did jesus and his crew smoke?
- Thread starter askG
- Start date
This is even more pathetic than the reply you ORIGINALLY had. Listen, can you explain the Jewish/Hebrew culture at the time of Jesus? Can you give us an insight on the differences between a NAZERENE and a NAZERITE? Can you give us ANY info pertaining to Jesus wearing dreads, and how that would have actually gone AGAINST his lifestyle?
Sure you can, jimmy.
:h:
Sure you can, jimmy.
:h:
Blah blah blah....Common sense has NOTHING to do with reading the bible or not.
Oh yeah, and I'm not doing a "pilot" show. Our show is actually on the air. I'm done replying to you though. You are obviously just like everyone else that doesn't have any sort of manners, "child." Get over yourself, if you can.
Junior, you are a repeat offender, this is why I often treat you as a deflowered virgin. See, people like you just don't get it. You come online, mad at the world, blame God for everything wrong in your pathetic life, say the bible is this or that and haven't even read it!!!! Now, you tell me how the bible is "speculation" when you have NO IDEA on who even compiled "THE BIBLE." You tell me what is speculation when you have historic records and outside sources validating things in the bible. Now, any person who has STUDIED or has KNOWLEDGE of the JEWISH/HEBREW sects at the time of Jesus would know WHY it was NOT cool for a male to have LONG HAIR OR DREADS/LOCKS. The people who DID have LOCKS/DREADS were under a VOW and this would go directly AGAINST what Jesus was doing (doing meaning how he lived.)
The reason why anything YOU say about the bible is pure speculation is because YOU HAVE NEVER READ IT! Until YOU read it ANYTHING you say about it is null & void. The ONLY thing you are capable of doing is hitting google to quench your thirst to belittle God and the bible. I repeat you have never read the bible so ANYTHING you say about it is PURE speculation.
BTW, common sense is not applicable to you. The people see it.
I thought a smarter individual such as yourself would recognize a joke (aforementioned original reply) when you see it, billy. And to answer your question, no, I cant give you any insight and neither can anyone else. Anything any of us would have to say would only be speculation. Nobody can even prove his existence as a devine being. This is not to insult anyone's beliefs, because who knows, maybe the Bible is 100% genuine, but the Bible can not be proven to contain any factual accounts of anything. This is why it is called faith.
I'm lazy and got this from dictionary.com...
Nazarite- A Jew bound by a vow to lave the hair uncut, to abstain from wine and strong drink, and to practice extraordinary purity of life and devotion, the obligation being for life, or for a certain time. The word is also used adjectively.
Nazarene- A native or inhabitant of Nazareth, Jesus. A member of a sect of early Christians of Jewish origin who retained many of the prescribed Jewish observances. A member of an American Protestant denomination, the Church of the Nazarene, that follows many of the doctrines of early Methodism.
And Heresy, the point is if you weren't there, you don't "KNOW" anything. You need to change your username to Hearsay.
Nazarite- A Jew bound by a vow to lave the hair uncut, to abstain from wine and strong drink, and to practice extraordinary purity of life and devotion, the obligation being for life, or for a certain time. The word is also used adjectively.
Nazarene- A native or inhabitant of Nazareth, Jesus. A member of a sect of early Christians of Jewish origin who retained many of the prescribed Jewish observances. A member of an American Protestant denomination, the Church of the Nazarene, that follows many of the doctrines of early Methodism.
And Heresy, the point is if you weren't there, you don't "KNOW" anything. You need to change your username to Hearsay.
Exactly? End of convo? No this is not the end of the convo. Were you present when your alleged Big Bang took place? No. Have scientist been able to prove 100% that this is how the universe started? NO. What can scientist do to help prove their claim? They look at stars, other galaxies etc to prove/validate their claim. What is wrong with me saying to study the political and culture climate of the time to see if Jesus did in fact have dreads or smoke weed? NOTHING. END OF CONVERSATION WITH YOU.
Now let me drive a couple of holes in a couple of domes before I leave. First, I will address my son.
