 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Dodge / Dodge Trucks / May 2006Gas boycott? You gotta be kidding!!
People are trying to organize a gas boycott imo a waste of time. Listen to this, it tells it why it won't work. www.freepressinternational.com/legal-boston-spader-james People don't really give a damn. Roy > People are trying to organize a gas boycott imo a waste of time. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Roy The link is screwed up. Click on freepressinternational then type in boston legal in the search box. A thing of James Spader should come up. Roy Don't need to read it.... ...it all boils down to the nation as a whole reducing our consumption and dependence on the product. Boycotts won't effect the price of fuel unless it's a boycott of OPEC imho.  Signature------------------------------------------ Laszlo Almasi ----Cool Toys (formerly Carolina Watercraft Works) ----Mack Daddy Trailers ----Ice Angels >> People are trying to organize a gas boycott imo a waste of time. >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Roy > Don't need to read it.... You should , it is a video and is on the money. > ...it all boils down to the nation as a whole reducing our > consumption and dependence on the product. Boycotts > won't effect the price of fuel unless it's a boycott of OPEC > imho. No, it won't work because we as a people don't give a sh.t. I'm going to borrow some of the points on the video. not to be political. We went to war under false pretenes's, no wmd's . Nobody is that pissed off. We now send prisinors to other countries to be totrured, that's okay. We hold suspects for years without charges or trial, that's okay. If you demonstrate and are not in favor of the governments position or policy you are put someplace else to demonstrate, if you are in favor you can stay, thats okay. Notice that our government has banned all pictures of the flag drapped coffins coming home, that's okay. The government is and has been doing massive surrvalience on americans, wiretaps, the whole thing, that's okay. The New Oleans screw up that is ongoing, of course that's not mentioned anymore, thats okay. We have imho, as country stuck our collective heads in the sand. We really don't give a damn!! Roy >> Don't need to read it.... > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Roy Roy, my friend, quoting political comments can only be done as a political statement. But who's fault is it that the US doesn't care anymore? Who killed God and /or kicked Him and His values out of society? What generation decided there were too many laws then expects the government to hand them everything, run everything? And don't forget, most of the data on WMD's came from the previous administration. The rest is the wonderful society OUR generation wanted. So, who's fault is it? Budd >Who killed God and /or kicked Him and His values out of society? Funny ... Bush has been ramming religious fanatical f.cks into the Whitehouse since he took office. Things are worse, IMO. The answer to the worlds problems is NOT further intolerence. Hence, religion has no place in government. Separation of church and state is a beautiful thing. Why do I think Americans don't care anymore? We're tired. Tired of fighting/policing the world, tired of the same ole sh.t from greedy politicians that have questionable motives, tired of religious intolerance ("I have the truth ... you don't, so you're going to hell or wherever"). We just want to work, pay our dues and pursue happiness. That is our *right* afterall, as indicated by our very own Declaration of Independence: ... life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. History lesson: religion causes war and intolerance rather than preventing it. Sorry Bud, I enjoy your posts ... but not everyone agrees with your vision of why the world, particularly the U.S., is in the sh.tter. >So, who's fault is it? Our own. For electing the wrong people to do an important job. Our own. For not demanding that the people in those elected positions be held responsible for their actions. Our own. For being (50% of us) too lazy to go vote. Craig C. > Separation of church and state is > a beautiful thing. Some people seem to believe that seperation of church and state is mandated by the constitution. Yes, and they usually don't realize it only means the federal government cannot legally establish a "Church of the United States". How ya doing, Miles? SignatureBudd Cochran >> Separation of church and state is >> a beautiful thing. > > Some people seem to believe that seperation of church and state is > mandated by the constitution. > Yes, and they usually don't realize it only means the federal government > cannot legally establish a "Church of the United States". Yep. Can't make a law for or against religion. Which means government can't support one religion over another. It does not say a thing about separation of church and state. Although in practice I think separation is needed. I don't see a thing wrong with the 10 commandments on a wall at a school etc. But I understand why its gotta be removed. Otherwise they have to allow any other religious symbols to be displayed. It could get out of hand. > How ya doing, Miles? Doing pretty good. >> Yes, and they usually don't realize it only means the federal government >> cannot legally establish a "Church of the United States". [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Doing pretty good. I have no objection to that but I'd rather see all theories and beliefs concerning the universe taught equally. Creation along with evolution, then let the kids decide when they get older for themselves. Besides, as long as there are tests in schools, there will be prayer in schools. Budd > I have no objection to that but I'd rather see all theories and beliefs > concerning the universe taught equally. Creation along with evolution, then > let the kids decide when they get older for themselves. Difficult to do since there are so many different religions in the world. The government can't choose one to teach. Calling it intelligent design is just an attempt at being politically correct but changes nothing. If one wishes to learn about religion then they should choose whichever one suits them and learn on their own. I think its a bad idea to give the role of teaching religion to government. >> I have no objection to that but I'd rather see all theories and beliefs >> concerning the universe taught equally. Creation along with evolution, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > suits them and learn on their own. I think its a bad idea to give the > role of teaching religion to government. My point exactly, Miles. There is insufficient proof of evolution, that is too many gaps and jumps, that in the end, to believe in evolution requires one to "believe in the unproven" or as the Bible puts it, "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. (Hebrews 11:1)" or in other words, it becomes a religion. And why are schools teaching a religion? IOW, don't have them teach either of them. Science, true science, is found in observed facts and evidence. You mix hydrochloric acid and sodium bicarbonate and you get carbon dioxide gas. That's observable, provable. A few scattered fragments of fossilized bone over a 5 square mile area (Lucy), found on different strata, and untested for DNA compatibility, CANNOT be considered evidence of a human ancestor WITHOUT A HUGE AMOUNT OF FAITH. The Piltdown Man was developed from a single BOAR'S tooth, fer crying out loud. The Brontosaurus is no more because the wrong head was placed on the skeleton . . a head from more than a hundred yards away . . .just to make the claim of having a complete skeleton. IMHO, and the opinion of many scholars, evolution requires more faith than Christianity because the fossil evidence we see today FITS the Creation story perfectly. An example: I'm sitting in my home and if I look at any of the sandstone layers around me, there are NO riverbeds in the layers, not even a small brook bed, but according to evolution, I should be seeing grooves filled with later, convoluted-to-fit, deposits ...well, the geologists say I'm looking at 40+ million years of time in those stones . . .where's the years of runoff and erosion? But, if you look at the stone layers as having been deposited in 40 days and nights, compacted by the weight of water which then ran off in huge flows big enough to carve the