JESUS !!!

[K9QJ]

Cameron. What do you think? I wonder how Christianity in general is going to react to this story? This could create a hellava storm.

[kc7jty]

more fodder for the mindless masses. Anna Nicole Smith must be losing wind.

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (K9QJ @ Feb. 26 2007,19:43)]Cameron. What do you think? #I wonder how Christianity in general is going to react to this story? This could create a hellava storm.
We've been discussing this here (http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=17;t=147706). Here's a repeat of my last post. Enjoy!

Quote[/b] (K3XR @ Feb. 26 2007,13:48)]Good try for a "Sideshow".

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news....D=54446 (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54446)
Well, it's certainly entertaining, #I'll give it that. But jesus is the all around family entertainer (http://www.videosift.com/video/Rowan-Atkinson-Jesus). However, where is the "expert" evidence that resurrection actually happened?

If it does exist then don't you think worldnetdaily could come up with a better reference than this (http://shop.wnd.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=1813)?

From the link
Quote[/b] ]
"Cameron, whose claim to fame is a fictionalized account of the sinking of the Titanic, unveiled a documentary claiming a coffin found in Jerusalem 27 years ago once contained the remains of Jesus Christ," said Rev. Rob Schenck, the president of the National Clergy Council.


I wonder if the good reverend is an archeologist or historian himself?

Oh look, from the good reverend's biographical information which can be found here (http://www.faithandaction.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=category.display&category_id=18).
Quote[/b] ]
Doctor of Divinity, honoris causae, Atlantic Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church
Master’s Degree in Christian Ministry, Faith Evangelical Lutheran Seminary of Tacoma, WA


Well, but he does have a Ph.D. in Divinity.

Quote[/b] ]
However, he said, "a Hollywood director is the least qualified to render any determination of biblical truth.


Certainly true, I suspect Cameron is making the movie but relying on other experts.

Quote[/b] ] Not only so, but the people Mr. Cameron has partnered with completely lack credibility. One has been discredited by experts as a charlatan


Um, which one, and what about the others, and which experts?

Perhaps someone else has a link to a better source of information. I mean, we clearly need to discredit this blasphemous story that is tantamount to public spitting on the bible, nay, public peeing on the GENUINE tomb of baby jesus.

But, in order to do this, we need a story with references.

Is this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simcha_Jacobovici) the charlatan? #After all, he claims to have found evidence that, if true, would be the first actual physical evidence (http://shopping.discovery.com/product-37753.html) that jesus even existed.

Or maybe it's this guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oded_Golan) who seems to be in a bit of a jam (http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=105853) over some forgery business?

Of course, if the church wants us to view it as anything other than historical charlatans, perhaps it should come up with its own physical evidence that jesus actually existed. How hard could that be, after all, they had hundreds of years to get the job done? How hard could it be to reject well documented arguments like these (http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm) and these (http://www.atheists.org/christianity/didjesusexist.html), which suggest that if we believe in jesus we could just as easily believe in hercules?

Some experts in the field claim that the tomb holds no merit
Quote[/b] ]
Amos Kloner, professor at Israel's Bar-Ilan University, who was the archeologist who first revealed the discovery, believes the cave and its contents hold no significance.

Kloner told CTV that the names found on the tombs are common ones at the time.

"These are the most common names among Jews in these centuries," said Kloner, who published his findings in 1996.

"It's very interesting," he said of all of the names of Jesus' family being found on ossuaries in the same cave, "but it's not a convincing proof that it's the family of Jesus." He knows of at least two other ossuaries that bear the name of Jesus, son of Joseph.


But Cameron claims (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070226/jesus_tomb_060226/20070226?hub=TopStories) that his team has calculated the odds of the coincidence

Quote[/b] ]
In the documentary, University of Toronto statistician Andre Feuerverger calculates that the chances of the names being found together are 600 to one.


Now, I'm not a betting man, so I wouldn't gamble on those odds, but they're one heck of a lot better than 1/33,830, the supposed odds of you choosing the right god (http://www.joeuser.com/articleComments.asp?c=1&AID=142842) thus avoiding an eternity of torment.

But, if you've got the soul to spare, then you have pretty good odds of getting a free dvd (http://www.blasphemychallenge.com/) for just a little bit of work.

[K9QJ]

I just got one of them there Reverend certificates. Now Ya'll give me all yer ham gear( Plus $500) and ya'll gonna go to heaven. Lordy help ya'll if'n ya don't!!!

[W2ILP]

I can believe that U.S. Grant is burried in Grant's tomb...but anything older than that is unreliable.

w2ilp (ID Living People)...before wasting time digging up the dead.

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (W2ILP @ Feb. 26 2007,20:53)]I can believe that U.S. Grant is burried in Grant's tomb...but anything older than that is unreliable.

w2ilp (ID Living People)...before wasting time digging up the dead.
But baby jesus isn't dead!

[KE5FRF]

I saw a grave in San Antonio once that said "Jesus Gonzales"....does that qualify for a movie?

I have no opinion on this matter, and this matter in no way alters my faith. If it IS Jesus, it is further proof that he actually lived and was flesh and blood. Of course he was flesh and blood, his blood flowed down Calvary as he suffered upon the cross. The resurrection of Christ is a matter of faith, and I've always maintained that his resurrection was of spirit, and not neccessarily of flesh. I'm not a 100% literalist when it comes to biblical scripture, as I don't have to believe every word of the bible to have faith that Christ was the most pure creature to ever walk the earth and was the divine son of God. God sent his son to walk in the flesh among men, thats what I believe. Nothing that Cameron films about a tomb that was discovered in the 70s and was dismissed even then will change things.

This is sensationalism designed to go along with the "De Vinci Code" hoopla.

[kf6snj]

I don't think too many of us who are Christians are really going to care about this one. The fact of the matter is that both Mary the mother of Jesus and Mary Magdelene are buried in Ephesus.

Here is my question, how on earth could Cameron even make the claim of verifying this with DNA. The DNA he'd need has not existed in almost 1300 years (presuming a slow rate of decomposition with a typical Hebrew burial). Again, Cameron failed to take into account the burial rituals of his day. I don't doubt that Faith Seminary will soon disavow his attendance soon. They tend to pride themselves on students who remain conservative.

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 26 2007,22:04)]I have no opinion on this matter, and this matter in no way alters my faith. If it IS Jesus, it is further proof that he actually lived and was flesh and blood.
Don't you mean the ONLY evidence? See above.

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (ab8ro @ Feb. 27 2007,23:15)]Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 26 2007,22:04)]I have no opinion on this matter, and this matter in no way alters my faith. If it IS Jesus, it is further proof that he actually lived and was flesh and blood.
Don't you mean the ONLY evidence? See above.
No, I don't mean the only evidence. The New Testiment is enough for me, but also I would cite the Roman historian Flavius Josephus in his work Jewish Antiquities

http://reluctant-messenger.com/josephus.htm

sorry, my link function doesn't seem to be working.

[K6BBC]

Jim Cameron is an old friend from many years ago. For those of us who knew him when, it never went unnoticed that his initials are J.C.

bbc

[al2n]

Was wondering when this would hit the Zed. You boys are slowing down.

This 'discovery' has been around for over 20 years. The vast majority of the Archaeological community as well as Theologans, including the guy who first discovered the tombs, have all said that this is not the tomb of the Jesus of New Testament fame.

The tv show is nothing more than a ratings and money grab. Not sure why Cameron would bother with something like this.

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 26 2007,22:26)]Quote[/b] (ab8ro @ Feb. 27 2007,23:15)]Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 26 2007,22:04)]I have no opinion on this matter, and this matter in no way alters my faith. If it IS Jesus, it is further proof that he actually lived and was flesh and blood.
Don't you mean the ONLY evidence? See above.
No, I don't mean the only evidence. The New Testiment is enough for me, but also I would cite the Roman historian Flavius Josephus in his work Jewish Antiquities

http://reluctant-messenger.com/josephus.htm

sorry, my link function doesn't seem to be working.
Which, of course, is (http://mwillett.org/atheism/jesusmyth.htm) not (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus) credible (http://www.truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm).

Quote[/b] ]
The best non-Christian source is Flavius Josephus, a Jewish historian. He mentions James as the brother of Jesus (yes, James, the son of the eternal virgin Mary... ) and he appears to call him the brother of Jesus, known as the Christ. That phrase is suspected by some as being a forgery, but I see no reason to doubt it. Earlier in the work of Josephus there is clear evidence of Christian tampering. The Christian apologist scholar Origen, writing a century after the time of Josephus, states clearly that the Jew Josephus does not acknowledge Jesus as Messiah. And yet later, after the establishment of the official Roman church the Christian Eusebius produces the only extant copy of the work of Josephus and lo and behold it contains a clear reference to Jesus as the Jewish Messiah. Of course it is faked. Clumsily. There is a lot of controversy over exactly how much of the passage is faked.



Pretty typical of christian evidence, ninety percent deceit with a dash of bs thrown in to improve the smell.

[KE5FRF]

Not credible because an atheism website says its not credible?

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAH



Shall I produce a Christian website that discredits your atheism website as a counterargument?

PULEEZ.



Archeologists and historians have widely accepted Josephus as one of the difinitive Jewish scholars of his day. So, I'm supposed to go against common wisdom and believe an atheism website as fact?

Get real.

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 26 2007,22:56)]Not credible because an atheism website says its not credible?

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH



AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH



AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH



AHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAH



Shall I produce a Christian website that discredits your atheism website as a counterargument?

PULEEZ.

Get real.
There is no need, had you actually read the links you might have realized that much of the scholarly work which rejects Josephus has been done by christian scholars.

I gave you three document links which were easy to find. Please note that each provides references which refute the authenticity of what is obviously a forgery.

