How can I prove/disprove that Saul of Tarsus existed?
>>1003192
Holy Bible is all you need my brother
>>1003236
>Bible
>>1003236
The agglomeration which was called and which still calls itself "The Holy Bible" was neither "The", nor "Holy", nor "Biblical".
>>1003192
Secular academia acknowledges that he existed. I think it's cause of the letters/
If you define him as "the author of these epistles from NT signed by Paul" then he surely existed, someone wrote these letters. Well, at least of 7 out 13, the other 6 are forged. Then you can take these 7 confirmed letters and get out of them something about him personally.
>>1003192
The existence of Saul of Tarsus is properly documented in the bible, and therefore true.
>>1003687
Evidence of forgery? No? Talking out of your ass? Yes?
>>1003468
It is The, it is Holy, and it is "biblical":
bib·li·cal
ˈbiblik(ə)l/
adjective
of, relating to, or contained in the Bible.
Do people who don't revere God's word have extra-biblical books in their canon?
Yes, yes they do.
>>1003192
Here's a thought. You could take the bible seriously.
How about that?
>>1003700
Different style and vocabulary, differences in teachings, other historical sources, internal consistency: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Criteria_used_by_scholars .
>>1003731
So, out of your ass, and out of the ass of known heretics like Origen.
>scholars as early as Origen of Alexandria in the 3rd century suspected that Paul was not the author.
Here's a clue for you. When discussing the bible, discount the word of known heretics.
>Bart D. Ehrman viewed the insistence of genuineness within the letter and the strong condemnation of forgery at its start as ploys commonly used by forgers
Here's another hint. Anything Bart Ehrman says, do the opposite.
And maybe stop getting your information from heretics, discredited scholars, and wiki.
>>1003744
>When discussing the bible, discount the word of known heretics.
Why? The fact the church branded them heretics doesn't make them wrong. It just means the Church branded them heretics.
>>1003753
People don't get branded heretics because they're not well liked.
They get branded heretics, at least in Christianity (can't speak to Catholicism, they think all Christians who are not Catholics are heretics) say, teach, and believe things contrary to the bible.
Origen believed Arian, another known heretic. It's likely Origin clipped the 1 John verse about the Trinity from his manuscript, as he did not believe in the Trinity. Neither did Arius.
>>1003764
>They get branded heretics, at least in Christianity (can't speak to Catholicism, they think all Christians who are not Catholics are heretics) say, teach, and believe things contrary to the bible.
No, actually. They get branded heretics because they say, teach, and believe things the Catholic church thinks are against the bible. This is an important distinction. The Catholic church is not the sole authority on the bible.
>>1003764
>They get branded heretics, at least in Christianity (can't speak to Catholicism, they think all Christians who are not Catholics are heretics) say, teach, and believe things contrary to the bible.
Not him, but by that definition, every Christian of every denomination is a heretic.
>>1003768
Not believing that Jesus is both the Son of Man and the Son of God is not believing the bible. Not believing in the Trinity is not believing the bible.
Not believing Jesus is as much God as though not man, and as much man as though not God, is heresy.
>>1003772
To the Catholics, yes. You didn't know that? Salvation is only inside their four walls; you have to belong to their church to be saved.
>>1003782
Not according to the Arians.
>>1003788
No, every denomination.
It is my understanding that Christians of every stripe believe that Jesus fulfilled the whole "law of God" thing perfectly. Sinless life and all of that. The Gospels record him sinning. Ergo, every Christian believes something against what is in the Bible, and by your definition, is a heretic.
>>1003744
>So, out of your ass
It's actually more or less academical consensus among historians.
> known heretics like Origen
Why? He's one of the most influential christian thinkers, and important historical source on the history of early church. The fact he was condemned as heretic 300 years after his death doesn't diminish his credibility as historical source.
> Anything Bart Ehrman says, do the opposite.
Why? He's influential scholar of the subject who spend decades studying it. He's well received by scholar community. Why should I outright dismiss his opinion?
