[Rolling Bones]

"babble...babble...babble." Kevin said as he pounded on his keyboard.

[Kevin]

[villalobos]

Originally Posted by Kevin

By definition, they can't get married. They wanted equal RIGHTS. Then when they were told they were getting them, they started demanding that the definition of Marriage gets changed as well.

That isn't the Christians pushing anything on anyone.

Christians aren't trying to CHANGE or force people to adapt to any new ideal.

So no, you are wrong.

You have either a reading problem or you are being a hypocrite. I am not going to argue with you any further, as this seems pointless.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by villalobos

You have either a reading problem or you are being a hypocrite.

Or non of the above.

I see what you are saying. I just don't agree with it.

Christians aren't trying to force people to change anything. Therefore, not trying to force a belief onto anyone.

So to say they are is absurd.

BTW, most Christians I know don't care about homosexuals getting equal rights.

Which is what it is all about right?

How this got derailed into this is beyond me.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

We used to slap kids like that around in grade school cuz they wanted attention so we gave it to them.

I can see you slapping kids around. It seems to fit your character.

I certainly find that kind of behavior deplorable and highly reprehensible..

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Tell me Rolling, why do you always come down on people for making personal attacks when you are the worst offender of this?

And I am saying, the character existed in idea thousands of years before he actually did.

Yes, you said it before. It's not about me knowing it all. I don't. It's about you not knowing what you are talking about.

Oh you are a real tough guy there Rolling.

Bragging about being a school bully on the internet has to be on the shallow end of the internet experience.

Because he's a hypocrite.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by villalobos

As an Italian friend of mine told me one day, religion is more about superstition than faith in Italy these days. Just the fear that if they aren't religious something bad is going to happen to them.

I can see religion in Italy being like that. She is probably correct. Most highly devout Catholics that I have met from Italy have been very superstitious.

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Railroader

Because he's a hypocrite.

ooch..ouch!

You bully!

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Railroader

I can see you slapping kids around. It seems to fit your character.

I certainly find that kind of behavior deplorable and highly reprehensible..

HA HA...you. believed me!

You're too easy.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

HA HA...you. believed me!

You're too easy.

You make statements, and I am going to assume you are telling the truth.

Now you admit to being a liar? Or is that simply troll behavior. Your nickname certainly fits now tRolling Bones.

So, can I assume that all of your posts are lies now?

You've lost all believability. Not that you had much from the begining.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

ooch..ouch!

You bully!

just telling it like it is.

You are a hypocritical, racist, lying troller.

Simply the facts.

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Railroader

You make statements, and I am going to assume you are telling the truth.

Quoted for posterity.

I will remember that my good buddy the Racistroader.

[Kevin]

Nevermind

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

Quoted for posterity.

I will remember that my good buddy the Racistroader.

Taking things out of context now?

You have a weak grasp of reality.

Originally Posted by Railroader

You make statements, and I am going to assume you are telling the truth.

Now you admit to being a liar? Or is that simply troll behavior. Your nickname certainly fits now tRolling Bones.

So, can I assume that all of your posts are lies now?

You've lost all believability. Not that you had much from the begining.

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Railroader

Taking things out of context now?

You have a weak grasp of reality.

What do you do, believe whatever you want to believe, whatever suits your agenda?

Make up your mind.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

What do you do, believe whatever you want to believe, whatever suits your agenda?

Make up your mind.

OK, I am just going to state my thoughts here:
I think you are mildly insane. Or atleast have severe mental retardation.

In no way do I think less of you for it. I just think that is the case. It would certainly explain your behavior in here.

You never submit a well thought out, easy to understand post. You simply make goofy statements and harsh personal attacks. You are highly intolerant of other people beliefs and constantly attack them as well. Your racist remarks, and now out right lying, are signs of an unstable mind.

I would visit a counselor or medical professional if I were you.

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Railroader

OK, I am just going to state my thoughts here:
I think you are mildly insane. Or atleast have severe mental retardation.

In no way do I think less of you for it. I just think that is the case. It would certainly explain your behavior in here.

You never submit a well thought out, easy to understand post. You simply make goofy statements and harsh personal attacks. You are highly intolerant of other people beliefs and constantly attack them as well. Your racist remarks, and now out right lying, are signs of an unstable mind.

I would visit a counselor or medical professional if I were you.

you made me cry!

And I thought you were my friend.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

you made me cry!

And I thought you were my friend.

In light of my new beliefs about you, I can only say: Please, seek help.

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Railroader

In light of my new beliefs about you, I can only say: Please, seek help.

Stop your whining and calling me a racist and your other bullshit.

Who needs the help amigo?

[Railroader]

Why are you calling me "amigo"?

[Kevin]

[QUOTE=Rolling Bones]Stop your whining and calling me a racist /QUOTE]
You might try to stop whining and calling him one then?

Maybe that might help?

Maybe?

[Stradlater]

Originally Posted by Leia's Left Bun

So why is he white as **** and dirty blond in all pics than?

Discovery channel did a big show about this. For some reason it is widely accepted he is a white dude when there is no evidence.

It is "widely accepted" only in the sense that people are ignorant. Medieval art first depicted Jesus in the style of contemporary European men—bearded, long hair, etc. In other words, the first artwork of Jesus was painted centuries after his death. Jesus actually appeared in the same way that modern scholars depict the historical Jesus: alike themselves. Artists wanted Jesus to look like they looked; Scholars usually want Jesus to behave like they would in the same circumstances.

Michelangelo, mentioned earlier, actually did NOT depict Jesus with a beard or long hair:

http://www.christusrex.org/www1/sistine/40c-Judge.jpg <-- "Last Judgement"

According to Paul's letters, it's most likely that Jesus wore short hair.