Again, as the third link points out, much of the refutation has come from christian scholars

Quote[/b] ]
The dismissal of the passage in Josephus regarding Jesus is not based on "faith" or "belief" but on intense scientific scrutiny and reasoning. Such investigation has been confirmed repeatedly by numerous scholars who were mostly Christian. The Testimonium Flavianum, Dr. Lardner concluded in none too forceful words, "ought, therefore...to be discarded from any place among the evidences of Christianity." With such outstanding authority and so many scientific reasons, we can at last dispense with the pretentious charade of wondering if the infamous passage in the writings of Josephus called the Testimonium Flavianum is forged and who fabricated it.


Your source is garbage, please stir in more bs to improve the smell.

Quote[/b] ]
Archeologists and historians have widely accepted Josephus as one of the difinitive Jewish scholars of his day.


And he may have been, he just didn't write the words that you think are evidence of jesus.

Quote[/b] ]
So, I'm supposed to go against common wisdom and believe an atheism website as fact?


No, you are supposed to think for yourself and be honest about questioning evidence. Atheists provide evidence because that's all they're interested in. There's no point in linking to apologists who are trying to convince people of something without evidence.

[W2ILP]

ab8ro

Thanks for calling me baby. I'm 73 years old, going on 74 and baby is a compliment and more unique than OM.

If Jesus isn't dead why are they looking for his remains in a tomb or a coffin?

Yeah... I know Jesus is God, the Son of God and the Holy Ghost and He is everywhere. If you can believe that He can be dead and buried, up in Heaven, and haunting all of us at home at the same time....even without the use of video recordings.

Hypothetical case that is relative:-
IF Jesus had a son: Would Jesus be His son's father or His son's grandfather or His son's Godfather?

w2ilp (Interrelated Limitless Parentage?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif)

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 27 2007,20:56)]Archeologists and historians have widely accepted Josephus as one of the difinitive Jewish scholars of his day. So, I'm supposed to go against common wisdom and believe an atheism website as fact?
Um, no. Josephus is widely regarded as having been no more than a self-serving biographer. While his 'local color' is considered of value, his historical authenticity is routinely doubted and frequently countered.

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (W2ILP @ Feb. 26 2007,23:09)]If Jesus isn't dead why are they looking for his remains in a tomb or a coffin?

#Yeah... I know Jesus is God, the Son of God and the Holy Ghost and He is everywhere. #If you can believe that He can be dead and buried, up in Heaven, and haunting all of us at home at the same time....even without the use of video recordings.

Hypothetical case that is relative:-
IF Jesus had a son: #Would Jesus be His son's father or His son's grandfather or His son's Godfather?
I think you need some education on the power of baby jesus. May I suggest this scholarly reference (http://imdb.com/title/tt0415306/).

Baby jesus is smart you know. But I have to wonder, if he was so smart how come he didn't invent the IBM pc? He could have made millions.

[WF7A]

Easter? Isn't that when Jesus rose from the grave, saw his shadow, then declared six more weeks of winter?

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (WF7A @ Feb. 26 2007,23:46)]Easter? Isn't that when Jesus rose from the grave, saw his shadow,then declared six more weeks of winter?
Baby jesus will shoot his laserbeams up your butt if you keep on with that blasphemy!

[ac4ut]

The dude had some neat and profound things to say,either way.
BTW: Nobody is buried in Grants tomb that would be redundant.

[k5xit]

Of course, if it comes from Hollyweird you know it is true! If it wins an oscar the entire world must accept it as fact!

[KE5FRF]

One more consideration as "evidence" that Jesus lived...

The fact that in 2007, we are still talking about him.
Indeed, the immediate wildfire spread in the first century of the early Christian church and its persistance and longevity are strong arguments that the man actually lived.

Think about it...the Christian faith was borne almost immediately after the death of Christ, as his apostles traveled the Greco-Roman world spreading his teachings. By the early 2nd century, a large "gentile" population of Christian converts had established itself along with the Christian Jew community of Jerusalum, as Paul had done missionary work into Greece, Rome, and Turkey. By around the year 250 AD, the Gentile Christian community had firmly rooted itself in Rome, Alexandria, Jerusalem, and Antioch.

How can one explain, within only a few generations after his reported death, such an expansion of a brand new religious sect? How can one logically conclude that he was "made up" or fictional? I'm not going to debate wether or not he was in fact a truly divine person...this is irrelavant. It is the assertion that he never lived that I challenge. By refuting the writings of Josephus as fabricated, you beg the question, why? Why would these early Christians so rapidly develop their doctrines, going against the grain of the times, for the sake of a man who never lived?

I find it laughable that modern Americans are so full of the perverbiable BS that you speak of. We sit here at our computers, citing a sensationalized documentary on the "Discovery Channel" and some Atheism website fodder as proof that a man who lived 2,000 years ago either did or din't live...and we further extrapolate that we know all about his life or lack thereof because of a box of old bones.

If, in 500 years lets say, someone claimed that YOU NEVER EXISTED, even given the vastness of modern record keeping, do you not realize that even 500 years from now doubts could be sewn?

You see, the challenge is that Jesus was NOT a man of means, and was not a man of power when he lived. He was a man who walked among the people as a carpenter, a simple man from the town of Nazareth. His importance wasn't measurable on a historic scale at the time of his life...he fought no battles, won no wars, and conquered no lands. He ruled no people and wrote no books. He would not have been regarded by the record keepers of the day as someone of great import. This does NOT MEAN, however, that he wasn't revered by a great many or that he didn't have a large following. It does not mean that accounts of his life as documented by the early apostles were not true.

Don't you see? The very simple nature of this man is all the more why it so amazing that his teachings spread so quickly and that an entire religious sect was spawned! In those days, the common people had few "superstars" to speak of. There were kings and warriors, artists and philosophers who attained notorioty, but how many of these broadly recognized people became thought of as the sons of gods by the common man?

No, I'll continue to read your postings that claim that the stories of Jesus are fraudulant, and I'll laugh. I'll laugh at the arrogance of someone 2,000 years after the fact disputing something that happened so long ago because "The internet says so".

[WF7A]

Just to play Devil's Advocate...

Why is Jesus portrayed as a white guy when he obviously wasn't?

[KC4HGH]

BTW, the name "Jesus" was the sixth most popular name in the day...and "Mary" was the first most popular.

So, if they dug someone up, his name WAS probably "Jesus"....but it wasn't Him....

AND, it has been reported the writing found is more like grafitti....

Cameron is not only lying, he's wasting time and money....

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (WF7A @ Feb. 28 2007,12:22)]Just to play Devil's Advocate...

Why is Jesus portrayed as a white guy when he obviously wasn't?
He's not.

He's portrayed as a Jew. Jews are not "white guys" nor are they "yellow guys" nor are they "brown guys". Jews are a religious group, not a race, and can't be classified as such. Traditional Mediterranean Jews can be seen as an ethnicity (different from race), but that ethnicity isalso technically classifed as Caucasian. But in terms of religion, there are European Jews as well as African Jews, such as in Etheopia, so that further complicates any discussion of Jesus's racial geneaology.

Where people confuse the matter is the fact that the origin of the Jewish faith lies in the cradle of civilization, ancient Mesopotamia, as a fractionation from Canaan and what later became Islam. (Read about Abraham)

Native Isrealies and Arab people in the region are decended from the same tribes. But the funny thing is, we don't identify Islamic people as a "race", we identify it as a religion, and we refer to the general ethnic background of those people as Arab, Middle Eastern, or Mediterranean. Yet, we speak of Jews as if they are of a different ethnicity. This is simply not true.

There are only three recognized races. Caucasian, African, and Mongoloid. Any further division is actually ethnicity and is traced to regionalism rather than true genetic factors.

Furthermore, Jews and Arabs are considered CAUCASIANS by genetic geneaologists. Just as Nordics, Germanics, Galics, etc. If the term white refers to people of fairer skin of European descent, or is interchangeable with Caucasian, then depicting Jesus as "white" would not be incorrect. He simply is was of the Meditteranean variety, just as Italians, Greeks, and even Spaniards.

Jesus's geneaology is expressly outlined in the bible, and he is a descendant of Abraham. As such, he would have been a Meditteranean Caucasian.

Most "portrayals" I've seen of Jesus in ancient paintings depict him as a medium complected man with long brown hair. I'll agree, in some cases you'll see his eyes painted blue and his hair a lighter color of brown, and his hair untypically straighter than would be true of his ethnicity, but it isn't surprising that early Christians would depict them looking more "like them". However, I've never seen it taken to the extreme of blonde hair and blue eyes. Our modern movies carry forth a similar "Westernization" of Jesus, but I would still argue that he isn't being depicted as a Nordic or Galic variety of white as much as a Meditteranean variety, save for the ridiculous "blue eyed" paintings.

[WB2WIK]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,07:24)]One more consideration as "evidence" that Jesus lived...

The fact that in 2007, we are still talking about him.
We're still talking about Adam and Eve, too. They're allegedly much older.

Think they were the first two people? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (WB2WIK @ Feb. 28 2007,14:05)]Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,07:24)]One more consideration as "evidence" that Jesus lived...

The fact that in 2007, we are still talking about him.
We're still talking about Adam and Eve, too. #They're allegedly much older.

Think they were the first two people? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
Why, yes, as a matter of fact, I do.

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (WB2WIK @ Feb. 28 2007,14:05)]Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,07:24)]One more consideration as "evidence" that Jesus lived...

The fact that in 2007, we are still talking about him.
We're still talking about Adam and Eve, too. #They're allegedly much older.

Think they were the first two people? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
Steve, I would think our "discussions" of Adam and Eve are just a wee bit different than those about Jesus.

My point is that in 2007, Jesus stands as one of the most important figures in Western Civilization and indeed world history. In fact, I dare say that no being has been more relevant in the shaping of our culture. And this influence was quite immediate after his death, with the Christian Roman Empire and Constantinople established by Constantine only a short 300 years after Jesus died. In a world without telephones or internet access, that is a pretty sweeping development!

