Pastor Frederick KC Price Passes From Covid

sidebar...

he had some of the FINEST women up in that church

can I get an AMEN

All them failed Hollywood actresses.

R-5594718-1397513455-7880.jpeg.jpg
 
Jesus probably existed bro. Just saying.
Here is the million dollar question .... you're "just saying" based on what proof? I'll make it easier .... How about based on what evidence? If you can provide neither, then what is your assertion based on? Your blind trusting faith in the campfire stories of some medieval, racist, sexist, desert dwelling eurocacs who made up stories with their fertile imaginations and thought everything they couldn't explain had to be a miracle from a giant invisible man who lives in the sky? C'mon man! I anxiously await your response........
 
Here is the million dollar question .... you're "just saying" based on what proof? I'll make it easier .... How about based on what evidence? If you can provide neither, then what is your assertion based on? Your blind trusting faith in the campfire stories of some medieval, racist, sexist, desert dwelling eurocacs who made up stories with their fertile imaginations and thought everything they couldn't explain had to be a miracle from a giant invisible man who lives in the sky? C'mon man! I anxiously await your response........

What's up bro. Although I'm an atheist, I do try and live by as much facts, evidence, proof and science as I can. That includes things that may go against what I might have thought or believed. I do think the Jesus of the New Testament PROBABLY existed. That doesn't mean I believe most of the things attributed to him in those writings. The majority of the historical ATHIEST scholars or those representing opposing religions agree. In addition EVERY critic of Christianity and Jesus from the first century onward (3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th etc etc) had no problem thinking he existed. There wasn't one ancient writer or critic that dissented in that thought. Not one. In two thousand years there may be those that don't believe JFK existed. However, we living today would be in a better position to determine that. Could all of these facts and more be one giant conspiracy? Yes, it could, but it would be the biggest ever needing corroboration from thousands of participants.

I don't expect you to agree with me on the probability of Jesus' prior existence. No matter what I say. Just expressing why I think a dude named Jesus living in the Palestine area two thousand years ago lived.

On another note. You seem angry about the church. While the church, black or otherwise, had or has it's issues it has also been a force for a lot of good things in history and in present times. This is why I respect someone like a Fred Price. He made his mark and many black people have benefitted. The church will likely be here for many years to come. Hating it won't make it go away.

Peace my mayne.
 
In addition EVERY critic of Christianity and Jesus from the first century onward (3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th etc etc) had no problem thinking he existed. There wasn't one ancient writer or critic that dissented in that thought. Not one.
Not even a nickel's worth of truth there, sir in what you said but you're free to believe that. As a matter of fact there.... you're not gonna believe me, maybe you'll believe Bart Ehrman....

1-g-Vb-T1-Cnfk-Yvmi0-VJ5iy-B6g.jpg


For a man who supposedly turned the world upside down, nobody even ever heard of him till the Council of Nicaea over 300 years later!
 
Not even a nickel's worth of truth there, sir in what you said but you're free to believe that. As a matter of fact there.... you're not gonna believe me, maybe you'll believe Bart Ehrman....

1-g-Vb-T1-Cnfk-Yvmi0-VJ5iy-B6g.jpg


For a man who supposedly turned the world upside down, nobody even ever heard of him till the Council of Nicaea over 300 years later!

Seems like you've done your research. I've read and have communicated with Dr. Ehrman. I agree with a lot of his results. Even this one.

"This is not even an issue for scholars of antiquity...The reason for thinking Jesus existed is because he is abundantly attested in early sources...If you want to go where the evidence goes, I think that atheists have done themselves a disservice by jumping on the bandwagon of mythicism, because frankly, it makes you look foolish to the outside world. If that’s what you’re going to believe, you just look foolish." Dr. Bart Ehrman


 
Seems like you've done your research. I've read and have communicated with Dr. Ehrman. I agree with a lot of his results. Even this one.

"This is not even an issue for scholars of antiquity...The reason for thinking Jesus existed is because he is abundantly attested in early sources...If you want to go where the evidence goes, I think that atheists have done themselves a disservice by jumping on the bandwagon of mythicism, because frankly, it makes you look foolish to the outside world. If that’s what you’re going to believe, you just look foolish." Dr. Bart Ehrman



been a pleasure talkin witcha, bro. stay healthy
 
I'm not much of a fan of megachurches or their pastors, but he actually did a lot of good work over the years. He never shied away from issues of race, and that "Race, Religion, and Racism" series was outstanding and drew him a whole lot of heat from so called white evangelicals. In fact, I first heard of Dr. Claud Anderson through his appearances on his program. Rest in peace, Dr. Price.
 
I'm not much of a fan of megachurches or their pastors, but he actually did a lot of good work over the years. He never shied away from issues of race, and that "Race, Religion, and Racism" series was outstanding and drew him a whole lot of heat from so called white evangelicals. In fact, I first heard of Dr. Claud Anderson through his appearances on his program. Rest in peace, Dr. Price.

So true. I forgot Dr. Claud Anderson made an appearance there.

On another note. Looks like an interesting site in your sig on black baseball. Your site?
 
So what's your view on Islam's admission of Jesus' existence?
NOBODY on Earth can "admit" his existence. Choose your words carefully. Anyone is free to believe as they wish but there is not a shred of objective evidence on the planet that supports the existence of Jesus at any time in history, so the opinion of ANYONE on this matter is simply that ... their opinion, based on their faith and their belief system. "That's why they call religions faiths because it is belief without evidence" (Neal deGrasse Tyson) Tell me why the opinion of an Islamic or anyone else should be valued any more than the opinion of my dog concerning issues of nothing but belief, no facts involved?
 
NOBODY on Earth can "admit" his existence. Choose your words carefully. Anyone is free to believe as they wish but there is not a shred of objective evidence on the planet that supports the existence of Jesus at any time in history, so the opinion of ANYONE on this matter is simply that ... their opinion, based on their faith and their belief system. "That's why they call religions faiths because it is belief without evidence" (Neal deGrasse Tyson) Tell me why the opinion of an Islamic or anyone else should be valued any more than the opinion of my dog concerning issues of nothing but belief, no facts involved?

So from my pov, I can say it's your opinion that God does not exist and the burden of proof is on you, I don't have to believe what you say. Why should I? Using your argument, "the opinion of ANYONE on this matter is simply that ... their opinion". Your argument is simply that. All these people you're quoting, it's their opinion based on what they believe, It doesn't make it true. I intentionally used Islam because it contrasts with Christianity and giving any credence to the latter may diminish its relevance. There's physical evidence that he existed, but you wouldn't believe it and I don't have to force you to believe it just as you don't have any right to force me to believe otherwise.
My main point, why attack others based on their belief system? If you don't agree with it, just agree to disagree and move on. This is a porn board, any argument about religion is just contrary.
 
So from my pov, I can say it's your opinion that God does not exist and the burden of proof is on you,
No, I'm sorry, but it doesn't work that way. Have you taken any collegiate level sciences yet? To say something DOES NOT exist requires no proof because a negative statement is scientifically IMPOSSIBLE to prove. When one makes the claim that something DOES indeed exist, then the burden of proof falls upon claimant. Only a statement that something does exist, or has existed, or can be made to exist is scientifically provable.

And you asked the question, and I quote: "why attack others based on their belief system? " If you think anything I have said to you in this thread could conceivably be described as an "attack" then you are seeking liberties you frankly didn't earn. It sounds as though you simply don't want to hear opinions that conflict with your own, because you've not endured one solitary word of "attack" from my direction! If so, then kindly quote the words of attack you attribute to me. (waiting) ......... I merely disagreed and stated my reasoning, but I will concede the entire matter at this point because you evidently aren't up to spirited mutually educational debate, you seemingly just want to hear from no one whose opinion doesn't perfectly mirror your own, and that's not something I'm prepared to deliver to anyone. Enjoy your day, sir!
 
So true. I forgot Dr. Claud Anderson made an appearance there.

On another note. Looks like an interesting site in your sig on black baseball. Your site?

It's my old site. I kept the domain name and I'm in the process of relaunching it now.
 
No, I'm sorry, but it doesn't work that way. Have you taken any collegiate level sciences yet? To say something DOES NOT exist requires no proof because a negative statement is scientifically IMPOSSIBLE to prove. When one makes the claim that something DOES indeed exist, then the burden of proof falls upon claimant. Only a statement that something does exist, or has existed, or can be made to exist is scientifically provable.

And you asked the question, and I quote: "why attack others based on their belief system? " If you think anything I have said to you in this thread could conceivably be described as an "attack" then you are seeking liberties you frankly didn't earn. It sounds as though you simply don't want to hear opinions that conflict with your own, because you've not endured one solitary word of "attack" from my direction! If so, then kindly quote the words of attack you attribute to me. (waiting) ......... I merely disagreed and stated my reasoning, but I will concede the entire matter at this point because you evidently aren't up to spirited mutually educational debate, you seemingly just want to hear from no one whose opinion doesn't perfectly mirror your own, and that's not something I'm prepared to deliver to anyone. Enjoy your day, sir!

:lol:

I sincerely apologize for not being at your intellectual level but once again, your own polite insults could be used against you, you're not open-minded. When your fellow atheists told you that historians (Josephus, Suetonius and Islamic records comes to mind) do not refute Jesus' existence, you utterly rejected that assertion without examining what he said but I'm the one who's closed-minded? Nice! Even one of the people you used as your basis never claimed Jesus did not exist (see Ehrman's book "Did Jesus Exist?).
Based on historical records, the man did exist at one point, it's just some people do not believe in his exploits or claims and it's their right to do so.
You reject any historical record about Jesus' existence so I am choosing to reject your basis that he doesn't exist and that gets you frustrated, I'm just using your line of argument.
You can "concede" all you want, claim all intellectual midgetry all you want but it's tantamount to you taking your ball and going home so I guess playtime is over. :lol:

Btw, this thread had nothing to do with the existence of Jesus.
 
Back
Top