The bible itself condems Jesus

1. But you've got no problem telling me how you feel about me? Why is one ok but not the other? Fail.

2. That's no my intention. You have no clue of my intentions. Fail.

3. Head in arse. Innovative. I never heard it before. FAIL.

4. Move on? Like you moving on away from me? Hypocracy = fail.

5. Overall grade: F-

Deity_Slapper

1. There is a difference. If someone is acting stupid and it is obvious, you can tell them. You cant attack an entire religion with an argument as stupid as that. Like I first said, get a good argument together so you seem credible and not like a person with too much time on their hands.

2. You didnt state your intentions in this thread, so I naturally assumed as it is kind of your MO now.

3. :roll:

4. Again :roll:

5. I dont really need to go into why it was stupid to put that.

[QUOTE="Lonelynight"]

Did Jesus had long hair? He could be bold for all we knoiw.

And this letter was written to the Churches at Corinth, so it was probably uncommon for a man to have long hair back than there.

Deity_Slapper

Could be? Probably? So am I just supposed to live in imagination land with the rest of you guys until something better comes along? I'd rather remain firmly grounded in reality, and believe in what I can actually see. When god shows his face, I'll believe in him...but since none of the gods of the past ever did, I doubt the christian god will ever do so either.

Oh I forgot to ask, can you provide evidence that Jesus had long hair?

[QUOTE="Deity_Slapper"][QUOTE="Lonelynight"]

Did Jesus had long hair? He could be bold for all we knoiw.

And this letter was written to the Churches at Corinth, so it was probably uncommon for a man to have long hair back than there.

Lonelynight

Could be? Probably? So am I just supposed to live in imagination land with the rest of you guys until something better comes along? I'd rather remain firmly grounded in reality, and believe in what I can actually see. When god shows his face, I'll believe in him...but since none of the gods of the past ever did, I doubt the christian god will ever do so either.

Oh I forgot to ask, can you provide evidence that Jesus had long hair?

That's irrelevant; he's attacking how Christians like to see Jesus.

I notice that no one seems to have come up with a counter-argument. It's all ad hominem attacks. Take that as a compliment, DS.Funky_Llama

Strangly though the ones that have attack him aren't Christians :o

I notice that no one seems to have come up with a counter-argument. It's all ad hominem attacks. Take that as a compliment, DS.Funky_Llama

I always do. ;)

You think I'm not enjoying getting everyone all hot and bothered over something so stupid? :lol:

They can't even present a reason for why I'm wrong, they just say, "Waaa! Cut it out!! I don't like this!! You're a meanie!!"

If anything, it actually proves how good of a point it was, since they have no responses other than insults. That in itself, speaks volumes about the impact the topic has had.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]I notice that no one seems to have come up with a counter-argument. It's all ad hominem attacks. Take that as a compliment, DS.Lonelynight

Strangly though the ones that have attack him aren't Christians :o

Yeah, I noticed that. I think they're assuming that he's trying to discredit Christianity, when he's actually trying to discredit Christian views of Jesus.

[QUOTE="Deity_Slapper"]

1. But you've got no problem telling me how you feel about me? Why is one ok but not the other? Fail.

2. That's no my intention. You have no clue of my intentions. Fail.

3. Head in arse. Innovative. I never heard it before. FAIL.

4. Move on? Like you moving on away from me? Hypocracy = fail.

5. Overall grade: F-

freek666

1. There is a difference. If someone is acting stupid and it is obvious, you can tell them. You cant attack an entire religion with an argument as stupid as that. Like I first said, get a good argument together so you seem credible and not like a person with too much time on their hands.

2. You didnt state your intentions in this thread, so I naturally assumed as it is kind of your MO now.

3. :roll:

4. Again :roll:

5. I dont really need to go into why it was stupid to put that.

Quite a clever way you have there of disguising that you only have comebacks for two of the points. :roll: just doesn't cut it as a counterargument, I'm afraid.

[QUOTE="Lonelynight"]

Did Jesus had long hair? He could be bold for all we knoiw.

