Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#573886 Dec 16, 2012
Susie wrote:
<quoted text>Actually if I choose to think differently about the whole X thing than you that does not make me stubborn; it makes you stubborn for insisting I think the way you tell me to think. I am not Catholic so the Vatican has no bearing on me. Like I said before; you and I both know why you are using an x; just be honest about it.. please if you can :)
Dude, it is a common abbreviation. Xtian does not denote an entirely separate religion or anything like that - it's just short for christian.

I really hope you're joking.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#573887 Dec 16, 2012
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
And the gravity but ain't it always? It's all about the math but ain't it always?
Ain't it though.

Oh, and the sticking.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#573888 Dec 16, 2012
Susie wrote:
<quoted text>WEll, actually I will rephrase that.. This time I was serious. I will not replace Christ with an X and you can't make me.. nahnah
No one is trying to "make you." You're just being ridiculous at this point. It's a simple abbreviation, like how someone might say "thurs."

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#573889 Dec 16, 2012
Susie wrote:
<quoted text>I wish a was a true representative of Chist and thank you for thinking that, but honestly I am human and I cannot and will never give Jesus the glory of being like him. I wish I was and I wish I could be, but I fail each and every day. I wish I could lead a life of glory and I try, but like everyone else on this earth I am but a mortal.
Isn't it nice how christianity instills such self hatred in some of it's followers?

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#573890 Dec 16, 2012
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
Ain't it though.
Oh, and the sticking.


blah, blah blah........blah blah blah.

If it sticks, it works. Trust me. It sticks.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#573891 Dec 16, 2012
Susie wrote:
<quoted text>Randy Newman is not my cup of tea.. sorry
It was about the subject of slavery. Do you condone it like the Bible god does?

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#573892 Dec 16, 2012
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =OeZb0pQsOsoXX
blah, blah blah........blah blah blah.
If it sticks, it works. Trust me. It sticks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

75ft.

It sticks.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#573893 Dec 16, 2012
Susie wrote:
<quoted text>Now, I never once said the x has not been used in place of Christ.. In fact, I specifically said it was a Greek representation before you googled it and brought it up.. I am not Greek so I do not use it... I know your spin and I do not accept it.
What I said was.. I as in ME PERSONALY as in MYSELF will not acknowledge the x for MY CHRIST nor that I acknowledge the term xtain or xtianity or any form there of.. xmen is a movie by my standards adn you cannot and will not force me to take Christ our of the equation to suit your own needs. it is used by atheist NOW as a removal and you can lie but you and I both know that to be true.
You are unbelievable , it isn't used by atheists to do anything to your religion, like that is even possible.
It is used by your religion invented by your religion and accepted by your religion ...get a clue you don't have one.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#573894 Dec 16, 2012
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
hahaaa....
No, I'm not Jewish.
I am able to understand, however, your myth falls apart if you don't adhere to the conditions that the parent myth(Judaism) set forth as conditions and prophecy.

Each and every Xtian bends the myth around in prophesy to mean exactly what they decide it to mean. It doesn't matter what the bible or anybody say's. It only matters what I think it says.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#573895 Dec 16, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Each and every Xtian bends the myth around in prophesy to mean exactly what they decide it to mean. It doesn't matter what the bible or anybody say's. It only matters what I think it says.
Agreed.

It is an odd situation when the Christian actually does investigate or look into the validity of their belief/religion only only to find it's utterly false. If that does happen you'll generally discover, too, that other deity/religious beliefs are false as well. It's a progression.

I said -*If*- that happens.*If* so, they rarely retain the belief, as many of us know.

That rarely happens, however, because I tend to think at some point they stop, the "faith"(willful ignorance at that point) kicks in and they go back to whatever specific denominational delusion they have embraced.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#573896 Dec 16, 2012
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
It was about the subject of slavery. Do you condone it like the Bible god does?
If you are saying the Bible condones slavery then you make common cause with Southern racists who tried to do the same thing. Take for example Deut. 23:15-16. This references non Israeli slaves who escape cruel Canaanite masters. Slaves were not to be handed over and not to be mistreated. In other words if they escaped to Israel there were to be taken care of. Exod 22:21. You shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him for you were strangers (slaves) in the land of Egypt. 22. You shall not afflict any widow or orphan. 23. If you afflict him at all and if he does cry out to Me I will surely hear his cry; 24. and My anger will be kindled and i will kill you with the sword, and your wives will become widows and your children fatherless.

This means slaves, aliens, widows, orphans had rights derived from God, just like it says in our Declaration of Independence. All the oppressed have to do is call out to God and God will hear. Over and over again nations are judged by God for mistreatment of people. In Amos 5:11, Israel is judged in part because they ''impose heavey rent on the poor And exact a tribute of grain from them.'' These are just a few examples. I could go on and on. Sodom had careless ease but did not help the poor. That is easy enough to find in Ezekiel.

My point being most here do not really know what they are talking about when they address slavery as depicted. They take a few verses probably from hostile websites, the same way southern racists did in the past to justisfy a practice which is abominable to God. There were debt slaves but they were not to be mistreated.

