Were there any disciples at Ishua's trial?

[1dell]

nAH DUde check again, I said several sources, the sources aren't unknown, hell the sources are actually innundating.

Thats what I have been saying derrick, since day one, you can come here offer up a reference, i can come here and offer up a reference to counter your reference you can offer one that will counter mine and back and forth it will go. Scholars have already had this debate, this ish aint new. It's like watching football. Most people will root for the team from their home town based on affinity with that team and hometown pride. Thats all this is, I love my bible you hate my bible so the tennis match continues however futilely. You make it your point to put down the info never offering counter info, then you switch to a new subject, thats your strategy I can see that now. So on and on the game goes. I see you worming your way now to a new subject, leaving dozens of unanswered questions in your shadow.

Play on playa, lol It's funny whenever I creat a post that is 2 paragraphs or less, you respond to those, but the long ones, you aint got ish to say. lol. sigh

KnaxemDead said:

What was the neccesity of you even mentioning Herod tetrarch, when that wasn't even presented in previous argumentation. Then your comment that, 'Herod the Killed Ihawakhanan the Immerser is the same as the herod that died in 4 B.C.' Also, I see a subtle rectification of your post that Herod died in 4BC, earlier you mention it as 4AD, then Christ being born after that in 6 or 7AD, based on some unknown source.

[1dell]

The hell I haven't, go back oh great scholar, and reread what I've typed. It's all in there.

KnaxemDead said:

You haven't yet clarified for the record if Jesus was born two years before Herod died in 6 or 7BC, or during time first taxtation occured in 6-7AD?

[1dell]

Derek I noticed that ever since that Burger Chef closed in your area you aint been the same. Is that something you need to talk about bru? Go 'head and let it out.

[KnaxemDead]

I've been holding back my tongue, from saying your babbling, seeing how that triggers your default setting which is invectiveness so I am attempting not to do that. So if you would indulge me by answering the question without all the scarasm, and antics. In your own words please.

Thank you.

[1dell]

nigga please AFTER Your famous evasion act? Lol, what questions do you have for me? what are you asking that I haven't already answered but that you were too negligent to answer? Too busy "skimming" to address any real meat of the issues. You come here demanding answers but you haven't answered not one of MY questions. Your arguments have been over turned time and time again.

You post nothing but impertinent and uneducated rhetoric but you are the biggest critic on the block. LOL. If that's what floats ya boat keep comin wit it. You give new meaning to the word bob and weave, duck and dodge.

KnaxemDead said:

I've been holding back my tongue, from saying your babbling, seeing how that triggers your default setting which is invectiveness so I am attempting not to do that. So if you would indulge me by answering the question without all the scarasm, and antics. In your own words please.

Thank you.

[KnaxemDead]

Are you done? Will you answer the question in your own words, please keep it brief and to the point. My time is valuable and I really don't have it to waste reading you babbling on about how I alledgely mistreated you. Just get over it and answer the damn question. If not, then we are finish, and I can respond to these other significant post.

[1dell]

Nah nigga we aint finished, You have slew of unansweres questions, you haven't so much as touched nor have you answered all that other wrong information you posted. You dont control a dayum thing up in here. You continue to demand an ansaar to a question that I have asked you twice already what question you are talking about but you never come back with you. You are purposely ignoring me because you know your old tired argument is weak and frail so you are desparately trying to avoid answering and addressing issues.

So if YOU are done then arrivaderci. The fact that you refuse to re ask the question after I have asked 2 times already speaks volumes to me dude. You keep trying to act like you have some leverage up in here. And you aint got a dayum leg to stand on.

KnaxemDead said:

Are you done? Will you answer the question in your own words, please keep it brief and to the point. My time is valuable and I really don't have it to waste reading you babbling on about how I alledgely mistreated you. Just get over it and answer the damn question. If not, then we are finish, and I can respond to these other significant post.