Junior, you said the following:
Common sense tells us that you are not qualified to speak on the subject because you haven't even read it. Am I saying you need to be a theologian/scholar to give your insight? Hell no. The father of the williams sisters NEVER played tennis, however he DID study the game of tennis. You have NOT studied the bible, you have NOT read the bible, you do NOT have ANY knowledge of the political climates during the different periods of the bible. You do NOT know the "philosophy" of the bible. You do NOT understand the culture of those who wrote the bible. You do NOT know ANYTHING about the bible except for what you google. This is a FACT.
Who cares? The point is I was NOT being disrespectful when I called it a pilot, and believe me if I wanted to be disrespectful I could, however is this the ONLY argument you can come up with? You want to argue about something that has not much of anything to do with the reality of this topic. You are attempting to change the direction of this convo by placing emphasis on my discription of your show. However, I am placing my emphasize on your idiocy laden posts about a subject you know NOTHING about. This also is FACT.
Have any sort of manners? You are here trying to argue against something you know NOTHING about. What type of manners do YOU have? You need to STFU, and stay out of grown folks business. People like you should be seen and not heard (just like women in the old days.) People like you should speak only when spoken to (just like women in the old days.) I hope you understand why I am comparing you to females...
No, I am getting information pertaining to you FROM you.
EXACTLY, BECAUSE YOU KNOW NOTHING!!!!! This is what you DO know:
You have no leg to stand on. I have totally destroyed you and your position. That statement PROVES what you know. You basically ADMIT to NOT knowing anything, admit you get lost while researching and studying the terms and you ADMIT that you have NOT read the bible. You are my accomplice in murdering any position you may have had. Please, take your own advice, and don't reply because I'll keep crushing your skull every single time, child.
Junior, how am I speaking about something I don't know about? Anything I say I know about OR that I have can be VERIFIED by people HERE (yes on this site) OR by people OFFLINE. You are an idiot. Now if you are comparing me to Tadou because I use "child" to describe your current mind state you are in need of correction. I have been a member of this site for a loooooong time. Child, Pavlov, Jimmy and Junior are names I have often used to describe people like you. Please, do NOT confuse these terms as being a knock off of someone else. So, how is it that I am acting like tadou by speaking on things I do not know about, but you ADMIT to not knowing about the bible and you are speaking on it? You have a twisted sense of logic, jimmy. SEEK HELP.
REFER TO MY WORDS DIRECTED TO 2-0-6. Also, if Jesus were a Nazarite (jewish men who DID have long hair) you would have to explain how long he was under the vow, why he drank wine, why he came in contact with dead bodies, etc.
Also, this is taken from another website (several have this same info)
The paintings of Christ are simply artists' conceptions and have no Scriptural authorization. At least one historian of His day described Him as being a tall man with chestnut-colored hair, parted in the middle, with short hair which turned up at the end. In the book, THE MODERN STUDENT'S LIFE OF CHRIST by Irving Vollmer, published by Fleming H. Revell, the author says, "Archeologists object to the conventional pictures of Christ because they are not true to history." A German painter, L. Fahrenkrog, says, "Christ certainly never wore a beard, and His hair was beyond a doubt a closely cut. For this we have historical proof." The oldest representations going back to the first Christian centuries and found chiefly in the catacombs of Rome all pictured Him without a beard. All the pictures of Christ down to the beginning of the first century and even later are of this kind. Students of the first century and of Roman history are aware of the fact that the time of Christ was characterized by short hair for men. This author has seen many coins and statues which bear the likenesses of emperors who reigned during and after the time of Christ. Such likenesses reveal that the Ceasars and other rulers and emperors had short hair, and of course, the subjects followed the example set by the emperor. The plain simple truth is that during the life of Christ, short hair was the acceptable style. That Jesus wore the conventional style of His day is proved by the fact that Judas had to kiss Him to point Him out to the soldiers. Had Jesus been somewhat different, as a long-haired freak, Judas could have simply told the soldiers that Jesus was the One with the long hair. This, of course, is not true, as Judas had to place a kiss on Him in order to identify Him.
