141 replies to this topic

[Ben Masada]

Realm, on 30 September 2012 - 02:19 AM, said:

Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God,
The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Isaiah 9:7
Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be, no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment
and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of host will perform this.


^{Oh wait, this must be hellenistic, a metaphor, a parable, or must mean the people of Israel as a whole, or whatever Ben wants it to be. Anything but literal.
Even when shown the truth he denies it. I'm beginning to think Islam suits you more Ben.}
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          

No, this is not about Israel as a whole. That's a prophecy of Isaiah about the welcoming demonstration of the Gentiles in the district of the Gentiles in Samaria when the Jews were returning from exile in Babylon to start anew their lives in the Land of Israel. That's all. That's a natural attitude of Gentiles to refer to humans whom they expect protection and prosperity as if they were gods themselves. Besides, no need to make too big a deal out of this because in Psalm 82:6,7 we have divine references to the Jewish People as: "You are gods, all of you sons of the Most High; yet, like men you shall die."  Then, later, Jesus confirmed this reference by reminding the Jews that indeed they were gods, according to the scriptures. Read John 10:34.

Ben

Edited by Ben Masada, 02 October 2012 - 09:18 PM.

[Ben Masada]

Realm, on 30 September 2012 - 02:19 AM, said:

Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God,
The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Isaiah 9:7
Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be, no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment
and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of host will perform this.


^{Oh wait, this must be hellenistic, a metaphor, a parable, or must mean the people of Israel as a whole, or whatever Ben wants it to be. Anything but literal.
Even when shown the truth he denies it. I'm beginning to think Islam suits you more Ben}  

No, this prophecy of Isaiah was not about Israel as a whole but about the welcoming demonstration rendered by the Gentiles at the district of the nations in Samaria/Galilee when the Jews were returning from exile in Babylon to start anew their lives in the Land of Israel. That's an natural attitude of the masses towards those whom they expect protection and prosperity from. (Isa. 9:1-6)

Ben

[Vatic]

Ben Masada: Take it easy Vatic. You are getting angry, hostile, and saying things not too good to your own credibility.

Vatic: I'm not angry. I'm just deriding your points as the fallacy they are with concise and cutting counterpoints.

-------
Ben Masada: Your own Bible was canonized by the Catholic Church in the 4th Century. So, you have a canon and read what they have dictated you should read.

Vatic: Nonsense! They aren't because I don't recognize them or allow them dictating anything to me. And you shouldn't allow anyone to dictate to you either. To do so would put you in the position of having invincible ignorance.

---------
Ben Masada: Anything that was not Hellenistic was excluded from the canon of the NT.

Vatic: Utter nonsense! They are Jewish testimonies. Jesus even endorsed the Pharisees. Everyone was living their Jewish lives. Jesus quoted Hebrew Scriptures, observed Jewish observances, wore Jewish clothing. It is uttely stupid to say things like I'm talking about Jesus like he's a greek. It is like BRAINWASHING to stand up and seriously assert the whole NT is Hellenist. Such a person is departing from reality and might need help breaking the control band attached around his mind. Ben, right now is one of the most wonderful times to be Jewish that has ever existed. But your being Jewish like a programmed robot. Your mind is in bands as exhibited in absurd control points designed to keep you from looking rationally at things and understanding reality as it is. Your above statement is proof that you are in intellectual and spiritual bonds, because it is such utterly irrational nonsense with no grasp of the reality.

-------
Ben Masada: The book of "The Wars of the Lord" was an ancient collection of Israelites songs that, somehow, got lost. It is mentioned in Numbers 21:14,15. That's the reason why it could not have been included in the Jewish canon.

Vatic: Yes I know and that is my point. THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a complete canon of scripture. Admit it for your own sanity's sake Ben.

--------
Ben Masada: I am using the Scriptures to say what God won't do. For instance, He can't change His mind. Read Numbers 23:19.

Vatic. You are suggesting God decided that he can never manifest a virgin Birth and won't change his mind. Good grief, there are contradictions all through scripture and you want to say what suits your sentiments is all there is. First of all, God didn't decide that he wouldn't create a virgin Birth, and second of all God does change his mind as many testimonies point out. Mere MEN implored God and God changed His mind because of their cries to Him. Many Testimonies contain such events. I have trouble dealing with the fact that you are somehow able to be convinced otherwise and are unconscious of the plainly stated written points of the testimonies. You are a psychological text book case of cult trained disregard for reality and plain facts. If slapping you would help, I would gladly slap you back to your senses.

