callum

[callum @starkiller230]

@awhlilana @DJAXLE69 @poopswag34 People who feel they are trapped and depressed deserve eternal suffering! What a great religion!!

[callum @starkiller230]

@WayneLovesGod @DoogiTubeTv @GreenTextRepost The question with the Gospels isn’t whether they’re evidence, they are. The question is whether they alone can establish their own authorship and reliability. That’s a completely different standard.

[callum @starkiller230]

@WayneLovesGod @DoogiTubeTv @GreenTextRepost No, because George Washington isn’t established by one collection of writings. He’s supported by thousands of contemporary letters, government records, newspapers, military documents, portraits, and independent witnesses.

[callum @starkiller230]

@WayneLovesGod @DoogiTubeTv @GreenTextRepost That’s why scholars compare internal claims with external evidence, manuscript history and early church testimony. The question isn’t whether the Bible is evidence; it’s whether its claims can be independently verified.

[callum @starkiller230]

@WayneLovesGod @DoogiTubeTv @GreenTextRepost You’re misunderstanding how historians use sources. Of course the Gospels are historical sources but a source can’t establish its own authorship or reliability simply by claiming it.

[callum @starkiller230]

@WayneLovesGod @DoogiTubeTv @GreenTextRepost I respect that you’ve had a personal experience that convinced you, but that’s different from historical evidence. Personal faith can be meaningful, but it isn’t something historians can evaluate. I’m only discussing what the historical sources can and can’t establish.

[callum @starkiller230]

@WayneLovesGod @DoogiTubeTv @GreenTextRepost We have thousands of manuscripts with known variants, and modern translations even note passages like the longer ending of Mark because they’re disputed. That’s very different from saying the text has been proven unchanged.

[callum @starkiller230]

@WayneLovesGod @DoogiTubeTv @GreenTextRepost I agree that decades aren’t unusually long in ancient history. But early doesn’t automatically mean reliable, that depends on authorship, independence, and corroboration. Also, “the Bible is unchanged” isn’t what textual critics argue.

[callum @starkiller230]

@TrollAccou94432 @DJAXLE69 @poopswag34 That’s retarded

[callum @starkiller230]

@gianny7777 @DJAXLE69 @poopswag34 Atleast that one makes sense. Shame christians throughout history didn’t seem to care

[callum @starkiller230]

@sauce__giver @DJAXLE69 @poopswag34 That’s just fucked up to me. This person sees no reason to live because of the life “God” has granted them, so they choose to free themselves from this pain, so because of that they deserve eternal suffering???

[callum @starkiller230]

@sauce__giver @DJAXLE69 @poopswag34 What an evil cult

[callum @starkiller230]

@sauce__giver @DJAXLE69 @poopswag34 Dafuq? So these poor people who have had shit lives who according to Christian’s had their lives decided by God who knew this would happen and they can’t even choose to free themselves from this pain without them saying you deserve to go to hell???

[callum @starkiller230]

@DJAXLE69 @poopswag34 Suicide is a sin in Christianity for some fucking reason

[callum @starkiller230]

@truNathaniel I lowkey have so much nostalgia for that year lol

[callum @starkiller230]

@kvct_ @_youngcapalot True btw

[callum @starkiller230]

@WayneLovesGod @DoogiTubeTv @GreenTextRepost The Gospels themselves are anonymous, and historians don’t simply assume apostolic authorship. Also, Paul claimed to see the risen Jesus in a vision after the crucifixion, not that he was an eyewitness to Jesus’ ministry.

[callum @starkiller230]

@WayneLovesGod @DoogiTubeTv @GreenTextRepost You’re presenting church tradition as if it’s established historical fact. That Mark wrote Peter’s memories, Matthew and John personally wrote their Gospels, and Luke was Paul’s historian are traditional Christian claims, but they’re debated by modern scholars.

[callum @starkiller230]

@WayneLovesGod @DoogiTubeTv @GreenTextRepost Luke may have intended to write history, but his work is also a theological text. And prophecy isn’t historical evidence unless you already accept Christianity. So I don’t think the evidence for Jesus is as clear-cut as you’re presenting it.

[callum @starkiller230]

@WayneLovesGod @DoogiTubeTv @GreenTextRepost I actually agree that the time gap alone doesn’t disqualify the Gospel, that wasn’t my strongest point. My issue is with the quality of the evidence, not just the dates. Tacitus, Josephus and Suetonius all wrote decades later and aren’t eyewitnesses.