Thank you for demonstrating how to be less babyish by posting a hit-and-run picture, SMW.

You're welcome, Blob. I'm not here to teach... I'm just here to observe. I enjoy Thislin's writings, but when he gets too deep for me, I just quit reading. Can't imagine why y'all can't do the same.

:)
SMW

You're welcome, Blob. I'm not here to teach... I'm just here to observe. I enjoy Thislin's writings, but when he gets too deep for me, I just quit reading. Can't imagine why y'all can't do the same.

:)
SMW


Good point, I'll dry my eyes and pull the binky out of my mouth now.

For the most part, SMW, I did. For like a month. But it's getting a little ridiculous, and something needs to be said. Not that you deserve this civil a response, so I'll say it in another way. Blow it out your ass.

Napsterbaster: "Dull, unreadable sophistry." An you accuse me of being insulting. Sheesh.

You're welcome, Blob. I'm not here to teach... I'm just here to observe. I enjoy Thislin's writings, but when he gets too deep for me, I just quit reading. Can't imagine why y'all can't do the same.

:)
SMW
Do me a favor--when I get too deep for you, tell me. I am here to learn too, and learning when things go over someones head is helpful.

Recently the discussion, or argument, has been about whether Nazareth existed as a historical city. I find it is almost impossible to present the evidence in a forum of limited messages and all sorts of irrelevant issues brought up by the other side.

More important, I think this is an interesting issue, and important when dealing with fundamentalists, but it is not pertinent to Christianity's validity in the modern world.

(It is sort of like the inadmissibility of sex a woman may have had prior to claiming someone raped her--such past events are not relevant to the instant case).

Yeah I gotta come out and side with Inviolable and Napster here, sorry Vile. While Inviolable's statement about "all of the long time residents" is technically untrue it relates to something very real: a new prolific poster who makes R&P a less attractive place to post. I'm frequently absent for a month or two due to time demands in my offline life and my very recent absence was due to that and not because of Thislin. However the couple of times I did have a quick glance the forum's most recent posts were all Thislin's and were all unpleasant insults at various people. I thought "Oh fuck it, I can't be bothered". I'm not saying Thislin always insults people and indeed seems to have calmed down now (though frankly his insults were more entertaining than his monotone monologues especially when contrasted against his own hyper-sensitivity to other's phrasology). However he is a prolific poster who moans if anyone dares to smile and is drowning R&P in dreariness.
I just don't get it with me making all these "insults." That is an easy charge to make, and Dharbamum, about the most insulting person on these boards (although Inviolable recently ran a close second with his "bull shit" and "crap" comments) makes it all the time. (He denies he insults anyone, in the same sentence where there are a couple of "idiots" and "stupids.")

My thesis with "Inviolable" is simple: The NT was not written by Palestinians but by Greeks. This is obvious once one has broken the bounds of Christian thinking.

The Christians won the religious battle of the Late Ancient World, and the winners write the history books. On some subjects, it seems the Christians are still in control of the history books.

I just don't get it with me making all these "insults." That is an easy charge to make, and Dharbamum, about the most insulting person on these boards (although Inviolable recently ran a close second with his "bull shit" and "crap" comments) makes it all the time. (He denies he insults anyone, in the same sentence where there are a couple of "idiots" and "stupids.")

My thesis with "Inviolable" is simple: The NT was not written by Palestinians but by Greeks. This is obvious once one has broken the bounds of Christian thinking.

The Christians won the religious battle of the Late Ancient World, and the winners write the history books. On some subjects, it seems the Christians are still in control of the history books.

Thislin, I am beginning to think you suffer from bipolar disorder, I would say you have a moderate case.
Often times people with bipolar disorder have trouble understanding simple logic and fall under the assumption that their understanding is crystal clear.
There for they go into long winded explanations to make sure all the bases are covered, going outside of the actaul conversation.

Let me give an example from this very thread.
Now what I am asking for is a very simple yes or no answer. Would you say you understand the following?

(The Mishnah is the first recording of the oral law of the Jewish people. When the Jews took to recording their laws in book form the Mishnah was the first copy of their laws. This book was writen sometime in the 1st century A.D.
It is taken into high regard as it is considered the first work of Rabbinic Judaism.
Rabbinic commentaries on the Mishnah over the next three centuries were recorded mostly in Aramaic and were revised as the Gemara.
The Mishnah and the Gemara together form the Talmud.
The Talmud is a record of rabbinic discussions pertaining to Jewish law, ethics, customs and history.