-------
Ben Masada: So, do not talk about him as if he was a Greek.

Vatic: You big Dummy! There you go saying stuff without basis in reality!

--------
Ben Masada: Those you mention above, were not Jews but Hellenists. Jews would not write against Judaism.

Vatic: You are making my head hurt. Listen..... They were Jews... Reality check....  They didn't write against Judaism.... They Talked About Jesus being born of a virgin...! Reality check... You have so much baggage that it is like talking to a schizophrenic when they used word salad. You never know what connection they have in their mind leading to the next thing thay state. Your points come as a complete non-sequiter to me..

----------
Ben Masada: The whole of the NT is Hellenistic.

Vatic: And this my friend is the manifestation of "INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE"..

--------
Ben Masada: Why don't you try to demonstrate to me how Jesus could have been the source of Judaism? He was a menber of Judaism, not the source of It. Abraham was the source of Judaism.

Instead of penting up your frustrations, why don't you, once and for all, prove to me that the NT is not Hellenistic literature.

Vatic: Yes I admit I have a soft spot for projects like you. I sympathize with all the confusion I see imposed upon you.

First of all, I am so out of your league in ways you can't imagine. Based on that, I can assert that you aren't ready for certain things. You needs some groundwork grounding, some down to earth parameters to help you think clearly about the whole matter.

Right now you are at a stage of unconscious incompetance. You simply don't know what you don't know about. I quized you with mysteries so that you might begin to realize and become consciously aware that you don't know some things. I'm going to give you an exercise to work on so that your mind will break out of bonds concering the source of your faith:

I want you to contemplate the Aaronic Benediction line for line, and try to connect it to "The Appearance of the Glory of the Lord" Describe how it connects together as one. This is for your benefit so that you might begin to actually know the source of your faith. And it is just a little exercise to get started. Once you have that stepping stone, we can perhaps venture to think you might be able to handle one more stepping stone. You do the thinking and I'll do the scrutinizing of your progress. I won't mind if you contemplate one line for weeks trying to figure it out. I'm patient and will even give you little pointers. But you will have to realize it, because if I just state it, you would choke and vomit up your reactions. I demand that you become invested in the answer for yourself.

[Ben Masada]

Vatic, on 03 October 2012 - 05:09 AM, said:

Quote

Nonsense! They aren't because I don't recognize them or allow them dictating anything to me. And you shouldn't allow anyone to dictate to you either. To do so would put you in the position of having invincible ignorance.

Sorry Vatic, but you are in a terrible state of denial. The NT you follow is what has been canonized by the Catholic Church. They have dictated what you read.

Quote

Utter nonsense! They are Jewish testimonies. Jesus even endorsed the Pharisees. Everyone was living their Jewish lives. Jesus quoted Hebrew Scriptures, observed Jewish observances, wore Jewish clothing. It is uttely stupid to say things like I'm talking about Jesus like he's a greek.

All right, Let us try to make this clear. When I say that you talk about Jesus as if he was a Greek, it is because there is no Jewish history of a Jew being born of God with an earthly woman, which is a Greek doctrine about the demigod. Whoever fabricated the idea that Jesus was born without the help of a man, in this case, Joseph, he must have been Greek, who made of Jesus a Greek man. Now, Christians talk about Jesus as if he was a Greek man. Clear now?

Quote

You are suggesting God decided that he can never manifest a virgin Birth and won't change his mind.

God can do everything, but one: What you wish He did. Regarding the virgin birth, if you are referring to Isaiah 7:14, the virgin is Israel and not Mary. Read Amos 5:2. "The virgin Israel is fallen."

Quote

God does change his mind as many testimonies point out.

No, according to Numbers 23:19, God is not like a man to change His mind. Are you trying to make the Torah like the NT a book loaded with contradictions?
I think your problem is that you have no idea about metaphorical language. Anthropomorphy is what you make of God.

Quote

You big Dummy! There you go saying stuff without basis in reality!

