Topic awaiting preservation: Here we Go again (Page 2 of 3)

Then you admit you don't "know" there is a god or was a xist as "The only things I know as fact are those that I can see, feel, touch, taste, smell. All others I can't be certain of".

Problem with your arguments Gid, is you say whatever is expedient at the time, forgetting what you have previously said.

Goes to credibility, of which you have none.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

Wow Webshaman, so just because you don't believe in things, doesn't mean they aren't there? Hmmm....

quote:

---

WebShaman said:

I think, therefore I am - and others think, therefore, they are.

---

How do you know other's think? Can you see inside thier minds? Are you psychic?!?! Get out of my head!

quote:

---

Ehtheist said:

Then you admit you don't "know" there is a god

---

I don't "know" there is a God. That is where faith comes in. Actually, there is enough proof to sway me, so it really isn't faith, but I like to say that anyway.

quote:

---

Ehtheist said:

Problem with your arguments Gid, is you say whatever is expedient at the time,
forgetting what you have previously said.

---

Sometimes, yes. But this was an experiment, and it went quite well. Both you and Webshaman have acknowledged (either directly or indirectly) that there are things outside of our own perceptions that are real.

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

Only in your dreams Gid.

I am still waiting for the proof there is a god, any god I won't make it hard on you.

Before you trie the tired 'prove there isn't' ploy let me remind you the proof must come from the one making the claim. You claim there is a god while it is patently obvious there is none.

I am still waiting.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

quote:

---

Ehtheist said:

Only in your dreams Gid.

---

You can see my dreams too?!?! AHHH!

Have you ever looked at a sunset Ehtheist? I love em. They are so beautiful. Every time I look at one of those beautiful picturesque moments, I know that I am not alone. God is a beautiful artist.

But as for proof, like scientific proof? Numbers and mathematical formulas? God has been proven be Steve Urwin Phd (not the Croc hunter) to be 67% probable if I remember correctly. He has a few arguments that pushes it to 100%, but those are discarded so that a number that isn't a cop-out can be attained.

Do you not like actuaries? How about miracles? There was one posted on the C v. E thread not too long ago. And the man at my church. That was a miracle. And countless others. How do you explain those?

Do you not like miracles? How about fulfilled prophecies? Isaiah 52 & 53 were written hundreds of years before Jesus was born yet He fulfilled all of the prophecies. Many of which were outside of His control.

You see, God may not be able to be measured, but He is there and shows us His might and power and glory and beauty and love through many other venues. The proof is there. The question is: will you accept it?

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

The beauty of prophecy is it's ability to be interpreted in so many ways. Like the 'psychic' which charges youy $60 a minute to give you generalities which you will convince yourself are specific to you.

A sunset is just a sunset Gid it is not proof of a god. If it is particulalry gorgeous it may be proof of pollution though.

There are no miracles Gid, things happen and people feel a need to attribute it to something, black-cats or rabbits feet are as likely an influence.

I am unable to find anything by Unwin on god, but he seems to know a bit about engines, is god a Nissan Gid?

You have posted no proof that a sane, mature, clear-thinking individual could accept as such and you never will.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

Psychics do that, yes. Some of them. But the prophets do not. It is kinda hard to place generalities on the things that happened. Actually, really hard.

quote:

---

Ehtheist said:

it may be proof of pollution though.

---

quote:

---

Ehtheist said:

things happen and people feel a need to attribute it to something

---

What if people attribute it to something, then things happen? That is a miracle. Not waiting for something good to happen then saying "glory to God!" It is asking God for something and praising His name, then it happening.

Sorry about the Unwin thing. I spelled it wrong. Here: Stephen D. Unwin, PH.D. The Probablitiy of God: A Simple Calculation That Proves the Ultimate Truth. It was a good book, but I don't suggest reading it fast. It has many calculations in there that took me a while to grasp (I read this about 2 years ago).

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

quote:

---

The Probablitiy of God: A Simple Calculation That Proves the Ultimate Truth.

---

Was torn apart by Mathmaticians, and totally discredited.

You really are wasting your time, Ehtheist.

I know WS, but I am a bit bored right now.

