Court Case over the Existence of Christ

Beyond the Grave · **Posted:** Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:21 am

Mr.KISS wrote:

Quote:

if my calculations are correct, this case may be over before june 6th

What calculations would those be?

There are a few Biblical Scholars out there that believe that when we switched to the Gergorian Calender that is is off by 6 and a half years. Which would place the actual start to the millenium on June 6, 2006, or 06/06/06.

I don't buy into it, but there is a group out there that does. They believe that date is the start of the Apocolypse.

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest · **Posted:** Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:30 am

Beyond the Grave wrote:

Mr.KISS wrote:

Quote:

if my calculations are correct, this case may be over before june 6th

What calculations would those be?

There are a few Biblical Scholars out there that believe that when we switched to the Gergorian Calender that is is off by 6 and a half years. Which would place the actual start to the millenium on June 6, 2006, or 06/06/06.

I don't buy into it, but there is a group out there that does. They believe that date is the start of the Apocolypse.

Exactly BTG, thanks, and if i am right, it should end September 9, 2009

and my calculations of it being over by then is because this seems like a really pointless lawsuit, just to say to that guy "Ha ha ha ha ha ha, you lost!"

Mr.KISS · **Posted:** Tue Jan 10, 2006 4:50 am

No, I meant like...How do you figure that's when the case will be over?

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest · **Posted:** Tue Jan 10, 2006 4:56 am

Mr.KISS wrote:

No, I meant like...How do you figure that's when the case will be over?

it should be over before that because its such a dumb case that no court, not even in italy would try.

seamusz · **Posted:** Tue Jan 10, 2006 4:15 pm

Cobalt wrote:

seamusz wrote:

There is more documentation of the existance of Christ than any other person of his time period.

clearly not the case. pretty much all the major players in the Jesus story (Pilate, Herod, Caiaphas the High Priest, several of the members of the Sanhedrin, etc) are far more well documented than Jesus. there are a few references -- beyond the Christian Bible -- to someone who could have been Jesus, but they're far from airtight.

But as a historical record, the Bible cannot be discounted, not to mention numberless other independent religious writings, all of which identify Jesus of Nazareth as an actual person, that are not included in the cannon of the Bible. Just because they are religious in nature, doesn't make them void as a historical record.

Kittie Rose · **Joined:** Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:24 pm **Posts:** 544

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest wrote:

oi..... if this case is in favor of that atheist guy, then the Second Coming of Jesus is at hand. if my calculations are correct, this case may be over before june 6th, and if it is won by the atheist, then on that day i mentiond, it might happen.

Uhh... k...

StrongRad · **Posted:** Tue Jan 10, 2006 5:20 pm

yeah, I don't think that's gonna happen, yet.

We don't have an antichrist yet, at least not one that fits the description of antichrist, as I've heard it.

Cobalt · **Joined:** Wed Sep 21, 2005 7:33 pm **Posts:** 269

seamusz wrote:

But as a historical record, the Bible cannot be discounted, not to mention numberless other independent religious writings, all of which identify Jesus of Nazareth as an actual person, that are not included in the cannon of the Bible. Just because they are religious in nature, doesn't make them void as a historical record.

not discounted, but it can't be considered absolutely accurate without alternate sources of evidence, either. it's possible that every event described in the Bible could be true, but without independent verification there's no way to rely on it as fact in a historical sense.

seamusz · **Posted:** Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:00 pm

Cobalt wrote:

seamusz wrote:

But as a historical record, the Bible cannot be discounted, not to mention numberless other independent religious writings, all of which identify Jesus of Nazareth as an actual person, that are not included in the cannon of the Bible. Just because they are religious in nature, doesn't make them void as a historical record.

not discounted, but it can't be considered absolutely accurate without alternate sources of evidence, either. it's possible that every event described in the Bible could be true, but without independent verification there's no way to rely on it as fact in a historical sense.

OK, I agree that accuracy may be in question, but in the case of establishing an identity or an existance of a person, if you have hundreds of independent documents referring to a particular individual, even if the events are in question because of a bias in the recorders account, the record is non the less just as reliable as any other record. You mentioned that there are others more established, as to their existance, than Christ. I would say that this is absolutely false, unless you strike out all records that refer to Jesus in other than a historical fashion.

