Are you an atheist?

Are you an atheist?


  • Total voters
    351
So you'll happily use Josephus to credit pilate existing and how he acted - but not how he acted with Jesus.

You cant make this up - or maybe you can?:D

Or perhaps you should learn to read. I simply said that the accounts of his actions do not mesh the crucifixion story. Even had I been in error and there was no actual evidence of his existance whatsoever, that would still be true: the historians note that he showed nothing but contempt for Jews, while Christians sainted him.

Not that I expect you to understand that, seeing as ever since I started posting here two years ago, you have, for some reason, made it your life's goal to contest every single thing I ever say. Something tells me that were I to stop replying to you, your life would lose all meaning.

But yes, I absolutely will trust the word of scholars (note the plural) who confine themselves to facts as they know them over religious fanatics who make up supernatural fables and justify them with 'God told me so'. I also find more accuracy in the works of Euclid than I do Homer. Strange, that.

Edit: I will grant you this much. I did think that Tacitus lived right around 0 BCE, not 50 to 100 years later. So I guess I should thank you for making me look that up and learn otherwise. Still doesn't change the point I was making one whit, however.
 
Last edited:
Or perhaps you should learn to read. I simply said that the accounts of his actions do not mesh the crucifixion story. Even had I been in error and there was no actual evidence of his existance whatsoever, that would still be true: the historians note that he showed nothing but contempt for Jews, while Christians sainted him.

Not that I expect you to understand that, seeing as ever since I started posting here two years ago, you have, for some reason, made it your life's goal to contest every single thing I ever say. Something tells me that were I to stop replying to you, your life would lose all meaning.

You said the actual facts - as well you know. Don't pretend I didn't read it properly. - then used the "facts" to dismiss "religious stories".

When I challenge your views on facts and history - you call foul and get personal but a gang up on Blade is fine by you, your dubious histories necessarily trumping his.

My life goal is you - again - where's the evidence of that - even of my actions on this forum, what in 2 threads?



Really?:confused:
 
You said the actual facts - as well you know. Don't pretend I didn't read it properly. - then used the "facts" to dismiss "religious stories".

When I challenge your views on facts and history - you call foul and get personal but a gang up on Blade is fine by you, your dubious histories necessarily trumping his.

My life goal is you - again - where's the evidence of that - even of my actions on this forum, what in 2 threads?



Really?:confused:

You've a history of doing this with me, actually, in these discussion threads. Ofttimes you've posted contrary things for no other reason I could find than to do your damndest to prove me wrong at all costs. I've yet to see that behavior from you against anyone else.

When Blade continues to argue that the Bible is fact and that scientests are religious fanatics who worship science and are too closed-minded to accept facts, did you honestly expect people to just let him slide? I can't even see his posts and was rolling my eyes just at the things that are showing in the quotes.

Honestly, had it been anyone BUT you calling me on the records thing, I could accept it was done out of a desire to set the record straight. (Also, as mentioned above, I thought Tacitus WAS contemporary!) You, however, seem to make a career out of trying to prove my every post wrong during your posting spurts, which is why I have little patience with you. I never see you actually trying to contribute, just trying to tear people down.

If you had actually wanted to contribute, you would simply have posted data of your own proving me wrong (as Galaxiom has done before), rather than attacking me right out of the gate:
So you cherry pick which non contemporary source trumps the other. Or indeed you cherry pick the same sources to believe bits and bobs of them, and use that to fit your beliefs?!?
The fact that you launched directly into the personal attack indicated an axe to grind for some reason, much like how Blade and I have so much difficulty being civil when talking directly to one another.
 
Last edited:
I don't need that shit right now.

I thought you did, which is why I caught you with your pants down?

I understand now though - its what you do when you talk?:eek:


Bothering to check what facts you were relying on, when I first questioned them, would have allowed you to admit your mistake earlier, and not led to any of this nastyiness.

You control that my friend.
 
I wasn't the one who started with the personal attacks right off - that was all you. You set the tone, not me. Had you simply pointed out that the only contemporary source was the stone, and NOT Tacitus, and done so without immediately launching into a personal attack, you'd have gotten something along "Oh, crap, really?"

