Christianity more dangerous than Atheism.

[Mudda]

The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet.

No, no person ever literally came out of their tomb after death.

If there is any truth to the story it was written in figurative language, the subjects not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used, and is therefore about something else.

If you look and look and keep on looking for it, you will find it.

If you don't look any deeper, you will find nothing.

Actually, a lot of people believe that a person actually did rise from the dead for real, as that's was the purpose of the story, to make people believe that jesus could do supernatural things...
You simply don't believe the stories of the bible, as it should be, but are so desperate to find god, that you make up new meanings for yourself to be able to wrap your head around all the nonsense.

 

[hobelim]

The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet.

No, no person ever literally came out of their tomb after death.

If there is any truth to the story it was written in figurative language, the subjects not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used, and is therefore about something else.

If you look and look and keep on looking for it, you will find it.

If you don't look any deeper, you will find nothing.

Actually, a lot of people believe that a person actually did rise from the dead for real, as that's was the purpose of the story, to make people believe that jesus could do supernatural things...
You simply don't believe the stories of the bible, as it should be, but are so desperate to find god, that you make up new meanings for yourself to be able to wrap your head around all the nonsense.

Even though the subject of the resurrection is still hotly debated even within Judaism, many of a more sober and rational mind understand that the subject of the resurrection was never about the resumption of a former existence after biological death but the elevation of the species into a higher sphere of intelligences, a new existence before biological death while still living in a physical body.


Jesus compared the pharisees to unmarked graves and whitewashed tombs. He renounced the beliefs and practices of the religion of his birth after three decades of life in the tomb and then bodily ascended in to heaven, day by day, while still living on earth.

So yes, many believed that he actually rose from the dead and wrote about it because he actually did, just not in the way that fundamentalist wackos believe.

 

[Mudda]

The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet.

No, no person ever literally came out of their tomb after death.

If there is any truth to the story it was written in figurative language, the subjects not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used, and is therefore about something else.

If you look and look and keep on looking for it, you will find it.

If you don't look any deeper, you will find nothing.

Actually, a lot of people believe that a person actually did rise from the dead for real, as that's was the purpose of the story, to make people believe that jesus could do supernatural things...
You simply don't believe the stories of the bible, as it should be, but are so desperate to find god, that you make up new meanings for yourself to be able to wrap your head around all the nonsense.

Even though the subject of the resurrection is still hotly debated even within Judaism, many of a more sober and rational mind understand that the subject of the resurrection was never about the resumption of a former existence after biological death but the elevation of the species into a higher sphere of intelligences, a new existence before biological death while still living in a physical body.


Jesus compared the pharisees to unmarked graves and whitewashed tombs. He renounced the beliefs and practices of the religion of his birth after three decades of life in the tomb and then bodily ascended in to heaven, day by day, while still living on earth.

So yes, many believed that he actually rose from the dead because he actually did.

If you would push your rationality all the way to the end, you'd toss out your bible. As I already stated "The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet."

 

[hobelim]

The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet.

No, no person ever literally came out of their tomb after death.

If there is any truth to the story it was written in figurative language, the subjects not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used, and is therefore about something else.

If you look and look and keep on looking for it, you will find it.

If you don't look any deeper, you will find nothing.

Actually, a lot of people believe that a person actually did rise from the dead for real, as that's was the purpose of the story, to make people believe that jesus could do supernatural things...
You simply don't believe the stories of the bible, as it should be, but are so desperate to find god, that you make up new meanings for yourself to be able to wrap your head around all the nonsense.

Even though the subject of the resurrection is still hotly debated even within Judaism, many of a more sober and rational mind understand that the subject of the resurrection was never about the resumption of a former existence after biological death but the elevation of the species into a higher sphere of intelligences, a new existence before biological death while still living in a physical body.


Jesus compared the pharisees to unmarked graves and whitewashed tombs. He renounced the beliefs and practices of the religion of his birth after three decades of life in the tomb and then bodily ascended in to heaven, day by day, while still living on earth.

