- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: We should listen when mooslums tell us who they are and their goal!
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:20 pm to Boom33
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:20 pm to Boom33
quote:
Satan is who Paul claims is God.
Jesus says over and over that Satan is the ruler of this world. Satan even offers him to be King over all the lands etc. Jesus says that he will no longer talk with them because the ruler of this world is coming. John talks about the ruler of this world stands condemened.
Jesus is telling people that the current power structure of the world serves Satan. This is still true today and we all know it. He was killed because he wouldn't bow down to it and threatened it.
Paul does the opposite. In Romans Paul says the authorities of this world are installed by God. Paul claims Satan is the "God of this age" and "the prince of power of the air". Paul teaches submission to the things Jesus fought against.
And then there is the entire blood sacrifice thing. That is purely a Paul thing. Paul is the one who turns it into humanity is saved by the physical blood and death of Jesus on the cross.
Meanwhile to the existing followers who were with Jesus, they did not believe in that. They believed you had to keep the commandments the way Jesus did.
Over a few hundred years the Pauline version won out. Gradually over time. Roman citizens were much more open to the idea of a "free gift" to where they didn't have to do anything while the "other side" was telling them they had to keep the commandments and live as Jesus did.
Jesus exposed things, Paul does the opposite. You don't even really have to keep the commandments anymore according to Paul, despite Jesus saying such things over and over. What better way to serve Satan than to tell people they are saved no matter if they keep the commandments or not? It's a lie.
Could you misunderstand this any worse quote:How convenient. "It exists but you won't find it anywhere."
Scripture won't tell you these things, but history will
1
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:20 pm to somethingdifferent
quote:
No he didn't nerd
Do you agree with James or Paul when it comes to faith and works?
Which one of them changed it?
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:20 pm to Boom33
quote:Just say you support murdering babies and we'll all know where you're coming from
Taking away the freedoms in others is not divine
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:21 pm to Boom33
quote:In philosophy, this is called a false dilemma
Do you agree with James or Paul when it comes to faith and works?
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:25 pm to somethingdifferent
quote:
No he didn't nerd
Yes, he did.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:25 pm to somethingdifferent
quote:
Could you misunderstand this any worse
You can't rebuke it.
quote:
How convenient. "It exists but you won't find it anywhere."
I literally told you where it exists. This idea that Christianity has always been united under the Pauline doctrine is just false.
People like Jesus and James and those in Jerusalem believed you had to keep the commandments yourself, while Paul taught that you were saved by the blood of Jesus, debts and all that trash.
So again, I'll ask - if the blood sacrifice of Jesus is the requirement Paul claims, then why and how did Jesus tell a man he was forgiven of his sin before his death?
On the same note, why didn't Jesus tell the rich man he had to sell his things and actually follow him rather than telling him he would be saved by the spilling of his blood if he just believed in that?
Because it's not the same religion, that's why.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:30 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:Prove it. List the verses. Lay out your misunderstanding
Yes, he did
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:31 pm to somethingdifferent
quote:
In philosophy, this is called a false dilemma
A false dilemma is a logical fallacy. Just because 2 options are offered doesn't mean it's a false dilemma.
You are free to name a 3rd option if you want. However, I mentioned the 2 because they say different things.
As I mentioned previously, Martin Luther wanted to get rid of James completely because of it. James was written for the purpose of dismantling Paul's doctrine. The only reason both James and Paul both exist in the bible at all was an attempt to unite the 2 factions. Basically, a compromise.
So do you believe faith alone is enough as Paul suggests, or do you believe what James said that you are not justified by faith alone?
James says even says "You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder"
If you want to offer the opinion of neither or some other 3rd part is correct on the topic, I'm fine with that.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:34 pm to somethingdifferent
quote:
Prove it. List the verses. Lay out your misunderstanding
Bro, come on. Don’t be coy. The Pauline epistles changed the direction of Christianity. There were fundamental debates in the early years of Christianity about what it meant to be a Christian.
