Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #358441 > unrolled thread
| Started by | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-07-23 12:11 -0700 |
| Last post | 2015-07-24 04:25 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 228 — 22 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-23 12:11 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-07-23 18:08 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-07-23 20:17 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2015-07-24 00:13 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-24 00:53 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-07-24 11:57 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-24 16:58 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-07-24 18:13 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-07-24 16:22 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-07-24 18:32 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-25 12:00 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-07-25 10:46 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-26 00:20 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-07-26 06:42 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-26 13:03 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-07-26 15:06 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-28 16:08 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-26 13:01 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-07-26 11:03 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-28 16:08 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-07-28 18:24 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-29 07:23 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-07-25 17:20 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-28 16:09 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-07-28 17:25 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-07-26 03:54 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-26 13:09 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-07-27 04:23 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-28 16:09 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-07-29 03:55 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-29 07:23 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-07-30 04:08 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-30 15:18 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-07-31 04:00 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-07-31 07:08 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-01 07:29 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2015-07-31 10:17 -0600
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-01 07:32 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-31 16:38 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-01 07:32 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-02 09:56 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-02 11:27 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-02 16:17 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-02 10:39 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-02 11:51 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-02 12:04 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-08-02 12:18 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-02 14:01 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-08-02 15:05 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-02 16:12 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-02 16:18 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2015-08-02 10:15 -0600
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-02 16:19 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2015-08-03 03:11 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-03 09:04 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-03 16:42 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-03 18:39 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-04 15:01 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-04 15:36 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-05 13:55 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-08-03 17:56 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-04 15:02 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-08-04 18:54 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-05 13:57 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-08-05 12:56 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-06 19:27 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-08-06 17:44 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-07 05:23 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-07 16:46 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-06 05:04 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-07 16:49 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-08 04:12 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-08 13:17 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-09 04:48 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-09 09:41 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-10 05:11 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-11 12:51 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-12 03:19 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-15 11:48 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-16 04:01 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-16 14:26 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@charter.net> - 2015-08-16 15:03 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 05:48 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-05 04:44 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-05 13:59 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-06 05:06 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-07 16:51 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-08 04:19 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-08 13:19 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-09 04:54 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-09 09:46 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-10 05:15 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-11 12:53 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-12 03:15 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-16 14:18 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@charter.net> - 2015-08-16 15:02 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 05:43 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-06 01:10 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-06 20:42 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-06 22:28 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-06 23:07 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-06 23:14 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-06 23:45 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-08-07 09:18 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-07 05:16 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-07 16:19 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-07 22:21 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-07 22:26 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-08 09:46 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-08-08 04:57 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-08-08 08:32 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-09 14:58 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-08-08 18:12 +0200
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-08 13:13 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-08-08 16:13 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-09 08:16 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-08-08 13:11 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> - 2015-08-08 14:06 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-08-08 14:58 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-09 04:38 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-07 00:00 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-07 05:19 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-07 12:22 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-07 15:42 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-08-07 15:48 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-08 04:26 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-08 09:42 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-09 04:58 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-09 12:59 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-10 05:21 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-11 12:54 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-09 13:14 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-07 16:53 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-08 04:31 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-08 13:20 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-09 05:00 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-09 09:47 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-10 05:22 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-11 12:55 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-12 