And this letter was written to the Churches at Corinth, so it was probably uncommon for a man to have long hair back than there.

Deity_Slapper

Could be? Probably? So am I just supposed to live in imagination land with the rest of you guys until something better comes along? I'd rather remain firmly grounded in reality, and believe in what I can actually see. When god shows his face, I'll believe in him...but since none of the gods of the past ever did, I doubt the christian god will ever do so either.

Haha, damn right. They're so dependant on what-ifs and yeah-buts and outright speculation, it's laughable.

[QUOTE="Deity_Slapper"][QUOTE="Lonelynight"]

Did Jesus had long hair? He could be bold for all we knoiw.

And this letter was written to the Churches at Corinth, so it was probably uncommon for a man to have long hair back than there.

luke1889

Could be? Probably? So am I just supposed to live in imagination land with the rest of you guys until something better comes along? I'd rather remain firmly grounded in reality, and believe in what I can actually see. When god shows his face, I'll believe in him...but since none of the gods of the past ever did, I doubt the christian god will ever do so either.

Haha, damn right. They're so dependant on what-ifs and yeah-buts and outright speculation, it's laughable.

Oh good, now there's two of us not trying to eviscerate DS.

There is a difference. If someone is acting stupid and it is obvious, you can tell them.

That's why I'm telling you how stupid it is for you to be obsessed with this.

You cant attack an entire religion with an argument as stupid as that. Like I first said, get a good argument together so you seem credible and not like a person with too much time on their hands.

You seem to have a lot of time on your hands, if you feel the need to reply to me over and over. I'm replying as well, yet I'm not the one trying to give someone a hard time forhaving too much time on their hands, as if that would be a bad thing. :roll:

You didnt state your intentions in this thread, so I naturally assumed as it is kind of your MO now.

Big deal. :roll:

I dont really need to go into why it was stupid to put that.

You didn't go into much of anything, actually. Tell me, what was I supposed to learn from all of your complaints? Oh you want to control me and what I do with my free time on these boards? Jeez, are you sure you're not a fundie who always wants his way? Would an atheist realy get this distracted over something he doesn't even believe in?

freek666

[QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Lonelynight"]

Did Jesus had long hair? He could be bold for all we knoiw.

And this letter was written to the Churches at Corinth, so it was probably uncommon for a man to have long hair back than there.

Lonelynight

Jesus has always been portrayed with long hair. There is no good reason to assume otherwise.

And he was always portrayed as white too, but he could have dark skin, since he was born in the middle east.

That doesn't help your side of the argument. If anything, it harms it. It calls Jesus into question even more with all these inaccuracies and false portrayals.

Yeah, I noticed that. I think they're assuming that he's trying to discredit Christianity, when he's actually trying to discredit Christian views of Jesus. Funky_Llama

Haha, damn right. They're so dependant on what-ifs and yeah-buts and outright speculation, it's laughable.

luke1889

Well at least there's 2 of you who aren't completely bonkers. :lol:

Oh good, now there's two of us not trying to eviscerate DS.

Funky_Llama

Yeah, the man makes perfect sense to me. I'll stand by him if need be.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]Yeah, I noticed that. I think they're assuming that he's trying to discredit Christianity, when he's actually trying to discredit Christian views of Jesus. Deity_Slapper

Haha, damn right. They're so dependant on what-ifs and yeah-buts and outright speculation, it's laughable.

luke1889

Well at least there's 2 of you who aren't completely bonkers. :lol:

Yep. :lol:

[QUOTE="Lonelynight"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Lonelynight"]

Did Jesus had long hair? He could be bold for all we knoiw.

And this letter was written to the Churches at Corinth, so it was probably uncommon for a man to have long hair back than there.

luke1889

Jesus has always been portrayed with long hair. There is no good reason to assume otherwise.

And he was always portrayed as white too, but he could have dark skin, since he was born in the middle east.