My argument, like the people who actualy know about this stuff is very simple. Study the culture and people of the time and see if it is true. Your argument is "you were not there you can't speak on it", and this is stupidity.
How original. I have heard that before and some people (who are idiots like you) actually thought my name was spelled like that. If I were not true to my name, I would need to change it. However, my name is an ACCURATE reflection of me as a person and my beliefs. Yours is a cockamamie moniker created to give you some sort of "hardness." Seek help.
@XxtraMannish you said:
Jim, the fact is, nothing comical could be found in that post. Why you would expect someone to find it comical is beyond me...
aranoid:
See all previous responses.
Being a divine being is not in question here. How is proof (or lack of proof) of being divine capable of making or breaking the current positions held in this thread?
I will allow you the chance to clean this up. Consider it a "pardon" if you will (I often do this when people type in haste.) Listen, you are making the claim that the bible can not be proven to contain any factual accounts of anything. What you are implying is the bible does not contain factual accounts and everything is false (including history.) If I can show you ONE instance (out of many) of FACTUAL accounts that ARE contained in the bible (factual meaning it is a fact and it is recorded in history, archaeology or nature) will you agree to leave this section of the board for six months? If I cannot show you any factual accounts in the bible I will leave this site (not just the forum) for one year.
If you want to reconcile or clarify your statement do so. If you want to take me up on my offer do so, because I have a GREAT one waiting for you as we speak.
Now let me drive a couple of holes in a couple of domes before I leave. First, I will address my son.
Junior, you said the following:
Common sense tells us that you are not qualified to speak on the subject because you haven't even read it. Am I saying you need to be a theologian/scholar to give your insight? Hell no. The father of the williams sisters NEVER played tennis, however he DID study the game of tennis. You have NOT studied the bible, you have NOT read the bible, you do NOT have ANY knowledge of the political climates during the different periods of the bible. You do NOT know the "philosophy" of the bible. You do NOT understand the culture of those who wrote the bible. You do NOT know ANYTHING about the bible except for what you google. This is a FACT.
Who cares? The point is I was NOT being disrespectful when I called it a pilot, and believe me if I wanted to be disrespectful I could, however is this the ONLY argument you can come up with? You want to argue about something that has not much of anything to do with the reality of this topic. You are attempting to change the direction of this convo by placing emphasis on my discription of your show. However, I am placing my emphasize on your idiocy laden posts about a subject you know NOTHING about. This also is FACT.
Have any sort of manners? You are here trying to argue against something you know NOTHING about. What type of manners do YOU have? You need to STFU, and stay out of grown folks business. People like you should be seen and not heard (just like women in the old days.) People like you should speak only when spoken to (just like women in the old days.) I hope you understand why I am comparing you to females...
No, I am getting information pertaining to you FROM you.
EXACTLY, BECAUSE YOU KNOW NOTHING!!!!! This is what you DO know:
You have no leg to stand on. I have totally destroyed you and your position. That statement PROVES what you know. You basically ADMIT to NOT knowing anything, admit you get lost while researching and studying the terms and you ADMIT that you have NOT read the bible. You are my accomplice in murdering any position you may have had. Please, take your own advice, and don't reply because I'll keep crushing your skull every single time, child.
Junior, how am I speaking about something I don't know about? Anything I say I know about OR that I have can be VERIFIED by people HERE (yes on this site) OR by people OFFLINE. You are an idiot. Now if you are comparing me to Tadou because I use "child" to describe your current mind state you are in need of correction. I have been a member of this site for a loooooong time. Child, Pavlov, Jimmy and Junior are names I have often used to describe people like you. Please, do NOT confuse these terms as being a knock off of someone else. So, how is it that I am acting like tadou by speaking on things I do not know about, but you ADMIT to not knowing about the bible and you are speaking on it? You have a twisted sense of logic, jimmy. SEEK HELP.