Be intellectually honest. I’m not making a value judgement on Christianity qua Christianity.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:37 pm to AlwysATgr
quote:
Who are these people "with understanding?" If it's so easy, you should be able to name them.
I mean you're really just asking so you can find a way to attack them personally rather than the position, but whatever. Here's a few.
James
Peter
Ebionites
Judaizers
Nietzsche
Leo Tolstoy
Thomas Jefferson
Søren Kierkegaard
This post was edited on 8/30/26 at 6:38 pm
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:47 pm to somethingdifferent
quote:
Oh my word here we go
You might want to read Galatians 2:6
What about it?
quote:
It's amazing. None of this is true
The Romans took Jerusalem in 70AD. The original Jewish-Christian power center lead by the family of Jesus was broken and scattered in the process. Many of them ending up in the desert.
The Gospels were formed after this. In large Part because Paul had written a bunch of things years prior and it started with Matthew trying to preserve things (they all thought the earth was going to end so didn't bother with it previously, but the actual eyewitnesses were dying off). These were the Ebonites.
Luke (from Paul) writes Luck and Acts to scrub out the historical fights between Peter and Paul.
Eventually by the 300 AD time period when Constantine converts to Pauline Doctrine, The Ebonite's were officially outlawed, branded as heretics and their texts were destroyed.
The idea it was all united is a myth.
quote:
Luther also believed consubstantiation so he was definitely far from perfect on theological issues
Ok, but he was a big influence of the direction of things wouldn't you say? Why would he want to do that other than what I said?
quote:
No it does not
The rest of your post is
It gives actual guidelines and regulations for it.
This post was edited on 8/30/26 at 6:49 pm
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:50 pm to somethingdifferent
quote:
Just say you support murdering babies and we'll all know where you're coming from
What the frick are you talking about.
If you haven't figured it out yet - my standards are much higher than yours.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:52 pm to Boom33
quote:You didn't prove anything genius. All you did was post a bunch of ahistorical crap.
You can't rebuke it
quote:You said "history."
I literally told you where it exists
quote:I completely agree. Did you bother to read the verse I quoted?
This idea that Christianity has always been united under the Pauline doctrine is just false
quote:Among quite a few other things
People like Jesus and James and those in Jerusalem believed you had to keep the commandments yourself
quote:"Trash." Like John 14:6, John 11:25–26, John 8:24, John 10:9, Matthew 20:28/Mark 10:45, John 10:11, 17–18, John 3:14–15, Matthew 26:27–28/Luke 22:19, John 6:51
while Paul taught that you were saved by the blood of Jesus, debts and all that trash
quote:Because Jesus understood Genesis 15:6 which is recapitulated in Romans 4:3/Romans 4:18–24/Galatians 3:6/James 2:23
if the blood sacrifice of Jesus is the requirement Paul claims, then why and how did Jesus tell a man he was forgiven of his sin before his death?
quote:Read the verses I quoted about Jesus saying he is the way to salvation. He told the person give up everything because he know the person couldn't do it.
why didn't Jesus tell the rich man he had to sell his things and actually follow him rather than telling him he would be saved by the spilling of his blood if he just believed in that?
quote:2 things
Because it's not the same religion, that's why
It's clear you've never read any good commentaries. These are junior high level issues that have been answered for hundreds of years in theologically sound commentaries.
I get that you're coming in hot but I've been on this board for more than 20 years. I've been on infidels.org. I've been to countless seminars and debates. I've read the skeptics annotated bible. I've seen all the kooks on youtube trying to reinvent history. I've read tons of anti Christian books. I've studied all these theological/philosophical issues at the graduate level. You are not going to present something new that I haven't already refuted about 100 times over. You aren't "on to something." You don't have the historical upper hand. I get that Dan McClellan is all fun right now because he's edgy and wears comic book t-shirts like he's nerd cool but he's just repackaging 100 year old slop.