Grand Canyon in hours, then it all fits perfectly, no gaps. Yes, I was exposed to the early theories of evolution in school and they didn't make sense then, they don't make sense now. Budd >>> I have no objection to that but I'd rather see all theories and beliefs >>> concerning the universe taught equally. Creation along with evolution, [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > >*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com *** Maybe you should sit on your porch at night and look up. If one in a million of those stars up there has a planet going around it and one in a million of those stars has a planet that orbits in the sweet spot that can support life and one in a million of those stars planets has some form of life and one in a million of those stars planets has inteligent life then there is more intelligent life out there than you can count! beekeep ) > On Thu, 4 May 2006 14:50:32 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 72 lines] > > beekeep Greg, If you could find a book of history, geology, law, theology, science, prophecy and philosophy verified by hundreds of experts to be more than 99% accurate, would you read it? I have. It says there is no life on other planets. Budd >) > [quoted text clipped - 80 lines] >prophecy and philosophy verified by hundreds of experts to be more than 99% >accurate, would you read it? reading comic books again budd? >I have. It says there is no life on other planets. well............that answers my first question. >Budd > >*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com *** >>) >> [quoted text clipped - 104 lines] > > well............that answers my first question. What question? All I read was a snide remark from one that seeks to destroy me. Btw, you do know they're using comic books to train surgical students, didn't you? Look it up. SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) > If you could find a book of history, geology, law, theology, science, > prophecy and philosophy verified by hundreds of experts to be more than 99% > accurate, would you read it? > > I have. It says there is no life on other planets. It was written by man over 1500 years ago when knowledge of the universe was completely an unknown. If that is what you believe, then it's always going to be a collection of useless words. But remember, it's what _you_ believe about it, not me. To me, the whole Bible is a completed work and no part stands alone, not one verse. The whole book means much to me. Take care of you and yours, my friend. SignatureBudd Cochran >> If you could find a book of history, geology, law, theology, science, >> prophecy and philosophy verified by hundreds of experts to be more than [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > It was written by man over 1500 years ago when knowledge of the universe > was completely an unknown. > If that is what you believe, then it's always going to be a collection of > useless words. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > The whole book means much to me. Other religious books around the world mean much to others but are in conflict with your book. Then there are the dead religions of long gone civilizations. Those religions were well developed and existed for 1000's of years before dying off. Why is this current religion any different? > If that is what you believe, then it's always going to be a collection of > useless words. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > The whole book means much to me. That's understandable Budd. I envy you even though I disagree. I've been on a "on again, off again" mission for the truth for over 30 yrs. The answers I've found do not provide comfort. Try this link: http://www.carm.org/ SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> If that is what you believe, then it's always going to be a collection of >> useless words. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > I've > found do not provide comfort. >Try this link: > >http://www.carm.org/ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ i am not familiar with this site, so i took a look. some interesting stuff there. " CARM is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization whose purpose is to equip Christians and refute error. It is well documented. Come here and learn about false teachings such as Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Islam, the New Age, etc., as well as provide counter arguments for evolution, atheism, relativism, abortion...and much more." "There are other non-Christian groups mentioned on CARM and many more are in the works. But please examine CARM and compare it to Scripture. See whether or not it is biblical. See if CARM preaches the true doctrine of God, salvation, regeneration, etc. Don't just believe everything you read." ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ now.....that last sentence may be one to focus on when going to this site. the "owner" of the site is mathew slick..... "While there are a few sites which give detailed counterarguments to Slick's articles on CARM's website [2] [3], most complaints about Slick are voiced in connection with discussions with him on the moderated forums operated on CARM. On those forums, Slick has been accused of censorship by excluding forum users that he asserts have been in violation of CARM's rules, but who believe he is attempting to diminish opposition to Evangelical beliefs through moderation. These users also have issues with Slick's general conduct in discussions with non-Evangelicals. An especially heated debate over alleged censorship originated in 2001 when Slick closed down the Universalist board in his forums and banned all discussion of Universalism from his other boards, citing examples of derogatory statements by the Universalists.[4][5] Meanwhile some of the excluded users have moved to other discussion boards to voice their views, including those regarding Slick. In 2004, one user, John W. Ratcliff created the alternative, unmoderated forum AARM to allow atheists and other former users of CARM to speak without constraint. Some aspects of Slick's apologetic materials have been critically discussed by Douglas Cowan in his sociological survey of the Christian countercult movement. Slick claims to have left a message offering to discuss the issues with Cowan in person, and to have not received a response. [6]" an intersting article by mr. slick: http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/predestination/predestination_slick.htm or about mr. slick http://www.shields-research.org/Critics/CARM.htm http://www.mslick.com/believe.htm Here's from the site's FAQ: http://www.carm.org/index/faq.htm SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> If that is what you believe, then it's always going to be a collection of >> useless words. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > I've > found do not provide comfort. >> Maybe you should sit on your porch at night and look up. If one in a >> million of [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > >*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com *** So then your "God" isn't powerful enough to create life elsewhere? beekeep > On Thu, 4 May 2006 17:46:49 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > beekeep He is, but He chose to make you, me and everyone else special to Him. Budd >Greg, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Budd And why didn't you inform our government of this BEFORE they spent all those millions building radio telescopes? FWIW 500+ years ago most books by the experts stated that the earth was flat. beekeep > On Thu, 4 May 2006 17:46:49 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > beekeep Columbus used the Bible to discover the world wasn't flat. Where do you think he got the idea from? The scientists that built those radio telescopes are among those that reject the Bible. Ok, what's the matter, Greg? If living my beliefs bothers you so much, I'm sorry. If you have questions, I'm happy to answer them, but please don't make it sound like Christianity is all my fault. It's God's. Budd >> On Thu, 4 May 2006 17:46:49 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom >> SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >The scientists that built those radio telescopes are among those that reject >the Bible. touch over-breadth here. not that you are not on friendly terms with over generalization.......but this