And my point still stands. You were quibbling over something that honestly wasn't relevent to the point at hand.

I also note that even now, you can't lay off the personal attacks.
 
Wait? you said it was a lie but now its a fact? are you feeling okay?

????????? You are stretching things these days,,,Have you seen you shrink today...
smile.gif



Just because it was written a long time ago doesn't prove evidence. If someone write a book about someone farting fire 2000 years ago and the story was told throughout the ages, would you perceive it as truth due to its ability to be passed down generations?


This brings to mind the new history books as written by liberals where Pearl Harbor did not happen and we attack Japan for no reason with a nuclear bomb.
Somewhere there will be a record of the true history (old but true) as was written in the days thereof. This is the same thing you speak of yet you will not recognize it because it was God's words or the Holy BIBLE


These Theories are theories for a reason Blade, as soon as new EVIDENCE arises to contradict it. it is then disproved and a new theory is arisen. It's amazing how we find physical evidence on the daily and even disprove other scientists theories but still the only evidence for your religion is here-say and parchments that may have been made up. The blind faith you require in your religion is what doesn't allow your opinion to sway?

Then we do not really know what happened thus we do not really know that Creation by a creator did not happen and we do not really know whether the Bible is real or not. So by your rules of Hypothesis, we as man of this ole earth know little to nothing about anything. Hell, we cannot even be sure what is happening outside today. MSNBC reports something one way and Fox reports it another. sort of , "I Said, She Said" kind of thing! We are back to square one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Dah


How does that account for different blood types? Isn't Incest a sin? a chickens body looks the same as the next albeit size differences, that doesn't mean they come from the same chicken does it? Where does racial differences come into the equation if we come from the same source? How about different religions?

This goes back to the exceptions I made, Mostly caused by the different reagions of the world they began in. Also, As today if two people are A Pos does not mean that they cannot have a child that is A NEG. (See Genetics).. Incest was not incest until (Leviticus 18:6-18). The chicken was a joke??????
Racial differences are just the color of the skin and the region of the world they are in. Skin in the hot deserts and other climates became darker over time so as to cut down on the amount of ultraviolet the skin absorbed. Religion, we have already discussed but to be expedient most all major religions today evolved from the Tora and/or the New Testament. Keep in mind that these books were put together for the first time in about 300 AD. There were some religions, Egyptian Sun God RA, etc. that came about. Why I do not know? Maybe because the Hebrews had a God. The sort of "got to keep up with the Jones" syndrome. I have not studied the Egyptian religion of old.


That would be because they live in Saudi Arabia.

It was not always Saudi Arabia....(i.e Iran was Persia, etc.)


More here-say, If god really did exist why would he allow them to blindly murder and pillage villages? Also I thought lack of faith was a sin and you must believe in the almighty to even have a chance of getting to the end-game.

I guess with everybody talking about Abraham and all the people that was killed, I would need to start there. First, The Hebrews were Gods chosen people and still are. Thru Abraham, his people learned how God created the earth and therefore a religion of sorts was born to worship Jehovah. After several years and we can follow the years through the lives of the players and their children,etc...Groups began to break away. After a while, although in the real sense they were related to Abraham, their mother/father had no ties with the Hebrews. God gave Abraham via a covenent the land of Judea (where they are now) and through out the rest of the old testament you will find that when God destroyed a people, those people had attacked and consumed the land of HIS people. What would you have done if you had the power. What would you do now for your family?. Would you kill anything and everything that threatened their lives? I would! I am going to stop here, it is getting too long. to summarize it : all the blood spilled in the Old Testament was over what is Judea.today. And it is not over yet? There will far more blood spilled in the coming years than in the last 5000 years in this area of the world.

The New Testament brought about Atonement. Jesus Christ died on the cross for yours and my sins now and in the future. However, you have to accept Jesus in your heart before the "sin thing" takes effect. OH, yeah.... The Father, The Son and the Holy Ghost (The Trinity) are all the same. "And the 'spirit of God' moved across the waters....... (Genesis 1:2), Jehovah the Father and Jesus the Son of both God and Man. (Man meaning Human).


Have a good day.

Blade.
 
