Lets talk about Jesus.
-
but those facts r written in history bks rite?...did u witness the battle of waterloo n see napolean in action? how abt articles in newspapers? do u believe them? haveu witness the incidents? how u noe reporters were truthful n nt exaggerating? tok abt reality rite? reality is wad u see...u belive wad u see...
-
what makes this hilarious for me is that you believe napoleon because he is recorded in the history books, you believe enistein because he is recorded in history books, you believe in hitler etc.. because he is recorded in history books, yet you won't believe in Jesus although he is recorded in History books.
-
There is a difference between a fact and an opinion ..Originally posted by despondent:but those facts r written in history bks rite?...did u witness the battle of waterloo n see napolean in action? how abt articles in newspapers? do u believe them? haveu witness the incidents? how u noe reporters were truthful n nt exaggerating? tok abt reality rite? reality is wad u see...u belive wad u see...
Now there are so many news outlet . .Reuters, CNN, BBC .. take your pick. If you think CNN reporters are lying about some facts .. then check Al Jazerra lor.
Regarding Waterloo and Napolean .. you can get collaborating accounts from the French and British side. Waterloo really happened .. unless you can show me otherwise?
whereas the account of Christ's resurrection .. only gospel can find. If gospel is lilke CNN .. wouldn't you want to find Al Jazerra to countercheck the story? -
to brey:
AMEN TO TAT BRO!!! -
when did al jazerra exist? jesus resurrection was in 33AD...ok, how abt the romance of 3 kingdoms? they existed during the BC yrs...any records? or juz merely history bks?
-
Look .. even Borg and Crossan believe in Jesus. Even Muslims believe in Jesus. But that doesn't lend you any credibility regarding the most important question.Originally posted by breytonhartge:what makes this hilarious for me is that you believe napoleon because he is recorded in the history books, you believe enistein because he is recorded in history books, you believe in hitler etc.. because he is recorded in history books, yet you won't believe in Jesus although he is recorded in History books.
What makes this hilarious is how pple like you and despondent stoop so low to counter-argue casino king.
Compare Napoleon with Jesus Christ. Suan le bah .. -
Al Jazerra .. maybe I spell wrongly but I think you know what I mean lah.Originally posted by despondent:when did al jazerra exist? jesus resurrection was in 33AD...ok, how abt the romance of 3 kingdoms? they existed during the BC yrs...any records? or juz merely history bks?
If you dunno history .. dun make pple like me and lau laff. -
gd u spotted my mistakes...so nw i ask: how u noe tat history bks recorded the dates correctly? u have so much faith in them but no faith in the bible?
-
this is a topic that will go on and on and on... and never stop... we believe one thing and that is true, you believe one thing and you hold that to be true, so we agree to disagree and lets not pursue this any further. NO POINT. We cannot convince you because you don't want to believe and you won't convince us because we already believe. Lets leave this alone.
Icemoon, be nice. I want friendly discussion here, thank you.
How is answering casinoking in the same vein as his question stooping low? It is all about your reality and our reality, we have ours you have yours, why are we even debating this?
-
I think dates can be trusted. While it is true Chen Shou wrote San Guo Zhi during the Jin Dynasty .. he should be basing his accounts on court historians' records. Or else very hard to go down to exact year. Like Jian4 An1 10 years.Originally posted by despondent:gd u spotted my mistakes...so nw i ask: how u noe tat history bks recorded the dates correctly? u have so much faith in them but no faith in the bible? -
How sure are you that we can trust dates? So many changes have been made to the way we look at time and dates that even people today are not sure what the exact year is.Originally posted by Icemoon:I think dates can be trusted. While it is true Chen Shou wrote San Guo Zhi during the Jin Dynasty .. he should be basing his accounts on court historians' records. Or else very hard to go down to exact year. Like Jian4 An1 10 years. -
Hmm, i dont know
There are historical records about all these people and the events during the time, its just whether you choose to believe it, thats all. Archaeologists and historians rely on them, mainly because there are no other way besides these and the historical artifacts. I mean, we cant expect the ancient Egytians to leave behind some thumbdrives or videocams right?
So in a way, historians make certain amount of assumptions if you like, from any written record or artifacts, It doesnt mean they are 100% true, but it also doesnt mean they are 100% false. Thats what i can say.