Do you have any idea about the meaning of ad hominems? You should read the rules of this forum. They are forbidden, and one could be banned for the use of them. To call a fellow poster "a big Dummy" is a grave ad hominem.

Quote

They were Jews... Reality check....  They didn't write against Judaism.... They Talked About Jesus being born of a virgin...! Reality check...

There is nothing checked as real. Paul compared the Jewish Covenant to Hagar, the slave girl, and  Israel to Ishmael the son of Hagar. Then, he urged with Christians to cast out the slave girl with her son altogether because they could not participate in the inheritance of the free ones, aka, Christians. Read Galatians 4:21-31. This is Replacement Theology which some Scholars compare to Christian Antisemitism. Therefore, the writers of the NT were not Jews.

Ben

[Vatic]

Ben Masada: Sorry Vatic, but you are in a terrible state of denial. The NT you follow is what has been canonized by the Catholic Church. They have dictated what you read.

Vatic: I suppose they would be quite alarmed at all the material I have strayed into then.

------
Ben Masada: All right, Let us try to make this clear. When I say that you talk about Jesus as if he was a Greek, it is because there is no Jewish history of a Jew being born of God with an earthly woman, which is a Greek doctrine about the demigod.

Vatic: I suppose your going to trot out greek and egyptian myths about virgin births as the source material. But as much as you see a corrolation and a credible claim of influence from surrounding cultures, you would still be wrong. it is a shame you're disqualifying the Jewish testimonies of Jesus birth. Yes I know the hellenist culture later compiled a canon, much of which they didn't understand. It is true some hellenist influences are there, but the Jewishness of the testimonies is there and it is undeniable. I would even say it is irrational to suggest hat the Jewish Cultural Roots have been excised from the NT. Indeed they remain intact insomuch as the Cultural Critical view of the writing as useful for correcting errors inadvertantly adulterating the recorded text of those Jewish Verbal Testimonies.

You have to remember the cult of Jesus is Jewish in its origins and the cult existed for several centuries without a canon (Bible). They were indeed Jewish testimonies of Jesus' birth.

-------
Ben Masada: Whoever fabricated the idea that Jesus was born without the help of a man, in this case, Joseph, he must have been Greek, who made of Jesus a Greek man. Now, Christians talk about Jesus as if he was a Greek man. Clear now?

Vatic: I'm seeing you forcing the association out of the bound of the reality behind the facts. Jesus birth has much historical controversy within the Jewish Community. It was ALWAYS a Controversy among the Jewish. In fact some of the Gospels alude to some Jews contemporary to Jesus implying in pregnant terms, that Jesus was a b******. We clearly see the undertones of community suspicion about Jesus Birth even then. So the issue was a Jewish Community controvery even in Jesus' time.

-------
Ben Masada: God can do everything, but one: What you wish He did. Regarding the virgin birth, if you are referring to Isaiah 7:14, the virgin is Israel and not Mary. Read Amos 5:2. "The virgin Israel is fallen."

Vatic: And you talk about me as if I have allegorical perception challenges. Ben, even point blank literal events have allegorical meaning. Allegorical exegesis is a valid method for understanding the maning behind events and prophecies.

But that aside, I'm not refering to any scripture at this point. Although many passages talk about Jesus birth, I'm going to tell you that I know of Jesus birth in ways that you wouldn't understand. let's just cut to the chase. This controversy between you and I is only a reflection of certain Jewish sects points of resistence to Jesus. It is just bad blood and hurt feelings behind it. I say that because Jesus is not contradictory to Judaism. Believing so is just tired old arguments being restated for centuries. It was a fallacy from the start and it is still being propogated.

Ben, you really don't know what has happened to the Jewish people. There are things God has done that you don't understand. Let me assure you the age of the reconciliation between Jesus and His people, The Jews, is here. To hope to see Jesus, it is a matter of Baruch ha ba bashem Adonai. Ben open you heart to allow me to tell you something profoundly true.

----------
Ben Masada: No according to Numbers 23:19, God is not like a man to change His mind. Are you trying to make the Torah like the NT a book loaded with contradictions?

Vatic: The OT has plenty of its own problems. Don't play like you're a fundy with me!

-------
Ben Masada: I think your problem is that you have no idea about metaphorical language. Anthropomorphy is what you make of God.