[1dell]

mistreated? Nah don't worry bout me dawg, you are no threat to me, I am talking about how you are ignoring the rules of engagement. You are RUNNING plan and simple, You leave then come back 3 or 4 days later hoping somebody forgot about how wrong you were about something then you come back with and entirely new argument about something entirely different. Instead of acknowledging how wrong you were like a man, you just ignore it and worm your way out of. LOL. what a waste of time

KnaxemDead said:

Are you done? Will you answer the question in your own words, please keep it brief and to the point. My time is valuable and I really don't have it to waste reading you babbling on about how I alledgely mistreated you. Just get over it and answer the damn question. If not, then we are finish, and I can respond to these other significant post.

[Xavier]

Good day gentlemen. I have read and heard both arguments before from different sources. You both seem to be doing what many generations of scholars have been doing in respect to knowledge and to GOD. You debate the facts while leaving out the meaning. I know that you are concentrating of a particular subject but don't forget the Spirit of the Word-in all of this debate have you two looked for a common ground of innerstanding of one another and found forgiveness in your action upon one another? Or are you just debating for debating sake? You might say that you are not but your actions say differently. The pharisses were stuck into the written law and not the Spirit of the Law. Treat and love one another as you love yourself. We are in this Hell together. What can we do to uplift one another and the rest of the World? This is the one of the meanings of the Gospel in Spirit and Truth no matter your belief.

Knowlege and facts without the human element of connection is void. Our "Right" relationships to one another is our Wisdom.

Since you are on the "Christian" site, please try to understand that the Messiah is greater than his written history. You can't research the Lord without truly knowing the Lord in Spirit(through your action of how you treat one another will bring insight to parts of your thinking that you have not developed yet-be whole). To research on a purely physical level will only lead you to a linear understanding of a wholistic/spherical Reality/GOD.

**I Am using some of this material in a new post named "In the Spirit".

[KnaxemDead]

I figured YOU wouldn't address that issue. Your source of reference didn't differ from my facts presented as to whether Jesus was taken to Egypt or Nazareth, directly after his birth. Actually in his conclusion he merely invoked the reader to stand by their convictions inspite of lack historical and archaeological evidence to establish thier belief. To just accept the Holy Bible for face value when it makes outlandish claims, is ignorance. Since you relied on that writer's closing premise you also adhere to faith and belief could demount the facts, you got to be kidding me! You 1dell successfully failed to articulate in your own words why Matthew (anoynmous NT) writers put Jesus birth before 4BC, then Luke puts it after 6AD, two distinct times. Accusations of me cut and pasting, yet nowhere did I see what you learnt in 12 years of studing the Holy Bible.
Those questions posed by yourself were either irrelevant or an antic that you answered yourself in the same post. It wasn't necessary to comment on entirely silly remarks.
I'm actually tired of reading your monstrous post, these fillerbusters with unfounded insinuations, babbling, and irrational analogies mixed with scarasm and stupid antics. All in all you just like the writer you presented, a believer in greatest story ever told, a MTYH.

[1dell]

Bro, I have touched on that several times in this standoff but if you notice this is what the opposition isn't in the least bit interested in discussing those things It's all about profiting from those unresearched "errors" they claim they are finding to substantiate some new "doctrine" claimed to be purported.

Dude, we are dealing with backsliders and apostates, You ALREADY know their conscious has been severed with a hot iron.

Xavier said:

Good day gentlemen. I have read and heard both arguments before from different sources. You both seem to be doing what many generations of scholars have been doing in respect to knowledge and to GOD. You debate the facts while leaving out the meaning. I know that you are concentrating of a particular subject but don't forget the Spirit of the Word-in all of this debate have you two looked for a common ground of innerstanding of one another and found forgiveness in your action upon one another? Or are you just debating for debating sake? You might say that you are not but your actions say differently. The pharisses were stuck into the written law and not the Spirit of the Law. Treat and love one another as you love yourself. We are in this Hell together. What can we do to uplift one another and the rest of the World? This is the one of the meanings of the Gospel in Spirit and Truth no matter your belief.

Knowlege and facts without the human element of connection is void. Our "Right" relationships to one another is our Wisdom.