Anyways, as I wrote in the duplicate thread:
"Though I'm no historian, I believe Christ's existence is along the lines of being as valid as Caesar's. Even outside of biblical texts, early C.E. historians—non-Christian Jew and Gentile alike—wrote of his death, though did not write of his being God or God's son, etc.

I remember reading about archaeological and historical evidence of Pontius Pilate's existence among other things, so I doubt the historicity of Jesus is even really in question—it's his reputation that is."

A dearth of physical description is hardly an argument against his existence in history. History was recorded differently back then.

[Railroader]

Who cares what Jesus looked like? He could have looked like Urkle and it would not have mattered one iota what he said/did.

[Kerrigan]

On second thought, I don't want to get dragged into yet another religious debate. So I withdraw my original reply, and replace it with this:

Hi SWG.

Looking forward to our next chat

[undotwa]

Originally Posted by MacNStein

Josephus:

About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he wrought surprising feats. He was the Christ. When Pilate condemned him to be crucified, those who had come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared, restored to life. And the tribe of Christians has not disappeared. Antiquities 18:63-64

This passage is suspected to have been added by monks (or at least 'elaborated' upon). I've heard that manuscript traditions in Arabic countries exclude this passage.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Stradlater

It is "widely accepted" only in the sense that people are ignorant. Medieval art first depicted Jesus in the style of contemporary European men—bearded, long hair, etc. In other words, the first artwork of Jesus was painted centuries after his death. Jesus actually appeared in the same way that modern scholars depict the historical Jesus: alike themselves. Artists wanted Jesus to look like they looked; Scholars usually want Jesus to behave like they would in the same circumstances.

Michelangelo, mentioned earlier, actually did NOT depict Jesus with a beard or long hair:

http://www.christusrex.org/www1/sistine/40c-Judge.jpg <-- "Last Judgement"

No, but he did depict him as TOTALLY ripped.

The "Last Judgment" Jesus is like the Terminator of Jesuses, here to take names (of the saved) and kick ass (of the un-saved). I actually like this representation of him. The intense physicality of his representation makes him to be feared as a person as much as the son of God. It's a nice artistic way to capture his duality as both human and divine.

Although, as far as actual likenesses go, I am guessing he looks more like your typical olive-skinned eastern-Mediterranean person than anything else, like somebody from Israel or Lebanon, maybe even Syria. And he was NOT tall. Nobody was tall back then.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by undotwa

This passage is suspected to have been added by monks (or at least 'elaborated' upon). I've heard that manuscript traditions in Arabic countries exclude this passage.

Anything anyone doesn't agree with in the Bible is "suspected" to have been added.

Nothing new.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by undotwa

This passage is suspected to have been added by monks (or at least 'elaborated' upon). I've heard that manuscript traditions in Arabic countries exclude this passage.

I've heard such claims, but the editting could have occured on either side.

[undotwa]

Originally Posted by MacNStein

I've heard such claims, but the editting could have occured on either side.

Considering the Josephus was a Jew, he hardly would have affirmed the belief in Christ's resurrection. On the other hand, perhaps the Muslims when they copied his works, left out this passage because it contradicted their own beliefs.

[undotwa]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Anything anyone doesn't agree with in the Bible is "suspected" to have been added.

Nothing new.

Sorry, I don't understand what you have written. Could you rephrase it? Thanks.

[undotwa]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Anything anyone doesn't agree with in the Bible is "suspected" to have been added.

Nothing new.

Sorry, I don't understand what you have written. Could you rephrase it? Thanks.

[undotwa]

Originally Posted by Railroader

I can see religion in Italy being like that. She is probably correct. Most highly devout Catholics that I have met from Italy have been very superstitious.

I have a few Italian friends who are also like that. It's a very worrying attitude to the faith though and quite inconsistent with the teachings of Christ.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by undotwa

Sorry, I don't understand what you have written. Could you rephrase it? Thanks.

What I am saying is, it seems to be a habit in here with certain people to dismiss things in the Bible they don't agree with as being "added later" without any single bit of proof.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by undotwa

Considering the Josephus was a Jew, he hardly would have affirmed the belief in Christ's resurrection.

Not all Jews were against Jesus. Some even followed him. Some even became Christians. But I see your point

On the other hand, perhaps the Muslims when they copied his works, left out this passage because it contradicted their own beliefs.

Bing. Which is more than likely what happened.

[undotwa]

Originally Posted by Kevin

What I am saying is, it seems to be a habit in here with certain people to dismiss things in the Bible they don't agree with as being "added later" without any single bit of proof.

But I'm speaking about Josephus's writings not the Bible. And many orthodox Christians do indeed actually question the validity of this passage.

[undotwa]

triple post

[undotwa]

triple post.

[undotwa]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Not all Jews were against Jesus. Some even followed him. Some even became Christians. But I see your point

That is true.

Bing. Which is more than likely what happened.

One also must take into account this passage in context with the rest of the Jewish Antiquities. His viewpoint throughout the rest of the work is decisively Jewish. If he was Christian, he would have given greater emphasis upon Christ's coming. This is the only mention of Christ in the entire work.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by undotwa

But I'm speaking about Josephus's writings not the Bible. And many orthodox Christians do indeed actually question the validity of this passage.

Lost of people do lots of things. That doesn't suddenly justify it I don't think.

In the end, I doubt it really matters.

[undotwa]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Lost of people do lots of things. That doesn't suddenly justify it I don't think.

In the end, I doubt it really matters.

In the end, in the final ordination of things, and at our judgement, of course this wouldn't matter. But it's interesting nonetheless.