Yet, here we sit 2,000 years after the fact, sewing seeds of doubt, bickering about times we ALL KNOW VERY LITTLE ABOUT, other than what has been fed to us by the establishment (on both Christian and secular accounts, BTW)

No, Jesus most certainly lived. We can debate his divinity, and that is a different matter, but his doubting his existance is on par with doubting the Lunar landing. Yet, here we are only 30+ years after Apollo and we have revisionists and conspiracy theorists trying to sew the same seeds of doubt that the DeVinci Code theorists are trying to do.

In both cases, nutty, IMHO.

One other thing...I have come to be convinced that anyone who claims to be a 100% convinced Atheist is on par with a homophobe. You know what they say about homophobes, don't you? They say the most vocal and extreme homophobes are actually closet homosexuals in a state of denial.

I'll let that metaphor stand on its own without explanation.

[N2NLN]

I'm with you FRF.
They can rant till their blue in the face, but that want change my faith in Jesus. Faith is what it's all about.

73

N2NLN

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,06:24)]One more consideration as "evidence" that Jesus lived...

The fact that in 2007, we are still talking about him.
Indeed, the immediate wildfire spread in the first century of the early Christian church and its persistance and longevity are strong arguments that the man actually lived.
There's better evidence for Buddha and Mohammed. Both have large followings at this late date and Sidhartha has been around longer.

None of your arguments are particularly compelling.

I'll take the guy who said your karma is your problem over the one with the sadistic father, kthx.

[ac3p]

It's got to be true.

Didn't the Discovery Channel tell us in great detail the migration and mating habits of dinosaurs?

Didn't they also explain the social habits of Neaderthals?

If it's on the Discovery Channel it must be true.

Oh and dont forget the evolution of dragons.

[WF7A]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,04:01)]Quote[/b] (WF7A @ Feb. 28 2007,12:22)]Just to play Devil's Advocate...

Why is Jesus portrayed as a white guy when he obviously wasn't?
He's not.

He's portrayed as...
Your answer was erudite, Bill, but that wasn't the point I was bringing up: in Western culture, Jesus is always artistically portrayed as belonging to (white) Caucasian or of European descent when he obviously wasn't.

...which brings up an interesting question: just for grins, let's say a contemporary image of Jesus is found and he's black: how would Western Christians accept that...really?

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Feb. 28 2007,14:29)]Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,06:24)]One more consideration as "evidence" that Jesus lived...

The fact that in 2007, we are still talking about him.
Indeed, the immediate wildfire spread in the first century of the early Christian church and its persistance and longevity are strong arguments that the man actually lived.
There's better evidence for Buddha and Mohammed. #Both have large followings at this late date and Sidhartha has been around longer.

None of your arguments are particularly compelling.

I'll take the guy who said your karma is your problem over the one with the sadistic father, kthx.
Quote[/b] ]There's better evidence for Buddha and Mohammed.


Hmmm, indeed, that is your opinion, but an opinion is a personal belief or judgment that is not founded on proof or certainty.

So I will officially file this opinion with the rest of the drivel you express.

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (WF7A @ Feb. 28 2007,14:37)]Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,04:01)]Quote[/b] (WF7A @ Feb. 28 2007,12:22)]Just to play Devil's Advocate...

Why is Jesus portrayed as a white guy when he obviously wasn't?
He's not.

He's portrayed as...
Your answer was erudite, Bill, but that wasn't the point I was bringing up: in Western culture, Jesus is always artistically portrayed as belonging to (white) Caucasian or of European descent when he obviously wasn't.

...which brings up an interesting question: just for grins, let's say a contemporary image of Jesus is found and he's black: how would Western Christians accept that...really?
I don't think it would matter much at all. I honestly don't. Christianity has spread through the world into all corners while breaking many ethnic and racial boundaries...(another reason why Christianity is so amazing, dynamic, and relevant)...Ever wonder why a Vietnamese, Mayan, or Australian Aboriginal would convert to a religion founded thousands of miles from their homes, abandoning their traditional beliefs in favor of those of a different ethnicity?

It is the WORD of God and Jesus that spreads Christianity, the message, the promise, and the sense of renewal from choosing to understand it.

Something I am so deeply sad to see that many people will never experience.

It is the cleansing of the spirit that compells people to follow Christianity, not some silly image of Jesus painted in the 12th century AD.

BTW, I would hardly classify myself as erudite on the subject, but thanks for saying so.

[al2n]

Quote[/b] (WF7A @ Feb. 28 2007,12:37)]Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,04:01)]Quote[/b] (WF7A @ Feb. 28 2007,12:22)]Just to play Devil's Advocate...

Why is Jesus portrayed as a white guy when he obviously wasn't?
He's not.

He's portrayed as...
Your answer was erudite, Bill, but that wasn't the point I was bringing up: in Western culture, Jesus is always artistically portrayed as belonging to (white) Caucasian or of European descent when he obviously wasn't.

...which brings up an interesting question: just for grins, let's say a contemporary image of Jesus is found and he's black: how would Western Christians accept that...really?
Would not bother most Christians a bit as most are well aware of the fact that Jesus was not the fair skinned man popularized by European artists.

There would be a few groups that would have a hard time with it, but they are the kind who use the Bible (incorrectly I might add) to justify their racist views in the first place.

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 27 2007,13:22)]Quote[/b] (WB2WIK @ Feb. 28 2007,14:05)]Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,07:24)]One more consideration as "evidence" that Jesus lived...

The fact that in 2007, we are still talking about him.
We're still talking about Adam and Eve, too. #They're allegedly much older.

Think they were the first two people? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
Steve, I would think our "discussions" of Adam and Eve are just a wee bit different than those about Jesus.

My point is that in 2007, Jesus stands as one of the most important figures in Western Civilization and indeed world history. In fact, I dare say that no being has been more relevant in the shaping of our culture.
We talk as much about Santa Claus and spend far more money in his honor than we do Jesus Christ.

As I originally stated, there isn't, in fact, any evidence that christ ever existed.

[al2n]

Quote[/b] (N2NLN @ Feb. 28 2007,12:24)]I'm with you FRF.
They can rant till their blue in the face, but that want change my faith in Jesus. Faith is what it's all about.

73

N2NLN
Ding ding ding!!!!

We have a winner!

Some guys will not accept anything about Jesus unless he were to appear before them personally. Even then they would be skeptical and write him off as a trickster.

Faith is something that a good many on this forum will not accept. Unless of course it has something to do with a topic that they happen to support. But it is not called faith, it is called "inferred evidence".

[KE5FRF]

]Blog on Cameron's film (http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/20070225_cameron_finds_jesus/)

I just read one of the most honest,thoughtful, and almost touching blogs I've ever read, quoted from the above URL. This particular person seems to be an agnostic still seeking answers.

Interesting thoughts highlighted by ME.

Quote[/b] ]Comment #55836 by Wendy #on #2/27 #at #11:29 pm

I’ve spent the last four hours reading all the comments on this page, and page 2 of this article (press release?), and I have to say I am really happy to have read everyone’s thoughts… very intense discussion for the most part. #I’m not exactly sure why I am adding my comment, but it is a topic that I’ve thought deeply about for most of my life…

I grew up a christian. #As a kid, I actually sought church out. #I went to as many different churches as I could find. #I also read the Bible, and I believed unquestioningly much of what I heard in those churches, although I was able to tell when they were just covering up the truth… like when they told me to be a rainbow girl all i had to do was memorize a certain passage, that I didn’t need to know what it meant! #So I detected some insincerity, but that was alright with me since the insincerity didn’t come directly from God. #But i digress…

So… when the Jehovah’s Witnesses knock on my door, I answer it because it’s an opportunity to ask some basic questions, and they might have an answer… questions like: #How could God create the world and everything in it in just six days! And if he created the first people, Adam and Eve, then where did Cain’s wife come from? #I know, the Bible says he took a wife from the land of ... Knod I think? #I really got scared when I read past the first few chapters in the Old Testament, so I admit that I skipped ahead to the New Testament, but I got really confused there too! #An immaculate conception? #No! That just flies in the face of science, we all know how babies are made, and to be honest about it, I wasn’t pleased to read that Eve (who represents the female line), was fashioned from one of Adam’s ribs! #Well gosh, even that sounds fantastic! #When I read about Jesus’ life and teachings, my heart was touched with love, but I have a hard time believing he rose from the dead, and assended into hell (where IS that place), for a few days before he came back to earth and eventually arose into heaven (don’t have a clude where that is), saying he’d come back again one day! #Whew, I think I hit all the major points… oh, there is one other thing that confuses me, satan… who is this person and what does he look like? #The Witnesses talk about him as though he were alive today.

I did figure one thing out… the Bible doesn’t mention dinosaurs because the writers didn’t know about them… but we do! #The fact that the Bible ommitted dinosaurs got me to thinking about the other incongruities. #And I have to say, I don’t have the answers, and I’m pretty sure no one else does either. #In fact, the way I think of it is that if there is a God, he might not have allowed us to be confounded by such a book, and he certainly would not have wanted us to fight over our ideas of who and what he is. #I don’t think we are smart enough to know the mind of God… I think it is arrogant to presume that we do. #

I don’t think we will ever prove the existence of God, or prove that he doesn’t exist. #As for Jesus, we know that he existed, and in a way, I think that he is the son of God, just as we all are children of God, whoever, wherever God may be. #Someone once told me that each prophet came in their own time to take humankind one step closer to God, a time when we were all ready to hear it… Moses, Abraham, Jesus, Mohammad… they each taught us something we needed to learn. #Jesus taught forgiveness, Mohammad taught obediance. #There may even be prophets yet to come before this is all over, come at their own time when humankind is ready to learn. #I liked that explanation of things, it makes sense to me on a deeper level.

Well, that’s my two cents. #Thanks for reading this, and what ever your concept of God is, even if you don’t believe in one, may you know peace and love throughout your life.



Such honesty, thoughtfulness and expressions of conflict, yet reasoned appreciation for the importance of faith and the relevance of Jesus's teachings.