03:17 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-15 11:58 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-16 04:00 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-16 14:19 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-08-16 12:24 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@charter.net> - 2015-08-16 15:03 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 05:45 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-20 12:40 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-04 05:16 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-04 15:03 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-05 04:46 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-05 14:00 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-06 05:07 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-07 16:53 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-08 04:35 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-08 13:20 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-09 05:00 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-09 09:48 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-10 05:23 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-16 14:16 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-08-16 12:25 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-18 13:27 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Mike M <mike@xenocyte.com> - 2015-08-18 19:04 +0000
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-18 12:33 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-19 17:17 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-20 04:47 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Doug Freyburger <dfreybur@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-18 22:42 +0000
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-19 17:19 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> - 2015-08-19 18:30 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. niunian <niunian@ymail.com> - 2015-08-20 21:52 +0800
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@charter.net> - 2015-08-16 15:02 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-17 05:38 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-18 13:28 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-18 16:48 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-08-19 17:20 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-20 04:49 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2015-07-29 11:15 -0600
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-07-29 13:56 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-07-29 18:59 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-07-30 06:43 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-07-30 04:11 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> - 2015-07-30 11:38 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-07-31 04:03 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> - 2015-07-31 04:14 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-01 07:34 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2015-07-31 10:19 -0600
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-07-31 12:06 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-31 21:52 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2015-08-01 00:56 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2015-07-31 22:22 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-31 22:32 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2015-08-01 01:55 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-01 12:39 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-01 07:39 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-08-01 07:38 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-07-30 04:10 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-25 11:59 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-07-24 16:27 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-25 10:32 +0100
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 09:07 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-25 12:03 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 15:15 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-26 10:09 +0100
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-26 13:11 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-07-26 15:08 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-28 16:11 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-07-25 06:36 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-25 12:04 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2015-07-25 11:31 -0600
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-26 13:13 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-07-25 10:45 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-26 13:14 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. bilgat@m.nu - 2015-07-25 17:23 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-25 12:02 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. talishi <talishi@example.net> - 2015-07-25 10:46 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-26 13:19 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 15:13 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-26 13:20 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-07-26 15:10 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> - 2015-07-26 15:19 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-07-26 15:29 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-28 16:14 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-28 16:13 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-07-26 22:45 -0400
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> - 2015-07-28 16:13 -0500
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2015-07-26 23:03 -0600
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-27 18:43 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-24 00:39 -0700
Re: Atheism is based on beliefs, not science. Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2015-07-24 04:25 -0400
Page 6 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 12 Next page →
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-06 23:07 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55C44B14.3BF8@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #359877 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > Attila < wrote: > > > > On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 01:10:45 -0700, The Starmaker > > <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id > > <55C31685.54A6@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > > >Attila < wrote: > > >> > > >> On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 15:02:34 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> in > > >> alt.atheism with message-id > > >> <9g62sat66jooq00mg9ro6fktj8qmg7stdi@4ax.com> wrote: > > >> > > >> >On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 17:56:09 -0700, talishi <talishi@example.net> wrote: > > >> > > > >> >>On 08/03/2015 02:42 PM, duke wrote: > > >> >>> Prove the American War of Independence occurred. Same difference. No eye > > >> >>> witnesses to testify. Just documents, accounts of others, paintings, artifacts, > > >> >>> etc. > > >> >> > > >> >>And third party verification (ie France), unlike your gospels. > > >> > > > >> >What 3rd party verification. I have the same types of verification for Jesus > > >> >Christ - documents, accounts of others, paintings, artifacts, etc. > > >> > > > >> > > >> What do you have that has absolutely no connection, directly or > > >> indirectly, with your bible? Direct verified accounts or 'paintings' > > >> by people who never heard of that bible or any person or organization > > >> connected to it? > > >> > > >> What 'artifacts' what are independent of such sources? > > >> > > >> Do you understand what 'independent' or 'verified' means? > > > > > > > > >“Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to > > >call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works—a teacher of such > > >men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of > > >the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when > > >Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned > > >him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, > > >for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine > > >prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things > > >concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not > > >extinct at this day.” > > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus > > > > It is the opinion of many scholars his writings were altered centuries > > ago to fit the necessary pattern. There is no independent > > verification from any other sources supporting him. > > > > I'm shocked. http://alivecampus.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/shocked_face.jpg
