If you discovered that Christianity is false,....?

[Divine Insight]

If you discovered that Christianity is false, would you be happy, or disappointed.

And why?

[Tired of the Nonsense]

[Replying to Thruit]


Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
Could you please provide a list of the eyewitnesses to the risen Jesus who left testimonies to that effect. Or are you actually referring to unsupported later stories and hearsay?

As far as ancient history goes, the copies of surviving manuscripts in support of the gospels with respect to date, volume and exactness have no equal, which is partly how scholars determine the validity of the NT...along with other factors such as the early church fathers who quoted directly from the gospels. You are obviously unaware of this, but since it is a concern for you, I would suggest doing an in depth study of the process, which I did years ago and found it extremely tedious. Happy leg work if you decide to do it. Of course, feel free not to, in which case you can just flush every ancient manuscript down the toilet and history along with it.

Can't DO IT,can you? I thought not.

Now here is a small task for you. Produce a single ancient manuscript, other then the one's that support your belief system, that are considered to be historically true and valid, which are predicated on the accepted historical accuracy of the occurrence of a totally impossible supernatural event. As far as "early church fathers who quoted directly from the gospels," I acknowledge that Christians do overwhelmingly verify the truth of Christianity. If you have any ACTUAL evidence however, I challenge you to provide it.


Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
While it is true that Christians have been quoting "the words of Jesus" for the last two thousand years, that does not change the fact that the words they are quoting are actually derived from others and are not directly from Jesus.

Flush.........

Essentially a raspberry on your part. A one word non answer reply. I will take that as point made on my part.


Tired of the Nonsense said,
Assuming that the words attributed to Jesus, written down and attributed to him decades after the fact, is actually nothing more than a huge leap of faith. Assumption and faith are the foundation of Christian belief.

Another area you are obviously unaware of is that "decades" in the ancient world is equivilent to the internet today. You're beating a dead horse my friend.

A decade is a span of ten years. A span of ten years is exactly the same today as it was 2,000 years ago. The only real difference is that the life span of the average person is almost double now what it was 2,000 years ago. How much of the church sermon from the last time you were in church could you recite accurately now, word for word, do you suppose? How accurate would you be 30 or 40 years from now? You are right about the horse being dead however. And people are finally becoming aware of it.

Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
Hard well established fact however turns out to be darned hard to come by.

No matter how hard and well established you believe a fact to be, those facts are all based on the testimony of others. Therefore, testimony is paramount...even in our modern world.

Unsupported, and insupportable, hearsay is NOT considered to be valid testimony in our modern world however.

Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
For example, how likely is it that a corpse actually came back to life and then flew away? The answer of course is that it is as unlikely as anything which can be imagined. Does the evidence and "facts" derived from the time this unlikely event was supposed to have occurred indicate any probability at all that such a remarkably unlikely event occurred?

Not really, if you discount the fact that the prophets said when the Messiah comes, He will reveal the God of the Jews to the entire gentile world and that through Jesus the entire gentile world has come to know about the God of the Jews. Still, there it is, fulfilled prophecy in black and white (and sometimes a little red) for all the world to see.

Please support this claim.


Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
In truth, there is absolutely NO evidence at all that any such thing occurred which can be derived from the time the event was supposed to have happened. Nothing! Zero! The story of the risen Jesus provoked not the slightest ripple of historical comment at all, at the time it was supposed to have occurred. The very earliest mention of the resurrected Jesus on record does not occur until roughly a quarter of a century after the time that the event was supposed to have occurred. And this account was provided by an individual who clearly never met the living Jesus, and who was not personally present to witness the event he is describing.

I find it even more amazing that because of an insignificant Preacher who was executed after three short years of ministry, the world got flipped on its head. Under those circumstances, you can span human history from the beginning of the world to date and you'll never top that.

One might well make the very same claim for the prophet Mohammad, an uneducated man who, starting with only his wife, converted much of the middle east to the religion of Islam. And of course there is the Buddha to consider, who accomplished much the same feat in India and south Asia. Joseph Smith accomplished much the same thing in the nineteenth century. Some 15 million Mormons today. Surprising, yes. Unusual, yes. Unprecedented, no.

Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
Is there reason to dismiss this account? Well, is a corpse coming back to life, and ultimately flying away, a reasonable claim?

