Draymond thinks earth could be flat

[Loose]

White folks told y'all it was a sphere and y'all ran with it. We really don't know

Why hasn't anyone fell off the earth then. how do we fly around the earth. please explain this

 

[Everythingg]

Live feed of Earth:


Not flat brehs

Believe CGI as reality brehs

 

[Professor Emeritus]

I dont agree we know that a man named Jesus existed but the way he is portrayed in popular culture from a religious standpoint none of it has been confirmed thats what I mean when I say I dont believe in Jesus.

Jesus was a common name back then, so when I say that historians across the board agree that Jesus really lived, I'm claiming a lot more than "a man named Jesus existed".

The basic consensus, agreed upon by the vast majority of scholars, is that:

Jesus was born in or around 4 B.C.
He grew up in Galilee somewhere in or near the town of Nazareth
He spoke Aramaic and at least some Hebrew and probably Greek
He became known in public ministry somewhere around A.D. 28
During the early stage of his ministry he was associated with a prophet named John the Baptist
He called people to repent and announced the coming "Kingdom of God", often teaching in parables
He moved around from village to village in an itinerant ministry, but occasionally entered Jerusalem
He was believed by some of the people to enact miraculous cures and expel demons
He made waves by associating with the poor, sick, sinners, Samaritans, tax collectors, sinful women, and other outcasts of society, and even ate with them
He had disciples, including a very close inner group of disciples who probably numbered 12
He committed a dramatic action in the Jerusalem Temple that disturbed the authorities
His activities, especially the temple action, disturbed certain other Jews in Jerusalem including the high priest, and led to him being turned over to the Romans
He was executed by Pontius Pilate, the Roman prefect, in A.D. 30 in the manner that revolutionaries are executed
His followers soon claimed that he was raised from the dead
Those followers attempted to carry on his work, were called "Christians" eventually, and were persecuted by both Jews and pagans


All of that is fairly non-controversial from a historical standpoint. It best fits the evidence we have, both in terms of writings (Christian, Jewish, and Roman) and in terms of explaining the acts which we know occurred and the progression that led Christianity to take the shape that it did. You could find outliers here and there who disagree, just like you can find scientists who believe that anthropomorphic climate change isn't proven. But the majority of even secular and Jewish scholars who are experts on 1st-century Christianity will agree with all or nearly all of those above points.

Now, I think there is a lot more to be known about Jesus. The fact that the "non-controversial" points only provide a rough sketch doesn't mean that you give up and don't try to infer anything else. You take the information that we have, and try to draw the best conclusions you can from it that make the most sense to explain all the evidence, not the minimal conclusions. But this probably isn't the place to start a whole conversation on all that we can know about Jesus.

 

[Chubbs]

The same common sense that tells you the earth might be flat?

I'll let you eat...but you just tap danced into blatant hypocrisy in your own philosophical skepticism. Having never been to space to view the round earth, or to Egypt to view the pyramids.....you should be equally skeptical of both.

I am equally skeptical. When you asked me about the pyramids, I simply said I wouldn't know.

 

[Shogun]

I am equally skeptical. When you asked me about the pyramids, I simply said I wouldn't know.

You said you only know what the evidence tells you, and that the evidence tells you they exist.

 

[TheGreatShowtime]

These arguments in this thread remind me of Mac trying to disprove evolution

 

[Chubbs]

You said you only know what the evidence tells you, and that the evidence tells you they exist.

There's evidence of the Earth being round, and there's evidence presented of it being flat. There's also evidence of the Earth being a hologram. I wouldn't know what is true until I take a trip to space myself; and I doubt that will ever happen.

 

[hayesc0]

Jesus was a common name back then, so when I say that historians across the board agree that Jesus really lived, I'm claiming a lot more than "a man named Jesus existed".

The basic consensus, agreed upon by the vast majority of scholars, is that:

Jesus was born in or around 4 B.C.
He grew up in Galilee somewhere in or near the town of Nazareth
He spoke Aramaic and at least some Hebrew and probably Greek
He became known in public ministry somewhere around A.D. 28
During the early stage of his ministry he was associated with a prophet named John the Baptist
He called people to repent and announced the coming "Kingdom of God", often teaching in parables
He moved around from village to village in an itinerant ministry, but occasionally entered Jerusalem
He was believed by some of the people to enact miraculous cures and expel demons
He made waves by associating with the poor, sick, sinners, Samaritans, tax collectors, sinful women, and other outcasts of society, and even ate with them
He had disciples, including a very close inner group of disciples who probably numbered 12
He committed a dramatic action in the Jerusalem Temple that disturbed the authorities
His activities, especially the temple action, disturbed certain other Jews in Jerusalem including the high priest, and led to him being turned over to the Romans
He was executed by Pontius Pilate, the Roman prefect, in A.D. 30 in the manner that revolutionaries are executed
His followers soon claimed that he was raised from the dead
Those followers attempted to carry on his work, were called "Christians" eventually, and were persecuted by both Jews and pagans


All of that is fairly non-controversial from a historical standpoint. It best fits the evidence we have, both in terms of writings (Christian, Jewish, and Roman) and in terms of explaining the acts which we know occurred and the progression that led Christianity to take the shape that it did. You could find outliers here and there who disagree, just like you can find scientists who believe that anthropomorphic climate change isn't proven. But the majority of even secular and Jewish scholars who are experts on 1st-century Christianity will agree with all or nearly all of those above points.