In the 1800's a man named, Adolf Neubauer was set with the responsibility of translating the Mishnah as well as several other works of Rabbinic Judaism.
Neubauer, services were secured by the University of Oxford for the task of cataloging the Hebrew manuscripts in the Bodleian Library. After 18 years of preperation the catalog appeared.
The Bodleian Library, the main research library of the University of Oxford, is one of the oldest libraries in Europe, and in England is second in size only to the British Library.
Neubauer, was created M.A. of Oxford in 1873, and was elected an honorary fellow of Exeter College in 1890. In the latter year he received the honorary degree of Ph.D. from the University of Heidelberg and was made an honorary member of the Real Academia de la Historia at Madrid.
While working on the Mishnah over a course of 16 years, Neubauer published a book called the La géographie du Talmud. Which records the existence of Nazareth around 200 A.D on page 190.)

Please try to remember that I did ask for a simple yes or no answer. Can you understand it?

Thislin, for the last time, it's not the fact that you're insulting, that I am complaining about. It's that you're so fucking dull you couldn't cut a sandwich. Being lively and insulting, that's no problem at all.

Blob is complaining of the blatant hypocrisy of insulting people, while complaining of their being insulting. Go back and read his post again.

Though I honestly don't know why I'm bothering. It's not like you'll listen.

Back to my rock.

Thislin, for the last time, it's not the fact that you're insulting, that I am complaining about. It's that you're so fucking dull you couldn't cut a sandwich. Being lively and insulting, that's no problem at all.

Blob is complaining of the blatant hypocrisy of insulting people, while complaining of their being insulting. Go back and read his post again.

Though I honestly don't know why I'm bothering. It's not like you'll listen.

Back to my rock.
Coming from you, you are right, I will not listen. I figured you out qute some time ago.

Sorry, that was an insult.

Thislin, I am beginning to think you suffer from bipolar disorder, I would say you have a moderate case.
I understand that this accusation serves you two purposes: first it helps you rationalize how someone who actually knows the history of the period can not share your beliefs or be persuaded by what you post. Second, it helps you to discredit me with a label so that you don't have to deal with the reality. So what if I were a bona-fide nut sitting on an acorn tree with some squirrel eyeing me, who says something is not relevant. Deal with the issue--don't engage in personal attack.
Often times people with bipolar disorder have trouble understanding simple logic and fall under the assumption that their understanding is crystal clear.
We both observe the same moon.
There for they go into long winded explanations to make sure all the bases are covered, going outside of the actual conversation.
Heaven help us! I trust you are never, ever, long-winded.
Let me give an example from this very thread.
Now what I am asking for is a very simple yes or no answer. Would you say you understand the following?

(The Mishnah is the first recording of the oral law of the Jewish people. When the Jews took to recording their laws in book form the Mishnah was the first copy of their laws. This book was written sometime in the 1st century A.D.
It is taken into high regard as it is considered the first work of Rabbinic Judaism.
Rabbinic commentaries on the Mishnah over the next three centuries were recorded mostly in Aramaic and were revised as the Gemara.
The Mishnah and the Gemara together form the Talmud.
The Talmud is a record of rabbinic discussions pertaining to Jewish law, ethics, customs and history.


In the 1800's a man named, Adolf Neubauer was set with the responsibility of translating the Mishnah as well as several other works of Rabbinic Judaism.
Neubauer, services were secured by the University of Oxford for the task of cataloging the Hebrew manuscripts in the Bodleian Library. After 18 years of preperation the catalog appeared.
The Bodleian Library, the main research library of the University of Oxford, is one of the oldest libraries in Europe, and in England is second in size only to the British Library.
Neubauer, was created M.A. of Oxford in 1873, and was elected an honorary fellow of Exeter College in 1890. In the latter year he received the honorary degree of Ph.D. from the University of Heidelberg and was made an honorary member of the Real Academia de la Historia at Madrid.
While working on the Mishnah over a course of 16 years, Neubauer published a book called the La géographie du Talmud. Which records the existence of Nazareth around 200 A.D on page 190.)