It is, when you consider because of the account, they paid for it with their lives. Of course, it's possible they did have another motive. Maybe they were smoking crack.

Again, please supply the factual basis for this claim, chapter and verse.

[Divine Insight]

Wow, I said all that? I though that I was just pointing out that two passages were not contradictory, but are different in nature and context. Before, I will even think of addressing your diatribe, one point at a time, maybe we could address the two passages I was referring to. Am I correct or incorrect regarding the nature and context of those two passages?

Context is irrelevant. These two verses contradict each other in general terms.

Verse 1:
"And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand" Mt.7:26

Verse 2:
John.12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.

The first verse is a judgement. In other words, anyone who doesn't do as Jesus says shall be judged to be a "foolish man". That's already a judgement supposedly being made by Jesus.

In the second verse he claims that if someone hears his words and believes not he will judge them not. That is a total contradiction to the first verse where he clearly did judge men who don't do as he says to be foolish men.

So the context doesn't matter. Jesus contradicts himself in any case.

Also neither of these two verses say anything about "obeying" directives which was the original context in which the first verse was being put forth in this thread.

And finally what did Jesus teach? He taught that people should love their neighbor as themselves. And he even referred to this as being among the greatest "commandments". But how can someone be commanded to love anyone? If you are only pretending to love someone because you are attempting to appease a command, then you aren't truly loving anyone.

The very idea that love can be commanded is absurd to begin with. Especially within the the context of this absurd religion.

According to this religion you can actually have someone who literally hates their neighbors but goes out of his way to be nice to them just to appease this God's commandment. He would then qualify as having appeased this command. Even though in his heart he doesn't love anyone.

On the other hand you can have someone who naturally loves their neighbors and wants to help others but rejects Jesus as being nothing more than false character in a scam religion.

So who goes to heaven? The loving person who rejects the idea that Jesus was the Christ?

Or the hateful person who restrains his desire to hate people in an effort to appease a God who is potentially threatening to destroy him if he doesn't obey commands.

The whole religion is an oxymoron when taken in 'context'.

You can't command people to love one other lest you'll do something unspeakably hateful to them. That would be a command coming from someone who doesn't even live by it. That would actually make Jesus the greatest hypocrite possible. Yet this is the Christian picture of Jesus. Someone who demands that you love your neighbor, but if you fail to obey him he'll hate you.

That's about as hypocritical as hypocrisy can get.

[Thruit]

[Replying to Thruit]


Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
Could you please provide a list of the eyewitnesses to the risen Jesus who left testimonies to that effect. Or are you actually referring to unsupported later stories and hearsay?

As far as ancient history goes, the copies of surviving manuscripts in support of the gospels with respect to date, volume and exactness have no equal, which is partly how scholars determine the validity of the NT...along with other factors such as the early church fathers who quoted directly from the gospels. You are obviously unaware of this, but since it is a concern for you, I would suggest doing an in depth study of the process, which I did years ago and found it extremely tedious. Happy leg work if you decide to do it. Of course, feel free not to, in which case you can just flush every ancient manuscript down the toilet and history along with it.

Can't DO IT,can you? I thought not.

Now here is a small task for you. Produce a single ancient manuscript, other then the one's that support your belief system, that are considered to be historically true and valid, which are predicated on the accepted historical accuracy of the occurrence of a totally impossible supernatural event. As far as "early church fathers who quoted directly from the gospels," I acknowledge that Christians do overwhelmingly verify the truth of Christianity. If you have any ACTUAL evidence however, I challenge you to provide it.


Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
While it is true that Christians have been quoting "the words of Jesus" for the last two thousand years, that does not change the fact that the words they are quoting are actually derived from others and are not directly from Jesus.

Flush.........

Essentially a raspberry on your part. A one word non answer reply. I will take that as point made on my part.


Tired of the Nonsense said,
Assuming that the words attributed to Jesus, written down and attributed to him decades after the fact, is actually nothing more than a huge leap of faith. Assumption and faith are the foundation of Christian belief.

Another area you are obviously unaware of is that "decades" in the ancient world is equivilent to the internet today. You're beating a dead horse my friend.

A decade is a span of ten years. A span of ten years is exactly the same today as it was 2,000 years ago. The only real difference is that the life span of the average person is almost double now what it was 2,000 years ago. How much of the church sermon from the last time you were in church could you recite accurately now, word for word, do you suppose? How accurate would you be 30 or 40 years from now? You are right about the horse being dead however. And people are finally becoming aware of it.

Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
Hard well established fact however turns out to be darned hard to come by.

No matter how hard and well established you believe a fact to be, those facts are all based on the testimony of others. Therefore, testimony is paramount...even in our modern world.

Unsupported, and insupportable, hearsay is NOT considered to be valid testimony in our modern world however.

Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
For example, how likely is it that a corpse actually came back to life and then flew away? The answer of course is that it is as unlikely as anything which can be imagined. Does the evidence and "facts" derived from the time this unlikely event was supposed to have occurred indicate any probability at all that such a remarkably unlikely event occurred?

Not really, if you discount the fact that the prophets said when the Messiah comes, He will reveal the God of the Jews to the entire gentile world and that through Jesus the entire gentile world has come to know about the God of the Jews. Still, there it is, fulfilled prophecy in black and white (and sometimes a little red) for all the world to see.

Please support this claim.


Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
In truth, there is absolutely NO evidence at all that any such thing occurred which can be derived from the time the event was supposed to have happened. Nothing! Zero! The story of the risen Jesus provoked not the slightest ripple of historical comment at all, at the time it was supposed to have occurred. The very earliest mention of the resurrected Jesus on record does not occur until roughly a quarter of a century after the time that the event was supposed to have occurred. And this account was provided by an individual who clearly never met the living Jesus, and who was not personally present to witness the event he is describing.

I find it even more amazing that because of an insignificant Preacher who was executed after three short years of ministry, the world got flipped on its head. Under those circumstances, you can span human history from the beginning of the world to date and you'll never top that.

One might well make the very same claim for the prophet Mohammad, an uneducated man who, starting with only his wife, converted much of the middle east to the religion of Islam. And of course there is the Buddha to consider, who accomplished much the same feat in India and south Asia. Joseph Smith accomplished much the same thing in the nineteenth century. Some 15 million Mormons today. Surprising, yes. Unusual, yes. Unprecedented, no.

Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
Is there reason to dismiss this account? Well, is a corpse coming back to life, and ultimately flying away, a reasonable claim?

It is, when you consider because of the account, they paid for it with their lives. Of course, it's possible they did have another motive. Maybe they were smoking crack.

Again, please supply the factual basis for this claim, chapter and verse.

Lol...uh, no dude (or dudette.) You do the leg work. I've already satisfied my curiosity. (Just one piece of advice...look at many sources...and I'll see you in a couple years.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

[Replying to Thruit]


Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
Could you please provide a list of the eyewitnesses to the risen Jesus who left testimonies to that effect. Or are you actually referring to unsupported later stories and hearsay?

As far as ancient history goes, the copies of surviving manuscripts in support of the gospels with respect to date, volume and exactness have no equal, which is partly how scholars determine the validity of the NT...along with other factors such as the early church fathers who quoted directly from the gospels. You are obviously unaware of this, but since it is a concern for you, I would suggest doing an in depth study of the process, which I did years ago and found it extremely tedious. Happy leg work if you decide to do it. Of course, feel free not to, in which case you can just flush every ancient manuscript down the toilet and history along with it.

Can't DO IT,can you? I thought not.

Now here is a small task for you. Produce a single ancient manuscript, other then the one's that support your belief system, that are considered to be historically true and valid, which are predicated on the accepted historical accuracy of the occurrence of a totally impossible supernatural event. As far as "early church fathers who quoted directly from the gospels," I acknowledge that Christians do overwhelmingly verify the truth of Christianity. If you have any ACTUAL evidence however, I challenge you to provide it.


Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
While it is true that Christians have been quoting "the words of Jesus" for the last two thousand years, that does not change the fact that the words they are quoting are actually derived from others and are not directly from Jesus.

Flush.........

Essentially a raspberry on your part. A one word non answer reply. I will take that as point made on my part.


Tired of the Nonsense said,
Assuming that the words attributed to Jesus, written down and attributed to him decades after the fact, is actually nothing more than a huge leap of faith. Assumption and faith are the foundation of Christian belief.

Another area you are obviously unaware of is that "decades" in the ancient world is equivilent to the internet today. You're beating a dead horse my friend.

