SIRTee15:


Do u own home work. Some of us have real lives we attend to

LoLz. So you know and yet you are having your knickers in a twist because I didn't respond yet.

SIRTee15:

Have u checked the new testament for other wider regions.

The history of the Jews will only write about people they have contact with, isn't it.

The Jews didn't write new testament, I thought that's what you have been saying to lordreed since, that old testament canon doesn't concern new testament canon.

Mention other nation that made Yahweh a national god apart from IsraEL, which is just Yahweh inheritance that he got from his father, El.

A true powerful god that created everyone won't take a particular tribe as favorite, helping them to fights wars against other people he also created 😂, a powerful god will share the nation among his children (lesser gods) and that's what El did, those lesser children are the ones fighting.

Both Yahweh and Chemosh are part of El and Asheerah 70 children.

SIRTee15:


The bible records moabites obtaining independence over Israel. So what are u bleating about?
There's nothing on the moabite stone not recorded in 2 kings 3.
As per LordReed, the mesha stone dated 870BC is another historical evidence of the old testament...what u call myths and legends. Prior to its discovery king omri was a myth.
U may also want to study Tel Dal Steele, another ancient inscription from the Canaanites.

Oga where did you and I discuss Mesha stone?

MaxInDHouse:


Even all the people you've been quoting both living and dead will agree with you on this!

So laws are not needed for intelligent and peaceful people.

Maynman:

Shameless liar, mention the verses where mobiates their arch enemy was taking independence from them.

The Israelites worshipped chemosh, so what are you barking about?

Chemosh defeated your creator, Yahweh and destroyed his shrine, where is that mention in the Jewish book?
Just like Yahweh, chemosh too was given burnt offering and he accepted both man and animals.

Isrealites themselves are cannities, worshipping the head of the Cannanites god before they were taken as slave to Babylon and influence of zoostranism.

You may also want to study the kurtillet Arjud, where your creator has a wife and is lesser to his father, El.

Read 2 kings 3. The whole story is there....


4 Now Mesha king of Moab raised sheep, and he had to pay the king of Israel a tribute of a hundred thousand lambs and the wool of a hundred thousand rams. 5 But after Ahab died, the king of Moab rebelled against the king of Israel.


27 Then Mesha took his firstborn son, who was to succeed him as king, and offered him as a sacrifice on the city wall. The fury against Israel was great; they withdrew and returned to their own land


The passage even confirmed the name of the king that got independence for Moab as Mesha as written on the stone.

In fact 2 kings 3 and Mesha Inscription, describe the same event, the revolt of Mesha.

Read this link that was able to correlate and confirm actual events by studying both works.

https://biblearchaeology.org/research/divided-kingdom/3437-mesha-king-of-moab

LordReed:


Oga when you start paying me you can demand I respond in less than 1 sec. LoLz.

Show where I said Gospel of Peter was written by Peter.

I don't know that church fathers confirmed the authorship of the 4 gospels. That is still up for debate.

When I am ready to teach you, you will learn.

Gospel letters are attributed to the primary source. If it says gospel of Peter's, it's assumed Peter contributed one way or another.

SIRTee15:


Read 2 kings 3. The whole story is there....


4 Now Mesha king of Moab raised sheep, and he had to pay the king of Israel a tribute of a hundred thousand lambs and the wool of a hundred thousand rams. 5 But after Ahab died, the king of Moab rebelled against the king of Israel.


27 Then Mesha took his firstborn son, who was to succeed him as king, and offered him as a sacrifice on the city wall. The fury against Israel was great; they withdrew and returned to their own land


The passage even confirmed the name of the king that got independence for Moab as Mesha as written on the stone.

In fact 2 kings 3 and Mesha Inscription, describe the same event, the revolt of Mesha.

Read this link that was able to correlate and confirm actual events by studying both works.

https://biblearchaeology.org/research/divided-kingdom/3437-mesha-king-of-moab

How did they take Independence from them in that verse
You said nothing, Chemosh defeated your god, Yahweh.
When was 2kings written?
When was mesha Witten?


Why is your jealous universal god fighting with other local deities in that vicinity?
Where in your culture history was yahweh fighting for you, or is it because you are not part of his inheritance as in property?

Deuteronomy 32:9
For Yahweh's portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.

Maynman:

How did they take Independence from them in that verse
You said nothing, Chemosh defeated your god, Yahweh.
When was 2kings written?
When was mesha Witten?

Did mesha continue to pay tribute to the Israelites king after 2 kings 3?

I really don't understand your gloating. If we see the stone of Philistines, it will also declare similar things...isn't it.
Israelites did not always win their battle. In fact they lost more than they won if we are to go by records.