Kittie Rose · **Joined:** Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:24 pm **Posts:** 544

They should have a case over the existence of Chuck Norris.

They'd vote "guilty".

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest · **Posted:** Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:14 pm

StrongRad wrote:

We don't have an antichrist yet, at least not one that fits the description of antichrist, as I've heard it.

whos to say that there hsnt been a baby born of the Antichrist? or, whos to say that the baby born on that day Wont be the antichrist?

StrongRad · **Posted:** Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:17 pm

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest wrote:

StrongRad wrote:

We don't have an antichrist yet, at least not one that fits the description of antichrist, as I've heard it.

whos to say that there hsnt been a baby born of the Antichrist? or, whos to say that the baby born on that day Wont be the antichrist?

Nobody...

but, the world doesn't end the day the antichrist is born, either..

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest · **Posted:** Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:44 pm

StrongRad wrote:

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest wrote:

StrongRad wrote:

We don't have an antichrist yet, at least not one that fits the description of antichrist, as I've heard it.

whos to say that there hsnt been a baby born of the Antichrist? or, whos to say that the baby born on that day Wont be the antichrist?

Nobody...

but, the world doesn't end the day the antichrist is born, either..

Exactly, i belive that the Start of the End of the world is on June 6, 2006 and will end on September 9, 2009.

Beyond the Grave · **Posted:** Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:47 pm

Alright, this is way overdue for a major TOASTPAINT.

I think this guy is nuts. I do think this will be shot down, before it ever gets to court.

Cobalt · **Joined:** Wed Sep 21, 2005 7:33 pm **Posts:** 269

seamusz wrote:

OK, I agree that accuracy may be in question, but in the case of establishing an identity or an existance of a person, if you have hundreds of independent documents referring to a particular individual, even if the events are in question because of a bias in the recorders account, the record is non the less just as reliable as any other record. You mentioned that there are others more established, as to their existance, than Christ. I would say that this is absolutely false, unless you strike out all records that refer to Jesus in other than a historical fashion.

the problem is that these "hundreds of independent documents referring to a particular individual" is that all of these documents are based on a couple of earlier documents written by people who weren't there in the first place. you'd need documents that were contemporaneous with the events, and also had no obvious agenda. and those pretty much don't exist.

seamusz · **Posted:** Wed Jan 11, 2006 4:55 pm

Cobalt wrote:

the problem is that these "hundreds of independent documents referring to a particular individual" is that all of these documents are based on a couple of earlier documents written by people who weren't there in the first place. you'd need documents that were contemporaneous with the events, and also had no obvious agenda. and those pretty much don't exist.

I don't think that this is really the case. There are many documents that are independent of any other documents. How many history books or historical accounts are written by accual obsevants of the events? Almost all of them are written be people who have the information second hand. There is more value in a first hand account, but there is still a lot of value in these other accounts.

As far as agendas go, all history books are written with a bias or agenda. The agenda of these records are not to estblish the existance of Jesus Christ, but to establish his purpose and identity.

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest · **Posted:** Sat Jan 14, 2006 1:06 am

Say, Didnt the Old Testament say to only worship god, Yahweh? I.E. God? so its like, mentioned in The brick testament, which is just a litteral translation of the bible with legos, that you cant worship Jesus? i know people always go around saying "Praise Jesus!" and all that load, but the bible says not to worship jesus, just Yahweh......

lahimatoa · **Posted:** Sat Jan 14, 2006 1:20 am

Quote:

mentioned in The brick testament, which is just a litteral translation of the bible with legos

This.... is.... the....best.... thing....I've....seen....today.

Awesome!

Kittie Rose · **Joined:** Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:24 pm **Posts:** 544

Someone should do that with Marvel Minimates.

Clan rHrN · **Posted:** Sat Jan 14, 2006 1:59 am

This seems inappropriate.

Jesus does exist, even though he is the only necromancer on Earth or immortal.

NOW LET THIS THREAD DIE!
(It insults me and the Lord jesus Christ. I'M DISGUSTED AT THIS SPAM! ARRGGGLLBLARRGGLLL!!!)