That doesn't help your side of the argument. If anything, it harms it. It calls Jesus into question even more with all these inaccuracies and false portrayals.

What does it matter how he was potrayed anyway?

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

Oh good, now there's two of us not trying to eviscerate DS.

luke1889

Yeah, the man makes perfect sense to me. I'll stand by him if need be.

Thanks bro. It's good to know there's still some people with brains AND guts left in this confused world. Seems like our numbers keep thinning out more and more with each passing day. I'm starting to get scared at the thought of what will be left in a decade or two...

[QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

Oh good, now there's two of us not trying to eviscerate DS.

Deity_Slapper

Yeah, the man makes perfect sense to me. I'll stand by him if need be.

Thanks bro. It's good to know there's still some people with brains AND guts left in this confused world. Seems like our numbers keep thinning out more and more with each passing day. I'm starting to get scared at the thought of what will be left in a decade or two...

Heh... yup. I'm reading Christopher Hitchens' book, God is Not Great. If anything could make me lose what little faith I have left in humanity, it's that. Or the Noah's Ark thread.

OK, first off, your point makes sense, even if your thread title was shock tactics.

I fully applaud you for the fact that you have unearthed this.

But it doesnt change anything except a few pictures. And not even that, as everyone will assume 'Oh, it's just a sentence, cant work against dozens of pictures'.

Even if you win, you dont change anything. And, in all likelihood, you wont win.

Out of curiosity, why bother?

And no, there were no hidden insults or veiled references in thaty post, sucks to you if you find them.

Excuse me? You know how Jesus wore his hair how?

OK, first off, your point makes sense, even if your thread title was shock tactics.

I fully applaud you for the fact that you have unearthed this.

But it doesnt change anything except a few pictures. And not even that, as everyone will assume 'Oh, it's just a sentence, cant work against dozens of pictures'.

Even if you win, you dont change anything. And, in all likelihood, you wont win.

Out of curiosity, why bother?

And no, there were no hidden insults or veiled references in thaty post, sucks to you if you find them.

atejas

It shows Christian ignorance of what their 'saviour' looks like.

I don't see why opposition to religion has to be purely through bold arguments attacking religion as a whole; small points like this can be effective too.

Excuse me? You know how Jesus wore his hair how?

LJS9502_basic

The same way that you know that god is real.

I saw it in the pictures! I heard the stories! I did! I really did!

Sorry deity_slapper but this thread is the atheist equivalent of a theist posting pascal's wager and acting like he did something significant.domatron23

Except that Pascal's Wager is flawed and this isn't.

[QUOTE="atejas"]

OK, first off, your point makes sense, even if your thread title was shock tactics.

I fully applaud you for the fact that you have unearthed this.

But it doesnt change anything except a few pictures. And not even that, as everyone will assume 'Oh, it's just a sentence, cant work against dozens of pictures'.

Even if you win, you dont change anything. And, in all likelihood, you wont win.

Out of curiosity, why bother?

And no, there were no hidden insults or veiled references in thaty post, sucks to you if you find them.

Funky_Llama

It shows Christian ignorance of what their 'saviour' looks like.

I don't see why opposition to religion has to be purely through bold arguments attacking religion as a whole; small points like this can be effective too.

Sorry deity_slapper but this thread is the atheist equivalent of a theist posting pascal's wager and acting like he did something significant.domatron23

Oh come on, you know the point is valid...even some have put their egos aside to give me credit...

Comparing my point to Pascal's Wager is an insult, actually. :P

But I didn't act as if anything significant occured...I just like to stir the pot every once in a while (when I'm not smoking it). I don't think anyone will change religions, or lose their religion, overnight. Don't worry.

Sorry deity_slapper but this thread is the atheist equivalent of a theist posting pascal's wager and acting like he did something significant.domatron23

[QUOTE="domatron23"]Sorry deity_slapper but this thread is the atheist equivalent of a theist posting pascal's wager and acting like he did something significant.Funky_Llama

Except that Pascal's Wager is flawed and this isn't.