As usual, you are not listening Gid. Prohpecy can be interpreted in many ways and the current interpreters (clergy), as their predecessaors back to when Grog was telling the tribe how the hunting will be next year by looking at the entrails of some luckless animal, will do so in the way which puts the very best light on the faith.

Your silly query about miracles is nothing more than an attempt to again try, unsuccessfully, to justify an untenable contention.

Unwin was undone. Of course, the faithful of late have been only too happy to grab anything vaguely 'scientific' to try to bolster their crumbling faith.

Reading the "Scrolls" yet?

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

Alright, may be i worded myself wrong once again. I do that alot. Stating the FACT that things evovle is a fact, and not a theory. Gideon will admit this. Things do evolve. Stating that all things on earth started from a single cell organism or protoplasm or whatever and then slowly formed the rest of all the animals is a THEORY it has not been proven to be the exact way things are formed. This is the same reason that saying all things were made by a divine being snapping his or her or it's fingers and *POOF!* everything is in existence is a theory. Maybe not a scientific theory but a theory. When I said that I merely meant that niether should be taken out of schools, all people should have an equal chance to form their own oppinions on whatever they want without hindrance. Evolution never says that there isn't a god it just says that animals and plants continously make themselves better. Simple definition i know but sometimes simple answers are the best.
As far as Gideon's stupidity, you have no actual proof of his intelligence. Ehtheist, you, somebody who has called himself a person who believes in live and let live, are merely attacking his intelligence because he doesn't conform to your BELIEF. He can be stubborn, and rather ignorant at times but someone who gets straight A's in all honors classes, and letters three times, (Band, ACADEMICS, and latin) is not stupid. If we are going to have a formal debate let's get rid of insults.

Creationism does not have to be taught as science, nor should it be. Religion is not science. One option could be to have an elective class that is based on teaching the differant teachings of all the major religions. And in somewhere in there creationism can be taught. If done correctly, and not the class is not called a mythology class, then anybody with a rational mind would have no problem with it.

By the way I believe webshaman was looking for the word collaborate.
Last time i checked the only thing i have ever heard be corrigated (if it is spelled correctly, i am not sure that i spelled it how it should be) is cardboard. I.e. corrigated cardboard.

History is nothing but a fable that has been agreed upon.
-Napolean Bonaparte

Corrugated.

The only circumstance in which I would accept creationism being taught in schools is if there were an optional, non-credit, course on comparative religions.

As to stupidity vs intelligence, one may very well be intelligent, study and learn well and spew back the learning under controlled conditons to earn high marks.

Where 'smart' (as opposed to stupid) enters the picture is applying all that thar book larnin' to every-day existance.

This Gid does not do well and thus he is stupid in many ways. BTW with his often fractured use of language I wonder about those marks you report.

If a man wandered into your shop and explained he had just seen a pig with wings and that it spoke to him and promised him a hell of a nice place in which to live if only he (the man) would stop eating bacon...you would be calling for the fella's in the nice truck who have those swell jackets with the extra-long arms and neat buckles.

This is xianity and makes as much sense.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

quote:

---

it just says that animals and plants continously make themselves better.

---

No it doesn't.

Important misconception.
Evolution states that living things mutate, generally in adaptation to their environment, and that these mutations get passed on to offspring.

It does not qualify the mutations. There is no implication of better or worse.

This may seem like a small point to some of you, but it is an extremely significant one.

quote:

---

Creationism does not have to be taught as science, nor should it be. Religion is not science. One option could be to have an elective class that is based on teaching the differant teachings of all the major religions. And in somewhere in there creationism can be taught.

---

Fantastic. The important parts of that are "elective" and that it would cover more than one religion. No problem with that.

But that is not what what was said before, not by far.

What was said many times here was that the religious concept of creationism should be taught as a counter to the scientific fact of evolution. And that is completely unacceptable in every way.

I have decided the word WS was seeking may have been "corroborated", it fits contextually.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

quote:

---

One option could be to have an elective class that is based on teaching the differant teachings of all the major religions.

---

They have those in colleges already. Public funds should not be used to teach this in public schools. That is what the churches are for.

