundamentalism”, ISBN 0664241913, "No one prepares themselves to be a fundamentalist theologian as there just isn't any job like that which exists".

Perhaps some definition are in order at this point.

Cult  –noun

1.a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2.an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, esp. as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.
3.the object of such devotion.
4.a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5.Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
6.a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.
7.the members of such a religion or sect.
8.any system for treating human sickness that originated by a person usually claiming to have sole insight into the nature of disease, and that employs methods regarded as unorthodox or unscientific. –adjective
9.of or pertaining to a cult.
10. of, for, or attracting a small group of devotees: a cult movie.

Origin: 1610–20; < L cultus habitation, tilling, refinement, worship, equiv. to cul-, var. s. of colere to inhabit, till, worship + -tus suffix of v. action

Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cult

This is not the best definition I have ever seen, but hey it was easy to cut and paste. We are doing pretty good up until we get to points 6-10 which is pretty much the modern day definition of the word.

I think this potentially came about in the 1980's when we were having all these upstart, very bizarre religions come about, which evangelicals seized on to demonstrate their point that the country was under the influence of Satan, and people were upset that their children were being taken in by them and everyone was hiring de-programs to basically kidnap their children, though they were the age of majority, and de-program them, (i.e. program them to the parents preferred cult), and so on and so forth.

The leading group in this endeavor was a group called Cult Awareness Network, (CAN for short), which was an evangelical front. Interestingly enough though this was a group that in 1984 or 85 you could actually go to an Internet file server they had, (when everything was still command line driven long before Marc Anderson came along with his HTML web browser), and get information files about CAN and cults and so on.

One of the files I downloaded from them was something like "10 Signs That You are in a Cult" which after perusing it for sometime could be applied to pretty much any religion. It seemed the main difference, as CAN defined it, between a cult and a bona-fide religion was size. (If you have 5 million adherents and you're Christian, you are a religion. If you have a couple of thousand adherents, Christian or not, you're a cult). So it is no surprise that Christian fundamentalist in America are light years ahead of liberals in utilizing technology in quickly and widely disseminating their propaganda, er, I mean point-of-view (POV).

It is also interesting that the main impetus for bringing about CAN, and their army of de-programmers, (available for a reasonable fee of course) was the church run by Rev. Sun Myung Moon, or the Moonies as they were called back then, and all the mass weddings he was doing and so on and so forth. Yes, this was a real threat to America and her freedoms and values and so forth and so on much like all the issues put forth by fundamentalist today.

But a funny thing happened on the way to the forum. Seems Mr. Mooney continued to grow his cult and got a study cash flow going, bought several newspapers, and started making sizable donations to the Republican Party, and viola, he is no longer a cult leader be instead is a respected member of society and an upstanding conservative. However, as far as I am aware his theology is still pretty much the same. He just has nicer buildings today. We should view this development in the context of Christian truth and principles.

But anyway, back to the main topic, the etymology of cult. As any student who actually attended his first day of Hermeneutics 101 should be able to tell you, the first thing one does when dissecting and diagraming scripture is to place it in its correct historical context. The same is true of writings of the time period and in all mythological literature of antiquity. Pretty much all religions are referred to as the cult of this or the cult of that and so on in this context.

Christianity is no different as there were many cults during the first couple of centuries of the common era(CE), particularly messianic cults of which Christianity was just one. Many scholars of history, Biblical studies and anthropology have stated that if Christianity had not become the state religion of the Roman empire they would have most likely joined the other cults of the time in the dust bin of history. However, as interesting of a point as that is, it is still however, a moot point.

Just one more interesting item on this topic, the following entry from Dictionary.com

cult**
1617, "worship," also "a particular form of worship," from Fr.*culte,from L.*cultus*"care, cultivation, worship," originally "tended, cultivated," pp. of*colere*"to till" (see*colony). Rare after 17c.; revived mid-19c. with reference to ancient or primitive rituals. Meaning "devotion to a person or thing" is from 1829.