[QUOTE="domatron23"]Sorry deity_slapper but this thread is the atheist equivalent of a theist posting pascal's wager and acting like he did something significant.Deity_Slapper

Oh come on, you know the point is valid...even some have put their egos aside to give me credit...

Comparing my point to Pascal's Wager is an insult, actually. :P

But I didn't act as if anything significant occured...I just like to stir the pot every once in a while (when I'm not smoking it). I don't think anyone will change religions, or lose their religion, overnight. Don't worry.

Wait, did you just admit to trolling?

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="domatron23"]Sorry deity_slapper but this thread is the atheist equivalent of a theist posting pascal's wager and acting like he did something significant.LJS9502_basic

Except that Pascal's Wager is flawed and this isn't.

How?

Actually as far as attacking religion goes...this is by far the worst attempt. You do realize that since Jesus lived in at a time without cameras and wasn't painted that people merely put their own spin on how He looked. It certainly doesn't disprove anything that artists of the day gave him long hair. :lol:LJS9502_basic

You just blew it, LJ.

So many times when a christian tries to give "proof" that everything that happened in the bible is true, they will say something like, "so many people were there, and it was documented. Of course there weren't cameras, but I know the records that they kept are true. I know it in my heart. You just have to believe."

Well, obviously, the portrayal of Jesus having long hair must have come from the same records. It must have...unless of course, christians just like to add their own personal touches to stories they spread, which of course instantly destroys it's credibility. Kinda like the whole Adam and Eve having belly buttons thing, remember? That was huge mistake overlooked by the church as well. They should have never let those paintings out into circulation, if it was supposed to be an accurate representaion of "the first human beings."

Winkity wink. ;)

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Actually as far as attacking religion goes...this is by far the worst attempt. You do realize that since Jesus lived in at a time without cameras and wasn't painted that people merely put their own spin on how He looked. It certainly doesn't disprove anything that artists of the day gave him long hair. :lol:Deity_Slapper

You just blew it, LJ.

So many times when a christian tries to give "proof" that everything that happened in the bible is true, they will say something like, "so many people were there, and it was documented. Of course there weren't cameras, but I know the records that they kept are true. I know it in my heart. You just have to believe."

Well, obviously, the portrayal of Jesus having long hair must have come from the same records. It must have...unless of course, christians just like to add their own personal touches to stories they spread, which of course instantly destroys it's credibility. Kinda like the whole Adam and Eve having belly buttons thing, remember? That was huge mistake overlooked by the church as well. They should have never let those paintings out into circulation, if it was supposed to be an accurate representaion of "the first human beings."

Winkity wink. ;)

[QUOTE="Deity_Slapper"]

[QUOTE="domatron23"]Sorry deity_slapper but this thread is the atheist equivalent of a theist posting pascal's wager and acting like he did something significant.atejas

Oh come on, you know the point is valid...even some have put their egos aside to give me credit...

Comparing my point to Pascal's Wager is an insult, actually. :P

But I didn't act as if anything significant occured...I just like to stir the pot every once in a while (when I'm not smoking it). I don't think anyone will change religions, or lose their religion, overnight. Don't worry.

Wait, did you just admit to trolling?

Not quite. I didn't mean it in the way that I purposely started trouble. I meant it like I like to kick up dirt in peoples' mind every once in a while...stimulate thought process not usually evdient in day to day activity. If that makes sense.

[QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Lonelynight"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Lonelynight"]

Did Jesus had long hair? He could be bold for all we knoiw.

And this letter was written to the Churches at Corinth, so it was probably uncommon for a man to have long hair back than there.

123625

Jesus has always been portrayed with long hair. There is no good reason to assume otherwise.

And he was always portrayed as white too, but he could have dark skin, since he was born in the middle east.

That doesn't help your side of the argument. If anything, it harms it. It calls Jesus into question even more with all these inaccuracies and false portrayals.

What does it matter how he was potrayed anyway?