Why xianity is a dieing religion and why I and others resist the sheer ignorance they promote'

http://traditionalvalues.org/urban/

http://www.traditionalvalues.org/

Sadly, this is just one of far too many examples of the hatred these folks promote , foster and encourage.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

quote:

---

Individuals may be free to pursue such behaviors as sodomy, but we will not and cannot tolerate these behaviors. They frequently lead to death.

---

source: http://www.traditionalvalues.org/

Yeah! I know a hell lot of people who died of sodomy. Actually I could have quoted the whole site, but this one was utterly ridiculous.

[explicit-edit] Sodomy might hurt, but it does not kill ... unless God kills a kitten. [/explicit-edit]



(Edited by poi on 03-02-2005 04:17)

Ah, finally! I've been waiting for the new bumper sticker and here it is:

SODOMY KILLS!

thanks for that...

In fact it does kill, a number of gays have been killed...by xians, we had a kid here in Vancouver beaten to death just because he was gay. The thugs didn't claim it was due to xian motives though, but where else would they get such negative attitudes?

I am highly suspicious a number of these Holier-than-thou types very likely enjoy anal sex with their wives. Or perhaps with the children of their parishoners.

Anal sex is a fact of life period.

Very few prisoners in various institutions will consider themselves gay, though they may be both the the quarterback and wide receiver while in prison.

As with most things, there is a great deal of hypocrisy involved.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

quote:

---

WebShaman said:

Was torn apart by Mathmaticians, and totally discredited.

---

Which mathematicians? I haven't read anything about them yet.

quote:

---

Ehtheist said:

Prohpecy can be interpreted in many ways

---

This is true, of course, but sometimes prophecy is very specific. There were some Jewish scholars (can't think of the names now) that decided upon the criteria for the Messiah a few hundred years before Jesus was born. I find it interesting that Jesus fulfilled each and every one of the prophecies. Kinda hard don't you think? I mean, a few, yes, but all? There were even specific ones like: the Messiah had to come from King David's line, He had to be born in the smallest tribe Bethlehem, his clothes had to be taken away and distributed by lots, he had to be beaten to a pulp, the bones in his body had to never break, and many others. They were very specific. And it is amazing how Jesus fit them all. But then, people could just stick their heads in the sand and dismiss it all. Their choice.

quote:

---

Ehtheist said:

Your silly query about miracles

---

Silly query or not, it is something to think about. Could there really be something to it?

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

Sillier and sillier, you have no evidence, save the mythical bible, that any of these so-called prophecies came true in the person of your alleged messiah.

Are the original writings of the Jewish prophets extant or merely 'reported' in your bible?

Do you not know what circular reasoning is?

Do you not ever think about what you are writing?

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

Never mind Ehtheist. Why do you imply that I am dumb? Why should I even consider a conversation, if all you do is dismiss what I have to say as silly? I thought for the ages huh?

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

quote:

---

I find it interesting that Jesus fulfilled each and every one of the prophecies. Kinda hard don't you think?

---

Not when people simply create the circumstances after the fact that lead to those fulfillments...

He came form David's line? Sure he did

He came from bethlehem? even many christian scholars conced that he probably did not come to bethelehem until a few years after birth, and many are pretty confident he was never there at all.

It's most certainly not hard to beleive that those details were manufactured, given the wide variety of information the early roman catholic manufactured.

Things like Christmas, Easter, Mary's virginity, etc, etc, etc...

Gid I see you are unable to answer my question and that you have leapt to a conclusion.

Asking you whether you think before you write (something I am prone to as well) is not saying you are dumb-which means BTW, unable to speak.

So far, everything you have said is silly to my mind and aside from biblical references (remember circular reasoning?) you have nothing to substantiate your allegations or your faith.