SIRTee15:


Did mesha continue to pay tribute to the Israelites king after 2 kings 3?

I really don't understand your gloating. If we see the stone of Philistines, it will also declare similar things...isn't it.
Israelites did not always win their battle. In fact they lost more than they won if we are to go by records.

Didn't chemosh defeat your god and dragged his vessel?

I really don't understand your barking, it's not related to the discussion... I'm sure the philistine stones will also show us how your creator is just a local god that was worshipped by the isrealites.


The national god of the isrealites is just like that of the Moabs, he is a local god, that's why the isrealites sometimes worship other gods, they all the same!.
That's what you are worshipping, Yahweh worshipper.

SIRTee15:


To help u answer your question here's how Yoruba described Olorun/Eledumare.

To help you also, this is how Jews described their god/Yahweh.
Abi Wikipedia is no more correct?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahweh

SIRTee15:


Gospel letters are attributed to the primary source. If it says gospel of Peter's, it's assumed Peter contributed one way or another.

Attribution is not authorship.

LordReed:


Attribution is not authorship.

Lol, the attribution is just what the "tradition" says.

Maynman:

Lot, the attribution is just what the "tradition" says.

Right.

Maynman:

To help you also, this is how Jews described their god/Yahweh.
Abi Wikipedia is no more correct?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahweh

So Jews now describe their God in Wikipedia screenshot.
Seriously I do t really know what to do with u.
U live on attention, I think it's time I starve info that thing u crave.

SIRTee15:


So Jews now describe their God in Wikipedia screenshot.
Seriously I do t really know what to do with u.
U live on attention, I think it's time I starve info that thing u crave.

So Yorubas now describe their God in Wikipedia screenshot?
Abi is that not what you posted for Lordreed?

See the mother of your creator.

LordReed:


Attribution is not authorship.

Dont u get it, Peter had nothing to do with the gospel of Peter.
He never knew such gospel existed.

Maynman:

So Yorubas now describe their God in Wikipedia screenshot?
Abi is that not what you posted for Lordreed?

See the mother of your creator.

Show me the written record where Yoruba people described their deity.

SIRTee15:


Show me the written record where Yoruba people described their deity.

So where did you get the Wikipedia screenshot from?
What's their source?

SIRTee15:


Ok I will take time to respond to your claims- that's what they are because u provided zero evidence for any of your submissions.

It's obvious u running your own script here and not engaging but since it's the first time we debating I'll oblige u.

1. For the upteenth time, the old testament is not binding on Christians because its doctrines are no longer relevent. The old testament is the history of the Jews which is weaved around their religious practice and beliefs.
Christians are not accountable to defend the history in the book, that's for the Jews- it's their history.
Instead, we read the history with theological interpretation because therein lies the principles God wants mankind to follow.
It's not about the Jews, it's about God. So u telling me to defend Jewish history is ridiculous.

And for the umpteenth time it's you Christians business since you guys included it in your canon. If you are including books which you cannot defend their providence then that's on you not the person pointing out your inconsistency.

Israelites were not the only ones who worshipped Yahweh. But they were the only ones who finally got it right after many years of turbulence and rebellion.
So it's only pragmatic we learn about God's principles and ordinances from them.

Who were the others who worshipped Yahweh and how can we know that it was the Israelites who got it right?

Regarding your so called Jewish myths/legends, it boils down to how do we handle the history? Swallow it hook, line and sinker or reject it outright?
All works of ancient history are neither entirely factual nor entirely made up.
By looking at details in history book and comparing with independent sources, as we do for the Jewish history, we do have a good chance of figuring out what is historically correct.

Good so I have no reason to believe any of the miraculous or fantabolous aspects of the stories since they have no collaboration from any other source especially the ones that would have left copious amounts of evidence but we can find none.

That's why I said David was considered a myth until the inscription city of David was discovered in 1993.

Learn the difference between myth and legend. David is considered legendary not mythical, same way King Arthur is considered legendary, there may have been a much beloved figure around who fantastic stories coalesced. Discovering a record of there being a house of David does not confer automatic credence to all the stories about David.

2. What old testament scripture did the Christians decide to exclude? I'm interested in these scriptures.

Comparing the book of Daniel to gospel of Peter makes no sense. Asking why the book of daniel was included in OT but the gospel of Peter was rejected in NT shows u not here to engage but argue for the sake of it.

Because the book of Daniel was written in the 2nd century BCE but purports to cover events of the 6th century BCE. It wasn't listed in the prophetic section of Tanakh and some versions of it don't have it at all! So based on what criteria was Daniel added to the Christian Bible?