is a load even for you. >Ok, what's the matter, Greg? If living my beliefs bothers you so much, I'm >sorry. If you have questions, I'm happy to answer them, but please don't >make it sound like Christianity is all my fault. It's God's. not living your beliefs. you can live your beliefs and i think we would all support that. the problem is that you don't live your beleifs. your behavior flies in the face of what you preach..........i believe the accurate word would be hypocracy.............and you tend to talk your beliefs a whole lot and live them not at all. that is what is so ridiculous about you. i see that in a lot of fundamentalists (not all, but a lot). they like to talk their game..........sort of a moral superiority thing..............then turn around and act much differently to everyone that doesn't immediately accept their moral superiority. >Budd > >*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com *** > Columbus used the Bible to discover the world wasn't flat. Where do you > think he got the idea from? Columbus went against the religious zealots in saying the world wasn't flat. Others went against the religious folks to say the earth was not the center of the universe and it revolved around the sun. They were punished for going against the church, not the other way around. It was the church that was wrong. >> Columbus used the Bible to discover the world wasn't flat. Where do you >> think he got the idea from? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > punished for going against the church, not the other way around. It was > the church that was wrong. Did I deny the church was wrong? No. Columbus read the Bible for himself. He found the world wasn't flat in those pages. That's why I'm not Catholic, Mormon, Jehovah's Witness, Seventh Day Adventist, or any other denomination that says they have special interpretation of Scriptures. I'm a non-denominational Christian. Budd >>> Columbus used the Bible to discover the world wasn't flat. Where do you >>> think he got the idea from? [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >I'm a non-denominational Christian. oh that's what you are? i was wondering about that. thanks for letting everyone know beause i thought...........oh never mind. >Budd > >*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com *** >>That's why I'm not Catholic, Mormon, Jehovah's Witness, Seventh Day >>Adventist, or any other denomination that says they have special [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >>Budd The "Church of what's happening now." beekeep > Columbus read the Bible for himself. He found the world wasn't flat in those > pages. What passage mentions the world as being round? None, it is called interpretation and can magically bend to fit the facts at hand. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > > > Columbus read the Bible for himself. He found the world wasn't flat in those > > pages. > > What passage mentions the world as being round? >> Columbus read the Bible for himself. He found the world wasn't flat in those >> pages. > >What passage mentions the world as being round? Genesis. On the first day God made a big mud ball and called it earth and it was good. beekeep Let me have a day or so to check, but till then here's a bit of info you may find interesting http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/columbus/columbus.shtml Ol Chris wasn't the only one to think the world was round. SignatureBudd Cochran >> Columbus read the Bible for himself. He found the world wasn't flat in >> those pages. > > What passage mentions the world as being round? >Let me have a day or so to check, but till then here's a bit of info you may >find interesting >http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/columbus/columbus.shtml > >Ol Chris wasn't the only one to think the world was round. readers digest has a web site that you should find very useful. "Ol Chris"? man you are old, didn't know you were on a first name basis with him. ta ta. > Let me have a day or so to check, but till then here's a bit of info you may > find interesting > http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/columbus/columbus.shtml > > Ol Chris wasn't the only one to think the world was round. Oh thats true. There were many people with differing views from the church at the time. But they had to keep quiet. Those that didn't were punished severely. The church was the government and whatever they said was law. Thats why separation of church and state is so important. >> And why didn't you inform our government of this BEFORE they spent all >> those [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >Budd I couldn't care less if you believed in Hobbits, Peter Pan, and little fairies. That's your choice. Personally I think that Christian mythology and other religions are for those that can't accept that when you die there is no hereafter. beekeep Then why the vicious remarks? SignatureBudd Cochran >>> And why didn't you inform our government of this BEFORE they spent all >>> those [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > beekeep >Then why the vicious remarks? Vicious? beekeep Vicious. Mean spirited, not friendly. SignatureBudd Cochran > On Sat, 6 May 2006 18:14:18 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > beekeep >Vicious. Mean spirited, not friendly. I know what it means. I didn't think anyone fit the discription. beekeep I'm sorry, Greg, but what you were writing was sounding more like "T-bone" than "Beekeeper" type wording. SignatureBudd Cochran > On Sun, 7 May 2006 05:54:35 -0600, "Budd Cochran" <mr-d150@preciscom > SPAM.net> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > beekeep >I'm sorry, Greg, but what you were writing was sounding more like "T-bone" >than "Beekeeper" type wording. yes, a very "christian" thing to say. actually, for a born again christian, you come across very unchristian like. >>Greg, >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >beekeep lol. yeah, crap he could saved us a lot of money and he sure could have saved tom cruise a lot of bad publicity if he's just let them in on this. > Maybe you should sit on your porch at night and look up. If one in a million of > those stars up there has a planet going around it and one in a million of those > stars has a planet that orbits in the sweet spot that can support life and one > in a million of those stars planets has some form of life and one in a million > of those stars planets has inteligent life then there is more intelligent life > out there than you can count! Not to mention the fact that the light from many of those stars traveled for well over the 8,000 years that the universe is said to have existed. Have you not heard that scientists have changed the speed of light? They've brought it to a complete stop. Mere little human beings. Now, how hard would it be for a truly Omnipotent God to: A) create light already on it's way or B) speed up light? SignatureBudd Cochran John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." (John Adams) >> Maybe you should sit on your porch at night and look up. If one in a >> million of [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Not to mention the fact that the light from many of those stars traveled > for well over the 8,000 years that the universe is said to have existed. > Have you not heard that scientists have changed the speed of light? They've > brought it to a complete stop. Mere little human beings. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > B) speed up light? Scientists have only slowed the speed of light, not stopped it. The amount it was slowed was a fraction of a billionth of a second. That was a test done in the past couple years. But all you seem to ever do is use God to explain what you otherwise can't. Civilizations have done that for eternity. However, some things that were once credited to the Gods have been easily explained by modern science. If you went back in time with todays technology you would appear to people as a God. > Scientists have only slowed the speed of light, not stopped it. The > amount it was slowed was a fraction of a billionth of a second. That > was a test done in the past couple years. Not that it has anything to do with religion or gas boycotts they slowed the speed of light down to about 38 mph. http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/1999/02.18/light.html SignatureKen Now that is really cool. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > > > Scientists have only slowed the speed of light, not stopped it. The [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > speed of light down to about 38 mph. > http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/1999/02.18/light.html > Now that is really cool. I'd say it's downright cold. -459.7° F. The University of Colorado has an excellent interactive learning website that shows you how they did it. http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000/bec/ At the bottom of the page click the "Next" button to begin. SignatureKen >> Have you not heard that scientists have changed the speed of light? >> They've brought it to a complete stop. Mere little human beings. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > amount it was slowed was a fraction of a billionth of a second. That was > a test done in the past couple years. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1124540.stm http://www.sciencentral.com/articles/view.php3?type=article&article_id=218392702 And I can come up with ten or more pages of the same. > But all you seem to ever do is use God to explain what you otherwise > can't. Civilizations have done that for eternity. However, some things > that were once credited to the Gods have been easily explained by modern > science. If you went back in time with todays technology you would appear > to people as a God. I see . . .I am not allowed to use my faith and beliefs to explain things. That's fine, as long as you don't use evolution, big bang, or any of that to explain your side. I suggest we end the conversation before it gets into an argument. If neither of us can use the sources we believe in, there's nothing to say. Budd > I see . . .I am not allowed to use my faith and beliefs to explain things. > That's fine, as long as you don't use evolution, big bang, or any of that to > explain your side. You have explained nothing. You just say more or less...Hmm, I dunno, God musta done that. Ya, thats the ticket. Budd, I fully respect your right to believe as you wish. It works for you. Thats great. I have not used evolution to explain my side. I do not know what the real truth is. Nobody does. Not you, nor anyone else. We are all very lacking in knowledge when it comes to our own existence. You believe you know the truth. Trouble is, many others in the world claim that too but their God is the real truth to them, yours isn't and vis-versa. >> I see . . .I am not allowed to use my faith and beliefs to explain >> things. That's fine, as long as you don't use evolution, big bang, or any [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > claim that too but their God is the real truth to them, yours isn't and > vis-versa. Miles, yes, I am biased towards the first century Christian beliefs, but please remember this: there are fewer copies of the works of Plato, Socrates, etc. still around than there are of early manuscripts and copies of the Bible. Those copies of the works of the philosophers are less than 80% accurate to each other, yet the philosophers are accepted without reservation. The Holy Bible is more accurate, compared to the earliest manuscripts, even in the modern translations, than those philosophical; works, yet it is rejected without being read. Why is that? Because man, in his pride, doesn't want to risk the possibility of a greater being than man. Yet he comes up with idols to substitute for God. And those that accept their spiritual frailty and seek God are looked upon as weak and losers. Look at how T-bone and theguy treat me if you want a perfect set of examples. In the history of the nation of Israel, when they were closest to God, they prospered. Did they fight wars? yes, but they prospered. When they turned from God, they suffered, led to captivity, enslaved, so on. Christians want the same prosperity for this country and for the world. Go in peace, my friend. I thank you for the intelligent conversation without any name calling or verbal abuse. You are a gentleman and a friend. Budd > The Holy Bible is more accurate, compared to the earliest manuscripts, even > in the modern translations, than those philosophical; works, yet it is > rejected without being read. Accurate? Are you referring to the references of people known to have existed? Of course thats a pretty small world the Bible refers too. Much the same can be said about the other religious books of the world that are in conflict with your own. What is the accuracy of the old testament? Even smaller world talked about in the old testament. Isn't it odd that the Bible (old and new) only reference the known world to the people that wrote it? > Look at how T-bone and theguy treat me if you want > a perfect set of examples. While I agree in general you are not free of being rather judgmental yourself. > In the history of the nation of Israel, when they were closest to God, they > prospered. Did they fight wars? yes, but they prospered. When they turned > from God, they suffered, led to captivity, enslaved, so on. Christians want > the same prosperity for this country and for the world. So everyone in the world must become Christians for world peace to exist? > Go in peace, my friend. I thank you for the intelligent conversation without > any name calling or verbal abuse. You are a gentleman and a friend. As I've said. I do respect anyones right to believe as they wish. I will not tell you that you are wrong. Only that I don't agree with certain aspects of your belief. >> The Holy Bible is more accurate, compared to the earliest manuscripts, >> even in the modern translations, than those philosophical; works, yet it [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > the Bible (old and new) only reference the known world to the people that > wrote it? If that were true, then you would be right, but Simon Greenleaf http://christjesus.us/greenleaf.html set out to prove the historical record of the Resurrection to be false and discovered overwhelming evidence of it's truth. It takes but one (1) eyewitness to gain a conviction in a criminal court, he found 500 traceable, verifiable accounts of eyewitnwesses to the Resurrection. Simon Greenleaf was born Jewish. Old Testament authenticity is easy. Try: The Dead Sea scrolls, for example, that contain much of the Book of Isaiah exactly like the King James Version has it, but in the original Hebrew. Did you try any of the links I posted? Miles, you're not going to find secular sites or info readily to verify the Bible. That would be like a criminal sending notices of his crimes to the cops. Each of those sites has information and will not fill your email box with attempts to convert you. >> Look at how T-bone and theguy treat me if you want a perfect set of >> examples. > > While I agree in general you are not free of being rather judgmental > yourself. Miles, I have a yardstick to measure lengths, a bucket to measure water, and a Bible to measure sins. If I hold the sin measuring device up to myself, it isn't long enough to cover what I've been forgiven for having done. Each of us will be measured by God by that device someday. That is my unshakable belief. >> In the history of the nation of Israel, when they were closest to God, >> they prospered. Did they fight wars? yes, but they prospered. When they >> turned from God, they suffered, led to captivity, enslaved, so on. >> Christians want the same prosperity for this country and for the world. > > So everyone in the world must become Christians for world peace to exist? I give a brief history and I'm saying all need to become Christians? Yes, and no. Yes, I would love for all to become Christians, but I'm realistic enough to remember we have all been given the choice to become Christian or not. I keep finding myself being berated for doing what I'm called to do, Christian apologetics, defending my faith, in a society the brags on it's religious freedoms when someone asks in public forum for my opinion. What I feel like doing is telling you all to "go to Hell" when that happens, but I do care about this big crazy bunch of pixels on a screen, so I try to explain my beliefs, the Bible and so on. >> Go in peace, my friend. I thank you for the intelligent conversation >> without any name calling or verbal abuse. You are a gentleman and a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > not tell you that you are wrong. Only that I don't agree with certain > aspects