Prophecies are, as DL pointed out, always infallible when made after the fact.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

So, Ehtheist, since you think something is silly that means it's wrong? What if I think 2+2 eqauling 4 is silly? Does that means it equals five? You seem to think that since you don't agree with something (which you do have the right to do) it gives you the right to ridicule the person who has an opposing oppinion. So what if Gideon wants to believe in a book that may or may not be thousands of years old. He is not saying there is no such thing as science he merely wishes to believe that there is some greater being. Where is the harm in that? He isn't going around shooting evolutionists for their beliefs (or at least I haven' heard about it if he is.). All you have done so far is agree with statements made by others, and dismiss anything that anybody else has to say that might go against the thoughts in-grained in your own head as silly. You tell Gideon that he and all the other people like him are being hard-headed and closed-minded by foolishly holding on to the erver-unraveling thread that is their faith and beliefs for fear that those beliefs may be undermined. YOU ARE DOING THE SAME. The differance between Gideon's thread of faith and yours is that your's is a thread of science. If your going to debate, debate. Don't just rely on agreeing with others who come with their own info and dismissing anything you might not agree with as silly. Wake up, bring your own materials to the table, and debate. This means analyzing both sides info no matter how 'silly' trying to figure out where their coming from, forming an oppinion and then find things to support that oppinion. Then once new info arises repeating this process. You and a lot of people in this forum (including myself) seem to have skipped trying to figure out where each side is coming from, and then have gotten stuck at repeat. Perhaps we are too lazy, or just scared that we might be wrong. Maybe I am at fault, my Gideon is, maybe you are, but it really doesn't matter. I am getting sick and tired of all this mud-slinging. That's all this is. Gideon throws mud in WS's eyes, then WS's makes a defending gesture, then you throw mud in Gid's eyes, and then I have to throw mud at you both. There's always going to be some religion. The book of that religion is always going to have it's defenders and it's skeptics. All books can be argued as fictional. This is the way of history. This was part of the reasoning behind my thread that stated that you could kill a god. (If one exists at all). I wish people would be more open-minded about their own close-mindedness.

History is nothing but a fable that has been agreed upon.
-Napolean Bonaparte

And you were doing so well.

Please keep up you practicing - type a few words, then hit [enter]. practice practice practice...

it's amazing how much better you can get your point across when you type things in a manner that will prompt people to actually read it...

Sangreal, you obviously haven't been paying attention - I'm not against religion here, nor is my stance anti-religious. All I am pointing out, is a certain religious sect's stance is at odds with Science fact.

Now, normally it would end there. But this particular follower doesn't wish to accept the fact that they are wrong. In fact, this particular follower in this case (Gideon) is suggesting that the facts are wrong. However, all the evidence points to the opposite.

Now, if Gideon was to say, "well, those are indeed the facts, but I still believe..." then I could care less.

Nice tirade Sang, you seem to on one hand to be granting me permission to have an opinion and then condemning me for having it.

I seem to recall providing some links and opinions not reflected by others and if someone posts somthing I agree with it makes more sense to say so then re-hash the thing.

If you, like Gid, choose to believe something obviously true is silly, then you like Gid, will be thought silly by others.

That is your choice and decision.

I defend your right to do so, but reserve my own right to think and say you are a damn fool for holding such a belief in the face of obvious facts.

I am impressed my opinion makes sufficient impact on you to inspire you to such a lengthy response however.

There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.
Oscar Levant
(1906 - 1972)

I do not mean to day that you are not allowed to have an oppinon. I merely meant to point out that you have 'rehashed' the same thing over and over.

*Before I go on I need to clarify something better*
Xian, Xianity is not a religioius following. It is a city in CHINA. Zion is however. It is a name for a branch of the Jewish faith which, amongst, other things states that you must be born a Jew. And practice things that non-Zionic Jews practice. So please if you mean Christianity say Christianity. It will make these things go a lot smoother.

There I am done clarifying.

Both Christianity and Zionistic religions have some very silly points. I will agree with you on that. All religions do. But it does make some, SOME good points.

The above statement can be said for evolution.
In the beggining of it's discussions two evolutionists submitted to the French Academy of Science that, due to evolution, one could find similiarities between an invertabrate and a human. This can be accomplished by taking the human and bending it over backwards in a bow so that it's head is sticking up it's own butt. (and yes in this case sodomy kills ) If you don't believe me I can post the exact quote from the book I am currently have on loan from a local library called he Evolution Wars: A guide to the debates by Michael Ruse. Ehtheist even you will agree that it sounds a little silly to submit that as a scientific finding.
Even then it is entirely reasonable to say that things make themselves better.