3. Your different criteria noise will only make sense if u can point out any Jewish prophet acknowledged by Israelites as a man of God but his work rejected by the tanakh compilers.
The Jews compiled the works of their recognised prophets sent by God throughout their history spanning thousands of years and made a book out of it.
Now u questioning why the Christians didn't use same criteria to compile the new testament. Does that make sense to u?
As I said, u don't understand the historical context of the old testament. That's the problem.

LoLz. See the point above.

4. Let me ask u a question, was there a Babylonian king who had mental health problem?
David was considered imaginary until 1993 then he became a real person. That's how ridiculous your historical evidence claim can be.

Was there? What was his name and which historical evidence confirms it.

See my previous response about pavid.

5. Your question on whether the church fathers confirmed the authorship of the gospel is outright ridiculous and shows you ve never done any serious research on the gospel works itself.
By the late 1st century, the the church and apostolic fathers knew the writers of the 4 gospels.
There's both internal and external evidence confirming authorship of the books.
Papias, Justyn matyr, Polycarp, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria all confirmed the 4 gospel writers.
Marcion the first Christian to codify a Christian cannon in early 2nd century used the gospel of Luke.

Of the people you mentioned only Polycarp, Papias and Marcion where born in the first century. Marcion was denounced by Irenaeus and Tertullian. Irenaeus even says that Polycarp called Marcion the first born of Satan. This is the kind of situation you want to use to defend how these books were canonised? LoLz.

The Muratorian cannon is the earliest new testament cannon dated to 170 AD. It confirms the traditional authorship of the 4 gospels

Another anonymous work. LoLz.

In fact, out of the 1st & 2nd century church fathers writings, none of them named the gospel authors as anonymous or attribute them to anyone else.
There was never a time in early church history that there was a misnomer of the 4 gospels authorship.

Name the works where these people confirmed the authorship of these books.

Even Celsus a Greek philosopher and Christian critic in the 2nd century affirm apostolic authorship.
Do u get it now!!!

LoLz. We know about Celsus through Origen a Christian criticising Celsus so how do we know he didn't manipulate Celsus' words to make them says what he wants them to say?

6. Once again your description of gospel writers as fisherman and couldn't have learn greek is ignorance in display
Greek was the lingua Franca in ancient eastern Roman empire. It was the language of commerce and communication amongst different ethnic group. It's far more widespread then u think.
Jesus spoke Greek, Andrew and Philip were Greek names and there's evidence they spoke Greek.

Regarding the gospel writers: Matthew was an accountant, Luke was a medical doctor. John Mark was a gentile who followed Paul to preach in foreign cities, which language will they speak? Paul told mark to bring his scrolls when coming to visit him, how will he know the ones to bring if he can't read.

Abeg this one no be talk.

You brought up Papias. The one thing Papias said bout Matthew was that it was written in HEBREW so where did you get that the Apostles, apart from Paul who was learned, wrote and spoke Greek?

6. Atheist are funny human beings. When it comes to ancient biblical evidence they start shouting anonymous up and down.
Tell me, how many of the historical records of ancient civilisations do we know the authors.
Most of what we know about Egyptian civilization today is from the royal annals and Egyptian book of the dead. Do u know the authors of these works or were they anonymous? Do u trust them?
Who wrote the Cyrus cylinder that tells us a lot about the Achaemenid empire? Do u trust it even though it's anonymous.
If above is yes then what's the problem with Didache, a book used by Jewish Christians in 70AD.
Mr Man stop the double standard, look for the book and read it.

It doesn't matter who those authors are because nobody is trying to convince the world that these are works decribing supernatural events that we must believe for our salvation. That is a massive difference in how you'd want me to approach them. If you didn't care if I believed the Bible then we would have very little to disagree on but because you want me to hinge my life on these books you bet that the scrutiny will be much different.

7. I want u to provide evidence for that Papias quote u brought here. Let me see his works u lifted it from.

It is taken from The Church History of Eusebius. Eccl. 3.39

So because something is recited orally mean it shouldn't be misinterpreted? Is that what u saying?
Now that we have written form, don't we have misinterpretation?