So yes, many believed that he actually rose from the dead because he actually did.

If you would push your rationality all the way to the end, you'd toss out your bible. As I already stated "The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet."

Seriously? No proof? There is overwhelming proof that the stories cannot be literally true, overwhelming evidence that the most dedicated and devout fundamentalist out there with even the largest and wealthiest congregations are just low life actors and lying frauds.

Why toss the Bible now? Have some fun! Think of the evil done, the blood shed, the lives destroyed by their lies?

Why not use it to pay those bastards back in their own coin?

 

[irosie91]

The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet.

No, no person ever literally came out of their tomb after death.

If there is any truth to the story it was written in figurative language, the subjects not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used, and is therefore about something else.

If you look and look and keep on looking for it, you will find it.

If you don't look any deeper, you will find nothing.

Actually, a lot of people believe that a person actually did rise from the dead for real, as that's was the purpose of the story, to make people believe that jesus could do supernatural things...
You simply don't believe the stories of the bible, as it should be, but are so desperate to find god, that you make up new meanings for yourself to be able to wrap your head around all the nonsense.

Even though the subject of the resurrection is still hotly debated even within Judaism, many of a more sober and rational mind understand that the subject of the resurrection was never about the resumption of a former existence after biological death but the elevation of the species into a higher sphere of intelligences, a new existence before biological death while still living in a physical body.


Jesus compared the pharisees to unmarked graves and whitewashed tombs. He renounced the beliefs and practices of the religion of his birth after three decades of life in the tomb and then bodily ascended in to heaven, day by day, while still living on earth.

So yes, many believed that he actually rose from the dead because he actually did.

If you would push your rationality all the way to the end, you'd toss out your bible. As I already stated "The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet."

I have never met an intelligent person who junked
scriptural writings----in general. I have come across lots
of really stupid people who do-------some of the very stupid
JUNK all of the scriptural writings NOT THEIR OWN----and
all but worship the same books that their parents liked. . Those who junk them ALL are the very most moronic morons. What does "EARLIEST FRAGMENT" got to do with anything?

 

[Mudda]

The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet.

No, no person ever literally came out of their tomb after death.

If there is any truth to the story it was written in figurative language, the subjects not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used, and is therefore about something else.

If you look and look and keep on looking for it, you will find it.

If you don't look any deeper, you will find nothing.

Actually, a lot of people believe that a person actually did rise from the dead for real, as that's was the purpose of the story, to make people believe that jesus could do supernatural things...
You simply don't believe the stories of the bible, as it should be, but are so desperate to find god, that you make up new meanings for yourself to be able to wrap your head around all the nonsense.

Even though the subject of the resurrection is still hotly debated even within Judaism, many of a more sober and rational mind understand that the subject of the resurrection was never about the resumption of a former existence after biological death but the elevation of the species into a higher sphere of intelligences, a new existence before biological death while still living in a physical body.


Jesus compared the pharisees to unmarked graves and whitewashed tombs. He renounced the beliefs and practices of the religion of his birth after three decades of life in the tomb and then bodily ascended in to heaven, day by day, while still living on earth.

So yes, many believed that he actually rose from the dead because he actually did.

If you would push your rationality all the way to the end, you'd toss out your bible. As I already stated "The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet."

I have never met an intelligent person who junked
scriptural writings----in general. I have come across lots
of really stupid people who do-------some of the very stupid
JUNK all of the scriptural writings NOT THEIR OWN----and
all but worship the same books that their parents liked. . Those who junk them ALL are the very most moronic morons. What does "EARLIEST FRAGMENT" got to do with anything?

It means that the stories of the bible can't be proven to have even been written at the time the events were supposed to have happened. Making it all hearsay.

 

[Mudda]

The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet.

No, no person ever literally came out of their tomb after death.

If there is any truth to the story it was written in figurative language, the subjects not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used, and is therefore about something else.

