Dramatic Tablet lends credence to Jesus' existence
-
NO, it's trolling. I'll explain,
in particular, with Jblue, the title I posted, says "lends credence".
Now, go look up those words and respond accordingly.
No, you're a lib, you won't. The article mentions the age old criticism about Jesus...
and
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/credence
"b : credibility 1 <lends credence to the theory>"
I never said "proof" anything. But it lends itself to establishing, perhaps, credibility to some folks
that otherwise saw no evidence at all. And complaining that the tablet didn't SAY JESUS....
what other religious figure in history sacrificed himself, arose again, to die for our sins ?
so, the trolling part of Jblu's thread, was strawman putting issues where there were none, so as to
have a smartass, contrary reply. Or, Jblu has a learning disability, as in reading comprehension -
which is tough, and I am not making fun of him about that. But, I believe it was a matter of trolling.
Lending some validity, to Jesus's existence and deity, is not absolute proof of anything.
It's a significant, blockbuster ...small part of a proof, with all the rest of the proof missing.
And now you're resorting to calling me mentally handicapped or having a learning disability Cal? Really? I guess my critique must've really offended your apparently delicate sensibilities in order for you to blatenly slander me. How very DieHard-ish of you....what other religious figure in history sacrificed himself, arose again, to die for our sins ?
Mithra: an ancient Zoroastrian deity, predating Jesus by roughly two and a half thousand years. Stories and miracles attributed to Mitra include:
- being born on December 25 to the virgin Anahita, wrapped in swaddling clothes, and being placed into a manger attended to by shepherds;
- had 12 disciples, and was considered a great teacher who performed miracles, had his own form of a Eucharist/Lord's Supper, and performed baptisms;
- sacrificed himself for world peace, and was resurrected after three days, later ascending to heaven.
- identified with many euphemisms, including "the messiah", "the redeemer", "the savior", "the good Shepard", "the way, the truth, and the light",
- considered to be omniscient
- had a sacred "Lord's Day" - Sunday
- known as both a "Lion" and a "Lamb" http://www.truthbeknown.com/mithra.htm
The Egyptian Gods Horus and Osiris, the Hindu God Krishna, and the Buddha all have very similar aspects to the Jesus story, and predate it by many centuries. It is believed by many legitimate scholars that many of the stories of Jesus were simply retellings of far older and more established mythologies by early Christians in an attempt to legitimize their own religion
-
I think what the OP was suggesting by the title of his article is that some people in the biblical study field think that the vague mentioning of a nameless, suffering Messiah is referring to the biblical idea of Jesus as a messiah sent to suffer for people's sins, and that this tablet constitutes as evidence for not just the historical existence of Jesus, but as the existence of Jesus in a biblical sense, which is to say, a Jesus of divine origin. From the article Cal first posted:
An author and Bible expert who has spent a great deal of time analyzing recent archaeological discoveries said that he has been blown away by an ancient tablet that was discovered back in 2000 one that has caused an earthquake in the biblical studies field.
The one [find] that really blew me away was the Gabriel Revelation a first century stone tablet that was discovered around the year 2000 on the other side of the Jordan River, author Robert J. Hutchinson toldThe Church Boys podcast.
"Hutchinson, who describes this find among many others in his new book, Searching for Jesus: New Discoveries in the Quest for Jesus of Nazareth and How They Confirm the Gospel Accounts,...
What a fucking punk you are.
What a fucking punk you are.
And what an insolent and painfully boring dullard you are; you are either unwilling or incapable of engaging anyone in a rational debate, so you try to hide your lack of mental fortitude between crude insults. Tsk tsk.
-
What a fucking punk you are.
And what an insolent and painfully boring dullard you are; you are either unwilling or incapable of engaging anyone in a rational debate, so you try to hide your lack of mental fortitude between crude insults. Tsk tsk.
-
even if it is against you're hypothesis. Jblows**********************************************************A. It's "your". "...your hypothesis" "you're" is a contraction of "you are"as in "you are being an idiot, constantly making points for the articlethat weren't made, so you can dispute them.B. Stick that in your "scientific method"
-
Well, Jblu, I was observing your idea that it is okay to put points in your posts that
you say you got from the article, but is not in the article.
I simply gave you a few options to help explain why you do that.
Again, the monumental message is, it, if valid and dated correctly, completely negates
the critics who have been claiming that the stories about Jesus were made up after,
in some kind of "cya", or whatever.
It does prove them wrong to have been claiming that. Nobody anywhere is claiming it proves Jesus
existed and was the Son of God. Nobody.
Interesting - you claim to be a scientist, and know the scientific method...just like woodypeckerhead.
And you both misuse words. Amazing.
-
Fuck science. Jesus #1
-
It helps show a similar story existed before the events of the Bible. It could very easily just mean the authors of the bible already had some folk stories they could base their stories on
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
science this, woodypeckerhead:'
'https://www.quantamagazine.org/20140122-a-new-physics-theory-of-life/
-
science this, woodypeckerhead:'
'https://www.quantamagazine.org/20140122-a-new-physics-theory-of-life/
science this, woodypeckerhead:'
'https://www.quantamagazine.org/20140122-a-new-physics-theory-of-life/
please just keep this to one thread. you don't need to embarrass yourself any more
-
Tell us your justification for disagreeing. I'm sure we'd all like an explanation.
You don't get away with just saying "ha..you're wrong, and all the articles don't prove you right".
Explain your phoney "point" - but I'm thinkin the only point you have, is your dimwitted beak.