This is the kind of person I can respect, I can indeed admire.
I'll also admit my moments of doubt, my continued search for the truth and answers, but my unwavering certainty that the teachings of Christ hold more wisdom, compassion, and love for fellow man that any doctrine before or after has expressed.

It is RELIGION that skews and warps those deeply wonderful words...it is man's application of religion throughout history that has made it a hard pill to swallow.

I am a Christian who doesn't affiliate with any particular sect. I was raised in the Baptist church, and thus am highly influenced by Baptist teachings, but I free myself to interpret the word of Christ myself without an indoctrination.

I wish the world could return to the early era of Christianity, at least in spirit, without all the history of conflict, and simply study the meaning of Christ's words. For in those words I find answers every day. I find answers in how I should live and how I should treat my fellow man.

Science and secular humanism can't offer me those answers, because secular humanism and science allows only for individualism. Individualism is inheritantly flawed because humankind exists in two states. We are both social creatures and individuals, but as social creatures, we MUST have established moral principals to guide us, certain, unwaivering, and able to stand the test of time.

Christianity has offered us that guidance throughout history, yet only relatively recently has secular humanism challenged the establishment of Christian ethics.

As we allow secularism to change our laws and our moral code, we see the fabric of our society deteriorate. We see individualism trump our social rules, and we see greed, lust, filth, smut, violence and extremism justified. We see excuses made for vile behavior and we see men giving in to our tendency to consume.

I think the proof as to the superiority of Christian principles lies in the advancement of Western culture, in all phases of art and science, in its 2,000 years of Christian faith. Christianity offered the common ethical structure that facilitated Western advancements.

Indeed, as the author of the quoted blog describes, Christianity is about compassion and forgiveness, and thus allowed people to coexist and seek the individual pursuits that ultimately brought us secular humanism.

Kind of ironic.

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] ]As I originally stated, there isn't, in fact, any evidence that christ ever existed.

Another opinionated assessment that will be properly filed where it belongs.

[WB2WIK]

Quote[/b] (WF7A @ Feb. 27 2007,22:46)]Easter? Isn't that when Jesus rose from the grave, saw his shadow, then declared six more weeks of winter?
Ya know, I often thought that. Bill Murray is reading for the movie version right now, I understand.

And if Easter, like "Good Friday," are honoring actual historical events, how can one always fall on Sunday and the other always fall on Friday? Shouldn't these be based on the sidereal movements, as are all other recorded historical events?

It's difficult to believe any part of this nonsense when so many details are so easily debunked.

WB2WIK/6

[KL7FZ]

"Faith" is just another way to bilk people of their money. But if you must believe, then you can send your donation to me, care of the Church of the Sacred Ohm, Our Lady of the Blessed Circuit, and I will see that it goes to good use providing new ICOM IC-9500 receivers to our poor so they can receive the word of GOD. (Just remember that dyslexics go through life worshipping DOG).
Please. Small bills only in plain brown envelopes.

Amen brother, amen.

KL7FZ

[KE5FRF]

You know, it is the arrogant, condescending a%^wipe mentallity that is displayed on these boards, the ridicule, the heckling, intollerence, and the tasteless commentary that firmly cements why I am NOT an atheist.

If you jerks are representative of what Atheism is all about, I am SO glad not to be a part of it.

[ac3p]

Quote[/b] ]We talk as much about Santa Claus and spend far more money in his honor than we do Jesus Christ.


Without Jesus there would be no Santa Claus.

Santa is just a corruption of St. Nicholas a Christian bishop.

[al2i]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,13:35)]You know, it is the arrogant, condescending a%^wipe mentallity that is displayed on these boards, the ridicule, the heckling, intollerence, and the tasteless commentary that firmly cements why I am NOT an atheist.

If you jerks are representative of what Atheism is all about, I am SO glad not to be a part of it.
Forgive them Heath, for they do not know how they know right from wrong... even if they do know... which they may not.

I set a question forth about this in the forum nearly two years ago and received only puzzlement and hostility in return -- which was a complete answer.

Chill like you are in Alaska, my heated friend. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[N0NVT]

faith is in YOU,, not the serpents tongue. you are the temple that houses the faith,,not the church. blessed are the meek,,for they shall inherent the earth. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[WB2WIK]

Quote[/b] (kc0vxb @ Feb. 28 2007,15:05)]faith is in YOU,, not the serpents tongue. you are the temple that houses the faith,,not the church. blessed are the meek,,for they shall inherent the earth. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
...and, he that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind:
and the fool shall be servant to the wise of heart.

Don't forget that part, comes from the same bible.

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,11:38)]Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Feb. 28 2007,14:29)]Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,06:24)]One more consideration as "evidence" that Jesus lived...

The fact that in 2007, we are still talking about him.
Indeed, the immediate wildfire spread in the first century of the early Christian church and its persistance and longevity are strong arguments that the man actually lived.
There's better evidence for Buddha and Mohammed. Both have large followings at this late date and Sidhartha has been around longer.

None of your arguments are particularly compelling.

I'll take the guy who said your karma is your problem over the one with the sadistic father, kthx.
Quote[/b] ]There's better evidence for Buddha and Mohammed.


Hmmm, indeed, that is your opinion, but an opinion is a personal belief or judgment that is not founded on proof or certainty.

So I will officially file this opinion with the rest of the drivel you express.
Actually, it's not my opinion, it's historical fact.

Siddhartha is independently documented by sources other than his followers, predates jesus by some time and quickly developed a following that has lasted to this day.

Don't blame me because your arguments are better suited to supporting a religion you don't want to believe in than the one that you were given as an accident of your birth.

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,11:49)]I don't think it would matter much at all. I honestly don't. Christianity has spread through the world into all corners while breaking many ethnic and racial boundaries...(another reason why Christianity is so amazing, dynamic, and relevant)...Ever wonder why a Vietnamese, Mayan, or Australian Aboriginal would convert to a religion founded thousands of miles from their homes, abandoning their traditional beliefs in favor of those of a different ethnicity?

Buddhism has spread through the world into all corners while breaking many ethnic and racial boundaries.

The difference is that Christianity is more likely to have been spread at the point of a gun.

Quote[/b] ]
It is the WORD of God and Jesus that spreads Christianity, the message, the promise, and the sense of renewal from choosing to understand it.

It's missionaries, actually, and until fairly recently, armed missionaries.

Quote[/b] ]
It is the cleansing of the spirit that compells people to follow Christianity, not some silly image of Jesus painted in the 12th century AD.

Usually, it's an accident of birth. Most Christians are christians because they were born into a christian family.

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,13:35)]You know, it is the arrogant, condescending a%^wipe mentallity that is displayed on these boards, the ridicule, the heckling, intollerence, and the tasteless commentary that firmly cements why I am NOT an atheist.

If you jerks are representative of what Atheism is all about, I am SO glad not to be a part of it.
What a fine demonstration of why one would not want to be a christian.

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (al2i @ Feb. 28 2007,13:46)]Forgive them Heath, for they do not know how they know right from wrong... even if they do know... which they may not.
I'm much happier doing what's right because I believe it's the right thing to do than because I'm afraid of some imaginary punishment.

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,12:27)]Science and secular humanism can't offer me those answers, because secular humanism and science allows only for individualism. Individualism is inheritantly flawed because humankind exists in two states. We are both social creatures and individuals, but as social creatures, we MUST have established moral principals to guide us, certain, unwaivering, and able to stand the test of time.

Science tells us how the universe works, not what to do with it. "secular humanism" is a term that covers a wide range of view points, most of which are at odds with your assertion of individualism as the sole component.

Quote[/b] ]
Christianity has offered us that guidance throughout history, yet only relatively recently has secular humanism challenged the establishment of Christian ethics.

Buddhism has offered guidance longer and has been misused far less often.

Quote[/b] ]
As we allow secularism to change our laws and our moral code, we see the fabric of our society deteriorate. We see individualism trump our social rules, and we see greed, lust, filth, smut, violence and extremism justified. We see excuses made for vile behavior and we see men giving in to our tendency to consume.

Because we all know that the Medicis never happened in a Christian context.

Quote[/b] ]
I think the proof as to the superiority of Christian principles lies in the advancement of Western culture, in all phases of art and science, in its 2,000 years of Christian faith. Christianity offered the common ethical structure that facilitated Western advancements.

Western culture was only Christian for brief periods in the last 2000 years. You might want to look into the history of the holy roman empire, the moorish influence in spain, and so forth.

Quote[/b] ]Christianity is about compassion and forgiveness, and thus allowed people to coexist and seek the individual pursuits that ultimately brought us secular humanism.

Kind of ironic.

Yes, a "compassionate and forgiving" christian calling people who disagree with him the sort of names you've called us is "kind of" ironic.

[KE5FRF]

How so?

I never said I was Christ, I said I was Christian. Jesus never said, "thou shalt not call people names". Christians are people with the same failings as non-Christians.

Besides, I didn't direct my "names" at anyone in particular. I was expressing my viewpoint that it is extremely unpleasant to see people trivialize another person's deeply held beliefs in the boorish and locker room way that some of you choose to do.

You will not see me insult atheists for their beliefs. You will not see me insult your intelligence, or your integrity. And most of all, I will not make jokes of your beliefs.

I will, however, defend MY beliefs, and I will call into question opinions disguised as facts or references of a questionable nature.

I challenge you to find a thread that I have started where I attacked atheists or secular humanism. My posts are always responses to attacks on Christianity.

And in that vein, I am doing what I believe is right.

By the way, I don't believe in the God that you speak of either, in reference to punishment or fear.

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Feb. 28 2007,17:43)]Quote[/b] (al2i @ Feb. 28 2007,13:46)]Forgive them Heath, for they do not know how they know right from wrong... even if they do know... which they may not.
I'm much happier doing what's right because I believe it's the right thing to do than because I'm afraid of some imaginary punishment.
Actually, Dave...you said a mouthfull there.

All Americans are Christians, like it or not.