Please try to remember that I did ask for a simple yes or no answer. Can you understand it?
I will only go on record that not all of what you assert is demonstrable fact: especially the date of the Mishna, at least as we have it. The rest is just interpretation by believers.

Coming from you, you are right, I will not listen. I figured you out qute some time ago.

Sorry, that was an insult.
Coulda fooled me.

Hmmm... Thislin, your posts are sometimes very long and slightly difficult to read, but don't worry, I still read them most of the time. And Inviolable apparently does too. Sometimes you do seem quite passive-aggressively insulting, perhaps a bit condescending, and I think that's what bothers Inviolable. But I don't think your discussions are pointless, even though both of you seem to be getting a bit tired of them, and I enjoy reading everything and occasionally popping in when I feel i have something intelligent to say.

I understand that this accusation serves you two purposes: first it helps you rationalize how someone who actually knows the history of the period can not share your beliefs or be persuaded by what you post. Second, it helps you to discredit me with a label so that you don't have to deal with the reality. So what if I were a bona-fide nut sitting on an acorn tree with some squirrel eyeing me, who says something is not relevant. Deal with the issue--don't engage in personal attack.

We both observe the same moon.

Heaven help us! I trust you are never, ever, long-winded.

I will only go on record that not all of what you assert is demonstrable fact: especially the date of the Mishna, at least as we have it. The rest is just interpretation by believers.


Here we see where Thislin has clearly gone out of the boundries of the conversation by simply stating a yes or no answer and going into a long winded explanation. One of which is replaced by the logic set before him with his own deformed regurgitated logic.
I can only conclude that he is indeed bipolar.
He clearly doesnt understand who Adolf Neubauer is making the possible claim that Adolf Neubauer could have a religious background instead of the very real background he was known for as a brilliant innovator of his time.

Backing himself in a corner, Thislin states that my religious background has something to do with the fact that I wish him to see the information Adolf Neubauer shared with the scientific community.
While all along his implications have been discharged, not knowing himself that I have on several occasions admitted on these very forums that there is quite a bit about my religion that could not possibly be backed up by any kind of proof or evidence.

Thislin, are there any good psychiatrist you can see while youre in Korea?
Besides yourself, as it is we can see your logic is faulty and you may hurt yourself more then do any good.

Hmmm... Thislin, your posts are sometimes very long and slightly difficult to read, but don't worry, I still read them most of the time. And Inviolable apparently does too. Sometimes you do seem quite passive-aggressively insulting, perhaps a bit condescending, and I think that's what bothers Inviolable. But I don't think your discussions are pointless, even though both of you seem to be getting a bit tired of them, and I enjoy reading everything and occasionally popping in when I feel i have something intelligent to say.
If you deal with difficult subjects, two things happen. First, you inevitably lose the peanut gallery. Second, people can misinterpret you. It would be nice if everything anyone ever said could not be misinterpreted, but language is by its nature ambiguous and no author knows what baggage each reader will bring.

I think an arrogance does come across in my writing that would not be present if one heard tone of voice and body language and all of that. Let me read what I have posted a couple days later and I see it too.

"Inviolable," even though we have pounded hard on each other, at least has the virtue of trying to defend what he believes rationally, rather than just making pronouncements as do the other fundamentalists around here (well "Sparky" is OK too).

What I am trying to get across--that the history of Christianity is utterly different from the traditional story--that it originated as a Greek mystery cult that adopted the Isaiah Messiah, that the Gospel biography of Jesus came after Paul, and that Christianity did not even seriously enter Palestine until Constantine, is so utterly alien to the Christian mind frame that I understand the shock.

It is, as "Sparky" says, a completely different "paradigm," and takes thinking about as a possibility before one can even consider the evidence.

However, it is not really all that important except as an intellectual matter, since I don't think any religion has the wonderful origins it more literal adherents think it has, and that does not subtract at all from the good they do.

You have no right to set the boundaries of what I am going to post.

Here we see where Thislin has clearly gone out of the boundries of the conversation by simply stating a yes or no answer and going into a long winded explanation. One of which is replaced by the logic set before him with his own deformed regurgitated logic.
I can only conclude that he is indeed bipolar.
He clearly doesnt understand who Adolf Neubauer is making the possible claim that Adolf Neubauer could have a religious background instead of the very real background he was known for as a brilliant innovator of his time.