Vatic: I have written a book so full of metaphor that I doubt you could ever plumb the depths of strata upon strata of meaning in it. You don't know who you're talking to. I am not athropomorphing God. If anything I insist man is in God's image. So get off that digression.

-------
Ben Masada: Do you have any idea about the meaning of ad hominems? You should read the rules of this forum. They are forbidden, and one could be banned for the use of them. To call a fellow poster "a big Dummy" is a grave ad hominem.

Vatic: I see your point, That had to have been just crushing.

----------
Ben Masada: There is nothing checked as real. Paul compared the Jewish Covenant to Hagar, the slave girl, and  Israel to Ishmael the son of Hagar. Then, he urged with Christians to cast out the slave girl with her son altogether because they could not participate in the inheritance of the free ones, aka, Christians. Read Galatians 4:21-31. This is Replacement Theology which some Scholars compare to Christian Antisemitism. Therefore, the writers of the NT were not Jews.

Vatic: I suppose that John the Baptist and Jesus weren't Jewish since they prophesied all over the place that Judea and Jerusalem were going to be destroyed. You know what? You confuse prophetic warnings coming from Jewish prophets as signs they aren't Jewish. By your logic, Jeremiah must not be Jewish since he prophesied against Judaism. Amos must not be Jewish either. See how rediculous your syllogistic reasoning is. Jewish figures making prophecies does not make them unJewish. Paul was prophesying as a Jew. Jesus was prophesying as a Jew, John the Baptist was prophesying as a Jew.

You call them Hellenist and not Jewish. But guess what Ben? Get out your history books and you will see their prophecies came TRUE in exact detail. Invalidate that! Now stop saying something prophesied by Jews and brought to pass by the God of the Chosen people, no matter how bad, somehow makes them unJewish Hellenist. Yours is a argument from emotive inferance and not fact. They ARE Jews making accurate prophecies.

[Alantheanylyst]

Ben Masada, on 21 April 2012 - 06:00 PM, said:

Ben Masada, on 21 April 2012 - 06:00 PM, said:

THE ALLEGED SONS OF GOD
  

According to an ancient Roman policy, any able-bodied man from the conquered lands, who joined the Roman Army, would obtain authomatic citizenship. And if he was lucky enough to reach retirement age, he could choose where he would like to spend the rest of his life, and he would be granted a piece of land or farm as severance pay for his services to the Empire. Rome excluded.

When the Roman Legions arrived in the Middle East and conquered Sidon, a man called Pantera applied to join the Army and was accepted. Then, he was conscripted into the Roman Legion which got stationed in Syria. When he reached retirement age, he chose to return to Sidon and got his farm there to live for the rest of his life.

According to Josephus, in the year 4 BCE, there was a local revolt in Israel against Herod. It became known as the Revolt of the Pharisees. It was so strong that it was threatening to depose him. Herod appealed to Rome for help and Caesar gave orders to the Legion stationed in Syria to cross over into Israel and put down the revolt.

Thousands of Roman soldiers came over and the task was quite easy. They crucified a few thousand Jews, and decided to stay for some time to make sure the discontent were subdued. In the meantime, the Roman soldiers would rape young Jewish ladies, at their hearts content, almost daily.

As it was to expect, many children were born as a result of those rapes. Since the unfortunate mothers were not to blame for promiscuity, the religious authorities forbade to ostracize them or to consider their children as mamzerim or ba$tards. But they grew up with the epithet of "sons of God." (Lecture on the "Historical Jesus" at Stanphord University)

Since Jesus was born just about that time, I am of the opinion that, it is much more prudent and less embarrassing to acknowledge that he was a biological son of Joseph's than to run the risk that Jesus might have been one of those sons of God.

Now, regarding Mark 7:24, I have here with me two different Bible translations. One is the Catholic New American version of the Bible, wherefrom, I read that when Jesus went to Sidon, he would retire into a certain house and wanted no one to recognize him in there. The other translation is the King James version, wherefrom, I read that when Jesus went to Sidon, he would enter into a certain house and would have no man know it.