I do not know Marty's background, but I fathom that at least one of his parents or grandparents was a Christian. And if not, I would wager a lot of money that several of his great-grandparents were Christians.

And in so being, they passed on a value system based on Judeo-Christian philosophy. One thing that none of us can ever completely shed is the value system that our childhood instills in us. Even if the average Atheist's parents claim no religious affiliation, they unwittingly pass on traditions and values that are most certainly derived from the Christian faith.

There is a little Christian in all of us, and that is a good thing.

BTW Marty, you are dead wrong on the history of Western civilization after the first century AD. No man has had more influence on our western world than Jesus Christ. Period.

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Feb. 28 2007,17:37)]Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,13:35)]You know, it is the arrogant, condescending a%^wipe mentallity that is displayed on these boards, the ridicule, the heckling, intollerence, and the tasteless commentary that firmly cements why I am NOT an atheist.

If you jerks are representative of what Atheism is all about, I am SO glad not to be a part of it.
What a fine demonstration of why one would not want to be a christian.
Just exactly how so, Marty? Because I dared be insensed by the ridicule and heckling of my faith?

Is a good Christian only one who meekly stands by to watch the bullying, ridicule, and downright intollerance of his beliefs?

What would you have me say to someone who makes a comment like..."Worship me, the lord of the Ohm, and I will send you Kenwood radios"...blah blah to paraphrase. What am I supposed to say when someone compares the embodiment of my faith to Santa Clause.

"Golly Gee, fellas, shucks, knock it off, would ya? Please guys, its insultive and hurtful."

I'll tell you this much, the intollerance of the pre-civil rightrs movement never died. It just shifted to antiChristian biggotry.

Yes, BIGGOTRY. Thats exactly what discussions like this are. Flaming biggotry that for some reason is "PC" because it isn't directed at people of color.

Everyone has to have some kind of biggorty, I suppose, so why not be an atheist biggot?

Even your remark that most Christians were born that way is telling. Most AMERICANS were born Christians. It is our adulthood which shapes our choices after adolescense. I went through a phase of atheism, but became a Christian based on certain life events, and the love of Chrsit through his scripture. That is how most Christians become Chrsitians.

Any other explanation is an example of biggotry, because it discounts another person's ability to think for themself, as if though the only free thinking person is Marty.

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,18:20)]Besides, I didn't direct my "names" at anyone in particular. I was expressing my viewpoint that it is extremely unpleasant to see people trivialize another person's deeply held beliefs in the boorish and locker room way that some of you choose to do.

If you read this thread closely, you will find that the first appearance of "locker room" behavior was yours.

Quote[/b] ]
You will not see me insult atheists for their beliefs. You will not see me insult your intelligence, or your integrity. And most of all, I will not make jokes of your beliefs.

I've seen you do all of the above in this thread, but using the cover "some people" as an excuse for it.

Quote[/b] ]
I will, however, defend MY beliefs, and I will call into question opinions disguised as facts or references of a questionable nature.

The problem, from the point of view of an intelligent discussion, is that you're not calling into question "opinions disguised as facts." Rather, you're rudely dismissing any assertion offered that disagrees with yours.

Quote[/b] ]
And in that vein, I am doing what I believe is right.

This is why I fear christians. They do so much damage in the name of what they "believe is right" based on the accident of birth that made them christian in the first place.

Quote[/b] ]
By the way, I don't believe in the God that you speak of either, in reference to punishment or fear.

That's one of the things that amuses me about christians. They tend to pick and chose which parts of the doctrine they believe or they don't.

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,18:27)]All Americans are Christians, like it or not.

Nope. Many americans come from cultures without christian tradition and have never had any christian training.

Quote[/b] ]
I do not know Marty's background, but I fathom that at least one of his parents or grandparents was a Christian. And if not, I would wager a lot of money that several of his great-grandparents were Christians.

Roman catholic. Jesuit trained.

Quote[/b] ]
And in so being, they passed on a value system based on Judeo-Christian philosophy. One thing that none of us can ever completely shed is the value system that our childhood instills in us.

More nonsense. It's amazing how many people routinely shed the value systems they were exposed to as children, especially in as materialistic a country as the United States.

But you do have a point: so many people are christian merely by an accident of birth. "An unexamined life is not worth living."

Quote[/b] ]Even if the average Atheist's parents claim no religious affiliation, they unwittingly pass on traditions and values that are most certainly derived from the Christian faith.

None of my US citizen friends who are buddhists by birth have traditions and values that are derived from the Christian faith.

Quote[/b] ]
BTW Marty, you are dead wrong on the history of Western civilization after the first century AD. No man has had more influence on our western world than Jesus Christ. Period.

Solon had more influence on the western world that the mythical jesus. The hallmark of western civilization is not christianity, it is, rather, the democratic form of government. A concept, by the way, that your jesus had no say about.

There are, as you say, christians all over the world. The concept of universal rights isn't a particularly christian one and is the most influential concept that distinguishes "Western civilization."

[n2nh]

Quote[/b] (W2ILP @ Feb. 27 2007,21:53)]I can believe that U.S. Grant is burried in Grant's tomb...but anything older than that is unreliable.

w2ilp (ID Living People)...before wasting time digging up the dead.
There was a rumor that Grant and his wife had been removed by his home state and buried there with honors.

If that's true, then only his horse is still at the tomb.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,18:41)]Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Feb. 28 2007,17:37)]Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,13:35)]You know, it is the arrogant, condescending a%^wipe mentallity that is displayed on these boards, the ridicule, the heckling, intollerence, and the tasteless commentary that firmly cements why I am NOT an atheist.

If you jerks are representative of what Atheism is all about, I am SO glad not to be a part of it.
What a fine demonstration of why one would not want to be a christian.
Just exactly how so, Marty? Because I dared be insensed by the ridicule and heckling of my faith?


Nice attempt at spin, but i did not ridicule you nor heckle you, but merely attempted to point a few things out in a civilized way. Whie you named no individual in the specific diatribe, you were certainly all of the things you're claiming of others in your response to me.

Quote[/b] ]Is a good Christian only one who meekly stands by to watch the bullying, ridicule, and downright intollerance of his beliefs?

I vaguely remember something about cheeks...

Quote[/b] ]
What would you have me say to someone who makes a comment like..."Worship me, the lord of the Ohm, and I will send you Kenwood radios"...blah blah to paraphrase. What am I supposed to say when someone compares the embodiment of my faith to Santa Clause.


"There's the truth, and then there's how you tell it." -- me

Quote[/b] ]
I'll tell you this much, the intollerance of the pre-civil rightrs movement never died. It just shifted to antiChristian biggotry.


I recommend the web comic "Freefall" which, in the past few weeks, has had a very interesting discussion on the relationship between christianity and the 'pre-civil rights' biggotry.

Quote[/b] ]
Yes, BIGGOTRY. Thats exactly what discussions like this are. Flaming biggotry that for some reason is "PC" because it isn't directed at people of color.

And your dismissive attitude of my comments that your arguments apply as well to Buddha as they do to christ differes from "flaming biggotry" in what way?

Quote[/b] ]
Even your remark that most Christians were born that way is telling. Most AMERICANS were born Christians.


Most christians were born christian. it's very simple math and has nothing to do with biggotry.

Quote[/b] ]
It is our adulthood which shapes our choices after adolescense. I went through a phase of atheism, but became a Christian based on certain life events, and the love of Chrsit through his scripture. That is how most Christians become Chrsitians.


Um, no. most become [same name] because of birth and an unwillingess to examine their own lifes.

Quote[/b] ]
Any other explanation is an example of biggotry, because it discounts another person's ability to think for themself, as if though the only free thinking person is Marty.

Do not confuse the [i]ability to think for one's self with the willingness to do so.

When you chose to dismiss my comment about your argument's applicability to buddhism, rather than address the comment, you demonstrated an unwillingness to think through a topic. A skill unused is no better than a skill unpossesed.

if you're going to be a christian, at least be honest about the weaknesses of your arguments for doing so.

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] ]Do not confuse the ability to think for one's self with the willingness to do so.

When you chose to dismiss my comment about your argument's applicability to buddhism, rather than address the comment, you demonstrated an unwillingness to think through a topic. A skill unused is no better than a skill unpossesed.

if you're going to be a christian, at least be honest about the weaknesses of your arguments for doing so.

Marty, I did address your comments about Buddhism. I made it clear that your asessment of Buddhism having a better case than Christianity is your OPINION, and deserves no more attention than my beliefs as a Christian. You dismiss my opinions, so therefore I dismiss yours. It really is that simple. "Better" is a subjective word, and therefore can not be masqueraded as fact.

I took the liberty of in bold what offends me most about your comments, Marty...BTW, my comments about rudeness and heckling were originally directed at others, but since you responded, I'll address you.

Even in discussing this matter, you have categorized my faith to suit your preconceptions. You STEREOTYPE me and others, another fine example of biggotry. Broad characterizations about unwillingness to think being my mark. Lets do the math...I disagree with MARTY equals I don't think for myself. Is that how you approach all your arguments, Marty? Wow, set up like that I guess its pretty hard to "lose", eh? (at least in your own mind) So, therefore, thinking for myself must mean that I accept your truth as my truth.

OK, I'm learning...Oh teach me, most learned and wise one, I am your eager pupil.

Maybe you can start a church of free-thinking atheists, become their pastor, and teach them the truth. This way, once you've indoctrinated them, they can think for themselves. It all makes sense to me now.

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] ]Nope. Many americans come from cultures without christian tradition and have never had any christian training.


Marty, for such a free-thinking person, you sure have a hard time with abstract thoughts.

My statement that all Americans are Christians by no means that all Americans come from a Christian family, or that all people from a Christian family practice their faith. It refers to the simple fact that we live in a country whose legal code and whose history is largely of Christian origin and influence.