He is the figurehead and divinity upon whom all Christians look up to. His portrayal is very important, because if that is not accurate, why should you believe anyuthing about him? It casts a shadow of doubt, that is all.

Look, Jesus was supposed to have been witnessed by hundred and hundreds of people. They would have known what he looked like down to the very last detail. According to every single portrayal of him, he was a white man with long, brown hair. The people responsible for capturing his image would have no reason to lie and misrepresent him in such a way.

You would expect the images we see today to be accurate, yet they are not, because we know that people from the middle east are not white. Like I say, this calls Jesus very much into question.

Also, why was Moses portrayed as a white man? And Mary? And every other mother out there?

[QUOTE="Deity_Slapper"]

[QUOTE="domatron23"]Sorry deity_slapper but this thread is the atheist equivalent of a theist posting pascal's wager and acting like he did something significant.atejas

Oh come on, you know the point is valid...even some have put their egos aside to give me credit...

Comparing my point to Pascal's Wager is an insult, actually. :P

But I didn't act as if anything significant occured...I just like to stir the pot every once in a while (when I'm not smoking it). I don't think anyone will change religions, or lose their religion, overnight. Don't worry.

Wait, did you just admit to trolling?

Sparking debate =/= trolling.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="domatron23"]Sorry deity_slapper but this thread is the atheist equivalent of a theist posting pascal's wager and acting like he did something significant.Funky_Llama

Except that Pascal's Wager is flawed and this isn't.

How?

Nowhere in the bible is jesus described as having long hair. All the paintings of jesus you will ever see have been painted hundreds upon hundreds of years after his death, and have been based on what the artist thinks jesus might have looked like rather than what he did look like.

I mean Jesus is usually portrayed with porcelain white skin too, and considering he was from modern day palestine... I'm sure you get the idea.

I love Diety Slappers threads. Mainly cause unlike the loads of "why don't you belive in god" with a single post he actually puts up a strong argument that no one can really put a fight up against and the only thing you can do is attack him cause of the fact hes already destroyed your arguments. dj_pulserfan

Did the Bible ever give out Jesus' physical appearance? I thought artists were responsible for that.

He is the figurehead and divinity upon whom all Christians look up to. His portrayal is very important, because if that is not accurate, why should you believe anyuthing about him? It casts a shadow of doubt, that is all.

Look, Jesus was supposed to have been witnessed by hundred and hundreds of people. They would have known what he looked like down to the very last detail. According to every single portrayal of him, he was a white man with long, brown hair. The people responsible for capturing his image would have no reason to lie and misrepresent him in such a way.

You would expect the images we see today to be accurate, yet they are not, because we know that people from the middle east are not white. Like I say, this calls Jesus very much into question.

Also, why was Moses portrayed as a white man? And Mary? And every other mother out there?

luke1889

[QUOTE="domatron23"]Sorry deity_slapper but this thread is the atheist equivalent of a theist posting pascal's wager and acting like he did something significant.Deity_Slapper

Oh come on, you know the point is valid...even some have put their egos aside to give me credit...

Comparing my point to Pascal's Wager is an insult, actually. :P

But I didn't act as if anything significant occured...I just like to stir the pot every once in a while (when I'm not smoking it). I don't think anyone will change religions, or lose their religion, overnight. Don't worry.

You've yet to provide a passage describing Jesus with long hair or any contemporary description of Jesus (weren't you claiming that the Christians had "reliable" records?). Seems far more obvious that the paintings of Jesus with long hair were done by artists who did not see Jesus and did not pay attention to the passage you cited, just like the omphalos case.

[QUOTE="dj_pulserfan"]I love Diety Slappers threads. Mainly cause unlike the loads of "why don't you belive in god" with a single post he actually puts up a strong argument that no one can really put a fight up against and the only thing you can do is attack him cause of the fact hes already destroyed your arguments. LJS9502_basic

None of them with half the IQ of diety slapper I might add.