And when you look at how complex things are it is not entirely absurd to say that there was some divine help. I don't see why creationism and evolutionism cannot be mixed.

Also,
Sorry if I have offended you Ehtheist, but if you reread some of your posts you do come across as very anti-religious. When you keep in mind that inflection of voice can not be put into typing and that Zion means the Jewish faith. There is one post were it seems that you want to blame ALL wars on religion. But, while I will agree that an overwhelming number are, there are some that are not. Take WW1, that was a war without the aid of religion.

History is nothing but a fable that has been agreed upon.
-Napolean Bonaparte

Also I feel that we need to define evolution if we are going to debate on it. As I expect many of us have gottin into heated arguements about the existence of God, only to find ourselves arguing completely at cross purposes.
The atheist is denying a God who looks little bit like aSanta Claus in a bed sheet, sitting on a cloud surrounded by angels with wings. The christian is asserting a God that is the very foundation of our being or some such thing.

The christian would be appalled to learn tht he or she is supposedly defending the odd entity that the atheist is denying. The atheist has never really though seriously about the being that the Christian is affirming.

So without further delay.

There are three things the term evolution can apply to,
First there is what we ight call the very fact of evolution. By this is meant the very idea that all organisms -- you and I, cabbages, kings, kangaroos and crabs, living and dead -- are the end result of a long process of development, from forms vastly differant.

Second there is the path or paths of evolution, knwon technically, as phylogeny. Here we are dealing with the tracks that evolution take through time. When did life occur on earth? When did mulitcellular orgaisms evolve from simpler forms? Fossil records, missing links and all that.

Third and finally we have the question of the causes or mechanisms or THEORY of evolution. What makes the whole process go and work? What drives evolution? What is its motive force? In physics, ths was Newton's great achievement. He did not discover that the planets go round the sun. Thsi was the job of copenicus. He did not map the heavens accurately. Tycho Brahe did this. He did find the planetary motions. Kepler's job. Nor did he work out what happens down here on eath. Galileo. But he did find the law of inverse gravitational attraction and show how everything follows from this -- orbiting planets and soaring cannon balls. Fo this reason alone, we venerate Newton and his genius. Likewise we have such questions in evolutionary biology. Is there a biological equivalent to the force of gravitiational attraction and, if so, does it work in the same way? Is there indeed one prime cause, or are there many such forces that collectively make for the overall mechanism? And is the whole thing theoretical, and if so in what sense?

History is nothing but a fable that has been agreed upon.
-Napolean Bonaparte

Sorry Ehtiesit. I should have said webshaman not your name in the last paragragh of the post two above this one.

History is nothing but a fable that has been agreed upon.
-Napolean Bonaparte

No apology required, I was and am not offended. I am anti-religious, have said so. Xian is a widely used shorthand form, live with it.

Of course the butt statement is ridiculous and sirely not meant to be taken seriousl. The death of the subject would be required in order to accomplish that feat in fact. Though there are many people who metaphorically have their heads up there.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

Sangreal said:

Xian, Xianity is not a religioius following.

---

Sangreal, "Xian" and "Xianity" are abbreviations where "X" stands for "Christ". I will continue to use these abbreviations just as I will continue to use "IMO" "IMHO" "YMMV" "BTW", you get the point. If you learn to adapt to developing situations I believe that will make things go even smoother.

FWIW

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

Saw this a bit up...

quote:

---

afterall Christianity is the most successful cult of all time. There had to be a cause for such effect to take place.

---

Got me thinking a bit (dangerous stuff, I know)
If Jesus han't been executed, would there be Cristianity today?
After all, a lot in the bible (most of it actually) is based on Jesus dying for our sins...


/Dan

{cell 260} {Blog}
-{ ?The Internet treats censorship as a malfunction and routes around it.? (-Barlow, John Perry) }-

Dying for your sins maybe.

However you make a good point and one I had not previously considered.

Nothing like making a martyr to perpetuate an otherwise dead proposition.

We gotta go back in time and stop old Pontious!