If you look and look and keep on looking for it, you will find it.

If you don't look any deeper, you will find nothing.

Actually, a lot of people believe that a person actually did rise from the dead for real, as that's was the purpose of the story, to make people believe that jesus could do supernatural things...
You simply don't believe the stories of the bible, as it should be, but are so desperate to find god, that you make up new meanings for yourself to be able to wrap your head around all the nonsense.

Even though the subject of the resurrection is still hotly debated even within Judaism, many of a more sober and rational mind understand that the subject of the resurrection was never about the resumption of a former existence after biological death but the elevation of the species into a higher sphere of intelligences, a new existence before biological death while still living in a physical body.


Jesus compared the pharisees to unmarked graves and whitewashed tombs. He renounced the beliefs and practices of the religion of his birth after three decades of life in the tomb and then bodily ascended in to heaven, day by day, while still living on earth.

So yes, many believed that he actually rose from the dead because he actually did.

If you would push your rationality all the way to the end, you'd toss out your bible. As I already stated "The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet."

Seriously? No proof? There is overwhelming proof that the stories cannot be literally true, overwhelming evidence that the most dedicated and devout fundamentalist out there with even the largest and wealthiest congregations are just low life actors and lying frauds.

Why toss the Bible now? Have some fun! Think of the evil done, the blood shed, the lives destroyed by their lies?

Why not use it to pay those bastards back in their own coin?

Yes, you're right, there is proof that the flood never happened, for example, or that the world wasn't made in 6 days. I was more talking about things Jesus is said to have done.

 

[irosie91]

No, no person ever literally came out of their tomb after death.

If there is any truth to the story it was written in figurative language, the subjects not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used, and is therefore about something else.

If you look and look and keep on looking for it, you will find it.

If you don't look any deeper, you will find nothing.

Actually, a lot of people believe that a person actually did rise from the dead for real, as that's was the purpose of the story, to make people believe that jesus could do supernatural things...
You simply don't believe the stories of the bible, as it should be, but are so desperate to find god, that you make up new meanings for yourself to be able to wrap your head around all the nonsense.

Even though the subject of the resurrection is still hotly debated even within Judaism, many of a more sober and rational mind understand that the subject of the resurrection was never about the resumption of a former existence after biological death but the elevation of the species into a higher sphere of intelligences, a new existence before biological death while still living in a physical body.


Jesus compared the pharisees to unmarked graves and whitewashed tombs. He renounced the beliefs and practices of the religion of his birth after three decades of life in the tomb and then bodily ascended in to heaven, day by day, while still living on earth.

So yes, many believed that he actually rose from the dead because he actually did.

If you would push your rationality all the way to the end, you'd toss out your bible. As I already stated "The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet."

I have never met an intelligent person who junked
scriptural writings----in general. I have come across lots
of really stupid people who do-------some of the very stupid
JUNK all of the scriptural writings NOT THEIR OWN----and
all but worship the same books that their parents liked. . Those who junk them ALL are the very most moronic morons. What does "EARLIEST FRAGMENT" got to do with anything?

It means that the stories of the bible can't be proven to have even been written at the time the events were supposed to have happened. Making it all hearsay.

so? did someone tell you that HERESAY is dirt? You are a very confused person. I will help----"HERESAY" is evidence which may be introduced in court-----but cannot be
subjected to scrutiny in a given trial ---for several possible reasons. Primarily because the actual witness to the event
is not available in the court-room at the time of the trial. THUS ----even though it may be introduced----it cannot be used to PROVE anything in a trial. Sometimes that judge just throws it out. In fact, sometimes judges based their decisions on heresay that they conclude is credible. HOWEVER---the above fact is not THE POINT-----scriptural writings constitute almost all of what we have of ancient times. Try to cope "heresay" is not defined as "shit"

 

[Mudda]

Actually, a lot of people believe that a person actually did rise from the dead for real, as that's was the purpose of the story, to make people believe that jesus could do supernatural things...
You simply don't believe the stories of the bible, as it should be, but are so desperate to find god, that you make up new meanings for yourself to be able to wrap your head around all the nonsense.