of your belief. That is your choice. Someday both of us will find out which is right, your way or the Bible's way. > If that were true, then you would be right, but Simon Greenleaf > http://christjesus.us/greenleaf.html set out to prove the historical record > of the Resurrection to be false and discovered overwhelming evidence of it's > truth. It takes but one (1) eyewitness to gain a conviction in a criminal > court, he found 500 traceable, verifiable accounts of eyewitnwesses to the > Resurrection. What year was this? How many of those eyewitnesses did he personally interview? Sorry Budd, there was nothing ever written contemporary to Jesus' time. Nothing. Not one shred of writing has ever been found that was written during Jesus' time. > Old Testament authenticity is easy. Try: The Dead Sea scrolls, for example, > that contain much of the Book of Isaiah exactly like the King James Version > has it, but in the original Hebrew. The stories in the old testament contradict each other. I know you'll argue otherwise but it's pretty clear. Each one tells the same story but with differing facts. > Did you try any of the links I posted? Miles, you're not going to find > secular sites or info readily to verify the Bible. Kinda makes you and your links a tad biased if you ignore such other sites and their findings. > I give a brief history and I'm saying all need to become Christians? Yes, > and no. Yes, I would love for all to become Christians, but I'm realistic > enough to remember we have all been given the choice to become Christian or > not. I keep finding myself being berated for doing what I'm called to do, > Christian apologetics, defending my faith, in a society the brags on it's > religious freedoms when someone asks in public forum for my opinion. Christianity is not the only religion on this planet. It isn't even the oldest. Other religions must constantly defend their religions against Christians such as yourself. You get upset that you have to defend your religion when others must defend theirs against you and your beliefs. > What I feel like doing is telling you all to "go to Hell" when that happens, > but I do care about this big crazy bunch of pixels on a screen, so I try to > explain my beliefs, the Bible and so on. Now that is exactly the point me and others have made. I have never ever told you or any other Christian to go to hell or even felt like doing so. It is the religious that all too often are the ones that lack tolerance. > That is your choice. Someday both of us will find out which is right, your > way or the Bible's way. That is true. Unfortunately nobody that does find out has ever been able to tell others that haven't yet. >> If that were true, then you would be right, but Simon Greenleaf >> http://christjesus.us/greenleaf.html set out to prove the historical [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Jesus' time. Nothing. Not one shred of writing has ever been found that > was written during Jesus' time. Yes, there was. Josephus, Roman historian and a Jew, was alive at a time when many eyewitnesses were still alive. He is just one of many sources. Look at the sites, Miles. >> Old Testament authenticity is easy. Try: The Dead Sea scrolls, for >> example, that contain much of the Book of Isaiah exactly like the King [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > argue otherwise but it's pretty clear. Each one tells the same story but > with differing facts. No, they don't. Secular interpretations about them conflict each other. Look at the sites. >> Did you try any of the links I posted? Miles, you're not going to find >> secular sites or info readily to verify the Bible. > > Kinda makes you and your links a tad biased if you ignore such other sites > and their findings. Find one for me, Miles, and I'll look at it. I've looked for years in an effort to answer folks like yourself that reject Christian sources out of hand simply because they are, as you call them, "Biased". >> I give a brief history and I'm saying all need to become Christians? Yes, >> and no. Yes, I would love for all to become Christians, but I'm realistic [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Christians such as yourself. You get upset that you have to defend your > religion when others must defend theirs against you and your beliefs. Are you saying you're completely happy about this discussion? It's been made quite clear that it bothers you and others that I: A) express my faith. ( the fact I get grilled about it for mentioning it is the evidence) B) quote Scripture ( the fact that I'm told how wrong the Bible has to be, when the provable evidence is to the contrary) C) that I'm considereed to be ( select at least one: hateful, bigoted, an idiot, crazy, intolerant, etc.) when I mention my faith. >> What I feel like doing is telling you all to "go to Hell" when that >> happens, but I do care about this big crazy bunch of pixels on a screen, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > told you or any other Christian to go to hell or even felt like doing so. > It is the religious that all too often are the ones that lack tolerance. No, that point is never made. Points about my supposed intolerance, etc. are dumped all over me, blame for every war or killing since day one is blamed on the Christian faith I believe in, but not a single one of you post any links that prove EMPIRICALLY that Christianity is false. But some do like the opportunity to call me names, I've noticed. >> That is your choice. Someday both of us will find out which is right, >> your way or the Bible's way. > > That is true. Unfortunately nobody that does find out has ever been able > to tell others that haven't yet. My point exactly. Except, there is the case of Jesus. He said there was a Heaven and He's preparing a place for those that believe on Him. Josephus recorded the testimonies of eyewitnesses to that Resurrection, Miles. Budd > Yes, there was. Josephus, Roman historian and a Jew, was alive at a time > when many eyewitnesses were still alive. He is just one of many sources. > Look at the sites, Miles. Wrong. Josephus wasn't even alive during Jesus time. Josephus is thought to have been born in 37AD and died around 100AD. His Jewish Antiquities was published in 93AD. While his child years were in Israel most of his 20's and 30's were not. His first works were written while he was living in Flavian court in Rome around 73AD. His other books were written while he was in his 50's. Much of his work was just a rewrite of the Hebrew Bible. Yes he could have met with witnesses but then the story is 2nd or 3rd hand news. I repeat, not one thing was ever written during Jesus time about Jesus. Nor was anything written by anyone who ever met Jesus. Not one. > Find one for me, Miles, and I'll look at it. I've looked for years in an > effort to answer folks like yourself that reject Christian sources out of > hand simply because they are, as you call them, "Biased". So why do you reject any non-Christian sources and say they are always wrong? They are wrong only because they differ from your own views. Some contradictions for you. There are 100's. Ya, some could be interpretation but so called scholars do not agree on such. Some contradictions are not interpretation differences. They are cut and dry dates, numbers, names that are in blatant contradiction to one another. Man was created after the plants. Gen.1:12, 26. Man was created before the plants. Gen.2:5-9. Adam was to die the day he ate the forbidden fruit. Gen.2:17. Adam lived 930 years. Gen.5:5. Bashemath was a daughter of Elon the Hittite. Gen.26:34. Bashemath was a daughter of Ishmael. Gen.36:3. After Aaron's death, the people journeyed from Mt. Hor to Zalmonah to Punon etc. Num.33:41, 42. After Aaron's death, the people journeyed from Mosera to Gudgodah to Jotbath. Deut.10:6, 7. David killed Goliath. 1 Sam.17:49,50. Elhanan killed Goliath. 2 Sam.21:19-21. Baasha died in the 26tth year of King Asa's reign. 1 Ki.16:6-8. Baasha built a city in the 36th year of King Asa's reign. 