-
Again, keep that in one thread. I've made my point multiple times. You've posted articles that make my point. It is very simple. Just keep it over there
-
science this, woodypeckerhead:'
'https://www.quantamagazine.org/20140122-a-new-physics-theory-of-life/
science this, woodypeckerhead:'
'https://www.quantamagazine.org/20140122-a-new-physics-theory-of-life/
That was actually pretty interesting Cal, not sure what that has to do with this thread but it's fascinating nonetheless. I like dudes who strike outside the box, and that cat is one of em. My old mans a physicist i'm gonna print that out and show him that, he loves that stuff and can actually relate to it better than I can.
-
even if it is against you're hypothesis. Jblows**********************************************************A. It's "your". "...your hypothesis" "you're" is a contraction of "you are"as in "you are being an idiot, constantly making points for the articlethat weren't made, so you can dispute them.B. Stick that in your "scientific method"
even if it is against you're hypothesis. Jblows**********************************************************A. It's "your". "...your hypothesis" "you're" is a contraction of "you are"as in "you are being an idiot, constantly making points for the articlethat weren't made, so you can dispute them.Tell us your justification for disagreeing. I'm sure we'd all like an explanation.
You don't get away with just saying "ha..you're wrong, and all the articles don't prove you right".
Explain your phoney "point" - but I'm thinkin the only point you have, is your dimwitted beak.
Well, since you wanted to go down the whole "Grammar-SS" path:
I'm thinking that "thinkin" is an improper contraction of the word "thinking", as in something that you seem to do very little of before you post on here.
Also, there is no need for a comma to punctuate your sentence fragment: "but I'm thinkin the only point you have, is your dimwitted beak."
But other than that, I hope everything is going well for you in Grammatikland.
-
Nazi grammar cat? I like, I very like.
-
I'm thinking that "thinkin" is an improper contraction of the word "thinking", as in something that you seem to do very little of before you post on here.
Also, there is no need for a comma to punctuate your sentence fragment: "but I'm thinkin the only point you have, is your dimwitted beak." Jblu
******************************
I have fun saying "thinkin"...because I say it that way all the time. It doesn't lend itself to miscommunication,
and I just spell as I say it. It's improper, but not a mistake. See the difference?
And, there may be no need for the comma.... but it is optional, and such, it is valid.
It is used as an introductory element divider. It is not required, but optional, and as a rule,
you should probably use it to preclude any miscommunication.
Use a comma + a little conjunction (and, but, for, nor, yet, or, so) to connect two independent clauses, as in "He hit the ball well, but he ran toward third base."
Contending that the coordinating conjunction is adequate separation, some writers will leave out the comma in a sentence with short, balanced independent clauses (such as we see in the example just given). If there is ever any doubt, however, use the comma, as it is always correct in this situation.
http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/GRAMMAR/commas.htm
Use a comma to set off introductory elements, as in "Running toward third base, he suddenly realized how stupid he looked."
It is permissible to omit the comma after a brief introductory element if the omission does not result in confusion or hesitancy in reading. If there is ever any doubt, use the comma, as it is always correct. If you would like some additional guidelines on using a comma after introductory elements, click HERE.
An absolute phrase is always treated as a parenthetical element, as is an interjection.
-
Their years of training now forgotten, the soldiers broke ranks.
-
Their years of training now forgotten, the soldiers broke ranks.
-
I'm thinkin that you are the one who wasn't thinkin, JBlu.
-
Yep, that comma is invalid, neither of the points you posted validate it. It didn't come after a conjunction (point two), and the introductory element is "I'm thinkin" or "I'm thinkin the only point you have" - it doesn't make sense to have it after the "is." For example, you could get by with "I'm thinkin the only car you have, is red" is just about fine, though the comma is unnecessary and makes for bad reading; whereas "I'm thinkin the only car you have is, red" just is plain wrong.
I'm not normally a grammar nazi (<-introductory element/conjunction->), but if you're going to call someone out on it you'd better be damn perfect yourself (conjunction->), and you're not.
I'm not perfect either, by the way, I'm fully aware of that.
-
You're wrong, I even bolded and colored the word "but" the same.
I just put it at the beginning, not the end of the phrase. It's still there.
"...but I'm thinkin the only point you have, is your dimwitted beak."
"He hit the ball well, but he ran toward third base."
as a sentence by itself, I would have said, "You have a dimwtted beak, but that is the only point you have"...
but it was only part of the sentence.
Go back and read, Chris. Click on the link "Absolute Phrase".... and you'll find this:
"Usually (but not always, as we shall see), an absolute phrase (also called a nominative absolute) is a group of words consisting of a noun or pronoun and a participle as well as any related modifiers. "
Now, not only have I used "but" like in the first example, but I have
"...but I'm thinkin the only point you have, is your dimwitted beak."
"point" = noun...... "you" = pronoun............................. "dimwitted" = adjective modifier "beak" = "noun"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participle
In the first sentence interesting is used as a true participle; it acts as a verb, taking the object him, and forming the participial phrase interesting him at the moment, which then serves as an adjective phrasemodifying the noun subject. However, in the second sentence interesting has become a pure adjective; it stands in an adjective's typical position before the noun, it can no longer take an object, and it could be accompanied by typical adjective modifiers such as very or quite (or in this case the prefix un-).
Similar examples are "interested people", "a frightened rabbit", "fallen leaves", "meat-eating animals".
See? "dimwitted beak".
-
Yep. that comma is valid.
-
It helps show a similar story existed before the events of the Bible. It could very easily just mean the authors of the bible already had some folk stories they could base their stories on
It helps show a similar story existed before the events of the Bible. It could very easily just mean the authors of the bible already had some folk stories they could base their stories on
You know, it is kind of odd how, after this was brought up, the conversation suddenly was steered away towards interpretations of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and proper grammatical sentence structures...
"That which can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence”. - Christopher Hitchens "The universe is under no obligation to make sense to you". - Neil deGrasse Tyson
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login