By the way, I may not remember the exact date of the Three Kingdoms Period, but I know the Han Dynasty span four centuries on both sides of the traditionally reckoned year of the birth of Christ, therefore a rough calculation assures you that the Three Kingdom Period was somewhere in 200 AD China. -
220 -280. You don't play enough game.Originally posted by laurence82:By the way, I may not remember the exact date of the Three Kingdoms Period, but I know the Han Dynasty span four centuries on both sides of the traditionally reckoned year of the birth of Christ, therefore a rough calculation assures you that the Three Kingdom Period was somewhere in 200 AD China. -
fair call.Originally posted by laurence82:Hmm, i dont know
There are historical records about all these people and the events during the time, its just whether you choose to believe it, thats all. Archaeologists and historians rely on them, mainly because there are no other way besides these and the historical artifacts. I mean, we cant expect the ancient Egytians to leave behind some thumbdrives or videocams right?
So in a way, historians make certain amount of assumptions if you like, from any written record or artifacts, It doesnt mean they are 100% true, but it also doesnt mean they are 100% false. Thats what i can say.
By the way, I may not remember the exact date of the Three Kingdoms Period, but I know the Han Dynasty span four centuries on both sides of the traditionally reckoned year of the birth of Christ, therefore a rough calculation assures you that the Three Kingdom Period was somewhere in 200 AD China. -
Court historians don't use the western calendar of course. They use their emperor's reign.Originally posted by breytonhartge:How sure are you that we can trust dates? So many changes have been made to the way we look at time and dates that even people today are not sure what the exact year is.
There is a difference between trusting an event took place in Jian An 12 years and pinpointing which year does that correspond to in our western calendar. -
and that is supposed to be more accurate? really?Originally posted by Icemoon:Court historians don't use the western calendar of course. They use their emperor's reign.
There is a difference between trusting an event took place in Jian An 12 years and pinpointing which year does that correspond to in our western calendar.
you realise how ironic your statement sounds in the light of all you have been saying here? -
what is more accurate?Originally posted by breytonhartge:and that is supposed to be more accurate? really? you realise how ironic your statement sounds in the light of all you have been saying here? -
i tink brey is referring to the emperor's reign...is it more accurate? n the qn comes back, how u noe the emperor even existed in the 1st place? tink wad laurence82 said makes some sense...u shld ponder abt wad he said
-
I don't see how one can compare the emperor's reign with the western calendar.Originally posted by despondent:i tink brey is referring to the emperor's reign...is it more accurate? n the qn comes back, how u noe the emperor even existed in the 1st place? tink wad lawrence82 said makes sense...u shld ponder abt wad he siad
The court historians do not think back 30 years then write the account. There are yu4 shi3 in the court who recorded down the happenings in court, and they have copies of the edict and other documents regarding imperial policies. So you think they be so dumb to confuse the 60th year of Kangxi with the 61st year of Kangxi with regards to an event?
Whether the emperor existed or not .. you got to see the strength of the evidence. It is obviously harder to ascertain some ulu pharaoh many centuries back than with modern luminaries like Napoleon and Einstein.
Don't forget collaborative accounts of an event. If the Qing Shi Gao and British newspapers 150 years ago talk about the Opium War, then you can be pretty sure it really happened. -
Used to play lar, but in SegaOriginally posted by Icemoon:220 -280. You don't play enough game.
-
It has been years since I last played also .. but I remember all from memory.Originally posted by laurence82:Used to play lar, but in Sega 
-
so wad r u trying to prove here? tat u noe a lot n have a gd memory?
-
This is trueOriginally posted by breytonhartge:How sure are you that we can trust dates? So many changes have been made to the way we look at time and dates that even people today are not sure what the exact year is.
Its like the humongous debate over which year is the real year 2000
So many just use the present calendar as it is already
By the way, interestingly, exact dates can be found through other ways.
For example, when King Wen of Zhou ascended the throne, a historian recorded the day as having 'double sun rise'.'
Using supercomputer, the historians were able to trace the exact day, month and year of his ascension, because its the day when the eclipse of the sun happened just shortly after sunrise. -
to laurence82
thanx for bringing tat up...according to geologians, there 1 day missing from the historical calendar...n they cun explain y...the bible stated tat it was due to God stopping time for 1 day(read bk of job)...well, we may nt be able to prove tat actually happened...but it offers an explanation -
Birth of Jesus also can be determined via astronomical methods. Too bad we have no idea what was the phenomena recorded in the bible.Originally posted by laurence82:This is true
Its like the humongous debate over which year is the real year 2000
So many just use the present calendar as it is already
By the way, interestingly, exact dates can be found through other ways.
For example, when King Wen of Zhou ascended the throne, a historian recorded the day as having 'double sun rise'.'
Using supercomputer, the historians were able to trace the exact day, month and year of his ascension, because its the day when the eclipse of the sun happened just shortly after sunrise.
Don't even know real or fake in the first place.