2 Chr.16:1. > Are you saying you're completely happy about this discussion? It's been made > quite clear that it bothers you and others that I: No I'm not bothered at all. It's interesting discussion. Do I want or expect you to change your views? No way. I fully respect your right to believe as you do. I do not tell you that you are wrong. I only say I disagree and why. Part of discussion. > but not a single one of you post any > links that prove EMPIRICALLY that Christianity is false. How can something intangible be proved false? My neighbors kid has an invisible friend she plays with and blames for things she did wrong. Can you prove this invisible friend isn't real? > My point exactly. Except, there is the case of Jesus. He said there was a > Heaven and He's preparing a place for those that believe on Him. Josephus > recorded the testimonies of eyewitnesses to that Resurrection, Miles. You are relying on what people wrote almost 2000 years ago and assuming anything they wrote must be true. Doesn't it strike you as odd that despite the birth and life of Jesus being such a grand thing that nothing was ever written about him during his time or by anyone who ever met him? >> Yes, there was. Josephus, Roman historian and a Jew, was alive at a time >> when many eyewitnesses were still alive. He is just one of many sources. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > about Jesus. Nor was anything written by anyone who ever met Jesus. Not > one. No, if he interviewed one surviving eyewitness, he reports having spoke to more than one, then you have your first hand account, Miles. For him to report it is no different than hearing about a robbery from a reporter that spoke to an eyewitness. Btw, what is your source for the information about Josephus? Historical records or some anti-Christian website? >> Find one for me, Miles, and I'll look at it. I've looked for years in an >> effort to answer folks like yourself that reject Christian sources out of >> hand simply because they are, as you call them, "Biased". > > So why do you reject any non-Christian sources and say they are always > wrong? They are wrong only because they differ from your own views. Because they don't report anything accurately. It's like the eyewitnesses to the resurrection, Miles, some survived, He interviewed them and wrote it down. The penalty for lying was death, btw. Good old lenient Roman Laws. > Some contradictions for you. There are 100's. Ya, some could be > interpretation but so called scholars do not agree on such. Some [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Man was created after the plants. Gen.1:12, 26. > Man was created before the plants. Gen.2:5-9. http://www.carm.org/diff/Gen_1.htm > Adam was to die the day he ate the forbidden fruit. Gen.2:17. > Adam lived 930 years. Gen.5:5. There was no death in the Garden of Eden for the animal life or for Humans. When he ate he began dying, just like you have been, and so hav e I, since the moiment we hit our physical peaks. > Bashemath was a daughter of Elon the Hittite. Gen.26:34. > Bashemath was a daughter of Ishmael. Gen.36:3. http://www.rae.org/esauswives.html > After Aaron's death, the people journeyed from Mt. Hor to Zalmonah to > Punon etc. Num.33:41, 42. > After Aaron's death, the people journeyed from Mosera to Gudgodah to > Jotbath. Deut.10:6, 7. http://www.lmdev.com/contradictions.asp?id=19 > David killed Goliath. 1 Sam.17:49,50. > Elhanan killed Goliath. 2 Sam.21:19-21. http://www.carm.org/diff/1Sam17_50.htm > Baasha died in the 26tth year of King Asa's reign. 1 Ki.16:6-8. > Baasha built a city in the 36th year of King Asa's reign. 2 Chr.16:1. I need to do a bit of research. >> Are you saying you're completely happy about this discussion? It's been >> made quite clear that it bothers you and others that I: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > invisible friend she plays with and blames for things she did wrong. Can > you prove this invisible friend isn't real? Can you prove God does not exist? Evolution can't, too many gaps. I wish that I could get scientists to do a genetic damage study on that so-called ice-man found in the Alps. I believe we would find his genes significantly less damaged than ours. >> My point exactly. Except, there is the case of Jesus. He said there was a >> Heaven and He's preparing a place for those that believe on Him. Josephus [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > despite the birth and life of Jesus being such a grand thing that nothing > was ever written about him during his time or by anyone who ever met him? Who wrote the gospels, Miles? They were written by the Disciples that walked each day with Him. I'd be suspicious of any anti-religious source that says otherwise. Budd > Btw, what is your source for the information about Josephus? Historical > records or some anti-Christian website? lol, of course if it differs from your views it must have been from an anti-Christian website. My knowledge comes from reading numerous historical records over the years. I do not frequent any particular website either for or against Christianity. > Because they don't report anything accurately. Accurately or per your view? Is it at all possible some of what your beliefs are may not be 100% accurate? Fact remains that not one scrap of information was written by anyone during Jesus time and nothing by anyone who ever met Jesus. For such a huge event as the Bible says I find it very odd that nobody wrote a thing about him during his time. The Romans wrote about everything else during that time. Israel wasn't left out of their writings during that time. >> Baasha died in the 26tth year of King Asa's reign. 1 Ki.16:6-8. >> Baasha built a city in the 36th year of King Asa's reign. 2 Chr.16:1. > > I need to do a bit of research. Your links on the other issues were weak. They tried to explain the discrepancies and generally did a poor job of it. There are several Christian websites with such explanations. However, they themselves differ on how these contradictions can be resolved. It appears to be in the eye of the beholder. People such as yourself refuse to believe there could be contradictions. Therefore you go out of your way to find reasons to explain them to suit your beliefs. You believe as you do, so you will find reasons to make everything fit the mold. > Can you prove God does not exist? Evolution can't, too many gaps. Can you prove God does exist? Evolution doesn't try to prove God doesn't exist. It only shows whats found and what it may mean. It's up to each individual to decide for themselves. I don't feel most of the idea of Evolution or the Big Bang theory contradicts creationism. I don't reject either one, it is you who does. > I wish that I could get scientists to do a genetic damage study on that > so-called ice-man found in the Alps. I believe we would find his genes > significantly less damaged than ours. So that person from the Alps must have been how old to you? > Who wrote the gospels, Miles? They were written by the Disciples that walked > each day with Him. I'd be suspicious of any anti-religious source that says > otherwise. Oh really? What years was the Bible written? How much during Jesus time? How much in say 1 to 30 years following his death? People didn't live much longer. Well 'cept Adam and Moses. >> Btw, what is your source for the information about Josephus? Historical >> records or some anti-Christian website? > > lol, of course if it differs from your views it must have been from an > anti-Christian website. If I believed that, why would I have asked if it was or wasn't Christian? Don't make sterotypical assumptions, Miles. that's the error, T-bone and theguy make and aren't smart enough to realize it. > My knowledge comes from reading numerous historical records over the > years. I do not frequent any particular website either for or against > Christianity. I'd still like to know so I can verify the sources, that's all. >> Because they don't report anything accurately. > > Accurately or per your view? First off, it's not my point of view, Miles. It is what the Bible says on the matter. > Is it at all possible some of what your beliefs are may not be 100% > accurate? I am not a perfect Christian and don't claim to be one. > Fact remains that not one scrap of information was written by anyone > during Jesus time and nothing by anyone who ever met Jesus. Fact is your source may be in error but you don't want to see it. > For such a huge event as the Bible says I find it very odd that nobody > wrote a thing about him during his time. I don't. > The Romans wrote about everything else during that time. Israel wasn't > left out of their writings during that time. It wasn't. Rome, and the records, burned when Nero came to power, not to mention that a Emperor / god could be jealous enough to destroy any records of another god bnefore his time and no one knows for sure except that Josephus and one or two others recorded it. >>> Baasha died in the 26tth year of King Asa's reign. 