Although I am not assuming anything, everyone of us has all the right in the world to speculate about such a shouting evidence, and to think that there was something fishy going on for Jesus to insist on secrecy about his being in Sidon or in that certain house. At that time Joseph had been long dead. Could it be that jesus knew about his real origins and was interacting with his real father? Everything is possible, but if you ask me, I am still in favor that he was rather a biological son of Joseph's.

What's your reaction to all the above?

Ben:

All religion is a fairy tale , not some ,all .

Edited by Alantheanylyst, 04 October 2012 - 01:10 AM.

[Vatic]

Alantheanylyst, on 04 October 2012 - 12:54 AM, said:

All religion is a fairy tale , not some ,all .

Vatic: Like you would know? Tell me how you have such omniscience that you can with such certainty dismiss so much human experience, undestand every factor involved, be aware of all the existences of the universe and any other realms, and then dismiss the claims of so many millions, and safely conclude there is no possibility of religion. You ain't that smart are you?

Your passing comment is duly noted.

Edited by Vatic, 04 October 2012 - 01:33 AM.

[Alantheanylyst]

Vatic, on 04 October 2012 - 01:31 AM, said:

Vatic: Like you would know? Tell me how you have such omniscience that you can with such certainty dismiss so much human experience, undestand every factor involved, be aware of all the existences of the universe and any other realms, and then dismiss the claims of so many millions, and safely conclude there is no possibility of religion. You ain't that smart are you?

Your passing comment is duly noted.

Should have added in my humble opinion , smart? I never proffesed to be so .However if there is some kind of omnipotent , omniscient being presiding over all of this then , there have been many mistakes made in the grand design  which would relegate the designer to less than glorified status .

Will add your intolerance is also duly noted .

Edited by Alantheanylyst, 04 October 2012 - 02:09 AM.

[Vatic]

Alantheanylyst, on 04 October 2012 - 01:40 AM, said:

Should have added in my humble opinion , smart? I never proffesed to be so .However if there is some kind of omnipotent , omniscient being presiding over all of this then , there have been many mistakes made in the grand design  which would relegate the designer to less than glorified status .

Will add your intolerance is also duly noted .

Vatic: If there is? Well at least you're realizing now that you can't eliminate the possibility based upon your limited information. Fact is, you can't back up your assertion that all religion is faery tales.

Whether the grand design suit your ideals or not is beside the point. If you had any experience in grand designing, you might have some credence on that. Have you got any grand designing experience?

But all this isn't even on topic, so I invite you meet me in one of the atheist vs, spirituality forums. I'll therein kick your fallacies in the gutter one by one until your brain is like a cleaned blackboard.

Edited by Vatic, 04 October 2012 - 05:22 AM.

[Alantheanylyst]

Vatic, on 04 October 2012 - 05:17 AM, said:

Vatic: If there is? Well at least you're realizing now that you can't eliminate the possibility based upon your limited information. Fact is, you can't back up your assertion that all religion is faery tales.

Whether the grand design suit your ideals or not is beside the point. If you had any experience in grand designing, you might have some credence on that. Have you got any grand designing experience?

But all this isn't even on topic, so I invite you meet me in one of the atheist vs, spirituality forums. I'll therein kick your fallacies in the gutter one by one until your brain is like a cleaned blackboard.

Rather aggressive stance , my experience of a grand design is life .

Not too grand from where I stand .

I was not aware that my opinion had to be proved or disproved , just stated.

This is an open forum , I was not out to offend .

As for debating you, I could see no possible reason for it other than for you to hold your position and me to hold mine .

I don't see that any  other way  than a waste of time .

[Ben Masada]

Vatic, on 04 October 2012 - 12:24 AM, said:

Vatic: I'm seeing you forcing the association out of the bound of the reality behind the facts. Jesus birth has much historical controversy within the Jewish Community. It was ALWAYS a Controversy among the Jewish. In fact some of the Gospels alude to some Jews contemporary to Jesus implying in pregnant terms, that Jesus was a b******. We clearly see the undertones of community suspicion about Jesus Birth even then. So the issue was a Jewish Community controvery even in Jesus' time.

I can relate to that. But don't blame us. Christians are the ones who deny that Joseph was Jesus' biological father. Since the idea of a Jew being born without the biological relation to a human father is non-existent in Judaism, the idea of the b****** is not ours but of Christian make.