Even though the subject of the resurrection is still hotly debated even within Judaism, many of a more sober and rational mind understand that the subject of the resurrection was never about the resumption of a former existence after biological death but the elevation of the species into a higher sphere of intelligences, a new existence before biological death while still living in a physical body.


Jesus compared the pharisees to unmarked graves and whitewashed tombs. He renounced the beliefs and practices of the religion of his birth after three decades of life in the tomb and then bodily ascended in to heaven, day by day, while still living on earth.

So yes, many believed that he actually rose from the dead because he actually did.

If you would push your rationality all the way to the end, you'd toss out your bible. As I already stated "The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet."

I have never met an intelligent person who junked
scriptural writings----in general. I have come across lots
of really stupid people who do-------some of the very stupid
JUNK all of the scriptural writings NOT THEIR OWN----and
all but worship the same books that their parents liked. . Those who junk them ALL are the very most moronic morons. What does "EARLIEST FRAGMENT" got to do with anything?

It means that the stories of the bible can't be proven to have even been written at the time the events were supposed to have happened. Making it all hearsay.

so? did someone tell you that HERESAY is dirt? You are a very confused person. I will help----"HERESAY" is evidence which may be introduced in court-----but cannot be
subjected to scrutiny in a given trial ---for several possible reasons. Primarily because the actual witness to the event
is not available in the court-room at the time of the trial. THUS ----even though it may be introduced----it cannot be used to PROVE anything in a trial. Sometimes that judge just throws it out. In fact, sometimes judges based their decisions on heresay that they conclude is credible. HOWEVER---the above fact is not THE POINT-----scriptural writings constitute almost all of what we have of ancient times. Try to cope "heresay" is not defined as "shit"

In the case of the bible, hearsay means not proven, thus not yet credible. Ex: the flood never happened (among other things), geologists can tell you that. Making the rest of the book not credible.

 

[irosie91]

Even though the subject of the resurrection is still hotly debated even within Judaism, many of a more sober and rational mind understand that the subject of the resurrection was never about the resumption of a former existence after biological death but the elevation of the species into a higher sphere of intelligences, a new existence before biological death while still living in a physical body.


Jesus compared the pharisees to unmarked graves and whitewashed tombs. He renounced the beliefs and practices of the religion of his birth after three decades of life in the tomb and then bodily ascended in to heaven, day by day, while still living on earth.

So yes, many believed that he actually rose from the dead because he actually did.

If you would push your rationality all the way to the end, you'd toss out your bible. As I already stated "The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet."

I have never met an intelligent person who junked
scriptural writings----in general. I have come across lots
of really stupid people who do-------some of the very stupid
JUNK all of the scriptural writings NOT THEIR OWN----and
all but worship the same books that their parents liked. . Those who junk them ALL are the very most moronic morons. What does "EARLIEST FRAGMENT" got to do with anything?

It means that the stories of the bible can't be proven to have even been written at the time the events were supposed to have happened. Making it all hearsay.

so? did someone tell you that HERESAY is dirt? You are a very confused person. I will help----"HERESAY" is evidence which may be introduced in court-----but cannot be
subjected to scrutiny in a given trial ---for several possible reasons. Primarily because the actual witness to the event
is not available in the court-room at the time of the trial. THUS ----even though it may be introduced----it cannot be used to PROVE anything in a trial. Sometimes that judge just throws it out. In fact, sometimes judges based their decisions on heresay that they conclude is credible. HOWEVER---the above fact is not THE POINT-----scriptural writings constitute almost all of what we have of ancient times. Try to cope "heresay" is not defined as "shit"

In the case of the bible, hearsay means not proven, thus not yet credible. Ex: the flood never happened (among other things), geologists can tell you that. Making the rest of the book not credible.

wrong-----hearsay means "cannot be challenged in court by cross examination of its SOURCE" Not proven does not mean not credible. Lots of floods have happened-----we have had a few in the USA this year. You have a serious vocabulary problem

 

[Mudda]

If you would push your rationality all the way to the end, you'd toss out your bible. As I already stated "The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet."