Quote from Blade
Racial differences are just the color of the skin and the region of the world they are in. Skin in the hot deserts and other climates became darker over time so as to cut down on the amount of ultraviolet the skin absorbed.

Is this the white suprematist view?
I suspect that the skin went lighter as man went to cooler climes so that it could absorb more.

Brian
 
BTW Don't you guys have any work to do, just got in from a days walking and thought I would have a quick read whilst having a beer and wow! It would take hours to digest today's posts on this thread alone.

Yeah yeah I'm old and slow.

Brian
 
Quote from Blade

Is this the white suprematist view?
I suspect that the skin went lighter as man went to cooler climes so that it could absorb more.

Brian

Heh, I think you nailed it, considering humanity evolved in Africa. Even if you believe the Bible was true, virtually all the times I've seen Biblical scholars place the garden, they placed it in Africa.

This is the same thinking that wound up creating the idea of Jesus being a white guy with light brown hair instead of, you know, looking like someone native to Judea.

BTW Don't you guys have any work to do, just got in from a days walking and thought I would have a quick read whilst having a beer and wow! It would take hours to digest today's posts on this thread alone.

Yeah yeah I'm old and slow.

Brian

Actually, no. It's a slow day at work, and I'm alternating between this site and typing up some process documentation for a process that's not completely worked out yet.
 
Quote from Blade

Is this the white suprematist view?
I suspect that the skin went lighter as man went to cooler climes so that it could absorb more.

Brian
Well Brian you like a Venus Fly trap...out to catch something anything???
smile.gif

Are you in cohorts with Frothy now. I was thinking a little better of you.
smile.gif

I really do not know what the skin color was in the beginning but do know a little about the human body. If you stay out in the sun, you skin gets darker and darker. I believe we call it tanning. However after so long the skin starts getting those dark spots that stay on the skin and does not go away. Over time I would think that theses skin cells have modified the DNA to stay that color and over a longer time you simply have a darker skin color that could be passed on to your offspring. If this happened, it has become a Genetics problem more than a race problem.

Also, take the Arabs (Middle east or Mediteranean area) where they were known to cover themselves because of the heat. This would cause a lighter color than that of Africa people who developed much like the Aborigines did with a darker color of their skin. The American Indian was far darker (almost Red in color, thus RedSkin) than the average European. One other thing,,, Most of the Blacks and they will tell you this themselves that they probably originated in Africa and their ancestors was brought here toAmerica by the Black Slave trade run by Blacks Slavers themselves. Same as it is now in the inner cites, BLACK killing BLACK!

Now to your Racialist question. I have worked on many different races of people (if that is what you call it) throughout the years and they all bleed the same color I do. As far as your remarks, I think that is really what we need a little bit more of in the world is people willing to call other people racist based upon the same evidence that makes them believe there is no God and that is Nothing.

Blade
 
Last edited:
BTW Don't you guys have any work to do, just got in from a days walking and thought I would have a quick read whilst having a beer and wow! It would take hours to digest today's posts on this thread alone.

Yeah yeah I'm old and slow.

Brian

Actually have been sitting here while it is raining outside. To wet to plow

Blade
 
Actually have been sitting here while it is raining outside. To wet to plow

Blade

Tough, I've been walking in the sun all day, mind you this means the farmers are out , some spreading shit on the fields, I told my companions who objected to the smell that it was good for the sinuses.

Brian
 
Well Brian you like a Venus Fly trap...out to catch something anything???
smile.gif

Are you in cohorts with Frothy now. I was thinking a little better of you.
smile.gif

I really do not know what the skin color was in the beginning but do know a little about the human body. If you stay out in the sun, you skin gets darker and darker. I believe we call it tanning. However after so long the skin starts getting those dark spots that stay on the skin and does not go away. Over time I would think that theses skin cells have modified the DNA to stay that color and over a longer time you simply have a darker skin color that could be passed on to your offspring. If this happened, it has become a Genetics problem more than a race problem.

Also, take the Arabs (Middle east or Mediteranean area) where they were known to cover themselves because of the heat. This would cause a lighter color than that of Africa people who developed much like the Aborigines did with a darker color of their skin. The American Indian was far darker (almost Red in color, thus RedSkin) than the average European. One other thing,,, Most of the Blacks and they will tell you this themselves that they probably originated in Africa and their ancestors was brought here toAmerica by the Black Slave trade run by Blacks Slavers themselves. Same as it is now in the inner cites, BLACK killing BLACK!