Dan Brown just took FC Baur's hilarious notes and wrote a page turner. But it's historically farcical.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:54 pm to Boom33
quote:No they don't and any theologically halfway clued up person knows this
I mentioned the 2 because they say different things
quote:And Luther was wrong on this account
Martin Luther wanted to get rid of James completely because of it
quote:There's no historical evidence for this whatsoever. None. This is Dan Brown level crap
James was written for the purpose of dismantling Paul's doctrine. The only reason both James and Paul both exist in the bible at all was an attempt to unite the 2 factions. Basically, a compromise.
quote:False dilemma. The 2 verses are complementary, not contradictory
So do you believe faith alone is enough as Paul suggests, or do you believe what James said that you are not justified by faith alone?
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:55 pm to Boom33
quote:
What the frick are you talking about.
welcome to this board. You: “I disagree with your statement”.
This board: “you’re a Muslim communist anti-Trumper who supports abortion, satanism, and child molestation”.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:55 pm to Mo Jeaux
somethingdifferent is something different
Posted on 8/30/26 at 6:55 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:I quoted you a verse that dispels this misconception
The Pauline epistles changed the direction of Christianity
Posted on 8/30/26 at 7:03 pm to Boom33
quote:
What about it?
Did you read it? Do you not understand why it explains the misconception? quote:In written form but they certainly existed before they were in written form. You can start with Acts 2:36–38
The Gospels were formed after this
quote:
Luke (from Paul) writes Luck and Acts to scrub out the historical fights between Peter and Paul
quote:There's the Dan Brown garbage. "Oh there were these OTHER poor suppressed Christians but their writings were destroyed by those power monger Pauline people. If they had survived, Christianity would look so different today." It's been historically refuted for a long, long time.
The Ebonite's were officially outlawed, branded as heretics and their texts were destroyed
quote:Sure. He was still wrong about consubstantiation and James. Pretty much every Christian knew it and that's why Bibles still have James in them
he was a big influence of the direction of things wouldn't you say?
quote:How is that "support?" It's not.
It gives actual guidelines and regulations for it
Posted on 8/30/26 at 7:03 pm to somethingdifferent
quote:
"Trash." Like John 14:6, John 11:25–26, John 8:24, John 10:9, Matthew 20:28/Mark 10:45, John 10:11, 17–18, John 3:14–15, Matthew 26:27–28/Luke 22:19, John 6:51
John 14:6 - Jesus is saying only by following the path based on his life and following the truth will you find God.
That is a true statement.
Paul turned Jesus into an idol however and claims that "If you declare with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."
That is different message, because Paul is a fraud and what he is saying is trash. You have to keep the commandments. There is no free gift, there is no free ride.
quote:
Because Jesus understood Genesis 15:6 which is recapitulated in Romans 4:3/Romans 4:18–24/Galatians 3:6/James 2:23
No, that is where Paul shifts the language and meaning of Genesis. He took a Hebrew word with one meaning and translated it into Greek legal framework.
And it's funny you mentioned James 2:23, because James is pointing this manipulation out there and to say that Paul's interperation is completely wrong.
You seem to think just because they both quote Genesis 15:6 it's the same thing. No, they are disagreeing with each other.
Why not bring up Galatians 3 where Paul insults anyone who disagrees with his view of Abraham?
quote:
Read the verses I quoted about Jesus saying he is the way to salvation. He told the person give up everything because he know the person couldn't do it.
Jesus says if you believe in him, you will do as he does. He is a teacher, not a sacrifice.
Posted on 8/30/26 at 7:15 pm to somethingdifferent
quote:
No they don't and any theologically halfway clued up person knows this
Tell it to James and Peter.
To Paul, being held to the commandments was a curse and only escaped by Jesus dying on the cross.
quote:
And Luther was wrong on this account
And he was wrong for wanting to keep Paul.
quote:
There's no historical evidence for this whatsoever. None. This is Dan Brown level crap
Galatians 2:12 even calls out James directly.
Or again, tell me which one is correct:
Romans 3:28: For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law.
or James 2:24: You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.
So how can you sit here and claim these fights didn't happen?
quote:
False dilemma. The 2 verses are complementary, not contradictory
In what way are they complementary?
The fact is, they both lead very different versions of Christianity, and you are trying to gloss over that.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News