Backing himself in a corner, Thislin states that my religious background has something to do with the fact that I wish him to see the information Adolf Neubauer shared with the scientific community.
While all along his implications have been discharged, not knowing himself that I have on several occasions admitted on these very forums that there is quite a bit about my religion that could not possibly be backed up by any kind of proof or evidence.

Thislin, are there any good psychiatrist you can see while youre in Korea?
Besides yourself, as it is we can see your logic is faulty and you may hurt yourself more then do any good.
I have no real interest in it because your apologist is "finding" what he wants to find, and the "scientific community" has nothing to do with it.

Provide actual ancient sources that show a Nazareth, not some nineteenth century interpretation of documents of unknown date.

You have no right to set the boundaries of what I am going to post.

Here we see that Thislin is possibly angry, or more over upset that I have made an attempt to set the boundaries on his posting style. This suggest that he refutes any kind of control and regularly replaces it with his own kind of control.
Giving him the illusion of dominance.
Yet another sighn of bipolar disorder.

Thislin, lets try another question and see how you respond.
It's for your own good.

Does 2+2=4?

Yes or no would be best. You do understand that a yes or no answer is a good answer, yes Thislin?

I have no real interest in it because your apologist is "finding" what he wants to find, and the "scientific community" has nothing to do with it.

Provide actual ancient sources that show a Nazareth, not some nineteenth century interpretation of documents of unknown date.

Again, Thislin has replaced reality with his own delusions. I can only guess that instead of taking the time to find out who Adolf is, Thislin has responded with what he thinks will keep his dominate posture.

Here we see that Thislin is possibly angry, or more over upset that I have made an attempt to set the boundaries on his posting style. This suggest that he refutes any kind of control and regularly replaces it with his own kind of control.
Giving him the illusion of dominance.
Yet another sighn of bipolar disorder.

Thislin, lets try another question and see how you respond.
It's for your own good.

Does 2+2=4?

Yes or no would be best. You do understand that a yes or no answer is a good answer, yes Thislin?
You persist on with your personal attack, neatly avoiding dealing with the issue at hand.

As I said, whether I am insane or not is not material, although your constant effort to dismiss me with label rather than with good evidence indicates to me a very genuine determination on the part of your own "subconscious" to avoid seriously considering what I have said.

You persist on with your personal attack, neatly avoiding dealing with the issue at hand.

As I said, whether I am insane or not is not material, although your constant effort to dismiss me with label rather than with good evidence indicates to me a very genuine determination on the part of your own "subconscious" to avoid seriously considering what I have said.


Here we see Thislin making an attempt at role reversal. This is yet another form of an effort to remain dominate. Thislins dominance is very important to him, with out it he has no control and without any control he makes no sense to anyone but himself. The illusion that his logic is not flawed disappears.

Overwhelmingly describing a clear case of bipolar disorder. Thislin makes the claim that his mental capacity isnt in question but what he states is the more important subject, not realizing that his mental capacity is the very fault of his statements.

Here we see that Thislin is possibly angry, or more over upset that I have made an attempt to set the boundaries on his posting style. This suggest that he refutes any kind of control and regularly replaces it with his own kind of control.
Giving him the illusion of dominance.
Yet another sighn of bipolar disorder.

Thislin, lets try another question and see how you respond.
It's for your own good.

Does 2+2=4?

Yes or no would be best. You do understand that a yes or no answer is a good answer, yes Thislin?
Inviolable, Thislin is being extremely civil and logical right now. You don't need to continue with your unnecessary personal attacks. If you think that your discussion with Thislin is becoming pointless, maybe you should just end the discussion. You said you were going to, but then you just insulted Thislin instead of leaving like you said you wanted to.

Inviolable, Thislin is being extremely civil and logical right now. You don't need to continue with your unnecessary personal attacks. If you think that your discussion with Thislin is becoming pointless, maybe you should just end the discussion. You said you were going to, but then you just insulted Thislin instead of leaving like you said you wanted to.

Sorry.

Here we see Thislin making an attempt at role reversal. This is yet another form of an effort to remain dominate. Thislins dominance is very important to him, with out it he has no control and without any control he makes no sense to anyone but himself. The illusion that his logic is not flawed disappears.