Ben

Edited by Ben Masada, 06 October 2012 - 08:18 PM.

[Ben Masada]

Alantheanylyst, on 04 October 2012 - 12:54 AM, said:

All religion is a fairy tale , not some ,all .

I agree with you as long as we do not understand metaphorical language. Religion is like poety. If you interpret it as it is written, it becomes no more relevant than fairy tales.

Ben

[Vatic]

Ben Masada, on 06 October 2012 - 08:14 PM, said:

I can relate to that. But don't blame us. Christians are the ones who deny that Joseph was Jesus' biological father. Since the idea of a Jew being born without the biological relation to a human father is non-existent in Judaism, the idea of the b****** is not ours but of Christian make.

Ben

Vatic: Ben, you never will be able to make a good argument until you stop using fallacious reasoning. First of all you create a false dichotomy between Jews and Christians concerning Jesus Birth. All the first Christians contemporary to Jesus, were JEWISH.  Christianity was a JEWISH cult of Jesus. This involves the fallacy of the false dichotomy and the fallacy of being factually incorrect. That's two demerits.

Also, there were no Christians at the time of Jesus birth. Everyone involved was Jewish and it was a big controversy concerning Mary. So you are factually incorrect again. Three demerits.

You are making the claim of not having human biological father is unknown in Judaism. This is factually incorrect again. There is Adam, Melchisedek, and Jesus to name a few as created directly by God. If we go further, we see no human fathers were involved in the intermarriage of the angels and human women creating the race of the giants. This is all Jewish stuff so that gives you four demerits for being factually incorrectn.

Also speaking for all Judaism as if you can, is using the fallacy of the False Authority. I can find many jewish people and accounts that can directly refute your claim of speaking a postion for all Judaism. That is five demerits.

All this leads to the syllogistic reasoning that Christians are responsiblefor the accusation that Jesus was a b******. No it was a Jewish controversy only from the start. Syllogistic fallacy. Six demerits.

Even if you believe the positions you are using, then you actually are still in fact arguing from ignorance of the facts. The argument from ignorance fallacy. Seven Demerits.

Let's see Ben, let's give you a grade here. You wrote two statements containing seven fallacies. That about 3.5 errors per statement Ben. You wrote 53 words and made seven errors in reason. That's like saying you can't speak 7.6 words without being wrong about something. Ben you really need to get a standard here.

[Vatic]

Ben Masada, on 06 October 2012 - 08:22 PM, said:

I agree with you as long as we do not understand metaphorical language. Religion is like poety. If you interpret it as it is written, it becomes no more relevant than fairy tales.

Ben

Vatic: That is a false claim. In fact just the opposite is true about the testimonies. They are literally testimonies of REAL literal experiences. This is why the faith is theism! Good grief man!

Now here is the catch, Literal events are themselves a language that depicts in symbolism, metaphors, and allegories of a higher reality. This is where we get the use of RITUAL, Allegorical exegesis, object prophecy, and synchronicity meaning in the literal events the people experienced. You want to talk about seeing the hidden meaning, look at the literal events!

Now another catch is not only do literal events depict a higher reality symbolically, but things that at face would seem to have no literal corrolation to reality, and could be taken as purely symbolic, are often still absolutely LITERAL. These kinds of events are the brain benders of our sensibilities, when the higher reality actually manifest itself directly and literally.

Ben, I'm not wanting to discourage you from seeking and learning the truth and reality of your faith. I'm trying to help you realize your are inconsciously incompetant and you have had horridly stupid instruction from your teachers that are creating big mental hangups for you. You know less than I do about Judaism and you know practically nothing about the reality of your own faith and its origination. You are just parroting propoganda stuff you've been taught. But you've never known the manifest reality of the things of which you speak about.

There is so much more to things than you have understood in your life. This is a case in which if you had a grip on reality, reality would drive you crazy. Trust me there is more than you know or understand Ben. So learn and quit talking like a programmed robot of propoganda.

Edited by Vatic, 06 October 2012 - 11:27 PM.