I have never met an intelligent person who junked
scriptural writings----in general. I have come across lots
of really stupid people who do-------some of the very stupid
JUNK all of the scriptural writings NOT THEIR OWN----and
all but worship the same books that their parents liked. . Those who junk them ALL are the very most moronic morons. What does "EARLIEST FRAGMENT" got to do with anything?

It means that the stories of the bible can't be proven to have even been written at the time the events were supposed to have happened. Making it all hearsay.

so? did someone tell you that HERESAY is dirt? You are a very confused person. I will help----"HERESAY" is evidence which may be introduced in court-----but cannot be
subjected to scrutiny in a given trial ---for several possible reasons. Primarily because the actual witness to the event
is not available in the court-room at the time of the trial. THUS ----even though it may be introduced----it cannot be used to PROVE anything in a trial. Sometimes that judge just throws it out. In fact, sometimes judges based their decisions on heresay that they conclude is credible. HOWEVER---the above fact is not THE POINT-----scriptural writings constitute almost all of what we have of ancient times. Try to cope "heresay" is not defined as "shit"

In the case of the bible, hearsay means not proven, thus not yet credible. Ex: the flood never happened (among other things), geologists can tell you that. Making the rest of the book not credible.

wrong-----hearsay means "cannot be challenged in court by cross examination of its SOURCE" Not proven does not mean not credible. Lots of floods have happened-----we have had a few in the USA this year. You have a serious vocabulary problem

A worldwide flood lasting 40 days didn't happen. Ask a geologist.
The world wasn't made in 6 days. Ask an astrophysicist.
A woman wasn't made out of a man's rib. Ask a sane person.

 

[hobelim]

No, no person ever literally came out of their tomb after death.

If there is any truth to the story it was written in figurative language, the subjects not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used, and is therefore about something else.

If you look and look and keep on looking for it, you will find it.

If you don't look any deeper, you will find nothing.

Actually, a lot of people believe that a person actually did rise from the dead for real, as that's was the purpose of the story, to make people believe that jesus could do supernatural things...
You simply don't believe the stories of the bible, as it should be, but are so desperate to find god, that you make up new meanings for yourself to be able to wrap your head around all the nonsense.

Even though the subject of the resurrection is still hotly debated even within Judaism, many of a more sober and rational mind understand that the subject of the resurrection was never about the resumption of a former existence after biological death but the elevation of the species into a higher sphere of intelligences, a new existence before biological death while still living in a physical body.


Jesus compared the pharisees to unmarked graves and whitewashed tombs. He renounced the beliefs and practices of the religion of his birth after three decades of life in the tomb and then bodily ascended in to heaven, day by day, while still living on earth.

So yes, many believed that he actually rose from the dead because he actually did.

If you would push your rationality all the way to the end, you'd toss out your bible. As I already stated "The earliest fragment of your manuscripts is dated to several generations after the facts were said to have occurred. It's possible that events happened as described, but there's no proof yet."

Seriously? No proof? There is overwhelming proof that the stories cannot be literally true, overwhelming evidence that the most dedicated and devout fundamentalist out there with even the largest and wealthiest congregations are just low life actors and lying frauds.

Why toss the Bible now? Have some fun! Think of the evil done, the blood shed, the lives destroyed by their lies?

Why not use it to pay those bastards back in their own coin?

Yes, you're right, there is proof that the flood never happened, for example, or that the world wasn't made in 6 days. I was more talking about things Jesus is said to have done.

Raising the dead, giving sight to the blind, turning water into wine, calming the storm, cleansing lepers, healing the paralyzed, the multiplication of the loaves?