A decade is a span of ten years. A span of ten years is exactly the same today as it was 2,000 years ago. The only real difference is that the life span of the average person is almost double now what it was 2,000 years ago. How much of the church sermon from the last time you were in church could you recite accurately now, word for word, do you suppose? How accurate would you be 30 or 40 years from now? You are right about the horse being dead however. And people are finally becoming aware of it.

Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
Hard well established fact however turns out to be darned hard to come by.

No matter how hard and well established you believe a fact to be, those facts are all based on the testimony of others. Therefore, testimony is paramount...even in our modern world.

Unsupported, and insupportable, hearsay is NOT considered to be valid testimony in our modern world however.

Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
For example, how likely is it that a corpse actually came back to life and then flew away? The answer of course is that it is as unlikely as anything which can be imagined. Does the evidence and "facts" derived from the time this unlikely event was supposed to have occurred indicate any probability at all that such a remarkably unlikely event occurred?

Not really, if you discount the fact that the prophets said when the Messiah comes, He will reveal the God of the Jews to the entire gentile world and that through Jesus the entire gentile world has come to know about the God of the Jews. Still, there it is, fulfilled prophecy in black and white (and sometimes a little red) for all the world to see.

Please support this claim.


Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
In truth, there is absolutely NO evidence at all that any such thing occurred which can be derived from the time the event was supposed to have happened. Nothing! Zero! The story of the risen Jesus provoked not the slightest ripple of historical comment at all, at the time it was supposed to have occurred. The very earliest mention of the resurrected Jesus on record does not occur until roughly a quarter of a century after the time that the event was supposed to have occurred. And this account was provided by an individual who clearly never met the living Jesus, and who was not personally present to witness the event he is describing.

I find it even more amazing that because of an insignificant Preacher who was executed after three short years of ministry, the world got flipped on its head. Under those circumstances, you can span human history from the beginning of the world to date and you'll never top that.

One might well make the very same claim for the prophet Mohammad, an uneducated man who, starting with only his wife, converted much of the middle east to the religion of Islam. And of course there is the Buddha to consider, who accomplished much the same feat in India and south Asia. Joseph Smith accomplished much the same thing in the nineteenth century. Some 15 million Mormons today. Surprising, yes. Unusual, yes. Unprecedented, no.

Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
Is there reason to dismiss this account? Well, is a corpse coming back to life, and ultimately flying away, a reasonable claim?

It is, when you consider because of the account, they paid for it with their lives. Of course, it's possible they did have another motive. Maybe they were smoking crack.

Again, please supply the factual basis for this claim, chapter and verse.

Lol...uh, no dude (or dudette.) You do the leg work. I've already satisfied my curiosity. (Just one piece of advice...look at many sources...and I'll see you in a couple years.

Smoke and mirrors will not hide the fact, so obvious for all to see, that you are folding your tent and running away. This is a forum rule:

5. Support your assertions/arguments with evidence. Do not persist in making a claim without supporting it. All unsupported claims can be challenged for supporting evidence. Opinions require no support, but they should not be considered as valid to any argument, nor will they be considered as legitimate support for any claim.

When the going gets tough, very often the opposition takes a powder. This is particularly true of Christians on this forum.

[Thruit]

[Replying to Thruit]


Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
Could you please provide a list of the eyewitnesses to the risen Jesus who left testimonies to that effect. Or are you actually referring to unsupported later stories and hearsay?

As far as ancient history goes, the copies of surviving manuscripts in support of the gospels with respect to date, volume and exactness have no equal, which is partly how scholars determine the validity of the NT...along with other factors such as the early church fathers who quoted directly from the gospels. You are obviously unaware of this, but since it is a concern for you, I would suggest doing an in depth study of the process, which I did years ago and found it extremely tedious. Happy leg work if you decide to do it. Of course, feel free not to, in which case you can just flush every ancient manuscript down the toilet and history along with it.

Can't DO IT,can you? I thought not.

Now here is a small task for you. Produce a single ancient manuscript, other then the one's that support your belief system, that are considered to be historically true and valid, which are predicated on the accepted historical accuracy of the occurrence of a totally impossible supernatural event. As far as "early church fathers who quoted directly from the gospels," I acknowledge that Christians do overwhelmingly verify the truth of Christianity. If you have any ACTUAL evidence however, I challenge you to provide it.


Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
While it is true that Christians have been quoting "the words of Jesus" for the last two thousand years, that does not change the fact that the words they are quoting are actually derived from others and are not directly from Jesus.

Flush.........

Essentially a raspberry on your part. A one word non answer reply. I will take that as point made on my part.


Tired of the Nonsense said,
Assuming that the words attributed to Jesus, written down and attributed to him decades after the fact, is actually nothing more than a huge leap of faith. Assumption and faith are the foundation of Christian belief.

Another area you are obviously unaware of is that "decades" in the ancient world is equivilent to the internet today. You're beating a dead horse my friend.

A decade is a span of ten years. A span of ten years is exactly the same today as it was 2,000 years ago. The only real difference is that the life span of the average person is almost double now what it was 2,000 years ago. How much of the church sermon from the last time you were in church could you recite accurately now, word for word, do you suppose? How accurate would you be 30 or 40 years from now? You are right about the horse being dead however. And people are finally becoming aware of it.

Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
Hard well established fact however turns out to be darned hard to come by.

No matter how hard and well established you believe a fact to be, those facts are all based on the testimony of others. Therefore, testimony is paramount...even in our modern world.

Unsupported, and insupportable, hearsay is NOT considered to be valid testimony in our modern world however.

Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
For example, how likely is it that a corpse actually came back to life and then flew away? The answer of course is that it is as unlikely as anything which can be imagined. Does the evidence and "facts" derived from the time this unlikely event was supposed to have occurred indicate any probability at all that such a remarkably unlikely event occurred?

Not really, if you discount the fact that the prophets said when the Messiah comes, He will reveal the God of the Jews to the entire gentile world and that through Jesus the entire gentile world has come to know about the God of the Jews. Still, there it is, fulfilled prophecy in black and white (and sometimes a little red) for all the world to see.

Please support this claim.


Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
In truth, there is absolutely NO evidence at all that any such thing occurred which can be derived from the time the event was supposed to have happened. Nothing! Zero! The story of the risen Jesus provoked not the slightest ripple of historical comment at all, at the time it was supposed to have occurred. The very earliest mention of the resurrected Jesus on record does not occur until roughly a quarter of a century after the time that the event was supposed to have occurred. And this account was provided by an individual who clearly never met the living Jesus, and who was not personally present to witness the event he is describing.

I find it even more amazing that because of an insignificant Preacher who was executed after three short years of ministry, the world got flipped on its head. Under those circumstances, you can span human history from the beginning of the world to date and you'll never top that.

One might well make the very same claim for the prophet Mohammad, an uneducated man who, starting with only his wife, converted much of the middle east to the religion of Islam. And of course there is the Buddha to consider, who accomplished much the same feat in India and south Asia. Joseph Smith accomplished much the same thing in the nineteenth century. Some 15 million Mormons today. Surprising, yes. Unusual, yes. Unprecedented, no.

Quote:
Tired of the Nonsense said,
Is there reason to dismiss this account? Well, is a corpse coming back to life, and ultimately flying away, a reasonable claim?

It is, when you consider because of the account, they paid for it with their lives. Of course, it's possible they did have another motive. Maybe they were smoking crack.

Again, please supply the factual basis for this claim, chapter and verse.

Lol...uh, no dude (or dudette.) You do the leg work. I've already satisfied my curiosity. (Just one piece of advice...look at many sources...and I'll see you in a couple years.

Smoke and mirrors will not hide the fact, so obvious for all to see, that you are folding your tent and running away. This is a forum rule:

5. Support your assertions/arguments with evidence. Do not persist in making a claim without supporting it. All unsupported claims can be challenged for supporting evidence. Opinions require no support, but they should not be considered as valid to any argument, nor will they be considered as legitimate support for any claim.

When the going gets tough, very often the opposition takes a powder. This is particularly true of Christians on this forum.

Lmao! I'm fine with violating a forum rule if it means not having to do your homework. Be it known to all here and now...I concede to Tired of the Nonsenses' s superiortity. (Btw...i love your screen name.)

[Tired of the Nonsense]

[Replying to Thruit]

Lmao! I'm fine with violating a forum rule if it means not having to do your homework. Be it known to all here and now...I concede to Tired of the Nonsenses' s superiortity. (Btw...i love your screen name.)