Since you are on the "Christian" site, please try to understand that the Messiah is greater than his written history. You can't research the Lord without truly knowing the Lord in Spirit(through your action of how you treat one another will bring insight to parts of your thinking that you have not developed yet-be whole). To research on a purely physical level will only lead you to a linear understanding of a wholistic/spherical Reality/GOD.

**I Am using some of this material in a new post named "In the Spirit".

[kAHANyAH]

frankly I dunno how any of yall can keep up wit the topic! Every issue gets burried under another issue!

[SatiyaH]

1dell said:

Derek I noticed that ever since that Burger Chef closed in your area you aint been the same. Is that something you need to talk about bru? Go 'head and let it out.

What the hell is this 1Dell? And you say you don't babble...this statement is just total nonsense.

[1dell]

Wow, thats deep, thats very deep. So then, you can pick and choose what to ansaar and whatnot to ansaar based on whether you feel like it or not? Dayum, bro, you'd get eaten alive if this was done in person. Goodness, you know an unanswered question is a sign of ignorance don't you?

Well let's see derek, if you paid attention and READ the entire article which by now we can all deduce that you DON'T you just "skim" thru material like you finally admitted 4 pages back. And not to mention you have a knack for copy and pasting SOME information but not ALL the information. You conveniently left out the remaining part of the text you copied and pasted:

The conclusions of historical study do indeed strengthen the case for the reliability of the Bible and should be used insofar as they are helpful, but the demand by the Word of God for our obedience and trust is total and immediate, thus far beyond the ability of scholarship to supply

In case it's too complex for you to figure out, the brother is saying Historical data indeed DOES strengthen the case for the reliabilty of the Bible.... But unlike you these brothers have provided MUCH information to substantiate their claims. They point back to history and text, papyri, scrolls you name it. If you even paid attention to what they were doing they were giving you BOTH sides of the argument. LOLOL, thats they you THOUGHT they were agreeing with you. LOLOLOLOL! Thats how I know you aint read it. You musta missed this part before they even began:

Let us look briefly at the issues involved in this case and try to see what is known about the events Luke describes as well as other historical parallels. In addition we shall try to identify assumptions that are made about the text both by its supporters and opponents.

You are lacking in finesse Derek, you try act like you got some but it's transparent and anyone can see right thru you. First when I present the info myself either you ignore what I said, duck what I said or run from what I said and go in hybernation for a few days then come back with a totally new subject to avoid dealing with the issues we last addressed. But THEN when I use come CONFIRMATIONal information (derek isn't that what you said was on your list of things that you consider as proof confirmation?) And I use some information to support what I am saying (and hell it saves me time and effort because you obvious have a selective reading problem that has proven to be a waste of my time anyway) Then you want it in my own words. LOLOL It's never good enough for you derek huh? just trying to buy yourself some time.

SIGH! this is some old dance like a butta fly sting like a flea type of strategy. LOL! That article argues BOTH points and that is why I used it to let you know you aint bringing nothing new to the table.

In all actually the events parallel, Lukas doesn't put Ishua's birth at 6 AD, that is your ASS-U-mption. The ONLY leg you have to stand one is Quirinius being the "governor" of Syria during that time for the census, that leg has been broken dawg. Reread the article.

Since you relied on that writer's closing premise

I don't rely on the writer's closing premise, you really got issues derek! You need some dayum help kid! I am refering to the ENTIRE article, just because the closing arguments are aparently ALL that you read don't ASS-U-me thats all I am "relying" on.

You 1dell successfully failed to articulate in your own words why Matthew (anoynmous NT) writers put Jesus birth before 4BC, then Luke puts it after 6AD, two distinct times.

Nah dude, Actually I have my version SOMEWHERE in there. But like you said "I'm actually tired of reading your monstrous post" and as a graphic designer, I know one thing, tired eyes miss details. So we have 2 confession from you derek, you like to skim my posts and in the process missing heaps of info, then you a tired of reading my monstrous posts which perfectly explains why you one dance around subjects and 2 dont ansaar questions and 3 claim i haven't ansaared questions that I have already ansaared.