All of that does not make a difference to Topix biblical illiterates who can do nothing but post from hostile sites or sources. And i know most of you are because all i have to do is get you in a discussion about the Bible and absent your sources and i get no response.

Since: May 11

Nottingham, UK

#573897 Dec 16, 2012
Semper Fi Brother Beam

say some more stuff that Bart wrote down we're strapped for comedy.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#573898 Dec 16, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Each and every Xtian bends the myth around in prophesy to mean exactly what they decide it to mean. It doesn't matter what the bible or anybody say's. It only matters what I think it says.
And the Bible means exactly what you want it to mean. The problem being you don't really know what you are talking about, when it comes to Scripture, and those that do can spot a phony from a mile off.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#573899 Dec 16, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
Rhetorical has to do with artificial elegance. There is no point in asking a question you already know the answer.
I disagree, as did the ancient Greeks, who attempted to study and codify rhetoric and rhetorical techniques, which have to do with the art of persuasive speech. A rhetorical question makes a statement in the form of a question. From the McCarthy hearings in 1954:

"You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"

Nobody was waiting for an answer.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#573900 Dec 16, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Not much, I would have to assume. Nobody bothered chronicling his life while he was alive.
"Hey, Jesus!"

"Hey Sofrates, good to see you. How're the wife and kids?"

"Oh, dude, listen, they're away. Let's party!"

"Woohoo, bring me some water!"

"hahaha, always the kidder. You! Servant! Get some wine - my best - for this man."

"Ah...you totally rock dude. Who rocks? You! You do! Yeah, baby."

<glug, glug, glug>

[later]

One hot girl: "Who's that hottie dancing in the dirty grey robe?"

Another hot girl: "That's Jesus. Come on, I'll introduce you."

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#573901 Dec 16, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Jesus may not even be the most important person in Christian history. Constantine probably did more for Christianity than Jesus.
lightbeamrider wrote:
Now you are talking about Christian history. That is not what Ehrman is referencing. He is referencing human history.
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Was there a point to that? In what way does that change anything in this discussion?
<crickets>

Incidentally, like most people, I tend to assume when you ignore a point that it is because you had no acceptable answer.
It aint necessarily so wrote:
If Jesus isn't the most important person in Christian history, he isn't the most important person inhuman history, either.
lightbeamrider wrote:
Then who is and why?
I already told you that both Paul and Constantine were more instrumental in establishing the Christian religion and its church
than Christ. Of the two, I think Constantine was the more important. Wasn't he the one that made Paul relevant and kept him off of the cutting room floor when the bible was being cobbled at the Council of Nicea? Jesus, too, for that matter. This is where it was decided which words would be imputed to Jesus and which would be ignored. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#573902 Dec 16, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
That isn't true , the theory civilization was born from war is wrong.
It didn't start that way , to prove it they had to find an untainted original civilization. One was finally found and the evidence shows it was peaceful , somehow greed took over though and they became the way you describe.
Caral proves civilization was born without the restraints we placed on it. It's sad it has become that way , perhaps it is the rivalry between different ones that made it become that way.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =61x7jHvBcYYXX
Do you have a scientific reference I can read?

Sorry, but I just don't believe these "it used to be perfect" stories.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#573903 Dec 16, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
Ignores the fact if it was not for Jesus; Paul would have nothing to write about.
So what? The same would be true about Mr. and Mrs. Christ, assuming anybody named Jesus was actually involved.

Even if such a man existed, we have no way of knowing which of the words attributed to him were ever actually spoken by him. Jesus is a shadowy character, and the words ascribed to him of unknown authenticity.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#573904 Dec 16, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
Much of what Paul wrote about is similar to the teachings of Jesus.
More importantly, much is not.

Jesus taught in Matt. 5:18-19 that Old Testament law was still in effect:

"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach [them], the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

But Paul had a different idea in Romans 10:4:

"For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness for every one who believes."

That's two radically different religions there - Jesus version, which includes the 613 Commandments called the Law of Moses - and Paul's, which dismissed them and starts over. Which tradition do you think you resemble more, the one that doesn't tolerate witches, working on the Sabbath, or sassy children, or the one that ignores those Commandments?

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#573905 Dec 16, 2012
MisterCharrington wrote:
Semper Fi Brother Beam
say some more stuff that Bart wrote down we're strapped for comedy.
Actually i was in the Navy. Go read Bart yourself. Bart is a double PH.D. who is agnostic with 30+ years experience and he is a gentleman. Although i do not agree with his interpretations, he certainly does make know what he is talking about which makes him a cut above Topix biblical illiterates who pontificate from positions of ignorance with impunity for the time being.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Wake up, Black America!! (Sep '13) 12 min Senecus 4,873
Thousands march in Holocaust memorial (Apr '06) 15 min zzzzzzzzzzzzzz 40
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 15 min guest 560,352
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 17 min Rick in Kansas 265,417
Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 30 min Rick in Kansas 96,846
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 41 min mike 605,310
Kemerburgaz Samsung Servisi SAMSUNG .. 342 OO 2... 44 min sansungrete 1
Why Iím no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 8 hr Kaitlin the Wolf ... 441,810
More from around the web