REFER TO MY WORDS DIRECTED TO 2-0-6. Also, if Jesus were a Nazarite (jewish men who DID have long hair) you would have to explain how long he was under the vow, why he drank wine, why he came in contact with dead bodies, etc.
Also, this is taken from another website (several have this same info)
The paintings of Christ are simply artists' conceptions and have no Scriptural authorization. At least one historian of His day described Him as being a tall man with chestnut-colored hair, parted in the middle, with short hair which turned up at the end. In the book, THE MODERN STUDENT'S LIFE OF CHRIST by Irving Vollmer, published by Fleming H. Revell, the author says, "Archeologists object to the conventional pictures of Christ because they are not true to history." A German painter, L. Fahrenkrog, says, "Christ certainly never wore a beard, and His hair was beyond a doubt a closely cut. For this we have historical proof." The oldest representations going back to the first Christian centuries and found chiefly in the catacombs of Rome all pictured Him without a beard. All the pictures of Christ down to the beginning of the first century and even later are of this kind. Students of the first century and of Roman history are aware of the fact that the time of Christ was characterized by short hair for men. This author has seen many coins and statues which bear the likenesses of emperors who reigned during and after the time of Christ. Such likenesses reveal that the Ceasars and other rulers and emperors had short hair, and of course, the subjects followed the example set by the emperor. The plain simple truth is that during the life of Christ, short hair was the acceptable style. That Jesus wore the conventional style of His day is proved by the fact that Judas had to kiss Him to point Him out to the soldiers. Had Jesus been somewhat different, as a long-haired freak, Judas could have simply told the soldiers that Jesus was the One with the long hair. This, of course, is not true, as Judas had to place a kiss on Him in order to identify Him.
My argument, like the people who actualy know about this stuff is very simple. Study the culture and people of the time and see if it is true. Your argument is "you were not there you can't speak on it", and this is stupidity.
How original. I have heard that before and some people (who are idiots like you) actually thought my name was spelled like that. If I were not true to my name, I would need to change it. However, my name is an ACCURATE reflection of me as a person and my beliefs. Yours is a cockamamie moniker created to give you some sort of "hardness." Seek help.
@XxtraMannish you said:
Jim, the fact is, nothing comical could be found in that post. Why you would expect someone to find it comical is beyond me...
aranoid: See all previous responses.
Being a divine being is not in question here. How is proof (or lack of proof) of being divine capable of making or breaking the current positions held in this thread?
I will allow you the chance to clean this up. Consider it a "pardon" if you will (I often do this when people type in haste.) Listen, you are making the claim that the bible can not be proven to contain any factual accounts of anything. What you are implying is the bible does not contain factual accounts and everything is false (including history.) If I can show you ONE instance (out of many) of FACTUAL accounts that ARE contained in the bible (factual meaning it is a fact and it is recorded in history, archaeology or nature) will you agree to leave this section of the board for six months? If I cannot show you any factual accounts in the bible I will leave this site (not just the forum) for one year.
If you want to reconcile or clarify your statement do so. If you want to take me up on my offer do so, because I have a GREAT one waiting for you as we speak.
Jesus Fucking Christ, take it easy comrade. I said four words. That’s it.
Anyways, there is a huge difference between believing the big bang and believing Jesus rocked dreads. The former is a scientific theory that is backed by scientific data; the latter comes simply from ancient text. You cannot test or conduct scientific experiments that prove what Jesus might have done. Shit, you can’t even prove he existed. The big bang on the other hand is backed by tons of experiments, observations and scientific data.
No, but at least there is supporting scientific data/evidence that suggests it happened. Jesus rocking dreads or smoking dank is supported by what? 1,900 year old text?
Anyways, there is a huge difference between believing the big bang and believing Jesus rocked dreads. The former is a scientific theory that is backed by scientific data; the latter comes simply from ancient text. You cannot test or conduct scientific experiments that prove what Jesus might have done. Shit, you can’t even prove he existed. The big bang on the other hand is backed by tons of experiments, observations and scientific data.