Any populous that you site as being non-Christian by heritage is less than 10% of the total population of this country. I am not going to waste my time siting a statistic, but from past census figures I've seen, a conservative estimate would be that more than 90% of Americas population is either European Caucasian, 5th,6th (or more) generation African American of slave ancestory, or Latino. Those three segments which comprise our biggest population base are certainly traditionally Christian, at least for the past 150 or more years. Another small percentage would be Native American of sufficient geneaology to be considered such in a census, and a large percentage of those folks are Christian converts by family heritage. Indeed, Native Americans who practice pre-Columbian traditions are the exception rather than the rule, at least those fully engaged in it. Another large population of immigrants from Asia are either converts through missionary work in years past, or adopt Christianity as a matter of course. I would conservatively estimate the percentage of Americans who can neither claim an ethnic heritage in Christianity through tradition (such as ourselves), or an adoption of Christianity within recent generations...that percentage would be tiny, certainly less than 5%.

So, my contention that we are all Christians is an abstraction, highlighting the relevance that Christianity plays in all our lives. And even for the small fraction of people who have no ties to it, these people are exposed to Christian tradition by our laws, our national identity, our history, and our media.

Can you say the same, keeping a straight face, for Buddhism? Oh, yes, I won't deny that some Buddhist philosophies have been introduced to our pop culture, but keep a straight face, Marty...can the two even be compared?

No, ...so see, your arguments are dishonest. Either that or you aren't the liberated thinker you size yourself up to be.

[ab8ro]

Well, I'm putting in another jiffy pop, anyone want some?

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,20:40)]Marty, I did address your comments about Buddhism. I made it clear that your asessment of Buddhism having a better case than Christianity is your OPINION, and deserves no more attention than my beliefs as a Christian. You dismiss my opinions, so therefore I dismiss yours. It really is that simple. "Better" is a subjective word, and therefore can not be masqueraded as fact.

Actually, I did not dismiss your arguments. I merely pointed out that they worked better for Buddhism. You've not yet addressed that.

Quote[/b] ]
Even in discussing this matter, you have categorized my faith to suit your preconceptions. You STEREOTYPE me and others, another fine example of biggotry. Broad characterizations about unwillingness to think being my mark.


"broad" characterizations based on your behavior after you made a big stink about "bigotry."


Quote[/b] ]
Lets do the math...I disagree with MARTY equals I don't think for myself. Is that how you approach all your arguments, Marty?


Nice strawman. Were you planning on a bonfire with it later?

The post you just made is yet another example of knee jerk responses in lieu of thinking for yourself. You know that, and you're not fooling anyone but yourself by mischaracterizing the arguments I made.

[al2n]

Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Feb. 28 2007,20:30)]Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,18:20)]Besides, I didn't direct my "names" at anyone in particular. I was expressing my viewpoint that it is extremely unpleasant to see people trivialize another person's deeply held beliefs in the boorish and locker room way that some of you choose to do.

If you read this thread closely, you will find that the first appearance of "locker room" behavior was yours.
Marty,

Think he is talking about the "Baby Jesus" comments made by another fellow.

You are engaging in a civil discussion on the matter, the original poster of this thread is just looking to stir the pot and make someone mad. Looks like his troll bait worked.

When I have made posts making fun of Atheists it made a number of you guys upset. I did so to put the shoe on the other foot so to speak. It is not fun to have someone make a mockery of a belief that is central to your world view. FRF is upset at some of the stuff that has been said just as some of you Atheist guys got made at me when I started to poke fun at you. It is human nature.

I have been tempted to enter the fray, but I have been down this road with you guys enough to where it no longer is worth rehashing the same arguments once again.

8RO can make fun all he wants to. In the end either he is right and all this debate is meaningless or he is wrong in which case he will have to answer to God for the life he has lead.

As for Buddism, it is the one faith that is closest to Christianity of all other faiths out there.

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 28 2007,21:06)]Marty, for such a free-thinking person, you sure have a hard time with abstract thoughts.

gratuitious insults do not make your point. They only demonstrate that you're hiding not having one.

Quote[/b] ]
My statement that all Americans are Christians by no means that all Americans come from a Christian family, or that all people from a Christian family practice their faith. It refers to the simple fact that we live in a country whose legal code and whose history is largely of Christian origin and influence.

Thus my comment about Salon.

Quote[/b] ]And even for the small fraction of people who have no ties to it, these people are exposed to Christian tradition by our laws, our national identity, our history, and our media.

John Adams, in the early days of the United States, wrote that the US is not a Christian country. This concept of Christian tradition as a guiding principle of US democracy is an invention of late 20th century religious conservatives.

Quote[/b] ]
Can you say the same, keeping a straight face, for Buddhism? Oh, yes, I won't deny that some Buddhist philosophies have been introduced to our pop culture, but keep a straight face, Marty...can the two even be compared?


The sad thing is that you probably don't realize how much of so-called "Christian" tradition is of Buddhist origins and probably traveled to the middle east in trade caravans.

Quote[/b] ]
No, ...so see, your arguments are dishonest. Either that or you aren't the liberated thinker you size yourself up to be.

Right. You accuse me of not understanding an argument that you didn't understand the counter to. You don't even realize that many aspects of Christianity are filtered from Buddhism. You've confused 'pop cultural' Buddhism for the real thing. You've cut my comments about Buddhism -- which were not a claim that it was a direct influence on US culture, by the way -- out of context and then attacked an argument I didn't made.

"dishonest."

un huh.

I don't mind you bouncing all over the map on this, but try to remember what part of the map you were on when I responded to a particular claim and don't use that response out of context in a differenet part of the map. Makes it look like you're creating strawmen to hide a lack of arguments and an unwillingness to critically examine your own views.

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (ab8ro @ Feb. 28 2007,21:42)]Well, I'm putting in another jiffy pop, anyone want some?
extra salt on mine, please.

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (al2n @ Feb. 27 2007,23:59)]You are engaging in a civil discussion on the matter, the original poster of this thread is just looking to stir the pot and make someone mad. #Looks like his troll bait worked.

When I have made posts making fun of Atheists it made a number of you guys upset.
What could you possibly make fun of in regards to atheism?

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (ab8ro @ Feb. 28 2007,22:12)]Quote[/b] (al2n @ Feb. 27 2007,23:59)]You are engaging in a civil discussion on the matter, the original poster of this thread is just looking to stir the pot and make someone mad. Looks like his troll bait worked.

When I have made posts making fun of Atheists it made a number of you guys upset.
What could you possibly make fun of in regards to atheism?
foxholes.

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (al2n @ Feb. 28 2007,21:59)]
When I have made posts making fun of Atheists it made a number of you guys upset.

I'm a non-theist by the way. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Quote[/b] ]I did so to put the shoe on the other foot so to speak. It is not fun to have someone make a mockery of a belief that is central to your world view.

One day, an eighth grade girl came into my first grade classroom and announced, loudly, "Would Farty Mouts please come to the principles office." It took me less than three days after that to figure out that words only have power over you if you let them.

Quote[/b] ]FRF is upset at some of the stuff that has been said just as some of you Atheist guys got made at me when I started to poke fun at you. It is human nature.

Please, poke fun at atheism. I could use a few more laughs, and the Laughing Ghod in the Corner thinks this thread's gotten far too serious for the intarwebs anyway.

Quote[/b] ]I have been tempted to enter the fray, but I have been down this road with you guys enough to where it no longer is worth rehashing the same arguments once again.

Please don't lump me in with "you guys". I don't even recall the thread you're speaking of. I probably missed it altogether, and I'd be among the first to tell atheism jokes, if I knew some good ones.

Quote[/b] ]As for Buddism, it is the one faith that is closest to Christianity of all other faiths out there.

And yet, it has no gods.

The similarity is not all that suprising. It's doubtful if they knew they were doing it, but the people who invented the jesus myth were borrowing from buddhism as it had filtered into the middle east by that time.

[al2i]

Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Feb. 28 2007,14:43)]Quote[/b] (al2i @ Feb. 28 2007,13:46)]Forgive them Heath, for they do not know how they know right from wrong... even if they do know... which they may not.
I'm much happier doing what's right because I believe it's the right thing to do than because I'm afraid of some imaginary punishment.
Some day we will have to explore how you know right from wrong. But not today - you've got poor Heath all twisted in distress.

I hope you do not revel in the unnecessary pain of another in order to stroke your own ego. I think that is wrong: something I share with true Christians but qua faithless unbeliever... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[wv6z]

SSDD

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Feb. 28 2007,00:23)]Quote[/b] ]FRF is upset at some of the stuff that has been said just as some of you Atheist guys got made at me when I started to poke fun at you. #It is human nature.

Please, poke fun at atheism. I could use a few more laughs, and the Laughing Ghod in the Corner thinks this thread's gotten far too serious for the intarwebs anyway.
Indeed, baby jesus is crying big crocodile tears and it's gumming up the intarweb tubes.

[WA5KRP]

Oh my

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (al2i @ Feb. 28 2007,23:00)]Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Feb. 28 2007,14:43)]Quote[/b] (al2i @ Feb. 28 2007,13:46)]Forgive them Heath, for they do not know how they know right from wrong... even if they do know... which they may not.
I'm much happier doing what's right because I believe it's the right thing to do than because I'm afraid of some imaginary punishment.
Some day we will have to explore how you know right from wrong. But not today - you've got poor Heath all twisted in distress.


One of the things I learned a long time ago is that there is only ever one person responsible for the way you respond to other people's words: you. If "poor Heath" is all twisted in distress it is distress entirely of his own making.

Quote[/b] ]I hope you do not revel in the unnecessary pain of another in order to stroke your own ego. I think that is wrong: something I share with true Christians but qua faithless unbeliever... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Now you've gone and made baby jesus cry.

[al2n]

Ok I'll bite. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

You may be a fundy atheist if....