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

the crucifixion is definitely central to christianity, without there would have been no christ, no messiah that followed the OT prophecies.

anyone happen to watch discovery today? 'jesus: the complete story' looked at a lot of historical evidence for jesus, his life, etc., interesting stuff.

chris


KAIROSinteractive | tangent oriented

quote:

---

DmS said:

If Jesus han't been executed, would there be Cristianity[sic] today?

---

One word answer: nope.

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

It's most certainly not hard to beleive that those details were manufactured,
given the wide variety of information the early roman catholic manufactured.

---

[speaking about the prophecies]
Well, ofcourse. It is more believeable that they were made, pre-Roman Catholic Church, though. Since the Catholic Church did not begin until roughly 300 AD, I would be surprised if they were able to effect writtings that had been in the Jewish heritage for many, many, many, generations. Of course, there are always discrepencies in everything we hear, read, see, do, etc. But speaking logically, it is more probable that the prophecies were written pre-Jesus.

And as for things being tampered with after Jesus, maybe. I seriously doubt that someone could pull something of tat magnitude off, but hey, no-one has been to the moon yet, right?

quote:

---

Ehtheist said:

you are dumb-which means BTW, unable to speak.

---

Exactly.

quote:

---

Ehtheist said:

you have nothing to substantiate your allegations or your faith.
Prophecies are, as DL pointed out, always infallible when made after the
fact.

---

That seems a key point in our discussion. If the prophecies were made before Jesus had appeared on earth, were fulfilled by Him, and were not changed afterwards, then this argument would collapse, huh?

As for substantiating my allegations, plenty. My faith, even more.

quote:

---

WebShaman said:

Now, normally it would end there. But this particular follower doesn't wish to
accept the fact that they are wrong. In fact, this particular follower in this
case (Gideon) is suggesting that the facts are wrong.

---

I seem to be doing more acceptance than you are WS. But I do not contest facts. Facts are facts, and that is the end of it. I am meerly a little leery about the interpretations of those facts, that is all.

Hey, Bugs, I am no Xian. I am a Christian. When you place the X there like in X-mas, you are effectively removing Christ from the Christian and Christ from the Christmas. If you wish to do that, go ahead. I prefer to take a little more time to allow my savior's name to be placed in my description.

"You must unlearn what you have learned."
~Yoda

quote:

---

But speaking logically, it is more probable that the prophecies were written pre-Jesus.

---

Well no kidding...

nobody suggested otherwise...

If you think that is what I said, then you need to re-read what I said...

As for the "tampering" that you find so implausible....we've been through that plenty of times.

Tampering was the name of the game...

But I'll post more on that later, in a thread that will address a few related issues.

^I'll be looking forward to it

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

If you think that is what I said, then you need to re-read what I said...

---

Well, I guess it was a little on the foggy side to me. I didn't know if you were implying the tampering of the documents that were written pre-Jesus, or the documents written post-Jesus, pre-Catholic Church. I tried to cover them both, just in case.

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

As for the "tampering" that you find so implausible....
we've been through that
plenty of times.

---

Probably, but thanks to my excellent memory, I tend to forget things, and it takes a few times before I retain it. Just ask Sangreal, it took me weeks to remember his name, and he is my best friend! Well, wait, don't ask Sangreal, he has about as good a memory as I do...

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

Tampering was the name of the game

---

I thought religion was the name of the game?

"You must unlearn what you have learned."
~Yoda

quote:

---

I thought religion was the name of the game?

---

Sure.

And what you need for a good religion is a good set of stories...

and what you need for a good set of stories, when those stories need to fit very precise criteria, is some good tampering...

=)

As for what kind of tampering I referred to above - it is extremely simple. We know *nothing* as historical fact about Jesus' life. We know only some stories that even the most generous historians say were written - at best - 20 years after the death of Jesus, by essentially unknown people (later attributed to such people as matthew, mark, luke and john, among others).

Not so amazing that Jesus was made to fit these prophecies given such circumstances...







(Edited by DL-44 on 04-02-2005 22:18)

The correct spelling of truly is "truly". :P

I take it, sad, you have something to add to the topic, that is on topic?