Overwhelmingly describing a clear case of bipolar disorder. Thislin makes the claim that his mental capacity isnt in question but what he states is the more important subject, not realizing that his mental capacity is the very fault of his statements.
The clarity of Thislin's argument is not what you are arguing here. You are making personal attacks for no reason.

For the record, since "Inviolable" has now gone off the deep end on my psychology, my wife is a psychologist, and we have a long-term, happy marriage with two grown, married daughters. I was a researcher through my life in the area of "artificial intelligence," in my last decade leaving that and serving as the CIO of a mid-sized insurance company.

Now she works for a NGO in Vietnam and we live there most of the time, commuting back to the States. Since I'm retired with time on my hands, these message boards are a pleasant diversion.

I understand his need to dismiss the challenge to his faith, and so am trying to be charitable about this, but I really have to think that he has now gone way too far with this personal attack.

For the record, since "Inviolable" has now gone off the deep end on my psychology, my wife is a psychologist, and we have a long-term, happy marriage with two grown, married daughters. I was a researcher through my life in the area of "artificial intelligence," in my last decade leaving that and serving as the CIO of a mid-sized insurance company.

Now she works for a NGO in Vietnam and we live there most of the time, commuting back to the States. Since I'm retired with time on my hands, these message boards are a pleasant diversion.

I understand his need to dismiss the challenge to his faith, and so am trying to be charitable about this, but I really have to think that he has now gone way too far with this personal attack.

Thislin, every single time I say something you dont agree with you anylize what I say and make your own personal psychological observations.
Its very annoying and most of the time its false.
The simple fact that you can not see this for yourself leaves me to think there is truely something wrong with you. You have this assumption that youre always right and you keep up the assumption even after the facts have been very clearly pointed out to you.
This is the last time I talk with you.

And Dark, if you want me to leave stop responding to me.
The personal attacks were very justified as it is what Thislin does in every other post he makes. I do not simply disregard something because of my religion and Im sure there are a few people here who know that.
It is very insulting to have the knowledge I have gained tossed aside like garbage because I am a Christian and for no other reason.

Thislin, every single time I say something you dont agree with you anylize what I say and make your own personal psychological observations.
Its very annoying and most of the time its false.
The simple fact that you can not see this for yourself leaves me to think there is truely something wrong with you. You have this assumption that youre always right and you keep up the assumption even after the facts have been very clearly pointed out to you.
This is the last time I talk with you.

And Dark, if you want me to leave stop responding to me.
The personal attacks were very justified as it is what Thislin does in every other post he makes. I do not simply disregard something because of my religion and Im sure there are a few people here who know that.
It is very insulting to have the knowledge I have gained tossed aside like garbage because I am a Christian and for no other reason.

I do not want you to leave. I merely said that I was under the impression that you wanted to leave the discussion.

Thislin, every single time I say something you dont agree with you anylize what I say and make your own personal psychological observations.
Its very annoying and most of the time its false.
You diagnose me from your keyboard as being manic depressive or bipolar, and then you say that?
This is the last time I talk with you.
You've already said that a few times. Stop grandstanding.

The simple fact is that you do not want to deal with some basic facts that I have presented, so you convince yourself that I must be insane--therefore you don't have to face them.

1. Nazareth never existed until the third century.
2. Jesus himself is a myth.
(There is no evidence for the existence of either except the NT).
3. The NT was written by Greeks in Greek, not Palestinians, and is a book mostly of myths (except the genuine Pauline epistles).
4. These facts are irrelevant to a true Christian, but desperately important to deny to a fundamentalist who has historical reality and religious truth mixed up.

I do not want you to leave. I merely said that I was under the impression that you wanted to leave the discussion.
You have a habit of posting while I'm preparing to post, and sometimes it makes me regret some of what I say. Still, I am glad you are here.

You have a habit of posting while I'm preparing to post, and sometimes it makes me regret some of what I say. Still, I am glad you are here.
Hehe, thank you.

I think you may have been a little blunt in that last post though. I don't think we can know beyond a shadow of a doubt whether anything is a "myth" or a "fact", but you are correct in that it really doesn't matter.

Hehe, thank you.

I think you may have been a little blunt in that last post though. I don't think we can know beyond a shadow of a doubt whether anything is a "myth" or a "fact", but you are correct in that it really doesn't matter.
We can't really "know" anything, but we can approach knowledge asymptotically and often get so close to it that it can be said to be "fact," for all practical matters.

