Is the "crcifixion" just a metaphor?

[Jayhawker Soule]

How does compiling different stories into a single book, make it a single book?

Really?

(Oh and you gave a dictionary definition for compilation, but forgot to include the second meaning, check it out.)

Bunyip, you really should quit while you're behind.

 

[oldbadger]

LOL Make an argument if you can, you guys have covered the 'yeah, your so dumb and I'm so great!' part of debating - but have forgotten to actually make a case, or present any arguments or evidence.

Try thinking a bit harder and see of you guys can come up with something better than just insulting my education and boasting about your own. The arguments from imagined authority are getting increasingly pathetic

Like some evidence for example.

like i said, you don't comprehend. Your inertia is causing you to overlook the fact that I question the crucifixion! How silly!
its your method of deduction that i also question, but then, so do many others.
now you know. Can you understand? I'm not sure about the crucifixion..... (this is hard work)!!!

 

[fantome profane]

How does compiling different stories into a single book, make it a single book?

Really?



(Oh and you gave a dictionary definition for compilation, but forgot to include the second meaning, check it out.)

In the same way that making a compliation of 60's rock music does not make Paul McCartney and Mick Jagger the same person.

You can use the word "compiling" if you want, but in the case of the NT testament what that means is "making a list". That is what they did. If you think they did something other than "make a list" tell me what you think they did, and then tell me what relevance that has.

 

[Bunyip]

Bunyip, you really should quit while you're behind.

Dude, so far you have only posted childish insults and personal digs, I can safely assume that if you had any sort of point, you would have made it by now.

That you are relying exclusively on childish insult, and are studiously avoiding any actual engagement is a pretty solid indicator that you have no case.

I am perfectly confident that the simple reality that you can not use the bible to prove the bible will be as obvious to many other members here as is the inability of my opposition do do anything other than fling mud. As it happens I have recieved a considerable degreeof support from others in relationto this exchange.


I think you and others have posted a dozen or so content free insults, that looks to me like all you can do.

 

[oldbadger]

In the same way that making a compliation of 60's rock music does not make Paul McCartney and Mick Jagger the same person.

You can use the word "compiling" if you want, but in the case of the NT testament what that means is "making a list". That is what they did. If you think they did something other than "make a list" tell me what you think they did, and then tell me what relevance that has.

you've got me going now.... .......phantome, this was not intended for you!

 

[Bunyip]

In the same way that making a compliation of 60's rock music does not make Paul McCartney and Mick Jagger the same person.

Wow! Really?

LOL. Correct. Compiling 60's rock music does not make Paul Macartney Mick Jagger - brilliant deduction there. Boy are you guys doing well.

How could I dare face such minds!

 

[Bunyip]

like i said, you don't comprehend. Your inertia is causing you to overlook the fact that I question the crucifixion! How silly!
its your method of deduction that i also question, but then, so do many others.
now you know. Can you understand? I'm not sure about the crucifixion..... (this is hard work)!!!

Perhaps it is senility, but you must be confusing me for another. I have not 'overlooked' your position on the crucifixion, you have not discussed it with me.

 

[oldbadger]

Wow! Really?

LOL. Correct. Compiling 60's rock music does not make Paul Macartney Mick Jagger - brilliant deduction there. Boy are you guys doing well.

How could I dare face such minds!

let me get this right... You argue that if something is wrong in or about, say, Corinthians, that this affects,say, g-mark?

 

[fantome profane]

Wow! Really?

LOL. Correct. Compiling 60's rock music does not make Paul Macartney Mick Jagger - brilliant deduction there. Boy are you guys doing well.

How could I dare face such minds!

Maybe one way to face such minds would be to answer their questions.

You can use the word "compiling" if you want, but in the case of the NT testament what that means is "making a list". That is what they did. If you think they did something other than "make a list" tell me what you think they did, and then tell me what relevance that has?

You are avoiding

 

[oldbadger]

Perhaps it is senility, but you must be confusing me for another. I have not 'overlooked' your position on the crucifixion, you have not discussed it with me.

so you have not been bothering to read all opinions on your own thread?

 

[Bunyip]

let me get this right... You argue that if something is wrong in or about, say, Corinthians, that this affects,say, g-mark?

Nope. I made no such argument.

 

[Bunyip]

so you have not been bothering to read all opinions on your own thread?

Again you are confusing me for another, this is not my thread.

 

[Bunyip]

Maybe one way to face such minds would be to answer their questions.You are avoiding

I did answer all questions, some of them several times over - only to be asked again. There is nothing for me to avoid, the bible is insufficient in itself, and there is little outside of it.

Generally your questions are unanswerable gibberish - how you imagine the NT to be a list is beyond me.

 

[fantome profane]

I did answer all questions, some of them several times over - only to be asked again. There is nothing for me to avoid, the bible is insufficient in itself, and there is little outside of it.

Generally your questions are unanswerable gibberish - how you imagine the NT to be a list is beyond me.

Simple question then. What do you think the word "Canon" means, when used in the context of "the Canon of the New Testament"?

 

[oldbadger]

Again you are confusing me for another, this is not my thread.

Correct. I just wanted to see an accurate post from you.

 

[Bunyip]

Correct. I just wanted to see an accurate post from you.

 

[Bunyip]

Simple question then. What do you think the word "Canon" means, when used in the context of "the Canon of the New Testament"?

Look it up.

 

[fantome profane]

Look it up.

Avoiding


If you looked it up you would not be so mystified as to why I refer to the NT as a list.

I am asking what YOU think it means.

 

[Bunyip]

Avoiding

If you looked it up you would not be so mystified as to why I refer to the NT as a list.

I know what 'canon' means.

What I do not understand is how you imagine it to be relevant, why you are referring to the NT as a canon, and what possible point you think you are making.

Speaking of avoidance, why not engage on the point that you can not use a book to prove its own claims?

 

[fantome profane]

I know what 'canon' means.

What I do not understand is how you imagine it to be relevant, why you are referring to the NT as a canon, and what possible point you think you are making.

Speaking of avoidance, why not engage on the point that you can not use a book to prove its own claims?

I absolutely agree and concede to that point. But the point I am making, the reason it is relevant is this. NT is just a list, a list of 27 books. It is not one book.