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest · **Posted:** Sat Jan 14, 2006 2:00 am

Listen here, jesus Freak, there are hundreds of other Gods out there that Live and predate the Religion of Christianity and Judaism, so with that said, Jesus Christ may have Exhisted, and with what i stated in my unnoticed post, Jesus Christ, If Worshiped, Will Cause who ever Worshipped him to enter The Level 2 Stage of Hell. so clan, i guess ill be looking down at you From the First Level of Hell, Limbo.

Kittie Rose · **Joined:** Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:24 pm **Posts:** 544

Clan rHrN wrote:

This seems inappropriate.

Jesus does exist, even though he is the only necromancer on Earth or immortal.

NOW LET THIS THREAD DIE!
(It insults me and the Lord jesus Christ. I'M DISGUSTED AT THIS SPAM! ARRGGGLLBLARRGGLLL!!!)

How do you know it insults Jesus, exactly? Do you speak for him?

Clan rHrN · **Posted:** Sat Jan 14, 2006 2:40 am

Kittie Rose wrote:

Clan rHrN wrote:

This seems inappropriate.

Jesus does exist, even though he is the only necromancer on Earth or immortal.

NOW LET THIS THREAD DIE!
(It insults me and the Lord jesus Christ. I'M DISGUSTED AT THIS SPAM! ARRGGGLLBLARRGGLLL!!!)

How do you know it insults Jesus, exactly? Do you speak for him?

I am one of his children, thus yes I am speaking for him and in him.
STOP SPAMMING ARRGGGHHHLLLBBBLLAARRGGGHHHLLLL!
*Does butt-dance to all the posters of this topic*

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest · **Posted:** Sat Jan 14, 2006 2:41 am

Rose, dont try to start anything with clan, Most of Everything you say to him, he wont understand.

Kittie Rose · **Joined:** Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:24 pm **Posts:** 544

Clan rHrN wrote:

Kittie Rose wrote:

Clan rHrN wrote:

This seems inappropriate.

Jesus does exist, even though he is the only necromancer on Earth or immortal.

NOW LET THIS THREAD DIE!
(It insults me and the Lord jesus Christ. I'M DISGUSTED AT THIS SPAM! ARRGGGLLBLARRGGLLL!!!)

How do you know it insults Jesus, exactly? Do you speak for him?

I am one of his children, thus yes I am speaking for him and in him.
STOP SPAMMING ARRGGGHHHLLLBBBLLAARRGGGHHHLLLL!
*Does butt-dance to all the posters of this topic*

Pat Robertson is one of Jesus's children. Do you think he is speaking for Jesus?
Do you think you speak for your biological father too, purely because he's your father?

Exhibit A · **Posted:** Sat Jan 14, 2006 2:43 am

Clan, listen very closely: SHUT UP. Someone saying something against your religion isn't spam, or innapropriate. Everyone has a right to their own opinion. If you think that this topic is innapropriate because it speaks against Christianity, then I hate you more now than I did before, because you are a bigot.

Toastpaint!

COLA: You're correct that only God is worthy of our worship, but you seem to be unaware of an important princple of Christianity (or at least most forms): Jesus is God. God is made up of three parts: The Father, The Son (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit. It's a confusing concept, and not one humans can really comprehend, but that's what we believe.

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest · **Posted:** Sat Jan 14, 2006 4:11 am

you see... thats why i dont like the human animal..... they say one thing and mean another.

Cobalt · **Joined:** Wed Sep 21, 2005 7:33 pm **Posts:** 269

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest wrote:

Say, Didnt the Old Testament say to only worship god...that you cant worship Jesus? i know people always go around saying "Praise Jesus!" and all that load, but the bible says not to worship jesus.

correct, which is why Judaism always regarded Christianity as heretical.

IantheGecko · **Posted:** Sat Jan 14, 2006 11:34 pm

Exhibit A wrote:

You're correct that only God is worthy of our worship, but you seem to be unaware of an important princple of Christianity (or at least most forms): Jesus is God. God is made up of three parts: The Father, The Son (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit. It's a confusing concept, and not one humans can really comprehend, but that's what we believe.

Didymus · **Posted:** Sat Jan 14, 2006 11:34 pm

Choco:

That would only apply if indeed Jesus was merely a man. If indeed he was, as he claimed to be, God Incarnate, then it would only be proper to worship him as God. When the disciples first worshipped him, they did so declaring him Lord and God (John 20:28).

Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

Court Case over the Existence of Christ

Who is online