I don't need to do any homework. I was asking YOU questions I already know the answer to. Like asking for chapter and verse examples of Jesus in the OT. Jesus is mentioned nowhere in the OT, as any practicing Jewish person will happily confirm for you. It's their book after all. And asking for examples of the many and various eyewitness testimonies to the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. Such testimonies simply do not exist. And the baseless assertion, so unfailingly common among Christians, that the apostles and earliest followers of Jesus uniformly underwent violent and painful deaths in defense of their beliefs. Chapter 7 of Acts tells of the stoning death of an early follower of Jesus named Stephen. Chapter 12 of Acts tells of the beheading of the apostle James, brother of John, at the hands of Herod Agrippa. That's the extent of the violent deaths inflicted on the apostles and early disciples which is to be found in scripture. Chapter 12 also tells the story of the apostle Peter being arrested and jailed. Peter subsequently escapes and immediately finds it convenient to depart "into another place." (Acts 12:17) He fled Jerusalem. And at this point the other original apostles also found it convenient to "depart for other places" as well. They in fact virtually disappear from the story, although Peter does subsequently return. But after chapter 12 Acts becomes almost entirely the Paul story. Scripture does not tell us what became of the remaining apostles. Stories of their various martyrdoms are nothing more then examples of Christian make believe and folk lore derived from later centuries of Christian believers at work.

The sort of make believe and folk lore we see you hard at work spreading even now.

[Thruit]

Tired of the Nonsense said,
I don't need to do any homework. I was asking YOU questions I already know the answer to. Like asking for chapter and verse examples of Jesus in the OT. Jesus is mentioned nowhere in the OT, as any practicing Jewish person will happily confirm for you. It's their book after all. And asking for examples of the many and various eyewitness testimonies to the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. Such testimonies simply do not exist. And the baseless assertion, so unfailingly common among Christians, that the apostles and earliest followers of Jesus uniformly underwent violent and painful deaths in defense of their beliefs. Chapter 7 of Acts tells of the stoning death of an early follower of Jesus named Stephen. Chapter 12 of Acts tells of the beheading of the apostle James, brother of John, at the hands of Herod Agrippa. That's the extent of the violent deaths inflicted on the apostles and early disciples which is to be found in scripture. Chapter 12 also tells the story of the apostle Peter being arrested and jailed. Peter subsequently escapes and immediately finds it convenient to depart "into another place." (Acts 12:17) He fled Jerusalem. And at this point the other original apostles also found it convenient to "depart for other places" as well. They in fact virtually disappear from the story, although Peter does subsequently return. But after chapter 12 Acts becomes almost entirely the Paul story. Scripture does not tell us what became of the remaining apostles. Stories of their various martyrdoms are nothing more then examples of Christian make believe and folk lore derived from later centuries of Christian believers at work.

The sort of make believe and folk lore we see you hard at work spreading even now.

Again..HEAR YE HEAR YE...ANYONE DESIRING TO KNOW THE TRUTH OF THE HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY, PLEASE SEE TIRED OF THE NONSENSE! (Or, just go do your own homework.)

[JoeyKnothead]

From the OP:

If you discovered that Christianity is false, would you be happy, or disappointed.

Disappointed.

And why?

My sins are my own, and some of them hens I commited 'em with, and the thought of some dude getting strung up on a cross in the long ago, for what it is I do in the here today, is a grossly repugnant idea borne of minds incapable of thinking beyond their own self-agrandizin'.

"Jesus died for your sins!"

"Good, 'cause I got me a heapin' pile of 'em I ain't even done yet!"

[dianaiad]

Lmao! I'm fine with violating a forum rule if it means not having to do your homework. Be it known to all here and now...I concede to Tired of the Nonsenses' s superiortity. (Btw...i love your screen name.)

Again..HEAR YE HEAR YE...ANYONE DESIRING TO KNOW THE TRUTH OF THE HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY, PLEASE SEE TIRED OF THE NONSENSE! (Or, just go do your own homework.)

Lol...uh, no dude (or dudette.) You do the leg work. I've already satisfied my curiosity. (Just one piece of advice...look at many sources...and I'll see you in a couple years.


Moderator Comment


One line comments such as these do not advance the conversation...and one line comments that, in effect, say that you will refuse to back up a claim you made is not helpful. As well, at least one of these may certainly be seen as sarcasm and an uncivil.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Thruit]

[Replying to dianaiad]

Noted.