The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum

=> Re: Kris...You don't know

Re: Kris...You don't know
Posted by Kris K. (Guest) statement@assyrianconvention.com - Thursday, October 21 2004, 6:42:33 (CEST)
from 67.163.61.19 - c-67-163-61-19.client.comcast.net Network - Windows XP - Internet Explorer
Website: http://www.assyrianconvention.com
Website title: This is my Statement.

***Kris here is one time out of several that Jesus could have denounced himself and set free. This goes to show you he is in control and this is his destiny to sacrifice himself.
Yes...he was in so much control, that he was in shackles.

>The problem with your argument is that it’s full of holes. But I wouldn’t call it Holy (pun intended)
ahh....swiss, ham on wheat

>The bible is considered a factual historical book. As a matter of fact it has more credibility than Plato’s and Socrates combined by a hundred folds. If you like we can also use the historians Josephus and Tacitus as a reference just to name a few.
Sorry to break this to you Saint, but it in no way shape or form considered factual. It's considered only HISTORICAL evidence, not FACTUAL evidence. The infallible book is fallibly infallible. It also contains stories that precede the times it claims to have taken place. To name one, Gilgamesh. Also, the many translations it endured through the years. And you want to claim it is factual?

>Let’s take it one more step further. How about witness accounts or forensic science with respect to manuscript evidence, archeology evidence and statistical probability. You would have to come to the conclusion that the Bible can and well hold up as scientific evidence. Your argument is not valid in this case. You did or could not bring out the evidence to show otherwise. As a matter of fact they have been trying to discredit the bible for thousands of years. Some become converts as they go a long and others die rejecting the loving knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

No Offense Saint....this is the funniest part.
Witness Accounts?? (That's the best)
Forensic Evidence?? (Shroud of Turin)
Statistical Probability??
Actually, it is considered to be almost completely inadmissible, because it lacks a single shred of evidence. It is considered a fable in the historical world. I along with the world would love to see this evidence you claim exists.

>I beg to differ…a text without a context is a pretext. In your case you are taking a verse out of context and trying to form a logical argument out of it. It will not hold. In a court of arbitration, you would lose.
Doubt it

Kris



---------------------


The full topic:



Content-length: 2663
Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Accept: image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, application/vnd.ms-powerpoint, application/vnd.ms-excel, applicatio...
Accept-encoding: gzip, deflate
Accept-language: en-us
Cache-control: no-cache
Connection: Keep-Alive
Cookie: *hidded*
Host: www.insideassyria.com
Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf3/rkvsf_core.php?Kris_You_don_t_know-9hqv.bgrs.QUOTE
User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)



Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9