That is my view of the writings that deal with early Christianity, or, for that matter, my view of the writings that deal with early Buddhism. They are mostly myth.

If, as an intellectual exercise, we want to get to the actual history, then we must of course make reasonable surmises, and we must also understand that religious belief interferes with clear thinking on subjects of this sort.

"Myth" is not a bad thing. Myths are stories and stories contain teachings and principles. They are the allusional vocabulary of a culture that shares these stories. These are what are valuable, not the literal history. We all know Hamlet was not Prince of Denmark, but the story is still of immense importance to our culture.

The Emperor, who was a devout Buddhist, invited a great Zen master to the Palace in order to ask him questions about Buddhism.

"What is the highest truth of the holy Buddhist doctrine?" the emperor inquired.

"Vast emptiness... and not a trace of holiness," the master replied.

"If there is no holiness," the emperor said, "then who or what are you?"

"I do not know," the master replied.

Since this was a Zen master, did you expect anything he said to make sense--especially to an emporer?

In fact there is no such thing as "holiness." That means something worthy of worship, and I am sure you know enough Buddhism to understand that nothing is worthy of worship--although sometimes we worship anyway. It's good for us.

Since this was a Zen master, did you expect anything he said to make sense--especially to an emporer?


Made sense to me.

A myth is a widely held belief, neither true nor untrue empirically, generally used to justify an institution.

No, it is not a bad thing.

Made sense to me.
Fine: you must have had Zen training. My experience is with a different form of Buddhism.

Of course what he says is all "literally" true, but the emperor would not have understood it at all, and would have misunderstood it. It may be that you do too.

A myth is a widely held belief, neither true nor untrue empirically, generally used to justify an institution.

No, it is not a bad thing.
Sometimes myths "justify" institutions--I would say (and you think you imply) that this is a bad use of myth.

But look at the myth of the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross out of love for mankind. We can look at it as a gory spectacle of a sadistic deity, but then we miss it entirely. It is a message conveying God's love--that he would do this to himself for us.

Taken literally--that he actually did do this to himself--and the message becomes the gory and sadistic bit; taken figuratively, well, we get a different and beautiful message.

Fine: you must have had Zen training.

A little.

My experience is with a different form of Buddhism.

Yes, I know.

Sometimes myths "justify" institutions--I would say (and you think you imply) that this is a bad use of myth.

But look at the myth of the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross out of love for mankind. We can look at it as a gory spectacle of a sadistic deity, but then we miss it entirely. It is a message conveying God's love--that he would do this to himself for us.

Taken literally--that he actually did do this to himself--and the message becomes the gory and sadistic bit; taken figuratively, well, we get a different and beautiful message.
Bad? No. I agree with Plato in that the use of myth is necessary to create an ideal society. Have you ever read the "Allegory of the Cave"? We literally cannot handle the truth. It would be as the sun to eyes that have become used to darkness for their entire lives.

Bad? No. I agree with Plato in that the use of myth is necessary to create an ideal society. Have you ever read the "Allegory of the Cave"? We literally cannot handle the truth. It would be as the sun to eyes that have become used to darkness for their entire lives.
Myths that were used to justify institutions that come to mind are those of the German Reich, or Mussolini's Roman myths. Today there are mythical beings, known as Mao Tse Dung and Ho Chi Minh (China and Vietnam) who are used to sustain a single-party state, even though their policies have long ago been abandoned.

America has had such myths too. Indeed, the Christian myth-set often gets used for political purposes, or look at the myths surrounding the "Founding Fathers," that serve to make their writings quasi-scriptural.

I would much rather base political institutions and social order on mundane, secular, demonstrable studies than on common myths.

On the other hand, when dealing with the human religous impulse, I think there is more "there" than mundane, secular, scientific "truth." Myths may be one of the ways things are revealed to us.

Even if that is going too far, myths are wonderful in literature.

Myths that were used to justify institutions that come to mind are those of the German Reich, or Mussolini's Roman myths. Today there are mythical beings, known as Mao Tse Dung and Ho Chi Minh (China and Vietnam) who are used to sustain a single-party state, even though their policies have long ago been abandoned.