Those questions posed by yourself were either irrelevant or an antic that you answered yourself in the same post. It wasn't necessary to comment on entirely silly remarks.

So remarks are silly only when derek construe them as being silly. Thats gotta come in handy whenever the going gets tough for ya. I might try that one day. But nah, I'm too much of a man to woos my way out of something like that.

"All in all you just like the writer you presented, a believer in greatest story ever told, a MTYH."

Well then that makes 2 of us bro, lol history is one big myth any dayum way written by the hands of men who from their perception documented a thing. Mikail Gorbachev put it plainly "History is a capricious thing, it all depends on who rights it". I can tell you one thing right now, lol, the war against Iraq, I bet you the American account of that history will differ from how the Iraqis record that event. You are still a child in your understand bro. You call this a myth, so be, that is what it is to YOU, so is what you believe a myth to me. lol so we even. Thats what the author was trying to tell you. But scripture matches the scriptures in moor ways than you think ESPECIALLY approven in that article. I read the enter thing, did you? The reason for the author's closing comments is because it all boils down to this, ANYONE who studies history for ANY length of time will notice one thing, That it was written by many different people who do not agree on any particular event. Plain and simple. There are contradiction "fact" in recorded history however flamboyant or however subtitle. Tis why York made his career off of THEIR history = His Story and My Stery = My Story. Thats why I said Ishua was born AROUND 6 or 7 B.C. Because there are several sources that say different things. That is no problem because you have different calendars to deal with, different systems of measuring time to deal with.

The authors of the Gospels aren't saying one year or another, your comparison of the events to contradicting history is saying that. lol That is really sad dude. very sad you exhonorate egypt who even historians will tell you have contradicting accounts of their own history, not to mention thousands of volumes of texts destroyed by Alexandar and Napolean. LOL,

Dude, I after that this I typed during this entire bebate I REFUSE to put it all in digestive form for you. That aint gonna happen. All the answers you are seeking are in here. Take your lazy ass and read it! I ain't doing the work for you. Everyone else is reading it, why don't you.

KnaxemDead said:

I figured YOU wouldn't address that issue. Your source of reference didn't differ from my facts presented as to whether Jesus was taken to Egypt or Nazareth, directly after his birth. Actually in his conclusion he merely invoked the reader to stand by their convictions inspite of lack historical and archaeological evidence to establish thier belief. To just accept the Holy Bible for face value when it makes outlandish claims, is ignorance. Since you relied on that writer's closing premise you also adhere to faith and belief could demount the facts, you got to be kidding me! You 1dell successfully failed to articulate in your own words why Matthew (anoynmous NT) writers put Jesus birth before 4BC, then Luke puts it after 6AD, two distinct times. Accusations of me cut and pasting,
Those questions posed by yourself were either irrelevant or an antic that you answered yourself in the same post. It wasn't necessary to comment on entirely silly remarks.
I'm actually tired of reading your monstrous post, these fillerbusters with unfounded insinuations, babbling, and irrational analogies mixed with scarasm and stupid antics. All in all you just like the writer you presented, a believer in greatest story ever told, a MTYH.

[1dell]

At times Satiyah, I like to add humor to keep the situation lite and fun. It aint that deep. I find an opportunity for a joke, I lay one on ya. Hey I get a kick out of this stuff. This is fun to me. I be daggone if I am going to abandon my style of because yall wanna be tight wads. Come on now.

I add jokes to let ya know we disagree on this but hell, friendship awaits us afterwards.

I don't take this stuff that seriously, but I do take fun seriously, I have to have fun in everything I do.

Oh let me quantify what I am saying before this starts an entirely new debate and give derek another reason to go off on a tangient. I don't take this stuff seriously meaning this bull crap derek is spewing is an old tired argument. You know how if Mike Tyson was fighting, Hector Camacho? You think Camacho's punches would affect Mike? Nah, Like Roy Jones in his former division, he would toy and play with his opponents if the didn't take em seriously because thier punches were either missing or just plain weak? Ok Same thing

SatiyaH said:

What the hell is this 1Dell? And you say you don't babble...this statement is just total nonsense.