Atheists, smarter than religious people

spendi, There were many, many, Jesus, living during that time. No different than the Tom, Dick, and Harry's of today.

You belong in the 4 years old group. You rarely, if ever, provide information of any value; just retorts of a 4 year old.

cicerone imposter wrote:

You belong in the 4 years old group. You rarely, if ever, provide information of any value; just retorts of a 4 year old.

We could very easily replace the word Spendius with Cicerone Imposter here.

I guess I was generalizing over several threads.

Intrepid wrote:

I guess I was generalizing over several threads.

I don't really blame you, but I must encourage you to let go of grudge and try to focus on being constructive. Sure I fail at being constructive too, but then please remind me in a mature manner to be what we all should consider an ideal.

I never hold a grudge. It is not constructive and only ages one ungracefully. Love your enemies, bless them that curse you.

You belong in the 4 years old group. You rarely, if ever, provide information of any value; just retorts of a 4 year old.

You said that the Bible must be used to prove the existence of Jesus. I told you of two references in Roman historians to Jesus that I've read. I have two biographies of Jesus and there are many more. You used the word "must" and you were wrong. You sought to pull the wool over our eyes in order to claim that Jesus is a tautological figure invented by an oppressive ruling class to keep us all awe and subjection. I know your position even if you don't. The Socialist Nirvana brigade have polluted all over your thoughts. That's what interests me about all this. Where it started. When did those siren voices start getting your sympathetic ear. It's a chain-reaction cascade once underway. It soon gets to a point of either sticking to it more and more emphatically, putting it on Ignore, as it is in my pub, or a humble repentance at the altar rails. Most A2Kers have this stuff on Ignore. A few pointedly.

The Church is pretty easy to discredit I must admit. Have you read Balzac on monks and nuns? But when the style of the denigration falls so woefully short of that of the Marquis de Sade's splendid efforts, maybe the one spark that lit the blue touchpaper in 1789 as some claim, I cannot help but think that it can shrug off the puny efforts of the likes of Dawkins.

Jesus is an important figure in Islam too. As befits a saviour. He threw a lifebelt for us. If 2000 years later we are still thrashing around trying to get hold of it is that the fault of the saviour?

Your belittling of Him belittles you.

And you said, a second lie, that the Pope washing the beggar's feet is a sham. And it isn't for the reasons I gave. It's a ceremony. Even if the rumours that the beggars are all actors and have been de-loused and sanitised in a Vatican cubicle built especially for the job, it doesn't mean that the ceremony is a sham. An employer treating a servant badly might well, on seeing the ceremony or hearing about it, have a twinge of conscience. Maybe hundreds of thousands of such people. Never a mention in Media because there's no "hook" like the one Pastor Dickhead read about in an old comic book. It's not dramatic. It's more like osmosis through an almost impermeable membrane. No Story. No big headlines. Would that be a sham? Just because you don't understand the effects of it and which are intended. It's a beautiful ceremony with a beautiful purpose and I have no doubt that it causes some effects on those who wonder about it even if it doesn't on those who dismiss it with a sneer.

You were wrong in both instances.

Intrepid wrote:

I never hold a grudge. It is not constructive and only ages one ungracefully. Love your enemies, bless them that curse you.

Yes,yes those are beautiful words, but try to live by them.