As a panentheist it is always reasonable to side with the Jews in a debate against Protestant fundamentalist Evangelicals like yourself and your pals J.P. Holding and Wildcat at Tektonics.org. As well as your inerrantist pal Glenn Miller (who I do respect, however I don't agree with him.

I let the Jews provide the internal critique of Christianity. The internal critique demonstrates that the Greek Testament is presuppositionally and logically incoherent with the Hebrew Bible. Since Christianity's foundation is founded on the Hebrew Bible, and the Greek Testament contradicts the presuppositions of the Hebrew Bible, the Greek Testament cannot stand without out the Hebrew Bible as its foundation.

Examples (Hebrew Bible = 1 God, Christianity = 3part God, Hebrew Bible = atonement through repentance, prayer, sacrifice; Christianity = atonement only through blood sacrifice.)


While I as a panentheist provide the external evidential critique of Christianity. Establishing and demonstrating based off of evidence that Jesus did not resurrect from the grave. I provide a cumulative case that entails independent lines of evidence and corroborating evidence that the claims of Christianity are not true. I always attack the resurrection first. Such as the 2 earthquakes in Matthew, Matthew's guards at the tomb, the rising saints from the grave in Matthew, Matthew's constant editing and polishing of Mark to make Jesus look better.

The fact that Luke is not a critical historian (you know who Richard Carrier is!). John keeps referring to Jesus as a Paschal Lamb (haha! that's not a sin sacrifice!). John tells us that Jesus is crucified on Passover (haha! Why not Yom Kippur?)


It's the Christian's fault for giving the Hebrew Bible a bad name. Christianity tried to make it seem like the Hebrew Bible ascribes to Hell and the Devil, when no such things were ever believed by the Jews. Honestly, I don't think Judaism would even be know if it weren't for your buddy Constantine making Christianity a national religion.

P.S. Check your genealogy research. THere was no concept of adoption in Biblical times. Why do you employ 21st Century low context societies conceptions on a 1st century Israeli high context society? I thought Holding taught you not to do such a thing?


Take care,


Chris