The basic root of cult is where such words as cultivate, (you know bringing in the sheaves) cull, ect, ect, springs from of which the New Testament is full of agrarian similes that I am sure pull forth into the common day word of evangelise. But I’m just not going to trace that at this moment as I have real work I need to get back to.

Cheers

 

[Count Iblis]

So I guess you are expecting to be banned?

I always expect to be banned when I exercise my free speech rights on a Christian forum. It's the nature of Christians and Christianity. When I get banned for saying this it will prove my point. <shrug>

 

[The Reverent One]

Would you care to show us where in Josephus' writing he 'reported on' any details of the alleged resurrection of this alleged Jesus?

Stuart

Hello Stuart! :wave:


Allow me to answer your question if I may.
Flavius Josephus did write about Jesus and his resurrection in his book entitled, Jewish Antiquities.

Specifically Chapter 3, paragraph 3 of Book 18 which says,

3. (63) Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. (64) And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross [2], those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day [3], as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named for him, are not extinct at this day.

And now to you Stuu,

"You will seek me and you will find me when you seek me with all your heart." Jeremiah 29:13 NIV

"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened." Matthew 7:7-8 NIV

Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me. Revelation 3:20 NIV

Peace and God bless,
David

 

[fdpatterson]

I always expect to be banned when I exercise my free speech rights on a Christian forum. It's the nature of Christians and Christianity. When I get banned for saying this it will prove my point. <shrug>

You've got that right? Dissent usually isn't meet with a lot of approval, truth, even less.

 

[The Berean]

I always expect to be banned when I exercise my free speech rights on a Christian forum. It's the nature of Christians and Christianity. When I get banned for saying this it will prove my point. <shrug>

You have "free speech rights" on a privately owned forum? You are a guest, as we all are, on Knight's private forum. He allows you to post on TOL. He can ban any of us for any reason he chooses since TOL is his property. Think of it this way. Can you go to Knight's home and "exercise" your free speech rights without his consent?

 

[Delmar]

I always expect to be banned when I exercise my free speech rights on a Christian forum. It's the nature of Christians and Christianity. When I get banned for saying this it will prove my point. <shrug>

:yawn:

 

[Delmar]

I think that is what they are getting at. Since Christianity, with it's trinity and Man-God-Hero myth as the core of it's foundation, is by definition a herasey towards G-d, any truth spoken about it is going to be considered blasphemy.

Maybe I'm wrong, we'll see what happens to this post. :sigh:

What did you expect to happen?

You've got that right? Dissent usually isn't meet with a lot of approval, truth, even less.

It that is the way you feel about us, you could exercise your freedom to go away, on your own,I guess.

 

[MacDiarmaid]

I always expect to be banned when I exercise my free speech rights on a Christian forum. It's the nature of Christians and Christianity. When I get banned for saying this it will prove my point. <shrug>

That being said, let me pose you this; Would you go to a Jewish forum and deny the Shoah? Would you tell Jews to "get over" thousands of years of persecution? Would you tell racist, off-color jokes? (What do Jews and Pizzas have in common? Both bake good in ovens...heard that one enough from the guidos growing up)

Point is, and my esteemed engineering colleague, the Berean pointed out, you are on a private forum. Also there is no free speech on the net. In case you don't know, China and Iran also use it.

 

[HappyCetacean]

Wow, I did not realize this thread was still alive and active. It is interesting to go back and read some of my original posts when I was a TOL n00b.

 

[bucksplasher]

Strings

Strings

never die although some are ended prematurely. tWINs

 

[BabyChristian]

:think:

Why would anyone want to deny Christ?

I guess if you had good reasons for denying Christ and were willing to share them in a constructive and thoughtful way then you wouldn't likely be banned for saying He was never alive.

But why would you want to deny Christ?

For many it would interfere with their chosen life-styles, I believe. Or at least it should.

Oh wow, I resurrected this dead thread I see.