I am saying that all of it is suspect because they injected too many fantabolous things to be real. Just look at what was attributed to Papias on Judas Iscariot:
Judas did not die by hanging[55] but lived on, having been cut down before he choked to death. Indeed, the Acts of the Apostles makes this clear: "Falling headlong he burst open in the middle and his intestines spilled out."[56] Papias, the disciple of John, recounts this more clearly in the fourth book of the Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord, as follows: "Judas was a terrible, walking example of ungodliness in this world, his flesh so bloated that he was not able to pass through a place where a wagon passes easily, not even his bloated head by itself. For his eyelids, they say, were so swollen that he could not see the light at all, and his eyes could not be seen, even by a doctor using an optical instrument, so far had they sunk below the outer surface. His genitals appeared more loathsome and larger than anyone else's, and when he relieved himself there passed through it pus and worms from every part of his body, much to his shame. After much agony and punishment, they say, he finally died in his own place, and because of the stench the area is deserted and uninhabitable even now; in fact, to this day one cannot pass that place without holding one's nose, so great was the discharge from his body, and so far did it spread over the ground."

How can anybody read this given what we know of human anatomy and believe it?

8. Finally I dont understand what u on about gospel of Peter. I already told u it was written in the 2nd century. How can a book written decades after the death of Peter be authored by him?

See my response about the book of Daniel. What is the difference between that book and the Gospel of Peter?

Going forward, I will only response to your statements borne out of facts and evidence. Any other thing else will be ignored.
Your opinion doesn't count.

Then neither does your opinion count nor have you provided ANY evidence while I have tried to back up what I am saying with quotes from the very things you claim support you. Any claim that I have made that you think I have not supported with evidence, list it and I will provide the evidence.

SIRTee15:


Dont u get it, Peter had nothing to do with the gospel of Peter.
He never knew such gospel existed.

How do you know?

SIRTee15:


2. What old testament scripture did the Christians decide to exclude? I'm interested in these scriptures.

Ignorant Yahweh worshipper, can't you see that everything about your "jealous universal god" is base in the middle east?

Is every book in the Septuagint in your Old testament now?
Or don't you know you are using the Masoteric text for your different bible VERSIONS.
Cc, lordreed.

Maynman:

Ignorant Yahweh worshipper, can't you see that everything about your god is base in the middle east?

Is every book in the Septuagint in your Old testament now?
Or don't you know you are using the masoteric text for your different bible VERSIONS.
Cc, lordreed.

Dude thinks these things are hidden from non-Christians as if most Christians even know or care.

LordReed:


How do you know?

because it was written in the 2nd century.

LordReed:


And for the umpteenth time it's you Christians business since you guys included it in your canon. If you are including books which you cannot defend their providence then that's on you not the person pointing out your inconsistency.



Who were the others who worshipped Yahweh and how can we know that it was the Israelites who got it right?



Good so I have no reason to believe any of the miraculous or fantabolous aspects of the stories since they have no collaboration from any other source especially the ones that would have left copious amounts of evidence but we can find none.



Learn the difference between myth and legend. David is considered legendary not mythical, same way King Arthur is considered legendary, there may have been a much beloved figure around who fantastic stories coalesced. Discovering a record of there being a house of David does not confer automatic credence to all the stories about David.



Because the book of Daniel was written in the 2nd century BCE but purports to cover events of the 6th century BCE. It wasn't listed in the prophetic section of Tanakh and some versions of it don't have it at all! So based on what criteria was Daniel added to the Christian Bible?



LoLz. See the point above.



Was there? What was his name and which historical evidence confirms it.

See my previous response about pavid.



Of the people you mentioned only Polycarp, Papias and Marcion where born in the first century. Marcion was denounced by Irenaeus and Tertullian. Irenaeus even says that Polycarp called Marcion the first born of Satan. This is the kind of situation you want to use to defend how these books were canonised? LoLz.



Another anonymous work. LoLz.



Name the works where these people confirmed the authorship of these books.



LoLz. We know about Celsus through Origen a Christian criticising Celsus so how do we know he didn't manipulate Celsus' words to make them says what he wants them to say?



You brought up Papias. The one thing Papias said bout Matthew was that it was written in HEBREW so where did you get that the Apostles, apart from Paul who was learned, wrote and spoke Greek?



It doesn't matter who those authors are because nobody is trying to convince the world that these are works decribing supernatural events that we must believe for our salvation. That is a massive difference in how you'd want me to approach them. If you didn't care if I believed the Bible then we would have very little to disagree on but because you want me to hinge my life on these books you bet that the scrutiny will be much different.