And you didn't address a single point, except for two ad hominem.
>>1003764
> Neither did Arius.
Get your facts right, Arius did believe in trinity, he didn't believed in co-existence in eternity of Jesus.
>>1003808
Don't bother trying to argue with Orthodox Christians. They're hilariously deluded.
>>1003808
>Why? He's influential scholar of the subject who spend decades studying it. He's well received by scholar community. Why should I outright dismiss his opinion?
He's probably prseupposing that the Bible is both true and authentic.
>>1003768
Basically anyone who is not a member and doesn't hold the dogma (i think thats the right word) of X church/denomination is considered a heretic. Im sure there're some exceptions but thats how it usually is.
>>1003192
Well according to atheists he made up Jesus, so if he didn't who did? Checkmate, somebody.
>>1007323
Not all Atheists thinks Jesus was made up.
They just think his wonders were.
>>1003192
The same way you convinced yourself he did/didn't exist.
>>1003711
>Here's a thought. You could take the bible seriously
weak b8 t b h
>>1003764
>can't speak to Catholicism, they think all Christians who are not Catholics are heretics
No we don't. Every Protestant that was never Catholic cannot be a heretic even if Protestantism is eternally heresy. To be a heretic, you must start from Truth and then both embrace and champion a Nontruth to be a heretic.
>>1003788
Nice job misinterpreting Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus.
Prots are still The Church, just not the fullness of the Church. And fun fact, East Orthodoxy Christians preach Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus as well.
>>1003790
Not according to the Hindus either.
So maybe their opinions don't really matter.
>>1003798
>The Gospels record him sinning.
They do not, actually. If they did, there would be no Christianity.
So, bulk of Christianity v your baseless bullshit.
You lose.
>>1003808
The children of the devil are not the people to go to when you want to know the things of God.
That would be obvious if you believed there is a God, and if you believed there is a devil.
That you believe in neither is also obvious, and makes you delusional.
>>1003817
Then Jesus is not fully God, and there was a time when Jesus was not in the Trinity.
Therefore heresy.
>>1004235
A sword, actually dividing truth from error.
>>1007337
This is known as a "normalcy bias" and is irrelevant when dealing with reality.
>>1008032
That's apostate, not heretic, you papist liar.
>>1008064
Nope. Pope again confirmed that salvation is only in the Whore of Babylon. He's wrong, of course. Which you would know, if you had any spiritual discernment whatsoever.
>>1008110
Uh?
>>1008113
Apostasy embraces heresy. Those that never could apostate can't be heretics.
>>1003192
Paul's letters exist.
Paul wrote Paul's letters.
Paul wrote of Saul's conversion to Paul in Paul's letters.
Therefore Paul existed.
Is that really difficult for you?
>>1003782
>Not believing in the Trinity is not believing the bible.
Than Jesus Christ didn't beleive in the bible. Neither did Paul, Mark, Mathew, Luke or John.
Trinity is a 3rd century invention. It's as biblical as Ancient Aliens.
>>1003192
He is the person who authored the epistles that are credited to a single author and are not disputed and vice versa.
Since there really is no other definition of Saul of Tarsus to go on.
What remains up in the air is whether the claims made by that person are true aside from the obvious falsehoods/hallucinations.
>>1008136
Bible starts with the Trinity, Elohim. Plural word used in the singular sense. Just like Trinity.
Try harder, edgelord.
>>1008145
>the obvious falsehoods/hallucinations.
Of which not only are there none, but of which you would be in no position to rationally object.
>>1008285
I think it's more of a problem of him not finding enough proof for it.
>>1008285
He claimed that Jesus appeared to him.
That's either one or the other.
To claim that Jesus did actually appear to him you would first have to be able to prove the divinity of Jesus which is impossible.
>>1008117
>muh Whore of Babylon
>Literally the theogical argument equivalent of "REEEEEEEE NORMIES OUT!!!!"
What part of Fullness don't you get? You ARE the Church, just not in the fullness of truth. You have most of the truth, just not all of it because you activley reject it.