1 Ki.16:6-8. >>> Baasha built a city in the 36th year of King Asa's reign. 2 Chr.16:1. >> >> I need to do a bit of research. > > Your links on the other issues were weak. I tried to keep them a little less religous for you. > They tried to explain the discrepancies and generally did a poor job of > it. No, they were accurate from a Christian / Jewish perspective. > There are several Christian websites with such explanations. However, > they themselves differ on how these contradictions can be resolved. It > appears to be in the eye of the beholder. People such as yourself refuse > to believe there could be contradictions. Therefore you go out of your > way to find reasons to explain them to suit your beliefs. You believe as > you do, so you will find reasons to make everything fit the mold. There again, the old line, "people like you" rears its bigoted head. >> Can you prove God does not exist? Evolution can't, too many gaps. > > Can you prove God does exist? Yes, but you reject the accuracy of the source. > Evolution doesn't try to prove God doesn't exist. Bull. For example, "Yom", the Hebrew word for "day" means only one thing, a 24 hour day, and that is the word used in Genesis for the 6 days of Creation. Evolution destroys God by claiming "millions of years" even when current discoveries deny it. > It only shows whats found and what it may mean. T-bone and I argued this: a word may be interpreted somewhat different from it's root meaning but if the root meaning fits the context, that is the meaning the writer intended. > It's up to each individual to decide for themselves. In your opinion. > I don't feel most of the idea of Evolution or the Big Bang theory > contradicts creationism. Oh, it does, it really does. I do wish you would look at some of those sites especially "Answers in Genesis". They cover this topic very well and with evidence from the secular scientists. > I don't reject either one, it is you who does. My choice, Miles. >> I wish that I could get scientists to do a genetic damage study on that >> so-called ice-man found in the Alps. I believe we would find his genes >> significantly less damaged than ours. > > So that person from the Alps must have been how old to you? <LOL> SECULAR scientists estimate him to be about 4500 years old, which, according to Scripture would have been after Noah's Flood. >> Who wrote the gospels, Miles? They were written by the Disciples that >> walked each day with Him. I'd be suspicious of any anti-religious source [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > How much in say 1 to 30 years following his death? People didn't live > much longer. Really??? Here's a eye opener for you: we heard for years the Neanderthal man could not have language, Jean Auel's fiction novels emphasise the point in detail . . .then archaeologists found a more complete Neanderthal skeleton with a very tiny bone in the area of the throat, the Hyoid Bone, required for speech. Apes don't have it, dogs, cats and birds don't have it, just Humans. I've worked a large amount around very senior citizens, 85 years old and above, and diet, arthritis will reshaped their skeletal structures until they resemble Neanderthals. Paul was 67 when he was crucified, John the Beloved died on Patmos at age 97. Josephus lived, iirc, till he was 75. Yep, real short lifetimes. . . > Well 'cept Adam and Moses. Methuselah was 969. Enoch didn't die. According to Genesis, "He walked with the Lord all his days and was not." There is no Hebrew term for the holy "taking up" of a person. The closest term in Christian verbiage is "Rapture". Budd > "miles" <nope@nopers.com> wrote in message >> lol, of course if it differs from your views it must have been from an >> anti-Christian website. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Don't make sterotypical assumptions, Miles. that's the error, T-bone and > theguy make and aren't smart enough to realize it. I haven't. You have done it to yourself. You already told me that you do not accept what non-Christian sites say and you gave your reasons as to why. > I'd still like to know so I can verify the sources, that's all. Verify? No, you mean rip apart to make it all fit into your particular beliefs. You will never ever change your views. You do whatever it takes to make it fit your beliefs. > First off, it's not my point of view, Miles. It is what the Bible says on > the matter. Bull. It is your view. Different people read the bible yet have different beliefs than you. It is not the view of the bible, it is your view of the bible. >> Fact remains that not one scrap of information was written by anyone >> during Jesus time and nothing by anyone who ever met Jesus. > > Fact is your source may be in error but you don't want to see it. Prove that anything was ever written during Jesus time by anyone anywhere. > I don't. Why do you not find such a huge event as the Birth and life of Christ as told in the Bible to never have been recorded by anyone? Other major events of lesser importance during that time was recorded. > It wasn't. Rome, and the records, burned when Nero came to power, not to > mention that a Emperor / god could be jealous enough to destroy any records > of another god bnefore his time and no one knows for sure except that > Josephus and one or two others recorded it. Thats partly flawed. Not all records were destroyed. Much of what the Romans and others recorded about times before and after Christ have been found. You telling me that there are no historical records of anything of the region prior to the burning etc? If so, you would be wrong. > There again, the old line, "people like you" rears its bigoted head. You are the one who earlier refered to 'US' in much the same manner with regards to our so called treatment of you. You're being very intolerant and hypocritical. > Yes, but you reject the accuracy of the source. Not so. You can't prove it. A book written by man is not proof of fact. There are other religious books in the world. They too say they are the word of God. Why do you not believe those books to be of equal fact? If they aren't fact then you're saying they were just made up by man. Hmm...same thing they say about your book. Who is the wrong one? Somebody has to be. > Bull. For example, "Yom", the Hebrew word for "day" means only one thing, a > 24 hour day, and that is the word used in Genesis for the 6 days of > Creation. The day or year didn't exist until the earth and sun were formed. The early churches didn't even know the earth revolved around the sun nor that the earth rotated on it's axis. The concept of an hour and why there are 24 hours in a day was not comprehended at the time. > Evolution destroys God by claiming "millions of years" even when current > discoveries deny it. Current discoveries have not shown the earth to be only 6,000-8,000 years old. Not even close. > Oh, it does, it really does. I do wish you would look at some of those sites > especially "Answers in Genesis". They cover this topic very well and with > evidence from the secular scientists. Spun to fit the story as told. As I said, people will go out of their way to bend what they see to fit what they believe. They will never change what they believe. The most notable is when something major happens some religious group makes a statement about how that event is what the Bible talks about. They make it fit because thats their belief. > Paul was 67 when he was crucified, John the Beloved died on Patmos at age > 97. Josephus lived, iirc, till he was 75. Yep, real short lifetimes. . . That is not old enough to have written anything by someone who met Jesus. I ask you again, when was the Bible written? What years? Jesus died around 36AD although different scholars seem to come up with different years. Josephus wasn't even born till 37AD. How much of the Bible was written before 100AD? Thats assuming someone knew Jesus late in his life when they were in their 20's and lived into their 80's and wrote some of the Bible. I'm just asking you who lived and met Jesus, and wrote substantial portions of the bible, and in what years did they do so. How old were they when they knew Jesus and how old were they when they died? >> "miles" <nope@nopers.