It is taken from The Church History of Eusebius. Eccl. 3.39



I am saying that all of it is suspect because they injected too many fantabolous things to be real. Just look at what was attributed to Papias on Judas Iscariot:
Judas did not die by hanging[55] but lived on, having been cut down before he choked to death. Indeed, the Acts of the Apostles makes this clear: "Falling headlong he burst open in the middle and his intestines spilled out."[56] Papias, the disciple of John, recounts this more clearly in the fourth book of the Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord, as follows: "Judas was a terrible, walking example of ungodliness in this world, his flesh so bloated that he was not able to pass through a place where a wagon passes easily, not even his bloated head by itself. For his eyelids, they say, were so swollen that he could not see the light at all, and his eyes could not be seen, even by a doctor using an optical instrument, so far had they sunk below the outer surface. His genitals appeared more loathsome and larger than anyone else's, and when he relieved himself there passed through it pus and worms from every part of his body, much to his shame. After much agony and punishment, they say, he finally died in his own place, and because of the stench the area is deserted and uninhabitable even now; in fact, to this day one cannot pass that place without holding one's nose, so great was the discharge from his body, and so far did it spread over the ground."

How can anybody read this given what we know of human anatomy and believe it?



See my response about the book of Daniel. What is the difference between that book and the Gospel of Peter?



Then neither does your opinion count nor have you provided ANY evidence while I have tried to back up what I am saying with quotes from the very things you claim support you. Any claim that I have made that you think I have not supported with evidence, list it and I will provide the evidence.

I want evidence the apostles can't speak or read Greek
Thank u.
I will ignore the rest. It's just a case of merry go round now- waffling and recycling stale points.
U ve made your point, i dont really see much sense in it.
And nobody force the bible or Christianity on u, I think u mistaking it for another religion.

SIRTee15:


I want evidence the apostles can't speak or read Greek

At what age did your savior, Jesus come back from Egypt?

SIRTee15:



Even Celsus a Greek philosopher and Christian critic in the 2nd century affirm apostolic authorship.

Show us where Celsus "affirm" this, don't just be sprouting barreness.

See what Celsus said;
Volume 4 of The Ante-Nicene Fathers
Book 1,
Chapter 28
...[Celsus] accuses [Jesus] of having "invented his birth from a virgin," and upbraids Him with being "born in a certain Jewish village, of a poor woman of the country, who gained her subsistence by spinning, and who was turned out of doors by her husband, a carpenter by trade, because she was convicted of adultery; that after being driven away by her husband, and wandering about for a time, she disgracefully gave birth to Jesus, an illegitimate child, who having hired himself out as a servant in Egypt on account of his poverty, and having there acquired some miraculous powers, on which the Egyptians greatly pride themselves, returned to his own country, highly elated on account of them, and by means of these proclaimed himself a God."

SIRTee15:


I want evidence the apostles can't speak or read Greek
Thank u.
I will ignore the rest. It's just a case of merry go round now- waffling and recycling stale points.
U ve made your point, i dont really see much sense in it.
And nobody force the bible or Christianity on u, I think u mistaking it for another religion.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

You are the waffler here. I produced the evidence for my claims and now you want to run away. You mentioned church fathers but refused to quote any of their works meanwhile I quoted a church father and gave you the book and chapter so yeah buddy you are waffling big time.

You are the one making the claim that the Apostles and Jesus knew Greek so give us the evidence.

Did I say it was being forced on me? LoLz. You just say things I never said and attribute it to me.

After all your puffed up boasting look at you waffling harder than a waffle iron. Bwahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

SIRTee15:

because it was written in the 2nd century.

Good. So the book of Daniel wasn't written by Daniel and is in the Christian canon. Tell me the difference.

LordReed:


Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

You are the waffler here. I produced the evidence for my claims and now you want to run away. You mentioned church fathers but refused to quote any of their works meanwhile I quoted a church father and gave you the book and chapter so yeah buddy you are waffling big time.

You are the one making the claim that the Apostles and Jesus knew Greek so give us the evidence.

Did I say it was being forced on me? LoLz. You just say things I never said and attribute it to me.

After all your puffed up boasting look at you waffling harder than a waffle iron. Bwahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

whats triggering the Lagta

Anyway u ask for evidence....

From Iranaeus

LordReed:


Good. So the book of Daniel wasn't written by Daniel and is in the Christian canon. Tell me the difference.

Were the two books compiled by same people.
Was the tanakh compiled by the church fathers.
U see why I said we going in circle or u just want to argue.

SIRTee15:


From Iranaeus

this has already been thrashed na, Yahweh worshipper...
Cc lordreed.
https://biblehub.com/greek/1672.htm

SIRTee15:

Were the two books compiled by same people.
Was the tanakh compiled by the church fathers.
U see why I said we going in circle or u just want to argue.

The people that complied the Tanakh says that thing you worship in the new testament is a fraud, and none of their text prophecied it, why do Christians object?
Do they know it more than the people that complied it?