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-06 23:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55C44CD8.3DA5@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #359879 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > Attila < wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 01:10:45 -0700, The Starmaker > > > <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id > > > <55C31685.54A6@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > > > > >Attila < wrote: > > > >> > > > >> On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 15:02:34 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> in > > > >> alt.atheism with message-id > > > >> <9g62sat66jooq00mg9ro6fktj8qmg7stdi@4ax.com> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> >On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 17:56:09 -0700, talishi <talishi@example.net> wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> >>On 08/03/2015 02:42 PM, duke wrote: > > > >> >>> Prove the American War of Independence occurred. Same difference. No eye > > > >> >>> witnesses to testify. Just documents, accounts of others, paintings, artifacts, > > > >> >>> etc. > > > >> >> > > > >> >>And third party verification (ie France), unlike your gospels. > > > >> > > > > >> >What 3rd party verification. I have the same types of verification for Jesus > > > >> >Christ - documents, accounts of others, paintings, artifacts, etc. > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> What do you have that has absolutely no connection, directly or > > > >> indirectly, with your bible? Direct verified accounts or 'paintings' > > > >> by people who never heard of that bible or any person or organization > > > >> connected to it? > > > >> > > > >> What 'artifacts' what are independent of such sources? > > > >> > > > >> Do you understand what 'independent' or 'verified' means? > > > > > > > > > > > >“Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to > > > >call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works—a teacher of such > > > >men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of > > > >the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when > > > >Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned > > > >him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, > > > >for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine > > > >prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things > > > >concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not > > > >extinct at this day.” > > > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus > > > > > > It is the opinion of many scholars his writings were altered centuries > > > ago to fit the necessary pattern. There is no independent > > > verification from any other sources supporting him. > > > > > > > I'm shocked. > > http://alivecampus.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/shocked_face.jpg how about this guy? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus#Tacitus_on_Christ “Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus#Tacitus_on_Christ
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-06 23:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55C4541A.2701@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #359881 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > Attila < wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 01:10:45 -0700, The Starmaker > > > > <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id > > > > <55C31685.54A6@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > >Attila < wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 15:02:34 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> in > > > > >> alt.atheism with message-id > > > > >> <9g62sat66jooq00mg9ro6fktj8qmg7stdi@4ax.com> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> >On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 17:56:09 -0700, talishi <talishi@example.net> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > >> >>On 08/03/2015 02:42 PM, duke wrote: > > > > >> >>> Prove the American War of Independence occurred. Same difference. No eye > > > > >> >>> witnesses to testify. Just documents, accounts of others, paintings, artifacts, > > > > >> >>> etc. > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >>And third party verification (ie France), unlike your gospels. > > > > >> > > > > > >> >What 3rd party verification. I have the same types of verification for Jesus > > > > >> >Christ - documents, accounts of others, paintings, artifacts, etc. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> What do you have that has absolutely no connection, directly or > > > > >> indirectly, with your bible? Direct verified accounts or 'paintings' > > > > >> by people who never heard of that bible or any person or organization > > > > >> connected to it? > > > > >> > > > > >> What 'artifacts' what are independent of such sources? > > > > >> > > > > >> Do you understand what 'independent' or 'verified' means? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >“Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to > > > > >call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works—a teacher of such > > > > >men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of > > > > >the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when > > > > >Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned > > > > >him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, > > > > >for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine > > > > >prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things > > > > >concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not > > > > >extinct at this day.” > > > > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus > > > > > > > > It is the opinion of many scholars his writings were altered centuries > > > > ago to fit the necessary pattern. There is no independent > > > > verification from any other sources supporting him. > > > > > > > > > > I'm shocked. > > > > http://alivecampus.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/shocked_face.jpg > > how about this guy? > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus#Tacitus_on_Christ > > “Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and > inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their > abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the > name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of > Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a > most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke > out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, > where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find > their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made > of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense > multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as > of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their > deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and > perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and > burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.” > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus#Tacitus_on_Christ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bilgat@m.nu |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-07 09:18 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <9ff9sa50hgv2sudnjfrulmq4to4vmkh21i@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #359884 |
On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 23:45:46 -0700, The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >The Starmaker wrote: >> >> The Starmaker wrote: >> > >> > The Starmaker wrote: and as usual we get starfart replying to himself replying to himself replying to himself <snip the crap noone reads anyway>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-07 05:16 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vkt8sa5nu09e1k873pubm6n51o0hk238k6@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #359881 |
On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 23:14:48 -0700, The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id <55C44CD8.3DA5@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >The Starmaker wrote: >> >> The Starmaker wrote: >> > >> > Attila < wrote: >> > > >> > > On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 01:10:45 -0700, The Starmaker >> > > <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id >> > > <55C31685.54A6@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > >Attila < wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >> On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 15:02:34 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> in >> > > >> alt.atheism with message-id >> > > >> <9g62sat66jooq00mg9ro6fktj8qmg7stdi@4ax.com> wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >> >On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 17:56:09 -0700, talishi <talishi@example.net> wrote: >> > > >> > >> > > >> >>On 08/03/2015 02:42 PM, duke wrote: >> > > >> >>> Prove the American War of Independence occurred. Same difference. No eye >> > > >> >>> witnesses to testify. Just documents, accounts of others, paintings, artifacts, >> > > >> >>> etc. >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >>And third party verification (ie France), unlike your gospels. >> > > >> > >> > > >> >What 3rd party verification. I have the same types of verification for Jesus >> > > >> >Christ - documents, accounts of