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > not accept what non-Christian sites say and you gave your reasons as to > why. No, I said I question the motives of non-Christian sites. Most have but one purpose: to destroy Christianity. >> I'd still like to know so I can verify the sources, that's all. > > Verify? No, you mean rip apart to make it all fit into your particular > beliefs. You will never ever change your views. You do whatever it takes > to make it fit your beliefs. No, Miles, "verify": their intent, their accuracy. >> First off, it's not my point of view, Miles. It is what the Bible says on >> the matter. > > Bull. It is your view. Different people read the bible yet have > different beliefs than you. It is not the view of the bible, it is your > view of the bible. Ok, whatever. >>> Fact remains that not one scrap of information was written by anyone >>> during Jesus time and nothing by anyone who ever met Jesus. >> >> Fact is your source may be in error but you don't want to see it. > > Prove that anything was ever written during Jesus time by anyone anywhere. Prove none of the Disciples wrote / dictated their gospel. >> I don't. > > Why do you not find such a huge event as the Birth and life of Christ as > told in the Bible to never have been recorded by anyone? Other major > events of lesser importance during that time was recorded. It was recorded, you reject the record based on some false claim of the historian licved too long after the fact. I give you provable infomation links then don't utilize them... And for your information, I do read and evaluate non-Christian sites . . . know thy enemy. >> It wasn't. Rome, and the records, burned when Nero came to power, not to >> mention that a Emperor / god could be jealous enough to destroy any [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > found. You telling me that there are no historical records of anything of > the region prior to the burning etc? If so, you would be wrong. I'm not the one denying the availability of records, Miles. That is you. >> There again, the old line, "people like you" rears its bigoted head. > > You are the one who earlier refered to 'US' in much the same manner with > regards to our so called treatment of you. You're being very intolerant > and hypocritical. I was referring to the way non-Christians of all persuasions blame everything on Christians in general. >> Yes, but you reject the accuracy of the source. > > Not so. You can't prove it. A book written by man is not proof of fact. Then a copy of the works of Plato written 800- 900 years after his lifetime would be worthless, right? The manuscripts and copies of manuscripts for the Bible were written less than 100 years after the Resurrection. Which is more likely to be accurate? > There are other religious books in the world. They too say they are the > word of God. Why do you not believe those books to be of equal fact? If > they aren't fact then you're saying they were just made up by man. > Hmm...same thing they say about your book. Who is the wrong one? Somebody > has to be. I'm not talking about them. >> Bull. For example, "Yom", the Hebrew word for "day" means only one thing, >> a 24 hour day, and that is the word used in Genesis for the 6 days of >> Creation. > > The day or year didn't exist until the earth and sun were formed. Limiting the power and abilities of God? God is outside of time. "In the beginning, the earth was without form and void. And God said, "Let there be Light." > The early churches didn't even know the earth revolved around the sun nor > that the earth rotated on it's axis. <LOL> Miles, did the early peoples know the Earth was round or not? Could they also have known the Heliocentricity of the Solar Syatem? > The concept of an hour and why there are 24 hours in a day was not > comprehended at the time. You were there? >> Evolution destroys God by claiming "millions of years" even when current >> discoveries deny it. > > Current discoveries have not shown the earth to be only 6,000-8,000 years > old. Not even close. Radiometeric dating has one major flaw; there's too much radioactivity. For the Universe to be as old as claimed, there couldn't be any radoactivity to speak of. Doubt me? Check out the half-life period of C-14, the archaeological favorite. >> Oh, it does, it really does. I do wish you would look at some of those >> sites especially "Answers in Genesis". They cover this topic very well [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > religious group makes a statement about how that event is what the Bible > talks about. They make it fit because thats their belief. You don't watch secular news do you? ABC, CBS, CNN? There are the spin experts. >> Paul was 67 when he was crucified, John the Beloved died on Patmos at age >> 97. Josephus lived, iirc, till he was 75. Yep, real short lifetimes. . . > > That is not old enough to have written anything by someone who met Jesus. WHAT THE???? Miles, John the Beloved sat at the Last Supper with Jesus. Paul was the first Disciple to be called after the resurrection, but lived and worked with the original ten (Stephen having been stoned to death and Judas commiting suicide). What more do you want? > I ask you again, when was the Bible written? What years? It depends on which books your asking about. The Torah, the first five books were written by Moses. The rest were written during or just after the time periods of whom they're named after. The last book, the Revelation of John, was written about 95 A.D. Remember, John walked with Jesus during His ministry. > Jesus died around 36AD although different scholars seem to come up with > different years. Josephus wasn't even born till 37AD. How much of the > Bible was written before 100AD? Thats assuming someone knew Jesus late in > his life when they were in their 20's and lived into their 80's and wrote > some of the Bible. Josephus was born about A.D. 37 and died about A.D. 101, so he would have been in his 20's when most of the Disciples were still alive. He lived in the Palestinian region and traveled to Rome. He was young enough to have traveled to talked to the Disciples AND/OR eyewitnesses. > I'm just asking you who lived and met Jesus, and wrote substantial > portions of the bible, and in what years did they do so. How old were > they when they knew Jesus and how old were they when they died? I keep telling you but you do not hear. I give you information, you reject it. Budd > No, Miles, "verify": their intent, their accuracy. You keep using the word 'accurate'. What does that mean to you? Factual or not factual? > Prove none of the Disciples wrote / dictated their gospel. If they did, then they lived to be a few 100 years old at the least. Otherwise religious scholars must be wrong and the bible was all written before 100AD or so. > It was recorded, you reject the record based on some false claim of the > historian licved too long after the fact. I give you provable infomation > links then don't utilize them... No it wasn't. You have never shown any proof that anything was recorded during Jesus time. His Birth, his life etc. Am I wrong? Fine, who exactly wrote anything about Jesus between the years 0AD and 36AD when Jesus was born and died. > I'm not the one denying the availability of records, Miles. That is you. No, I deny the availability of any records written about Jesus during his time. I am still awaiting your proof of such documents. > Then a copy of the works of Plato written 800- 900 years after his lifetime > would be worthless, right? It is that authors views. It can't be taken as fact just because. > The manuscripts and copies of manuscripts for the Bible were written less > than 100 years after the Resurrection. Scholars have shown time and again that the Bible was written in pieces for several 100 years after 36AD. >> There are other religious books in the world. They too say they are the >> word of God. Why do you not believe those books to be of equal fact? If [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I'm not talking about them. Why not? They exist and use your exact same arguments as to their 'accuracy'. Why is your 'accuracy' more accurate than theirs? >> The day or year didn't exist until the earth and sun were formed. > > Limiting the power and abilities of God? God is outside of time. "In the > beginning, the earth was without form and void. And God said, "Let there be > Light." What??? Limiting God's powers? & |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message