Originally posted by [imdestinyz]:
A 5000 thousand year old religion doesn't prove anything? :)Really incredible attempt.
Excuse me, I am not saying it doesn't prove anything, I am asking what exactly does it prove?
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
And so? That does not prove anything. Better a frog in the well than a blind frog in an open field.
Am i supposed to read "that does not prove anything" as "so what does it prove"
The nature of those few words are vasely different.
So are u trying to say again that many ppl have misinterpreted/misrepresented you again? or are you twisting your own words?
Originally posted by Aneslayer:
Erm... the earth is believed to be 6000 year old... which is still older than Hinduism. I would bet on BIC this time round. Any bookies?
Disclaimer: Linking to a wiki description does not imply believe in the described.
how can earth be 6,000 years old?
what about pre-history then
Originally posted by [imdestinyz]:
Am i supposed to read "that does not prove anything" as "so what does it prove"The nature of those few words are vasely different.
So are u trying to say again that many ppl have misinterpreted/misrepresented you again? or are you twisting your own words?
Are my words so hard to understand?
Please read in context to my reply to Jacky can? Common sense please.
OK, let me put it in simple words for you. Jacky claims that religions copy from each other (a claim that he asserted but did not prove). He then say that Hinduism predates Christianity by 5000 years. My reply is: So what? What does this prove?
Of course, being an intelligent reader I would gather that Jacky was insinuating (but not stating) that Christianity copied from Hinduism. But then the question to him (and you) would be, is that true? Has it been proven? Or merely asserted? Based on prejudice or based on verifiable facts?
Originally posted by BroInChrist:Are my words so hard to understand?
Please read in context to my reply to Jacky can? Common sense please.
OK, let me put it in simple words for you. Jacky claims that religions copy from each other (a claim that he asserted but did not prove). He then say that Hinduism predates Christianity by 5000 years. My reply is: So what? What does this prove?
Of course, being an intelligent reader I would gather that Jacky was insinuating (but not stating) that Christianity copied from Hinduism. But then the question to him (and you) would be, is that true? Has it been proven? Or merely asserted? Based on prejudice or based on verifiable facts?
Oh i believe and i thought things were quite logical to understand that you would not even need to ask that question.
hmmm talking about insinuating... haha... i guess NUS recent incident fits the call. Verificable, proves, hmmmm... how much have what is in the bible proven as truth then?
http://www.allabouttruth.org/when-was-the-bible-written-faq.htm
bible written <5k years ago. Defintely could not be the other way round.
Originally posted by Jacky Woo:how can earth be 6,000 years old?
what about pre-history then
Why can't the earth be 6000 years old? See http://creation.com/old-earth-or-young-earth-belief
What about pre-history? See http://www.creationmoments.com/content/where-does-prehistoric-man-fit-bibles-history
Originally posted by [imdestinyz]:Oh i believe and i thought things were quite logical to understand that you would not even need to ask that question.
hmmm talking about insinuating... haha... i guess NUS recent incident fits the call. Verificable, proves, hmmmm... how much have what is in the bible proven as truth then?
http://www.allabouttruth.org/when-was-the-bible-written-faq.htm
bible written <5k years ago. Defintely could not be the other way round.
Why would it be a logical thing? Jacky has not demonstrated the logic of his conclusion. You need to apply critical thinking so as not to be duped by dubious claims and assertions.
NUS recent incident? Red herring?
To substantiate allegations of copying you need to do more than saying that one preceded the other. Please don't be superficial in your analysis and conclusion.
Originally posted by Jacky Woo:how can earth be 6,000 years old?
what about pre-history then
Tl;dr version: It could be all a conspiracy against Christianity out of all possibilities...
Originally posted by BroInChrist:Are my words so hard to understand?
Please read in context to my reply to Jacky can? Common sense please.
OK, let me put it in simple words for you. Jacky claims that religions copy from each other (a claim that he asserted but did not prove). He then say that Hinduism predates Christianity by 5000 years. My reply is: So what? What does this prove?
Of course, being an intelligent reader I would gather that Jacky was insinuating (but not stating) that Christianity copied from Hinduism. But then the question to him (and you) would be, is that true? Has it been proven? Or merely asserted? Based on prejudice or based on verifiable facts?
BIC,
But we all know that it is a fact that christianity is copied or adapted from Judaism.
It is a branch of Judaism.
Jews, followers of Judaism view christianity as a deviant branch.
Originally posted by Tcmc:BIC,
But we all know that it is a fact that christianity is copied or adapted from Judaism.
It is a branch of Judaism.