others, paintings, artifacts, etc. >> > > >> > >> > > >> >> > > >> What do you have that has absolutely no connection, directly or >> > > >> indirectly, with your bible? Direct verified accounts or 'paintings' >> > > >> by people who never heard of that bible or any person or organization >> > > >> connected to it? >> > > >> >> > > >> What 'artifacts' what are independent of such sources? >> > > >> >> > > >> Do you understand what 'independent' or 'verified' means? >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >“Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to >> > > >call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works—a teacher of such >> > > >men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of >> > > >the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when >> > > >Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned >> > > >him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, >> > > >for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine >> > > >prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things >> > > >concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not >> > > >extinct at this day.” >> > > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus >> > > >> > > It is the opinion of many scholars his writings were altered centuries >> > > ago to fit the necessary pattern. There is no independent >> > > verification from any other sources supporting him. >> > > >> > >> > I'm shocked. >> >> http://alivecampus.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/shocked_face.jpg > > > >how about this guy? > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus#Tacitus_on_Christ > > > >“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and >inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their >abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the >name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of >Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a >most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke >out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, >where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find >their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made >of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense >multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as >of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their >deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and >perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and >burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.” > > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus#Tacitus_on_Christ How about him? It appears he was born after the events supposedly occurred and the major players were dead therefore the could not have seen anything himself but must have worked from third party accounts. Were these verified accounts? What were they and how were they verified? This only raises the same questions and hardly qualifies as verification itself does it? -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor Ass. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-07 16:19 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55C53D19.74FB@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #359881 |
Kevrob wrote: > > On Friday, August 7, 2015 at 2:14:51 AM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > Attila < wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 01:10:45 -0700, The Starmaker > > > > > <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id > > > > > <55C31685.54A6@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >Attila < wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 15:02:34 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> in > > > > > >> alt.atheism with message-id > > > > > >> <9g62sat66jooq00mg9ro6fktj8qmg7stdi@4ax.com> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> >On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 17:56:09 -0700, talishi <talishi@example.net> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >>On 08/03/2015 02:42 PM, duke wrote: > > > > > >> >>> Prove the American War of Independence occurred. Same difference. No eye > > > > > >> >>> witnesses to testify. Just documents, accounts of others, paintings, artifacts, > > > > > >> >>> etc. > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >>And third party verification (ie France), unlike your gospels. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >What 3rd party verification. I have the same types of verification for Jesus > > > > > >> >Christ - documents, accounts of others, paintings, artifacts, etc. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> What do you have that has absolutely no connection, directly or > > > > > >> indirectly, with your bible? Direct verified accounts or 'paintings' > > > > > >> by people who never heard of that bible or any person or organization > > > > > >> connected to it? > > > > > >> > > > > > >> What 'artifacts' what are independent of such sources? > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Do you understand what 'independent' or 'verified' means? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >"Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to > > > > > >call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works--a teacher of such > > > > > >men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of > > > > > >the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when > > > > > >Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned > > > > > >him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, > > > > > >for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine > > > > > >prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things > > > > > >concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not > > > > > >extinct at this day." > > > > > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus > > > > > > > > > > It is the opinion of many scholars his writings were altered centuries > > > > > ago to fit the necessary pattern. There is no independent > > > > > verification from any other sources supporting him. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm shocked. > > > > > > http://alivecampus.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/shocked_face.jpg > > > > > > > > how about this guy? > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus#Tacitus_on_Christ > > > > > > > > "Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and > > inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their > > abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the > > name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of > > Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a > > most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke > > out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, > > where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find > > their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made > > of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense > > multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as > > of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their > > deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and > > perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and > > burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired." > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus#Tacitus_on_Christ > > GoTo the 1st para @ > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus > > Born circa 56 CE Died 117 CE > > So, he was on the scene 23 years after the traditional death date for > the Nazarene, 33 CE. He wasn't a contemporary of Jesus. > > Thank you for playing. > > Kevin R 23 years??? The story of Jesus Christ...the new testament wasn't even writen until 50 years after Jesus Christ died.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-07 22:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55C591CD.41E8@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #359971 |