You watched Power Rangers except for the seasons of SPD, Lost Galaxy, Zeo, Ninja Storm, Jungle Fury, Samurai, Dino Thunder, Turbo and Time Force. You have not watched the full series, refuse to watch all of it, but you have watched some of it. You can still accurately call yourself a fan of the franchise. But a guy who's seen it all has seen the fullness of it and can beconsidered a truer fan for it. you might not have seen it all but you still can't be a fan. Now a guy who has never seen it in any capacity can't be a fan at all.
Not the best analogy but it still conveys the point of "some of the Truth, none of the Truth, all of the Truth" concept.
Heck, Prots preach extra Ecclesiam nulla salus too. Are Hindus saved?
The fact Orthobros preach it also nips that "non Catholics are damned" thing in the bud too, as our mutual qualms don't mean each of us damns eachother. Heck, the Orthodox know and understand what we preach as we understand and preach it, but they still reject it, Protestants don't care to know or understand what we preach as we understand and preach it before you reject it, instead coming up with your own idea and rejecting that because it's easier to reject something you've made into the worst thing possible that obviously is bad!
Plus you can't into history.
>>1008282
No serious scholar thinks Elohim is a reference for the trinity
>>1008092
Where are his wife and kids then? Why did he come to Jerusalem too late for him and his followers to bring a paschal offering at the right time?
>>1008285
Claiming to be an expert Pharisee scholar and then not knowing the difference between sin and defilement, or not knowing what sacrifices are for what, am seems to fit the bill.
>>1008292
I used to think as you do. Now I just see the godless make absurd statements about things not happening in the past because they don't believe they happened.
Like this idiot: >>1008319
Jesus appeared to Saul on the Road to Damascus. When we say Jesus is alive, we mean Jesus is alive, and capable of meeting people on the Road to Damascus.
Jesus claimed to be God, and proved it by fulfilling hundreds of prophecies of the Messiah, the Son of Man; by living a sinless life; by performing many miracles and wonders; and by RAISING FROM THE DEAD.
>>1008555
Funny as I used to think like you did about Evolution, then I realized how much the Creatonists are grasping at straws and use personal insults against Darwin and changed.
>>1008325
Jesuits lie, and then they lie, and then they lie.
Ope Eugene IV, in the Bull Cantate Domino in 1441, when he proclaimed ex cathedra:
“The Most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, also Jews, heretics, and schismatics can ever be partakers of eternal life, but that they are to go into the eternal fire ‘which was prepared for the devil and his angels’ unless before death they are joined with Her…
No one, let his alms giving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Jesus Christ can be saved unless they abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”
Are popes speaking ex cathedra infallible or not?
Is this catholic doctrine or not?
Pope Francis uses that the article brings up is as follows:
“Dear friends, let us ask the Lord, through the intercession of the Virgin Mary, Mother of the Church, for the grace to never fall into the temptation of thinking we can make it without others, that we can get along without the Church, that we can save ourselves alone, of being Christians of the laboratory. On the contrary, you cannot love God without loving your brothers, you cannot love God outside of the Church; you cannot be in communion with God without being so in the Church.”
Hmmm, seems like the current pope agrees with the other popes.
Yes, it is the Whore of Babylon.
Rome is Babylon (per Peter)
Roman Catholicism is Mystery Babylon
The Vatican is the Whore of Babylon.
The pope is the False Prophet of Babylon
You can REEEEE all you want; you have not only no defense, but no alternative candidates for this very apparent player in the end times.
And no, you cannot have just a little bit of the truth, as the truth is Jesus, and you either have Him (me) or you don't (you).
>>1008329
Then no serious scholar is correct on the issue.
>>1008411
For, what, the fifth time? Jesus is the Lamb of God to be sacrificed for the sins of the world.
He showed up right when Daniel said He would, and He died for the sins of the world on Passover, just like He said He would.
And then He rose on First Fruits, just like He said He would.
That you think Jesus had a wife and kids is ponderous.