#1 You became an atheist when you were 10 years old, based on ideas of God that you learned in Sunday School. Your ideas about God haven't changed since.
#2 You think that the primary aim of an omnibenevolent God is for people to have FUN.
#3 You believe that extra drippy ice-cream is a logical proof against the existence of God, because an omniscient God would know how to stop the ice-cream from being extra drippy, an omnipotent God would have the ability to stop the ice-cream from being extra drippy, and by golly, an omnibenevolent God wouldn't want your ice-cream to be extra drippy.
#4 Although you've memorized a half a dozen proofs that He doesn't exist, you still think you're God's gift to the ignorant masses.
#5 You believe the astronomical size of the universe somehow disproves God, as if God needed a tiny universe in order to exist.
#6 You think questions like, "Can God create a rock so big that He cannot lift it?" and, "Can God will Himself out of existence?" are perfect examples of how to disprove God's omnipotence and ultimately how to disprove God. When someone proves to you the false logic behind the questions (i.e. pitting God's omnipotence against itself), you desperately try to defend the questions, but then give up and go to a different Christian site to ask them.
#7 Related to the above, you spend a great deal of your spare time writing to Christian websites asking them these very questions.
#8 You declare on a public forum that you are "furious at God for not existing."
#9 You spend hours arguing that a-theism actually means "without a belief in God " and not just " belief that there is no god" as if this is a meaningful distinction in real life.
#10 You consistently deny the existence of God because you personally have never seen him but you reject out of hand personal testimony from theists who claim to have experienced God as a reality in their lives.
#11 You can make the existence of pink unicorns the center-piece of a philosophical critique.
#12 You insist that "the burden of proof is on he that alleges/accuses", and "it's impossible to prove a negative", then state "That's what Christians do. They lie. Their most common lie is that they were once atheists." When reminded about the burden of proof bit, you reply with, "Well, prove Christians don't lie!"
#13 You adamantly believe that the "God of the gaps" idea is an essential tenet of orthodox Christian faith espoused by all the great Christian thinkers throughout history.
#14 When you were a child, someone came down with a deadly disease and prayed and prayed for God to take it away. God did not remove the disease and your friend died. You ask other Christians why they had to die when they were such a nice person and never harmed anyone. Dissatisfied with their answers, you suddenly decide that there is no God and that all Christians are nothing but lying, conniving con artists and hypocrites....all that is except for your friend who died.
#15 You call a view held by less than ten percent of the American public "common sense".
#16 You're a spoiled fifteen year old boy who lives in the suburbs and you go into a chat room to declare that, "I know there is no God because no loving God would allow anyone to suffer as much as I...hold on. My cell phone's ringing."
#17 You attack your fellow atheists, who hold the "belief that there is no god", calling them "liars," and state that, "I do not deny the existence of any god. I just don't believe in any." Then you tell someone that their God is "made up." When someone calls you on this, you state, "I never made such a claim."
#18 Going with the definition of "without a belief in God", you insist that all people are born atheists, and that dogs, cats, rocks, and trees are as well. You make statements like, "My dog is an atheist. Ask him about his lack of belief."
#19 You believe that if something cannot be touched, seen, heard, or measured in some way, then it must not exist, yet you fail to see the irony of your calling Christians "narrow-minded".
#20 You say that there is no God and that those who believe in God do so in blind faith, yet your claim that there is no God also rests on blind faith.
#21 While you don't believe in God, you feel justified on bashing God or attacking those who believe in something that you KNOW doesn't exist, fighting against or even discussing about a non-existent being are the symptoms of mental illness!
#22 You complain when Christians appeal to their emotions when justifying their belief in God yet you feel justified on appealing to your emotions for lack of belief in God.
#23 You blame God for the starvation, sickness, pain and suffering in the world...when, indeed, it is MAN's greed, politics, selfishness and apathy that not only causes, but also ignores the sick and the starving masses. We aren't our brothers' keepers....but we should be.

Shamelessly borrowed from
this site. (http://www.tektonics.org/parody/fundyath.html)

[ac4ut]

Quote[/b] (n2nh @ Feb. 28 2007,20:45)]Quote[/b] (W2ILP @ Feb. 27 2007,21:53)]I can believe that U.S. Grant is burried in Grant's tomb...but anything older than that is unreliable.

w2ilp (ID Living People)...before wasting time digging up the dead.
There was a rumor that Grant and his wife had been removed by his home state and buried there with honors.

If that's true, then only his horse is still at the tomb.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
The question is a matter of semantics and definition. Generally no one is ever buried in a tomb.
They are entombed, therefore "who is buried in Grants tomb"? " No one is"!

Back on subject.

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (al2n @ Mar. 01 2007,01:14)]Ok I'll bite. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

You may be a fundy atheist if....
The difference between that list and Jeff Foxworthy is that Jeff Foxworthy is sometimes funny.

Come on, y'all gotta know some funny jokes about atheism.

Here, I'll start: The Bear and the Atheist (http://www.atheistalliance.org/aaw/Atheistandbear.html)

[W2ILP]

Now in 2007 there are still people who talk about Frankenstein's monster but don't believe that he ever really lived to be a walking zombie...walking out of a movie. Just because there is talk about some body or something today it doesn't follow that it should be worshipped.

I suspect that some day they will find what they think is the head of Jesus. After a lot of tests they will find that it is really a fake head of Jesus which the shroud of Turin was rubbed on to make it look authentic.

w2ilp (I Like Paleonthologists)...but their work is often dated.

[W2ILP]

k5frf

I understand that you think that religions are so seriously important and holy that they should not be criticized or joked about...and i understand why you think that religious jokes, like dirty jokes are only to be said in whispers in men's locker rooms where they can't offend the innocent females or the pious men of good theological faith...BUT
I suggest that you read a book called "Breaking the Spell" by Daniel C. Dennett.

Dennett is a professor of philosophy and I am but an amateur. He says that our society can not tolerate religious intolerance...because it is intolerant to truth. Some people have to break "the spell" that has hypnotized most Americans. I know that it can't be done in most other media because media is always afraid to offend the majority ...but here on QRZ we have a chance to point out some of the funny beliefs that people have been conditioned to believe with full reference to their funny biblical origins.

A Reviewer of Dennet's book says:-
Dennett is a big man with a big appetite for intellectual fights. In his book he provokes readers to examine religion as a product of evolution rather than a transcendental force.

"Newsweek" said:-
Dennertt and Sam Harris are not writing polite demurrals to the time-honored beliefs of billions. they are not issuing pleas for tolerance or moderation, but bone-rattling attacks on what they regard as pernicious and outdated superstition.

w2ilp (I Like Philosophy) ...when it is done philosophically by philosophical philosophy philosophers...but not by perpetuates of superstitious mythology that should have been put in its proper phony prospective when we were all in the fifth grade...I have gotten tired of the gutless sheep who revere the words of priests, preachers or rabbis or the words on scrolls that they think are God inspired....and thus taboo to debate or poke fun at.

[W2ILP]

Historians believe that most of our original legal laws were not based on Christianity. They were based on Scotch...who didn't base their laws on Christianity either.

w2ilp (Inspect Legal Piety) Most of the original biblical laws would be illegal if enforced in the modern world.

[VK3ZL]

Oh Bum !!! I said earlier that religion was a cult for slaves.
Reading the last few pages reinforces that statement.
Open your eyes gentlemen and the answer is right before you.

[k4uug]

http://www.gracecares.net/images/Jesus%20On%20The%20Cross.jpg


Do You Know Jesus?

If you don't know Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior, please pray this prayer. As you confess it with your mouth and believe it with your heart, you will be born again. (Romans 10:9-10) you will meet Jesus!

Lord Jesus, I need You in my life. I believe You are the Son of God and that You died on the cross for me. Please forgive me for my sins and create a clean, new heart in me. Renew my spirit so that I can hear Your voice. I accept You as my Savior! You are my Lord!

If you have prayed the prayer, please write us and let us know so that we can bless you with a free booklet on salvation. We love you so much and want to welcome YOU to the family of God. Write us today!

John 3:16

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

[W2ILP]

wf7a

I suspect that Jesus was white...because He was a Jewish rabbi and there wern't many non-white Jewish rabbis in the Land of Israel in His days. The Black Africans weren't even allowed a place in a manger because of the bigoted Jews of that time...I think.

But it is OK to believe that Jesus was Black if you are Black. Muslims believe that Allah is or was white...but yet there are many Black Muslims today...so don't feel too bad if somebody can prove with certinty that Jesus was white.

It is a good thing that cameras were invented because if there were no cameras , I'm sure that many Black people of the far future would believe that the Bushes and the Clintons were Black....and if they believed that I dinno if it would make much difference or cause them to get low grades on any future equal opportunity history test.

w2ilp (I Like Peace)...You can color it any way you want but don't fight.

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (k4uug @ Mar. 02 2007,16:37)]"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
Anybody who did that to their kid should do hard time.

Never could see the fascination people have with such a sadistic god.

[al2n]

Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Mar. 02 2007,20:43)]Quote[/b] (k4uug @ Mar. 02 2007,16:37)]"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
Anybody who did that to their kid should do hard time.

Never could see the fascination people have with such a sadistic god.
Surely a Jesuit trained fellow like yourself would know the theology behind the reason Jesus died for our sins?

Or did you sleep through that particular class?

Maybe a refresher course is in order.

Bible.org (http://www.bible.org/)

Lots of free courses for you to download and follow or listen to on that site. That should bring you up to speed on Christian theology rather than having to rely on decades old memories of your youth.

Take a fresh look with the eyes and mind with a lifetime of experience, you may see something you missed the first time around.

I read Atheist literature all the time, do me a favor and read up on some Christian stuff.

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (al2n @ Mar. 02 2007,19:54)]Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Mar. 02 2007,20:43)]Quote[/b] (k4uug @ Mar. 02 2007,16:37)]"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
Anybody who did that to their kid should do hard time.

Never could see the fascination people have with such a sadistic god.
Surely a Jesuit trained fellow like yourself would know the theology behind the reason Jesus died for our sins?


Of course I do. His daddy was a sadist. Not that you need the new testament to figure that out. Worst serial killer in history.