[Ben Masada]

Vatic, on 06 October 2012 - 10:39 PM, said:

Quote

Vatic: Ben, you never will be able to make a good argument until you stop using fallacious reasoning. First of all you create a false dichotomy between Jews and Christians concerning Jesus Birth. All the first Christians contemporary to Jesus, were JEWISH.  Christianity was a JEWISH cult of Jesus. This involves the fallacy of the false dichotomy and the fallacy of being factually incorrect. That's two demerits.

Now, let us see who is using fallacious reasoning. There was no Christian contemporary to Jesus, as Christians were for the first time called Christians in Antioch, about 35 years after Jesus had been gone, as a result of Paul's missionary activities. (Acts 11:26) You don't quote your assertions because they do not exist. That's your first demerit. Then, Christianity  was indeed a cult, but not Jewish, as mainstream Judaism accepted the Sect of the Nazarenes and chased Paul out of Israel. (Acts 9:30) That's your second demerit.

Quote

Also, there were no Christians at the time of Jesus birth. Everyone involved was Jewish and it was a big controversy concerning Mary. So you are factually incorrect again. Three demerits.

There was never a controversy concerning Mary until Christians started preaching their gospel of virgin birth, which could never be a Jewish idea. You don't quote about that so-called controversy about Mary because it does not exist. That's a falacious claim and, of course, your third demerit.

Quote

You are making the claim of not having human biological father is unknown in Judaism. This is factually incorrect again. There is Adam, Melchisedek, and Jesus to name a few as created directly by God. If we go further, we see no human fathers were involved in the intermarriage of the angels and human women creating the race of the giants. This is all Jewish stuff so that gives you four demerits for being factually incorrectn.

Since Judaism comes from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, it could not exist at the time of Adam. Fallacious claim; therefore, your fourth demerit. Melchisedek, king of Salem was a pagan Canaanite king and priest of the Canaanites. The priest of the Most High, according to the text was Abraham whom Melchizedek addressed to as such because he was afraid that Abraham had climbed up to Jerusalem with the intent to sack the city, as he was coming back from battle with five kings. (Gen. 14:17-20) So, Melchisedek had nothing to do with Judaism. Therefore, your fallacious claim and sixth demerit. And since Jesus was a Jew and not a Greek, he could not have been born directly of God, but of Joseph. And there was never a problem about that in Israel until the Christian gospel came to existence. Fallacious claim therefore, and your seventh demerit. Last but not least, there were never intermarriage among the Jews to explain the origin of the Nephilim. According to a footnote in the NAB by the Catholic Bible Association of America, the fragment about the Nephilim was an old Babylonian legend which Ezra borrowed and incorporated just prior to the text about the Flood as a moral orientation about the constant increasing wickedness of Mankind. (Gen. 6:4,5) That was a strong fallacy of Vatic, which became his eighth demerit.

Quote

Also speaking for all Judaism as if you can, is using the fallacy of the False Authority. I can find many jewish people and accounts that can directly refute your claim of speaking a postion for all Judaism. That is five demerits.

False authority is to apply to outside sources, whose opinions are affected by preconceived notions. The issue here is Jewish. Therefore, my opinion might diverge but not be considered as false. False would be any non-Jewish opinion. That's a logical fault by default. Therefore, your nineth demerit.

Quote

All this leads to the syllogistic reasoning that Christians are responsiblefor the accusation that Jesus was a b******. No it was a Jewish controversy only from the start. Syllogistic fallacy. Six demerits.

Another illogical judgment by default. Jesus could not be accused as a b******* if there was no claim that he had been born directly of God without a human father. Therefore, the NT, written 50+ years after Jesus had been gone is guilt of the charge. That's Vatic's tenth demerit.

Quote

Even if you believe the positions you are using, then you actually are still in fact arguing from ignorance of the facts. The argument from ignorance fallacy. Seven Demerits.

Since I am the one who quote the Scriptures and you don't, I have the evidence that I am speaking our of knowledge and not of ignorance. And that makes your list of demerits to climb to eleven.

Quote

Let's see Ben, let's give you a grade here. You wrote two statements containing seven fallacies. That about 3.5 errors per statement Ben. You wrote 53 words and made seven errors in reason. That's like saying you can't speak 7.6 words without being wrong about something. Ben you really need to get a standard here.

Evidentially, Vatic is the one using fallacious reasoning. Obviously, Vatic does not have what it takes to debate a Jew in the Scriptures.

Ben