>>1008565
Origin
Abiogenesis
Morality
Destiny
Answer any of the above using evolution as your worldview.
>>1008578
The early Jews believed in many gods, with El or Yaweh only being the chief god.
Elohim in this case is probably referring to the assembly of gods, and serves has a hang over of the Jews earlier beliefs
>>1008586
>Origin
Explain that with an all powerful and eternal God.
>Abiogenesis
It's debated, but the consensus seems to be that it formed near and around hot water pounds beneath the sea surface billions of years ago.
>Morality
>Destiny
I don't see what these have to do with Evolution really or how they may disapprove it in any way, unless its proven they do exist in objective and predestinated forms.
>>1008592
If you think El is YHWH, you're hopelessly lost.
>>1008596
Explain how God created the universe? He spoke it into existence.
God breathed life into the world; He is the source of life.
God is the objective basis for morality.
The destiny of humanity is to be separated between the people who choose to spend eternity with God in heaven, and people who choose to be on fire forever.
You have absolutely no answers to life's important questions when you limit yourself like an animal to your five senses.
>>1008609
I know that the latter Jews conflated the two Gods as the same. Yaweh was orginally the God of the army. (God of hosts)
Isra El
Micha El
Gabri El
>>1008609
>If you don't think like I do you are lost and will go to hell
Why isn't this viewed as insults?
Fundies will tell everyone else how they will surely go to hell and suffer for all eternity for not agreeing with them without anyone seeming to care much.
>>1008584
>Jesus is the Lamb of God to be sacrificed for the sins of the world.
And for the fifth time, passover doesn't have anything to do with sin or remission of such, lambs as sin offerings are female, and you're repeating Paul's "I have no idea what I'm talking about" 2000 years later.
>He showed up right when Daniel said He would,
Not a prophet.
> and He died for the sins of the world on Passover, just like He said He would.
Except that's nonsense.
>And then He rose on First Fruits, just like He said He would.
Resurrection proves nothing, see Elisha's tomb.
>That you think Jesus had a wife and kids is ponderous.
Oh look, you can't even read English. I asked, rhetorically "where are his wife and kids" because reproduction is also a divine command, and not doing it is sinful.
So, given that you can't even understand a straightforward 4chan post, what makes you think you can understand theology written in a foreign language?
>>1008615
You are basically telling me that Evolution is wrong because it don't makes you feel comfortable.
If someone came up with a religious book that gave answers to even more things than the Bible you would have to go with it since it gives more answers as well.
And Evolution don't have to mean disbelief in a God, just that you most likely disregard the entire Genesis or make it metaphorical.
>>1008616
When the obedient YHWH Jews worshiped foreign demon gods, the foreign demon gods were El, Ba'al, Molech and Asheroth, for the most part. And then they were punished by YHWH for being adulterers.
>>1008623
Everyone born, who reaches the age of accountability, is going to hell for being spiritually dead.
If you do not regain the life in you that Adam and Eve lost, you were born spiritually dead, are spiritually dead, and will die spiritually dead, suffering the second death.
You can take the warning as a threat, if you'd like, but the threat is out of my hands. I only provide the warning.
And it's not think as I do. It's do what God says.
>>1008636
Actually, you have zero clue about Judaism. I wonder if you're even a Jew.
Here's a passover lamb.
Exodus 12:5 Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year. You may take it from the sheep or from the goats.
Here's Jesus, the Lamb of God:
John 1:29 [Full Chapter]
The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!
Daniel is a prophet; he prophesied that the most powerful man on earth would live in the fields like a beast for seven years, and the most powerful man on earth lived in the fields like a beast for seven years.
You don't believe Moses, you don't believe the prophets, and you don't believe the Messiah.
I'll take my go-to Joo, Aaron Budjen of Living God Ministries over your home brewed nonsense all day, every day.
>>1008683
Yes, and if everyone calls you a retard he may very well think he is saying the truth, that don't stop making it an insult though.
Do you think you would be happy if a bunch of Muslims came on and said that everyone that didn't follow their religion would get assraped in all eternity and the mods didn't care because they really just wants to warn everyone else?
>>1008651
No, I'm telling you it's wrong because it takes every thing from micro-evolution, things we know happen, and infers that over time macro-evolution happens.
>>1008704
They do say that. They're wrong.
>>1008703
>Exodus 12:5 Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year. You may take it from the sheep or from the goats.
Notice how nothing in there is said about sin. Notice how the requirements are different for the sin offerings in Leviticus chapter 5 (of whom the first push is supposed to be a bull) Also you should re-check the timing in the synoptic gospels as to when the last supper was, he arrives in Jerusalem too late to properly bring an offering.
>Daniel is a prophet
Which is of course why his book is placed in the non-prophetic portion of the Bible and isn't included on any of the actual Hebrew lists of prophets.
>You don't believe Moses, you don't believe the prophets, and you don't believe the Messiah.
That projection. Have a nice day.
>I'll take my go-to Joo, Aaron Budjen of Living God Ministries over your home brewed nonsense all day, every day.
You should try Pablo Christiani instead. He was a very persuasive apologetic when confronted with actual Jewish beliefs before an impartial audience.
>>1008707
It do explain a lot of things rather well though.
Like why we Humans got more DNA in common with Moneys than other animals, and especially with Chimpanzees.
Why Marsupial's cant exist without having been ousted by Mammals.
>>1008709
They think they are right.
Fine with them saying it or?
>>1008675
Yes, its amazing how much the bible got wrong about early Jewish religion, isn't it?
>>1008798
Be fair, it gets a lot wrong about later Jewish religion too.
>>1008741
Micro-evolution was already covered by natural selection, adaptation, breeding, and genetic mutations. There is literally zero that "evolution" brings to the table except the faith based belief that all that exists today came from one single cell creature.
Nothing we see today contradicts creation, at all. It just purports to.
>>1008743
Am I fine? I'm fine with letting the chips fall where they may.
>>1008822
Any reason to think that HUmans aren't in some way related to Monkies if we got way more in common considering DNA than with other animals?
>>1008824
Are you fine with other Religions saying you will get buttfucked for all eternity for not believing in what they say?
>>1008828
I found my way out when I realized some things in the bible are wrong.
I hope you find your way out someday, you might be much happier
>>1008828
Suspend all logic and believe that a book of myths is real.
>>1008833
Of course. God spoke all the beasts of the field into existence at once. God formed man out of clay, and breathed the Breath of Life, the Holy Spirit, into man, made in God's image.
God uses DNA to make things. It's not the similarities that matter as much as it is the differences. And the similarities are really not so much as you have been lead to believe.
>>1008835
Of course. Why wouldn't I? I know their beliefs are false, and I'm not concerned about their threats in the least.
>>1008841
Keep studying what was in the bible that is holy, just, righteous and true, and find out where you made your error.
It's a good way to really learn the bible well.
Or you could just quit, after being wrong, and lose. Your choice.
>>1008882
Suspend all disbelief and realize that the bible is truly the word of God.
>>1008928
You can repeat that something is right and true untill your blue in the face, eventually you'll convince yourself. But you'll just be deluded
>>1003707
>Despot
>Johnny's
>Manuscript
>>1008921
They use tolls.
They wage war at each other.
They can show their feelings through facial features.
They are sentient.
They do have quite big similarities with us.
And God don't say a single world about anything even close to DNA or anything like that in the Bible, which I suppose he should have had an interest in doing somewhere, right?
>>1008931
Sure thing, buddy, what with all the contradictions in it and such.
>>1008936
That doesn't apply to you?
>>1008925
>I know their beliefs are false, and I'm not concerned about their threats in the least.
Kind of like how I feel about you
>>1008943
Yes, animals are wonderful. They were not, however, made in the image of God; they cannot, practically speaking, house the Holy Spirit of God in them. They will die, and their animating spirit will die with them.
>>1008961
Being as I listen to logic and evidence rather than religious dogma, no. At least not to the extent it applies to you
>>1008947
Gee, I've never seen one. Maybe you can find one, and win that million dollar prize that nobody has ever won. Or, maybe, just maybe, you're an idiot.
Maybe that?
>>1008963
Yes, but we both can't be right, now, can we. I'm happy standing on the solid rock that is Christ Jesus, and watching you sink in quicksand, well, it's not going to go well for you.
>>1008975
Oh, yes, you are a 100% logical and 100% evidence based human automaton.
You wouldn't, for instance, have a worldview with zero upside and an infinite downside.
You're too smart for that.
>>1008976
What million dollar prize?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bxPPZztGC4
>>1008980
Whatever helps you sleep at night
>>1008988
I sleep like a baby.
>>1008987
The one you'll never win.
>>1008987
Four words that do not go together: "Biblical scholar Bart Ehrman".
>>1008983
>Oh, yes, you are a 100% logical and 100% evidence based human automaton.
I never claimed to be
>You wouldn't, for instance, have a worldview with zero upside and an infinite downside.
You can believe what ever you want. You could believe for instance that when you die everyone goes not a magical land where all wrongs are righted and everyone is happy forever.
sounds nice but it isn't particularly convincing.
>>1009014
>I don't like what this scholar said, somehow that means other scholars don't respect him and use his work. None of that matters because I know better with my bachelors degree in an unrelated field
>>1009017
And again, you absolutely refuse to scrutinize your worldview.
Upside: None.
Downside: Eternity in flames.
>>1009025
The godless love Bart Ehrman, yes. It's a pity he's dead bang wrong, and a liar.
>>1009142
You aren't going with Pascal's wager now, are you?
>>1009029
The things of God are foolishness to the lost, and Bart Ehrman confessed he is lost. As a lost fool, you can believe lost fools, if you choose. I just wonder why.
>>1009149
Nope. Pascal's wager is lose-lose no matter how many columns you have.
A person is either For Jesus, or Against Jesus. There's only one way to be For Jesus, and that's to have the Holy Spirit in you. There are millions, if not billions, of ways to be Against Jesus.
For Jesus won.
Against Jesus lost.
>>1009153
It's actually for or against Ba'al.
>>1009166
You'd be hard pressed to find anyone but the most evil throwing their lot in with any canaanite demon god.
>>1009246
At least he never drowned the whole earth, eh?
>>1008576
>this level of BS paranoia
Do you seriously believe any of this? Next you'll be telling me all priests are Jesuits and Catholic priests call upon demons to conjur mighty spells of fire ice and lightning and that's what caused the Great Chicago Fire.
If Catholics are Babylonian, so are Protestants. Anyone familiar with Causality and development of religions will contest that, even athiests.
Ex Cathedra isn't a permanent status buff. You'd actually need evidence that something a pope says is done ex Cathedra. Ex Ecclesiam nulla salus applied to schismatics and heretics of the day because they were acting in a form of heterodox apostasy. Very few Orthodox Christians or Protestant Christians are apostates of Catholicism thus their status is fundamentally different. You probably had pagan ancestors, are you a pagan because of lineage or a Christian because of now?
Protestantism is heresy, but it's modern followers aren't really heretics because they weren't Catholic to begin with.
That's saying exactly what I said earlier, and you ARE still the Church, just not the full Church.
And I'm not REEEEEEing, you are. I'm actually using verifiable arguments, you're just making shit up. If Peter was the Whore, then what's with all the favoritism he seems to get in the Gospels, Acts, or his own Epistles? That's all in your translations too BTW.
And you can have partial truth.
Fire burns. Fire is extinguished by Water. This is because tiny water spires kill all the fire sprites.
That's not the full truth. There are no sprites, water extinguishes fire because it cools heat from the fuel when evaporating, and thus lowers the temperature, making it more difficult (or impossible) for the fuel to burn; It makes it more difficult for the fuel to be in contact with air, thus not letting oxygen and the fuel come together. THAT is full Truth.