Jews, followers of Judaism view christianity as a deviant branch.
They may share the same OT as Scriptures but IMO it takes a seriously confused individual to say that Christianity is a branch of Judaism. Jesus was a Jew but He certainly was not a follower of Judaism. You need to know what Judaism believes to note the differences. See http://www.gotquestions.org/Judaism.html
But EVEN IF what you said is true, so what?
Firstly, you commit the genetic fallacy, the error of disproving a belief by tracing it to its source.
Secondly, not all Jews see Christianity as deviant. There are Messianic Jews who see Christianity as the fullness of the Jewish faith. See http://www.gotquestions.org/Messianic-Judaism.html
Originally posted by BroInChrist:They may share the same OT as Scriptures but IMO it takes a seriously confused individual to say that Christianity is a branch of Judaism. Jesus was a Jew but He certainly was not a follower of Judaism. You need to know what Judaism believes to note the differences. See http://www.gotquestions.org/Judaism.html
But EVEN IF what you said is true, so what?
Firstly, you commit the genetic fallacy, the error of disproving a belief by tracing it to its source.
Secondly, not all Jews see Christianity as deviant. There are Messianic Jews who see Christianity as the fullness of the Jewish faith. See http://www.gotquestions.org/Messianic-Judaism.html
BIC
1. Christianity is a branch of Judaism. But of course you see christianity as a :"fulfillment" of judaism. But theoretically speaking, christianity came from judaism. Jesus quoted from the OT, and always referred to the judaic god as his god,even on the cross (abba abba why did you forsake me). BTW, saying it's a branch doesnt mean it is completely the same as judaism. Thats why its called a branch, not totally identical. It's just like how buddhism is a branch from hinduism.
2. When did i try to use its source to prove thats its wrong in this specific discussion? We are just discussing about the roots of xtianity, not whether it is wrong by its roots. You are overly defensive.
3. I never did say all Jews see jesus as deviant. Defensive again
Originally posted by Tcmc:BIC
1. Christianity is a branch of Judaism. But of course you see christianity as a :"fulfillment" of judaism. But theoretically speaking, christianity came from judaism. Jesus quoted from the OT, and always referred to the judaic god as his god,even on the cross (abba abba why did you forsake me). BTW, saying it's a branch doesnt mean it is completely the same as judaism. Thats why its called a branch, not totally identical. It's just like how buddhism is a branch from hinduism.
2. When did i try to use its source to prove thats its wrong in this specific discussion? We are just discussing about the roots of xtianity, not whether it is wrong by its roots. You are overly defensive.
3. I never did say all Jews see jesus as deviant. Defensive again
1. Already addressed this on the other thread.
2. OK, take it that I am overly defensive then. As asked in the other thread: So what's your point?
3. Well, you never qualified your statement, so who's to tell whether you meant some or all?
Originally posted by Tcmc:BIC,
But we all know that it is a fact that christianity is copied or adapted from Judaism.
It is a branch of Judaism.
Jews, followers of Judaism view christianity as a deviant branch.
Thats true
Otherwise, they wouldnt even use the Old Testaments
But i disagree on the point Jews view xtianity as a deviant branch, i am not even sure they view xtianity as a branch at all
Originally posted by laurence82:Thats true
Otherwise, they wouldnt even use the Old Testaments
But i disagree on the point Jews view xtianity as a deviant branch, i am not even sure they view xtianity as a branch at all
Of course, when its not solid, its is not
Is a pool of water still ice?
How stupid can you get???
Originally posted by laurence82:Thats true
Otherwise, they wouldnt even use the Old Testaments
But i disagree on the point Jews view xtianity as a deviant branch, i am not even sure they view xtianity as a branch at all
Jews differ on their views. I mean, that is from my experience of speaking to a Jew myself and reading on Judaism.
Some jews view jesus as a false prophet, some view him as a prophet but a bit wayward, some view him as non-existent even.
Then there are the "messianic jews" who are actually christians in the religion sense.
Originally posted by Tcmc:Jews differ on their views. I mean, that is from my experience of speaking to a Jew myself and reading on Judaism.
Some jews view jesus as a false prophet, some view him as a prophet but a bit wayward, some view him as non-existent even.
Then there are the "messianic jews" who are actually christians in the religion sense.
So with all these differing views, which one is right? Or you think none is right? Or it doesn't matter because "your truth is not my truth"?
Originally posted by BroInChrist:So with all these differing views, which one is right? Or you think none is right? Or it doesn't matter because "your truth is not my truth"?
The truth for this situation is that everyone has differing views on jesus and it's hard to know the truth as it happened a while ago.