What, you thought I didn't know the whole sin-and-forgiveness excuse for all that unnecessary violence? Rigged game and an omnipotent being doesn't have to be such a drama queen.

Quote[/b] ]
Take a fresh look with the eyes and mind with a lifetime of experience, you may see something you missed the first time around.

I read Atheist literature all the time, do me a favor and read up on some Christian stuff.

Funny you should mention that. I just finished rereading the screwtape letters. It's dumb the second time too.

Next up, Merton's Mystics and Zen Masters

[W2ILP]

I dunno if we should worship any God who is rumored to have had a begoten Son. It serves Him right for messing around with a Jewish virgin who was much younger than Him.

w2ilp (Initial Lord's Problem:)...Who could be responsible for His Son's education?

[k4uug]

http://www.wallpaperforchrist.com/1highwaytoheaven/highwaytoheaven_640.jpg

[KI4UDV]

If Jesus didn't exist, who did Pontious Pilate send to be Crucified? (and said BTW, "I find no fault in him") If the Cruxificion never took place, then the whole account of Jesus would have been snuffed out 2 millenia ago. Oh BTW, Bible says that many people say Jesus after he was resurrected. How about this argument. If Jesus was so "fake" why did so many of his followers were persecuted and meet untimely ends? I don't think anyone would do that for a made up story, do you?

[ka5s]

Jesus! Rivera, that is!

Cortland
KA5S

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (KI4UDV @ Mar. 12 2007,16:16)]If Jesus didn't exist, who did Pontious Pilate send to be Crucified?

Nobody.

Quote[/b] ]If the Cruxificion never took place, then the whole account of Jesus would have been snuffed out 2 millenia ago.

There are weirder stories that are demonstrably false that have been believed for longer than 2000 years and are still believed.

Quote[/b] ]If Jesus was so "fake" why did so many of his followers were persecuted and meet untimely ends? I don't think anyone would do that for a made up story, do you?

You might find the history of "The Children's Crusade" an interesting counterexample.

[WA5KRP]

http://www.inetteacher.com/clip/big_headed_tiny_dog_c_a_mc.gif



Wouldn't it be more meaningful to pursue this in a NASCAR or NFL forum?



WA5KRP
Texas

[WB2WIK]

Mythology preceded reason for thousands of years, and in the case of most religious principles, still does.

Absolute truisms regarding "earthquakes," ferverntly believed for many centuries:

Ancient Greece
Thales of Miletos (6th century BC) believed an agitation of the great sea on which the earth floats, produced earthquakes. But the notion that the movement of air in subterrestrial chambers created earthquakes formed the basis for the most elaborate theories of ancient times.


Mexican, Vaqueros, California
El Diablo, an Indian god, made a giant rip in the ground so that he and his cohorts did not have to take the long way around, whenever they wanted to stir up mischief on the earth.


Gabrielino Indians, Southern California
Long ago, when most of the world was water, Great Spirit decided to make a beautiful land with lakes and rivers, that turtles carried on their backs. One day the turtles began to argue and three of the turtles began to swim east, while the other three swam west. The earth shook! It cracked with a loud noise. The turtles could not swim far, because the land on their backs was heavy. When they saw that they could not swim far away they stopped arguing and made up. But every once in a while, the turtles that hold up California argue again, and each time they do, the earth shakes.

Hindus of India
They believed that eight mighty elephants held up the land. When one of them grew weary, it lowered and shook it's head, causing an earthquake.

Kamchatka, Siberia, Russia
A god named Tuli drove an earth-laden sled pulled by flea-infested dogs: when the dogs stopped to scratch, the earth shook.


Mongolia, China
A gigantic frog which carried the world on its back, twitched periodically, producing slight quakes.


Peru
Whenever their god visited the earth to count how many people were there, his footsteps caused earthquakes. To shorten his task, the people ran out of their houses to shout "I'm here, I'm here!" (incorporating in their myth, the wisdom of leaving their flimsy houses during an earthquake).

Japan
A giant catfish lived in mud beneath the earth. The catfish liked to play pranks and could only be restrained by Kashima,a god who protected the Japanese people from earthquakes. So long as Kashima kept a mighty rock with magical powers over the catfish, the earth was still. But when he relaxed his guard, the catfish thrashed about, causing earthquakes.

I'm glad we now understand that earthquakes are actually the result of sports fans jumping up and down in stadium seats when their team wins.

WB2WIK/6

[WB2WIK]

What preceded Adam and Eve? What preceded Heaven and Earth?

Maybe the Big Bang.

"The Big Bang's Echo

Listen to this story... by Ralph Schoenstein

Robert Wilson and Arno Penzias stand in front of the Bell Labs horn radio antenna.
View Gallery

Robert Wilson, left, and Arno Penzias stand in front of the Bell Labs horn radio antenna in Crawford Hill, N.J., where they discovered cosmic background radiation confirming the Big Bang. (1975 photo) Bell Labs, National Park Service

Hear the Noise

* Robert Wilson Describes the Background Radiation Noise Picked up by the Horn Antenna

All Things Considered, May 17, 2005 · Forty years ago, two astronomers in New Jersey heard noise on a radio telescope that bolstered the idea that the universe began with a massive explosion 13 billion or 14 billion years earlier. Commentator Ralph Schoenstein visits the "horn antenna" where Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson first heard the cosmic background radiation backing the Big Bang theory.

The Bell Labs antenna in Crawford Hill, in northeastern New Jersey, was designed to trace signals bounced off satellites. But Penzias and Wilson used it to study radio emissions from the Milky Way. They needed quiet. Instead, they found noise -- a strange, maddening hum.

"We call it noise because it's completely unstructured, it's random signals," Wilson says.

At first, they couldn't figure out where the noise was coming from. They ruled out military testing. And then, inside the horn of the big antenna, they found droppings from pigeons that were nesting there. The scientists tried to trap the birds and release them 30 miles away, but they kept flying back. Penzias says the team had no choice but to kill the pigeons. "It seemed like the only way out of our dilemma," he says.

The pigeons were gone, but the noise remained. And it was coming from every direction.

The great search might have ended right there, but Penzias learned that Princeton professor Robert Dicke had been predicting that the residue of the Big Bang would be low-level background radiation throughout the universe. Penzias called him and learned that Dicke and physicist Dave Wilkinson were about to build a device to hunt for cosmic background radiation.

Although the teams both published papers, it was Penzias and Wilson who in 1978 won the Nobel Prize for physics for what has been called the most important scientific find of the 20th century."

14 billion years, it's a long time.

Maybe God created the Big Bang. Then, what created God?

[KA8DKT]

Quote[/b] ]I think the proof as to the superiority of Christian principles lies in the advancement of Western culture, in all phases of art and science, in its 2,000 years of Christian faith. Christianity offered the common ethical structure that facilitated Western advancements.(My emphasis)
Yeah, especially the years from about 400CEto 1500CE, more than half of the time from the birth of Christianity until now.
Of course the Islamic religion has bested that record: #from 700CE until now.
-gary

[KA8DKT]

Quote[/b] ]#23 You blame God for the starvation, sickness, pain and suffering in the world...when, indeed, it is MAN's greed, politics, selfishness and apathy that not only causes, but also ignores the sick and the starving masses. We aren't our brothers' keepers....but we should be.

Ahh, but we were "created in His image". Thus we behave just like him.
-gary

[KA8DKT]

Quote[/b] (W2ILP @ Mar. 02 2007,21:27)]wf7a

I suspect that Jesus was white...because He was a Jewish rabbi and there wern't many non-white Jewish rabbis in the Land of Israel in His days. # The Black Africans weren't even allowed a place in a manger because of the bigoted Jews of that time...I think.

But it is OK to believe that Jesus was Black if you are Black. #Muslims believe that Allah is or was white...but yet there are many Black Muslims today...so don't feel too bad if somebody can prove with certinty that Jesus was white.

It is a good thing that cameras were invented because if there were no cameras , I'm sure that many Black people of the far future would believe that the Bushes and the Clintons were Black....and if they believed that I dinno if it would make much difference or cause them to get low grades on any future equal opportunity history test.

w2ilp (I Like Peace)...You can color it any way you want but don't fight.
Yeah, but he certainly was NOT blond as was depicted in the books at the Sunday School my parents sent me to.
-gary

[W2ILP]

Here is something to cogitate about...If Jesus died of old age instead of being crucified would He be worshipped as God today? What if Ponty Pilot didn't order Him crucified? What if He was allowed to go into exile to Gaul... or worse to Pakistan where it would be hard to find Him?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

I know the good book says that He was crucified and there are lots of passion plays and movies to reinforce that belief. It could be Gospel.

Somehow...I'd rather believe that people could believe in Gods that never could be crucified or have to be resurrected. Gods like Poseidon or Neptune are still said to be under the sea in Davy Jones' Locker, ruling over a school of Mermaids and clams. If you want to believe it it is true but I can't believe that stuff just because some Greeks, Romans or gypsy sailors thought it up a long time ago. Some of it was thought up even before the days of Jesus...but that can't make it any truer.

I can picture Jesus standing watchful with His shepherd's hook. A psalm of David said that the Lord was his shepherd...so the concept may remain that all humans are but sheep and they can only be guided by God, the Lord of the green pasture, where He can maketh us all lie down and be comforted. "Baah"...says a ram. "Humbug", say I. If you must lie down in that pasture don't lie on any sheep turds

w2ilp (Ignoring Lord's Pastures)...and preferring a firm mattress.

[KA8DKT]

I can't speak for what was happening two or three thousand years ago, but today we refer to mindless people who just follow without question what they are told as "sheep".

So, I guess the Bible's use of the word is accurate.

-gary

[ka5s]

Quote[/b] (W2ILP @ Mar. 02 2007,21:27)]I suspect that Jesus was white...because He was a Jewish rabbi and there wern't many non-white Jewish rabbis in the Land of Israel in His days. The Black Africans weren't even
Did Jesus get smicha?

Heh!


Cortland
KA5S