Now to your Racialist question. I have worked on many different races of people (if that is what you call it) throughout the years and they all bleed the same color I do. As far as your remarks, I think that is really what we need a little bit more of in the world is people willing to call other people racist based upon the same evidence that makes them believe there is no God and that is Nothing.

Blade

I'm too tired to break up the quote but it is in three paragraphs so

1 I think the skin colour change was probably due to evolution.

2 the slave trade to the Americas was by white slave traders but sure they had the cooperation of the native Africans.

3 I did not call you a racist as you imply, I merely asked a question, you may have been quoting from some source without giving it much thought.

Brian
 
.
.
.
I guess with everybody talking about Abraham and all the people that was killed, I would need to start there. First, The Hebrews were Gods chosen people and still are. Thru Abraham, his people learned how God created the earth and therefore a religion of sorts was born to worship Jehovah. After several years and we can follow the years through the lives of the players and their children,etc...Groups began to break away. After a while, although in the real sense they were related to Abraham, their mother/father had no ties with the Hebrews. God gave Abraham via a covenent the land of Judea (where they are now) and through out the rest of the old testament you will find that when God destroyed a people, those people had attacked and consumed the land of HIS people. What would you have done if you had the power. What would you do now for your family?. Would you kill anything and everything that threatened their lives? I would! I am going to stop here, it is getting too long. to summarize it : all the blood spilled in the Old Testament was over what is Judea.today. And it is not over yet? There will far more blood spilled in the coming years than in the last 5000 years in this area of the world.
.
.
.
Blade.
It's pretty easy to see, with this kind of thinking, how religion and wars fought over religion are thought to have caused more death, devastation, and suffering than from all other causes combined.
 
I'm too tired to break up the quote but it is in three paragraphs so

1 I think the skin colour change was probably due to evolution.

2 the slave trade to the Americas was by white slave traders but sure they had the cooperation of the native Africans.

3 I did not call you a racist as you imply, I merely asked a question, you may have been quoting from some source without giving it much thought.

Brian
Well Brian...did you get that beer drank in between reading all those post.????? :D

1. I am not sure about you idea of Evolution but if you want to call it that I am ok with it. Now Going from a dinosaur to a Bird or from a Lemar to a Human is a little too much. I had rather call it modification of the body itself but if you insist ,,,OK

2. http://www.crf-usa.org/black-history-month/the-slave-trade

3.I will take you at your word about the racist part. You and the rest over there, have got to realize that we here in the US have entered a dangerous period of time where the left & far Left (associated with the democratic party) actually attack (99.5% verbally at this time) individuals, companies, etc (anyone) who disagrees with their agenda of a more liberalized nation., a nanny state where the the government would supersede any of the state authority given to them by our constitution. The tactics for these attack is to destroy the person (s), companies in question by calling them racist, skin heads, white supremacist , KKK, etc. Most of the time it works, because no one wants to be called a racist so they shut up. The lack of speak-up gives them extra power. However, once people understand what they are doing they start to speak up anyways. I fear the attacks may become more heated as they did in the 60's. We already see them trying to incite race riots in hopes of accomplishing..... what I do not know. I do know that George Sorros, the one who did your country in, has turned his sights on the US and is with other billionaires funding groups like Acorn and other companies in an effort to install a ONE controlling party here in the US. Even today, Our Pres. stated that it would be a good idea to force everyone to vote.. Of course the vote would be in the favor of his party (democrats) mainly because those that do not vote are poor, homeless and those who really don't give a damn one way or the other. Given them subsidies from the government in power only strengthens the vote for them.Once a one-party system is setup, America will become a socialist nation just a small step from communism. China is setting over there and cheering them on for sure. A far worse scenario than what your nation has. While we begin to fight amongst ourselves, ISIS and Putin keep getting bigger and bolder.

Oh well, what will be will be.

If I went overboard at your mention of it, I become tired of the tactics and will fight back vehemently. My Apologies to you.

Blade
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom