Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Spirituality & Mysticism
Is Jesus Azizus Monobaz?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Harte" data-source="post: 96115" data-attributes="member: 443"><p>You can read what Ellis wrote in the pic I uploaded, if you can't be bothered to check the ebook.</p><p> </p><p>Should I quote Ellis again? Like I said, I can read. I can see what Ellis said - that jesus was "always described in the New Testament as being a glutton and a drunkard."</p><p> </p><p>Where did I state that Ellis was calling Jesus anything?</p><p>Eliis utterly mischaraterized how Jesus was described, then cited a passage, a <em>single</em> passage, that in no way supports his claim.</p><p> </p><p>IOW, he lied about how Jesus was characterized. He lied in two ways.</p><p>1) He lied when he used the term "always" where not a single person other than Jesus himself (and only in that one passage, and only in sarcasm) <em>ever</em> described Jesus that way.</p><p>2) He lied by citing the passage, full well knowing that the passage indicates no such characterization of Jesus at all, other than Jesus' own sarcastic comments on how the Pharisees and Lawyers invented faults for both He and John the Baptist.</p><p> </p><p></p><p>I gave you the correct title AND page number, Ren. I simply linked to the wrong url, connecting you with the Book of Luke by accident:</p><p></p><p> </p><p>I see that, having no other position except "That's not what he meant!!!" you decide to act juvenile and attack me personally.</p><p> </p><p>Hey Num, I thought this sort of thing was fvrowned on around here.</p><p> </p><p>Perhaps, once you muster up the mental faculties that could possibly allow you, after an hour or two of study, the ability to discern the difference between the number 291 and the number 398 (as a Math teacher, I can help you there, but it will take much longer with the rest of the numbers and these two suffice to make my point,) you can begin to make your way into the halls of civil discourse. Until then, I'm afraid you're stuck on the playground, hooting your inane "ideas" from the monkey bars.</p><p> </p><p>Harte</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Harte, post: 96115, member: 443"] You can read what Ellis wrote in the pic I uploaded, if you can't be bothered to check the ebook. Should I quote Ellis again? Like I said, I can read. I can see what Ellis said - that jesus was "always described in the New Testament as being a glutton and a drunkard." Where did I state that Ellis was calling Jesus anything? Eliis utterly mischaraterized how Jesus was described, then cited a passage, a [I]single[/I] passage, that in no way supports his claim. IOW, he lied about how Jesus was characterized. He lied in two ways. 1) He lied when he used the term "always" where not a single person other than Jesus himself (and only in that one passage, and only in sarcasm) [I]ever[/I] described Jesus that way. 2) He lied by citing the passage, full well knowing that the passage indicates no such characterization of Jesus at all, other than Jesus' own sarcastic comments on how the Pharisees and Lawyers invented faults for both He and John the Baptist. I gave you the correct title AND page number, Ren. I simply linked to the wrong url, connecting you with the Book of Luke by accident: I see that, having no other position except "That's not what he meant!!!" you decide to act juvenile and attack me personally. Hey Num, I thought this sort of thing was fvrowned on around here. Perhaps, once you muster up the mental faculties that could possibly allow you, after an hour or two of study, the ability to discern the difference between the number 291 and the number 398 (as a Math teacher, I can help you there, but it will take much longer with the rest of the numbers and these two suffice to make my point,) you can begin to make your way into the halls of civil discourse. Until then, I'm afraid you're stuck on the playground, hooting your inane "ideas" from the monkey bars. Harte [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Spirituality & Mysticism
Is Jesus Azizus Monobaz?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top