Now, I think there is a lot more to be known about Jesus. The fact that the "non-controversial" points only provide a rough sketch doesn't mean that you give up and don't try to infer anything else. You take the information that we have, and try to draw the best conclusions you can from it that make the most sense to explain all the evidence, not the minimal conclusions. But this probably isn't the place to start a whole conversation on all that we can know about Jesus.

I respect everything you are saying for the most part and agree but Jesus the way he is portrayed in the bible i dont believe in.

 

[Premeditated]

@GoddamnyamanProf come post in here so I can neg you back bish

 

[NoMorePie]

 

[Everythingg]

These arguments in this thread remind me of Mac trying to disprove evolution

Thats a great video that makes a great point. We all place our faith in something. Yall just place your faith in something thats been proven wrong time and time again, and will be proven wrong time and time again going forward (the establishment's cacs scientists)...

 

[Lamar Givens]

Jesus was a common name back then, so when I say that historians across the board agree that Jesus really lived, I'm claiming a lot more than "a man named Jesus existed".

The basic consensus, agreed upon by the vast majority of scholars, is that:

Jesus was born in or around 4 B.C.
He grew up in Galilee somewhere in or near the town of Nazareth
He spoke Aramaic and at least some Hebrew and probably Greek
He became known in public ministry somewhere around A.D. 28
During the early stage of his ministry he was associated with a prophet named John the Baptist
He called people to repent and announced the coming "Kingdom of God", often teaching in parables
He moved around from village to village in an itinerant ministry, but occasionally entered Jerusalem
He was believed by some of the people to enact miraculous cures and expel demons
He made waves by associating with the poor, sick, sinners, Samaritans, tax collectors, sinful women, and other outcasts of society, and even ate with them
He had disciples, including a very close inner group of disciples who probably numbered 12
He committed a dramatic action in the Jerusalem Temple that disturbed the authorities
His activities, especially the temple action, disturbed certain other Jews in Jerusalem including the high priest, and led to him being turned over to the Romans
He was executed by Pontius Pilate, the Roman prefect, in A.D. 30 in the manner that revolutionaries are executed
His followers soon claimed that he was raised from the dead
Those followers attempted to carry on his work, were called "Christians" eventually, and were persecuted by both Jews and pagans


All of that is fairly non-controversial from a historical standpoint. It best fits the evidence we have, both in terms of writings (Christian, Jewish, and Roman) and in terms of explaining the acts which we know occurred and the progression that led Christianity to take the shape that it did. You could find outliers here and there who disagree, just like you can find scientists who believe that anthropomorphic climate change isn't proven. But the majority of even secular and Jewish scholars who are experts on 1st-century Christianity will agree with all or nearly all of those above points.

Now, I think there is a lot more to be known about Jesus. The fact that the "non-controversial" points only provide a rough sketch doesn't mean that you give up and don't try to infer anything else. You take the information that we have, and try to draw the best conclusions you can from it that make the most sense to explain all the evidence, not the minimal conclusions. But this probably isn't the place to start a whole conversation on all that we can know about Jesus.

What's sad is that you have too many militant so called black hotep scholars on the coli who are willfully ignorant of the validity of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ of Nazareth.

Some of the profound ignorance on here is a disgrace to black intellectual thought.

The fact you have willfully ignorant folks rejecting the profound evidence of Biblical Christianity is sad.



Makes me think this site has been over run by militant atheistic cacs.

Then you have cats on here trying to validate neo cac darwinian evolution

And you got black cats trying to defend it as if they are intellectually woke

Dayum shame

 

[hayesc0]

What's sad is that you have too many militant so called black hotep scholars on the coli who are willfully ignorant of the validity of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ of Nazareth.

Some of the profound ignorance on here is a disgrace to black intellectual thought.

The fact you have willfully ignorant folks rejecting the profound evidence of Biblical Christianity is sad.



Makes me think this site has been over run by militant atheistic cacs.

Then you have cats on here trying to validate neo cac darwinian evolution

And you got black cats trying to defend it as if they are intellectually woke

Dayum shame

Im black we know that the historical figure existed I realize that Im talking about a nikka going around performing miracles and the son of god I dont believe that. We have alot more evidence of evolution and darwinism than the version of Jesus of the bible.

 

[Floyd Pinkerton]

White folks told y'all it was a sphere and y'all ran with it. We really don't know

Yes we do.

 

[Lamar Givens]

These arguments in this thread remind me of Mac trying to disprove evolution

Define evolution