No, but at least there is supporting scientific data/evidence that suggests it happened. Jesus rocking dreads or smoking dank is supported by what? 1,900 year old text?
Heresy....I wasn't the one arguing about Jesus having dreads. Why don't you ask those people if they read the Bible? Or anyone else in here if they have read it besides me? You got somethin against me cause I told you I haven't read the ENTIRE Bible or somethin? You 'KNOW' just as much as I do about Jesus, which is NOTHING, cause unless you were his homey you really don't know shit. That's like saying the Book of Mormon is all fact just cause it's on paper. How about I right you a note that sucks fuck off, that would be fact, cause you KNOW it came from me. You don't KNOW for a FACT where any of that came from. You are believing what others have to say about the subject and what your opinion is, but that's all it is...your opinion. Take a break from the coffee and take a valium.
I see you are a glutton for punishment, sixxness.
I didn't say you were, however when you start cheerleading for people and type madness such as, "Thank you for saying this. I'm glad someone else has common sense", you open the doors for the same type of punishment for those who DO claim Jesus DID have dreads. Basically, you are guilty by association.
Actually, I didn't need to because they weren't professing their views as loud as you were, however I did ask them some questions (refer to the end of page three), and these questions will suffice and stand in place for not asking if the person has read the bible or not.
Sure I have. 206, 916, Xianex, EDJ, Showilla, Hutch.....the list goes on. Also here is a RECENT example:
http://siccness.net/vb/showthread.php?t=184755&page=3
Also, read page 2. It has been six days since I said he would not return (if he were asked questions.) Where is he? :dead:
NO!!! I have, NOTHING against you PERIOD. What I DO have a problem with is your position pertaining to the bible. I am not asking you to believe God exists. You can worship Buwhamlekzeel for all I care (thats a page from 206's book.) Seriously, I don't care what people believe. I am not saying or implying that you are a bad person because you have not read the bible. I believe a lot of people who HAVE read the bible and believe in God are hellbound (and proof of this is in the bible), and I believe a lot of people who have never read it are going to heaven (because Gods law was written within them.) Now, with that being said, I have NO problem with YOU personally, nor do I have a problem with you not reading the bible (for your good), however I DO have a problem with you saying what it is or isn't when you haven't read it. By doing so, I believe you are doing an injustice to yourself as a human.
See, the thing is I AM his homey.
No, that is not like saying the book of mormon is fact because it is on paper. I would be critical of the book of mormon if it were not in line with the teachings and beliefs of it's contemporaries. I would be critical of the book of mormon if it did not coincide with the beliefs from which it was derived.
?!?!?!? what are you saying?
What are you talking about now? I need clarification on what you mean by "any of that." If you are implying that the things contained in the bible are not KNOWN or considered FACT (and undisputed.) I offer you the same thing I offered XXTRA only I will require you to leave the board (this entire site) for one year if I prove it, and I will leave this site for good if I DON'T prove it. If you are not implying what I believe you are implying please explain.
How is it that you can form an opinion of something and have yet to read it? Everything what you just typed is what YOU are doing now. You have NEVER read the bible, and you believe what others have to say about the subject. THIS IS FACT. However, contrary to your unpopular belief I took the time to study the bible on my own (thus learning some of the languages of ancient culture along the way.) I actually took time reading unbiased sources, I've actually done RESEARCH outside of a 501 c3 church or school. You? Well, you have done NOTHING! I am basing my beliefe on what my own eyes have saw, what I have studied and researched, and what I have heard (and not from man.) Again, you are basing your position on what?
A.) NOTHING BECAUSE YOU HAVE YET TO READ THE BIBLE.
B.) THE OPINIONS OF OTHERS.
C.) BOTH.
:dead: x sixxness
Take a break from stupidity, and learn about subjects and source material before you condemn them.