Every one of those so called miracles were actually included in the story as signs that God was with Jesus, and every single story can easily be interpreted in a rational way that conforms to reality which excludes the need for any unverifiable supernatural explanation.

When Jesus healed the blind man he wrote something on the ground, put a paste of mud and spit in his eyes, then put his hand over that and asked the man what he saw. First the man saw trees, and after jesus told him to take a harder look he finally saw men. Obviously Jesus was teaching the man how to think rationally and interpret the figurative language used in scripture where trees are often symbolic of men.

It was a healing of perception, not sight..

In the same way there are exactly seven miracles that act like seals placed on scripture which prevent people who do not think very deeply from comprehending what was written inside.

If you look and look and keep on looking you will find it, even if I don't spit in your eyes.

If you don't look, you will find nothing.

 

[Mickiel]

Christians are more dangerous because they keep piling on lie after lie and think their helping the world.

And no one is putting them in check.

 

[hobelim]

Christians are more dangerous because they keep piling on lie after lie and think their helping the world.

And no one is putting them in check.

Ahem....really?

It's clear to me that you don't seem to see anything at all beyond your own nose...

 

[RWNJ]

Christians are more dangerous because they keep piling on lie after lie and think their helping the world.

And no one is putting them in check.

Ahem....really?

It's clear to me that you don't seem to see anything at all beyond your own nose...

It seems to me that you are a clueless buffoon. Stop and think about how many Biblical Scholars disagree with you. If that doesn't clue you in, then you are beyond hope. Your suffering will be great in Hell.

 

[Mickiel]

Christians are more dangerous because they keep piling on lie after lie and think their helping the world.

And no one is putting them in check.

Ahem....really?

It's clear to me that you don't seem to see anything at all beyond your own nose...

It seems to me that you are a clueless buffoon. Stop and think about how many Biblical Scholars disagree with you. If that doesn't clue you in, then you are beyond hope. Your suffering will be great in Hell.

This thread is not by any bible scholar , its by me. Its my work. There is no hell, you just want me to suffer ; that's why Christianity is dangerous ; they want and desire others to suffer. Yet they think its something wrong with you. Its arcane. Its demonic.

 

[Mickiel]

Christians are more dangerous because they keep piling on lie after lie and think their helping the world.

And no one is putting them in check.

Ahem....really?

It's clear to me that you don't seem to see anything at all beyond your own nose...

All I see is my thread and you on it.

 

[hobelim]

Christians are more dangerous because they keep piling on lie after lie and think their helping the world.

And no one is putting them in check.

Ahem....really?

It's clear to me that you don't seem to see anything at all beyond your own nose...

All I see is my thread and you on it.

lol... like I said.....

 

[hobelim]

Christians are more dangerous because they keep piling on lie after lie and think their helping the world.

And no one is putting them in check.

Ahem....really?

It's clear to me that you don't seem to see anything at all beyond your own nose...

It seems to me that you are a clueless buffoon. Stop and think about how many Biblical Scholars disagree with you. If that doesn't clue you in, then you are beyond hope. Your suffering will be great in Hell.

How many? Let even one step forward and dispute with what is irrefutable.

The fact that you can't tell the difference between reality and fantasy or a fairy tale from a historical document or a blessing from a curse shows that you are already in hell.

 

[Mickiel]

Christians are more dangerous because they keep piling on lie after lie and think their helping the world.

And no one is putting them in check.

Ahem....really?

It's clear to me that you don't seem to see anything at all beyond your own nose...

It seems to me that you are a clueless buffoon. Stop and think about how many Biblical Scholars disagree with you. If that doesn't clue you in, then you are beyond hope. Your suffering will be great in Hell.

How many? Let even one step forward and dispute with what is irrefutable.

The fact that you can't tell the difference between reality and fantasy or a fairy tale from a historical document shows that you are already in hell.

Enjoy!

I reject your hell and the Christian hell.