Proselytizing

I agree .. for the third time, that there is no verifiable proof that Jesus did any of the miracles attributed to him.

Perhaps you do not believe that Jesus did miracles.

For those that do believe that Jesus raised folks from the dead then they believe that Jesus practices sorcery according to the definition of the word that I have given.

 

Raising people from the dead is Sorcery.

If one believes that Jesus raised folks from the dead then one is admitting that Jesus was a Sorcerer.

 

when did he talk to you?

 

1: the use of power gained from the assistance or control of evil spirits especially for divining : necromancy
2: magic 2a

Is that realy what you think Jesus and his followers are claiming Jesus did?

Oh, you found an alternative definition did you? And now you want us all to accept that definition, even though the Bible specifically condemn socercy, in order to call Jesus a Socerer?

I think what you are doing is imply attempting to twist people's faith in order to injure them. I hope its quite thrilling for you.

 

Jesus did not do miracles. The miracles that were performed were performed by the Spirit of God working through Jesus. Haven't you learned anything in your studies of the Bible?

 

I agree that that would be sorcery, but I do not claim that is what Jesus did.

 

I will just respond with your words:

Where is your proof for your claim that the miracles of Jesus was through the Holy Spirit ?

You must not believe in the Trinity if you believe this or perhaps you do not understand the meaning of the Trinity.

Summoning Spirits (evil or otherwise) to do works is Sorcery in any case.

 

In one of those same sources which you have used to try to say that Jesus was a practitioner of sorcery..... the Bible. Do your research from both perspectives. BTW: Did I say Holy Spirit? No? Keep your facts straight also.

 

Is the Spirit of God not the Holy Spirit ?

Why would Jesus need to summon the Spirit of a God ? (Sorcery)
Do you not believe in the Trinity ?

Where is your Proof .. the Bible is only claims from the past as you point out.

You have presented something as Proof that does not meet the standard you suggest needs to be met for Proof to be established.

Hypocrisy

 

Your constant nothingness is really getting boring. Can't you at least come up with something new?

 

awwww .. are you upset now that your own words have proven you false.

Time to take your ball and go home is it ?

 

What words of mine have proven me wrong? Be specific and show link back to the post.

 

Lets start with your words:

Claims from the past are not Proof .. said by you so many times in numerous different ways .. "not objective emperical evidence"

?

The Bible is made up of claims from the past so by your words:

"Then for someone to claim affirmatively that Jesus" did anything "without such verifiable PROOF, would be a false claim...."

You have no verifiable proof and by your own admission claims from the past are not verifiable proof.

The Bible is claims from the past so your claim that the Bible is Proof that Jesus worked miracles through the Spirit of God is false by your own admission.

 

Giftedone: Here is a special little something for YOU.

Perhaps with it laid out in front of you, you might be able to see that "opinions" are not PROOF.

"o·pin·ion (-pnyn)
n.
1. A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof: "The world is not run by thought, nor by imagination, but by opinion" (Elizabeth Drew).
2. A judgment based on special knowledge and given by an expert: a medical opinion.
3. A judgment or estimation of the merit of a person or thing: has a low opinion of braggarts.
4. The prevailing view: public opinion.
5. Law A formal statement by a court or other adjudicative body of the legal reasons and principles for the conclusions of the court."

"proof (prf)
n.
1. The evidence or argument that compels the mind to accept an assertion as true.
2.
a. The validation of a proposition by application of specified rules, as of induction or deduction, to assumptions, axioms, and sequentially derived conclusions.
b. A statement or argument used in such a validation.
3.
a. Convincing or persuasive demonstration: was asked for proof of his identity; an employment history that was proof of her dependability.
b. The state of being convinced or persuaded by consideration of evidence.
4. Determination of the quality of something by testing; trial: put one's beliefs to the proof.
5. Law The result or effect of evidence; the establishment or denial of a fact by evidence.
6. The alcoholic strength of a liquor, expressed by a number that is twice the percentage by volume of alcohol present.
7. Printing
a. A trial sheet of printed material that is made to be checked and corrected. Also called proof sheet.
b. A trial impression of a plate, stone, or block taken at any of various stages in engraving.
8.
a. A trial photographic print.
b. Any of a limited number of newly minted coins or medals struck as specimens and for collectors from a new die on a polished planchet.
9. Archaic Proven impenetrability: "I was clothed in Armor of proof" (John Bunyan)."

I realize it is asking a little bit much from you, but please try to comprehend the words used above. ALL of the words above.

 

LOL you call this a response ...

You got caught in the falsehood of your own making. That is all that needs be said.

The Bible is "opinions" of others and you claim the opinions of others are not proof.

Then you turn around and claim the Bible is Proof. Hypocricy

Make up your mind .. are the claims of others proof or are they not ?

 

OK .. so "Opinions are not Proof" according to you.

Neither is History, Archeaology, Science, Logic, and Philosophy according to you.

The Bible contains the opinions of others so your claim that the Bible is "Proof" is false according to your own proclaimations.

 

Funny, so do you.

 

That is exactly what you are claiming Jesus was doing when you claim that Jesus was a Socerer - and that is EXACTLY what you are claiming.

That you found some random definition under which you can slyly define something in a manner that is insulting to most Christians?

Well, now you know why most of the Christians are disgusted with the tactic.

You are accusing Jesus of communing with evil spirits to accompish his miracles.

Attempting to be coy about something that offensive to Christians is just plaine and simple immature. Its not even debate, just a mean opinion.

 

I have never accuses Jesus of communing with evil spirits.

You obviously have no idea about all the things that Sorcery includes or how Sorcery has been discussed in this thread.

What is offensive is your lack of reading comprehension.

 

I am clearly capable of reading so grow up.

Obviously, you continue to do what you do, which is find some off the wall defintion and claim that this is what you mean. Unfortunately, the Biblical interpretation of sorcery is that of commuing and drawing power from evil spirits.

THAT is what most Christians are thinking when you say something stupid like, "Jesus was a sorcerer!"

And when people look askance at you, well, the old silly tap dance of I was referring to this definition over here that can be shaped ... whatever.

The entire religion of Christianity is not going to adjust itself and its message to fit your narrow after the fact definition, nor is it going to tolerate childish definition games that seek to deliberately undermine the message as clearly conveyed in the Bible referrence sorcery.

The problem is not everyone ignoring your silly definition, it is you ignoring everyone else's.

All you have to say is that the Biblical definition of sorcery, as implied in the Bible, is definitely not what Jesus was doing.

I doubt very seriously that you have the ability to do this. And that makes this just a simple game obstinace doesn't it?

 

His actions go way beyond the point of saying something "stupid".

 

I said this.

 

No you said that Jesus used sorcery.

 

So says the person who says that Science, History, Archaeology, Logic and the writings and opinions in historical documents are not proof of anything and then claims that the Bible is proof that Jesus worked miracles.

Go figure.

What is worse, a person who is stupid or a person who is a hypocrite ?

 

How about you link to that, because as I said, I am fully capable of reading.

As Inc points out, I see you saying repeatedly that Jesus was a Sorcerer, and just a few posts up, you are lampooning me about your silly ancillary definition.

If you are acknowledging a point, good.

If you are acknowledging that statements like, "Jesus was a sorcerer," are little more than emotional bait - even better.