I didn't say you were, however when you start cheerleading for people and type madness such as, "Thank you for saying this. I'm glad someone else has common sense", you open the doors for the same type of punishment for those who DO claim Jesus DID have dreads. Basically, you are guilty by association.
Actually, I didn't need to because they weren't professing their views as loud as you were, however I did ask them some questions (refer to the end of page three), and these questions will suffice and stand in place for not asking if the person has read the bible or not.
Sure I have. 206, 916, Xianex, EDJ, Showilla, Hutch.....the list goes on. Also here is a RECENT example:
http://siccness.net/vb/showthread.php?t=184755&page=3
Also, read page 2. It has been six days since I said he would not return (if he were asked questions.) Where is he? :dead:
NO!!! I have, NOTHING against you PERIOD. What I DO have a problem with is your position pertaining to the bible. I am not asking you to believe God exists. You can worship Buwhamlekzeel for all I care (thats a page from 206's book.) Seriously, I don't care what people believe. I am not saying or implying that you are a bad person because you have not read the bible. I believe a lot of people who HAVE read the bible and believe in God are hellbound (and proof of this is in the bible), and I believe a lot of people who have never read it are going to heaven (because Gods law was written within them.) Now, with that being said, I have NO problem with YOU personally, nor do I have a problem with you not reading the bible (for your good), however I DO have a problem with you saying what it is or isn't when you haven't read it. By doing so, I believe you are doing an injustice to yourself as a human.
See, the thing is I AM his homey.
No, that is not like saying the book of mormon is fact because it is on paper. I would be critical of the book of mormon if it were not in line with the teachings and beliefs of it's contemporaries. I would be critical of the book of mormon if it did not coincide with the beliefs from which it was derived.
?!?!?!?
what are you saying?What are you talking about now? I need clarification on what you mean by "any of that." If you are implying that the things contained in the bible are not KNOWN or considered FACT (and undisputed.) I offer you the same thing I offered XXTRA only I will require you to leave the board (this entire site) for one year if I prove it, and I will leave this site for good if I DON'T prove it. If you are not implying what I believe you are implying please explain.
How is it that you can form an opinion of something and have yet to read it? Everything what you just typed is what YOU are doing now. You have NEVER read the bible, and you believe what others have to say about the subject. THIS IS FACT. However, contrary to your unpopular belief I took the time to study the bible on my own (thus learning some of the languages of ancient culture along the way.) I actually took time reading unbiased sources, I've actually done RESEARCH outside of a 501 c3 church or school. You? Well, you have done NOTHING! I am basing my beliefe on what my own eyes have saw, what I have studied and researched, and what I have heard (and not from man.) Again, you are basing your position on what?
A.) NOTHING BECAUSE YOU HAVE YET TO READ THE BIBLE.
B.) THE OPINIONS OF OTHERS.
C.) BOTH.
:dead: x sixxness
Take a break from stupidity, and learn about subjects and source material before you condemn them.
I am implying that I wouldn't believe something because it was written in a book. I'm not saying it's a bad book, I just have a hard time getting through Genesis when they talk about the Sabbath being Sunday when it came from the Pagans. I mean, that's within the first 3 pages, so how am I supposed to take that seriously? Then again, maybe I'm just assuming that the Pagans did it first and I really don't know, I just read that somewhere or something irrelevant I guess?
I'm not gonna leave the site for any reasons but my own. However, if you would like to share some information with me I would be more than happy to read it...I'll get back to you when I'm done reading the shit, I don't want to say it will just back up what I already think but I have a feeling it's gonna be the case.
And unless you personally met Jesus, I don't think he's your homey. But before I assume any of your beliefs, what are they specificly in regard to this subject (Jesus and religion). I've read your posts before but elaboration would help.
Sorry, what I meant to say was, "God's day of rest is on Sunday." Which is what 99% of the Christians I know call their Sabbath. So I guess I was speaking from a generalization and a misread. At least I can go about reading it now without looking at it like that. Thanks for correcting me on that JoMoDo...