America has had such myths too. Indeed, the Christian myth-set often gets used for political purposes, or look at the myths surrounding the "Founding Fathers," that serve to make their writings quasi-scriptural.

I would much rather base political institutions and social order on mundane, secular, demonstrable studies than on common myths.

On the other hand, when dealing with the human religous impulse, I think there is more "there" than mundane, secular, scientific "truth." Myths may be one of the ways things are revealed to us.

Even if that is going too far, myths are wonderful in literature.

How about the myth perpetuated in the U.S., brought up by my history professor in class, that one cannot become successful without a college degree? It's a good myth, because it makes people become more educated, even if their only goal is to make more money someday.

I just don't get it with me making all these "insults." That is an easy charge to make, and Dharbamum, about the most insulting person on these boards (although Inviolable recently ran a close second with his "bull shit" and "crap" comments) makes it all the time. (He denies he insults anyone, in the same sentence where there are a couple of "idiots" and "stupids.")You were lashing out the insults for a while when you first arrived, Thislin, but I don't see you doing it anymore. I don't bear grudges and that you have stopped is enough for me.

Inviolable - relax a little. I'm not used to seeing you worked up like this and prefer it when you enjoy yourself here.

How about the myth perpetuated in the U.S., brought up by my history professor in class, that one cannot become successful without a college degree? It's a good myth, because it makes people become more educated, even if their only goal is to make more money someday.
DK, I think the wording of your professor's 'myth' is a little twisted. If he/she said, "it's MORE DIFFICULT for one to become AS successful without a college degree" it wouldn't be a myth at all, but a true statement, backed up by statistical data. Just about anytime the word CANNOT is used, the statement becomes unprovable.

Funny how changing one or two words can result in a whole new meaning, isn't it?

And speaking of that, while I've enjoyed following this deep religious discussion, I think it's amusing to note that the subject matter is unknowable by those of us living in the here and now. That is if you believe only what you can prove or disprove.

Which makes INV's demand for a yes or no answer even more unreasonable.

Just my $.02 worth... nothing too deep to add here. (except a short msg for Nappy -- kiss my grits)

:)
SMW

You were lashing out the insults for a while when you first arrived, Thislin, but I don't see you doing it anymore. I don't bear grudges and that you have stopped is enough for me.

Inviolable - relax a little. I'm not used to seeing you worked up like this and prefer it when you enjoy yourself here.
I think the target of my attacks was Napster, and I still an willing to return his insults and will remain so until or if he changes.

The theme that hit me when I first arrived was what I perceived as a blanket condemnation of religion, with Christianity targeted in particular. This is, if nothing else, too one-sided, and I for one think religon is a positive if not indespensible part of human culture.

My perception is that I promptly got hit with accusations that were untrue.

DK, I think the wording of your professor's 'myth' is a little twisted. If he/she said, "it's MORE DIFFICULT for one to become AS successful without a college degree" it wouldn't be a myth at all, but a true statement, backed up by statistical data. Just about anytime the word CANNOT is used, the statement becomes unprovable.

Funny how changing one or two words can result in a whole new meaning, isn't it?

And speaking of that, while I've enjoyed following this deep religious discussion, I think it's amusing to note that the subject matter is unknowable by those of us living in the here and now. That is if you believe only what you can prove or disprove.

Which makes INV's demand for a yes or no answer even more unreasonable.

Just my $.02 worth... nothing too deep to add here. (except a short msg for Nappy -- kiss my grits)

:)
SMW
Bill Gates was a college dropout and I have an alphabet soup I could put after my name if I were so inclined. Which of us is the more "successful" in financial terms?

I have a devil of a time persuading young Vietnamese to stay in college. First, Vietnamese colleges are not all that good and are not much recognized by foreign firms; second, there are few jobs available for college graduates other than seriously underpaid teaching positions; third, they can get a career started and make money if they don't go to college.

Still, where will Vietnam be in twenty years if it doesn't produce more college graduates? It is a testimony to the Confucian education ethic that prevails there that so many do stay in school.

The theme that hit me when I first arrived was what I perceived as a blanket condemnation of religion, with Christianity targeted in particular.Bar freethinker's posts - which elicit nothing but disagreement from everyone else including the resident atheists anyway - I honestly can't see how you perceived that.
My perception is that I promptly got hit with accusations that were untrue.Oh don't we just know it! The over-sensitive whining was as obvious as the offensive insults you dealt out when you first arrived.