Jesus would have looked the same as others of His time. LJS9502_basic

To quote you, "you know this, how?" :lol:

Therefore, His appearance would not have been extraordinary or notated. LJS9502_basic

Again, this guy once again said it best:

He is the figurehead and divinity upon whom all Christians look up to. His portrayal is very important, because if that is not accurate, why should you believe anyuthing about him? It casts a shadow of doubt, that is all.

Look, Jesus was supposed to have been witnessed by hundred and hundreds of people. They would have known what he looked like down to the very last detail. According to every single portrayal of him, he was a white man with long, brown hair. The people responsible for capturing his image would have no reason to lie and misrepresent him in such a way.

luke1889

Byt the way LJ, that's in the NT...you know the NT? The book that YOU follow? Oops.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="domatron23"]Sorry deity_slapper but this thread is the atheist equivalent of a theist posting pascal's wager and acting like he did something significant.LJS9502_basic

Except that Pascal's Wager is flawed and this isn't.

How?

What did the quote mean in context?

[QUOTE="luke1889"]

He is the figurehead and divinity upon whom all Christians look up to. His portrayal is very important, because if that is not accurate, why should you believe anyuthing about him? It casts a shadow of doubt, that is all.

Look, Jesus was supposed to have been witnessed by hundred and hundreds of people. They would have known what he looked like down to the very last detail. According to every single portrayal of him, he was a white man with long, brown hair. The people responsible for capturing his image would have no reason to lie and misrepresent him in such a way.

You would expect the images we see today to be accurate, yet they are not, because we know that people from the middle east are not white. Like I say, this calls Jesus very much into question.

Also, why was Moses portrayed as a white man? And Mary? And every other mother out there?

LJS9502_basic

And as DS said, you're applying double standards here. You blindly believe all that the Bible says, while questioning the authenticity of equally unbelievable paintings.

Nowhere in the bible is jesus described as having long hair. All the paintings of jesus you will ever see have been painted hundreds upon hundreds of years after his death, and have been based on what the artist thinks jesus might have looked like rather than what he did look like.

I mean Jesus is usually portrayed with porcelain white skin too, and considering he was from modern day palestine... I'm sure you get the idea.

Mr_sprinkles

They must have been pretty dumb then to think that he would have been white. :lol:

I still think it is a tool used to make Jesus more appealing to Western culture and society. I'm not being funny, but I don't think as many Europeans and especially Americans would follow Jesus if he was black.

None of them with half the IQ of diety slapper I might add.

dj_pulserfan

[QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"]

Nowhere in the bible is jesus described as having long hair. All the paintings of jesus you will ever see have been painted hundreds upon hundreds of years after his death, and have been based on what the artist thinks jesus might have looked like rather than what he did look like.

I mean Jesus is usually portrayed with porcelain white skin too, and considering he was from modern day palestine... I'm sure you get the idea.

luke1889

They must have been pretty dumb then to think that he would have been white. :lol:

I still think it is a tool used to make Jesus more appealing to Western culture and society. I'm not being funny, but I don't think as many Europeans and especially Americans would follow Jesus if he was black.

[QUOTE="dj_pulserfan"]

None of them with half the IQ of diety slapper I might add.

LJS9502_basic

But yet you always come back for more amiright.

[QUOTE="atejas"][QUOTE="Deity_Slapper"]

[QUOTE="domatron23"]Sorry deity_slapper but this thread is the atheist equivalent of a theist posting pascal's wager and acting like he did something significant.Deity_Slapper

Oh come on, you know the point is valid...even some have put their egos aside to give me credit...

Comparing my point to Pascal's Wager is an insult, actually. :P

But I didn't act as if anything significant occured...I just like to stir the pot every once in a while (when I'm not smoking it). I don't think anyone will change religions, or lose their religion, overnight. Don't worry.

Wait, did you just admit to trolling?

Not quite. I didn't mean it in the way that I purposely started trouble. I meant it like I like to kick up dirt in peoples' mind every once in a while...stimulate thought process not usually evdient in day to day activity. If that makes sense.

Oh, my bad

But yet you always come back for more amiright.

dj_pulserfan