Actually, I went pretty hardcore on him in our first argument, Blob. I never really accused him of anything, mind you, but I slammed religion pretty hard.

Actually, I went pretty hardcore on him in our first argument, Blob. I never really accused him of anything, mind you, but I slammed religion pretty hard.Aha! One person slammed religion. I can now see why he perceived "blanket condemnation".

btw, prefered the nuns sig you had recently.

Oh don't we just know it! The over-sensitive whining was as obvious as the offensive insults you dealt out when you first arrived.

And still does, depending upon who the poster is.

A Challenge to All Christians




i got one. DO what jesus DID.

try living simply. turning the other cheek, judge not, keep money out of the church, matter of fact, have no churches-jesus didn't, share, and live, and go into the "wilderness" to actually see "god". and mostly, have no government.

i got one. DO what jesus DID.

try living simply. turning the other cheek, judge not, keep money out of the church, matter of fact, have no churches-jesus didn't, share, and live, and go into the "wilderness" to actually see "god". and mostly, have no government.
Nice post Ivan. I like that!

i got one. DO what jesus DID.

try living simply. turning the other cheek, judge not, keep money out of the church, matter of fact, have no churches-jesus didn't, share, and live, and go into the "wilderness" to actually see "god". and mostly, have no government.heh. You know I hope Christianity is true just to imagine the faces of today's rich Western Christians when their modern apologetics fail to impress Jesus on judgement day.

Jesus: Explain why you did not live in poverty and commit yourself to spreading the word. I said quite clearly that a camel will pass through the eye of a needle before a rich man will get into heaven.
Modern Christian: No, no, Jesus. You're taking that verse out of context. It doesn't mean that literally Christians have to...
Jesus: Save it, fat wallet. To the fire you go.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b222/godsandmen/religion/praisegoose.jpg

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b222/godsandmen/religion/wwjdJesusWithTruckerHat.jpg

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b222/godsandmen/religion/jesusparkingspace.jpg

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b222/godsandmen/religion/cartoons/282062304_f552f5e9a7_o.jpg

Originally Posted by Freethinker
A Challenge to All Christians

i got one. DO what jesus DID...........

Nope.

The challenge I made stands.

Let the supposed Bible "believers" pick up snakes and drink poison, exactly as the Bible tells them.........

.......or, conversely, I guess they COULD admit the "Bible" is filled with nonsense, and not worth paying any attention to.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b222/godsandmen/religion/cartoons/282062304_f552f5e9a7_o.jpg
Ha! I'm not the only one to have thought of this then. It first occured to me on theologyweb when I was told I was "so taking those give away your posessions verses out of context" by some (actually very pleasant and generally sensible) Christians.

Thanks for posting that godsandmen, lol.

Ha! I'm not the only one to have thought of this then. It first occured to me on theologyweb when I was told I was "so taking those give away your posessions verses out of context" by some (actually very pleasant and generally sensible) Christians.

Thanks for posting that godsandmen, lol.

hehe...give it all up to Me, me, me me. I will take it all so you may have eternal life... works for me.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b222/godsandmen/religion%20ani%20gifs/bible.gif

According to Christian tradition, "snakes" or "serpents" have traditionally represented pagans or Druids. Haven't you ever heard about how St. Patrick "drove the 'snakes' out of Ireland"? I guarantee you they're not referring to actual snakes.

Only stupid fundamentalists take the Bible literally.



Check out history...Was the Temple destroyed in 70 AD?..guess what..Jesus predicted it would happen withon 40 yrs after He left..Matthew 24

how do we know he was talking about that particular temple..right..

Of course christians would see pagans and snakes. Anyone who did not follow god was snakes.."rolls eyes"

Check out history...Was the Temple destroyed in 70 AD?..guess what..Jesus predicted it would happen withon 40 yrs after He left..Matthew 24
:rolleyes: I shan't dignify that with more of a response than this.

Check out history...Was the Temple destroyed in 70 AD?..guess what..Jesus predicted it would happen withon 40 yrs after He left..Matthew 24 holy shit! you mean a book that was written after the temple was destroyed actually says someone knew when the temple would be destroyed before it was destroyed?...