Kevrob wrote: > > On Friday, August 7, 2015 at 7:19:45 PM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote: > > Kevrob wrote: > > > > > > On Friday, August 7, 2015 at 2:14:51 AM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote: > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Attila < wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 01:10:45 -0700, The Starmaker > > > > > > > <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id > > > > > > > <55C31685.54A6@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Attila < wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 15:02:34 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> in > > > > > > > >> alt.atheism with message-id > > > > > > > >> <9g62sat66jooq00mg9ro6fktj8qmg7stdi@4ax.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 17:56:09 -0700, talishi <talishi@example.net> wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> >>On 08/03/2015 02:42 PM, duke wrote: > > > > > > > >> >>> Prove the American War of Independence occurred. Same difference. No eye > > > > > > > >> >>> witnesses to testify. Just documents, accounts of others, paintings, artifacts, > > > > > > > >> >>> etc. > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >>And third party verification (ie France), unlike your gospels. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> >What 3rd party verification. I have the same types of verification for Jesus > > > > > > > >> >Christ - documents, accounts of others, paintings, artifacts, etc. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> What do you have that has absolutely no connection, directly or > > > > > > > >> indirectly, with your bible? Direct verified accounts or 'paintings' > > > > > > > >> by people who never heard of that bible or any person or organization > > > > > > > >> connected to it? > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> What 'artifacts' what are independent of such sources? > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Do you understand what 'independent' or 'verified' means? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >"Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to > > > > > > > >call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works--a teacher of such > > > > > > > >men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of > > > > > > > >the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when > > > > > > > >Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned > > > > > > > >him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, > > > > > > > >for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine > > > > > > > >prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things > > > > > > > >concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not > > > > > > > >extinct at this day." > > > > > > > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is the opinion of many scholars his writings were altered centuries > > > > > > > ago to fit the necessary pattern. There is no independent > > > > > > > verification from any other sources supporting him. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm shocked. > > > > > > > > > > http://alivecampus.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/shocked_face.jpg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > how about this guy? > > > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus#Tacitus_on_Christ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and > > > > inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their > > > > abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the > > > > name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of > > > > Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a > > > > most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke > > > > out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, > > > > where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find > > > > their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made > > > > of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense > > > > multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as > > > > of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their > > > > deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and > > > > perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and > > > > burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired." > > > > > > > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus#Tacitus_on_Christ > > > > > > GoTo the 1st para @ > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus > > > > > > Born circa 56 CE Died 117 CE > > > > > > So, he was on the scene 23 years after the traditional death date for > > > the Nazarene, 33 CE. He wasn't a contemporary of Jesus. > > > > > > Thank you for playing. > > > > > > Kevin R > > > > > > 23 years??? > > > > The story of Jesus Christ...the new testament wasn't even writen until 50 years after Jesus Christ died. > > So what. We were talking about non-biblical verification that someone > called "Jesus" or something close to it had lived and either founded a > religion or had been the example for a religion founded by his followers. > Tacitus wasn't alive when JC was, so he would only have heard about any > Jewish Messiah after the fellow was said to have died. He isn't, as the > historians say, a primary source. That's not to say he didn't encounter > Christians in his lifetime. > > Kevin R Born circa 56 CE Died 117 CE Doesn't CE mean Before Christ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-07 22:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55C592EB.2D7@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #359989 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > Kevrob wrote: > > > > On Friday, August 7, 2015 at 7:19:45 PM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote: > > > Kevrob wrote: > > > > > > > > On Friday, August 7, 2015 at 2:14:51 AM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Attila < wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 01:10:45 -0700, The Starmaker > > > > > > > > <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id > > > > > > > > <55C31685.54A6@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Attila < wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 15:02:34 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> in > > > > > > > > >> alt.atheism with message-id > > > > > > > > >> <9g62sat66jooq00mg9ro6fktj8qmg7stdi@4ax.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> >On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 17:56:09 -0700, talishi <talishi@example.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> >>On 08/03/2015 02:42 PM, duke wrote: > > > > > > > > >> >>> Prove the American War of Independence occurred. Same difference. No eye > > > > > > > > >> >>> witnesses to testify. Just documents, accounts of others, paintings, artifacts, > > > > > > > > >> >>> etc. > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >>And third party verification (ie France), unlike your gospels. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> >What 3rd party verification. I have the same types of verification for Jesus > > > > > > > > >> >Christ - documents, accounts of others, paintings, artifacts, etc. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> What do you have that has absolutely no connection, directly or > > > > > > > > >> indirectly, with your bible? Direct verified accounts or 'paintings' > > > > > > > > >> by people who never heard of that bible or any person or organization > > > > > > > > >> connected to it? > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> What 'artifacts' what are independent of such sources? > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Do you understand what 'independent' or 'verified' means? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >"Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to > > > > > > > > >call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works--a teacher of such > > > > > > > > >men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of > > > > > > > > >the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when > > > > > > > > >Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned > > > > > > > > >him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, > > > > > > > > >for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine > > > > > > > > >prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things > > > > > > > > >concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not > > > > > > > > >extinct at this day." > > > > > > > > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is the opinion of many scholars his writings were altered centuries > > > > > > > > ago to fit the necessary pattern. There is no independent > > > > > > > > verification from any other sources supporting him. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm shocked. > > > > > > > > > > > > http://alivecampus.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/shocked_face.jpg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > how about this guy? > > > > > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus#Tacitus_on_Christ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and > > > > > inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their > > > > > abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the > > > > > name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of > > > > > Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a > > > > > most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke > > > > > out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, > > > > > where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find > > > > > their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made > > > > > of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense > > > > > multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as > > > > > of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their > > > > > deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and > > > > > perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and > > > > > burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus#Tacitus_on_Christ > > > > > > > > GoTo the 1st para @ > > > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus > > > > > > > > Born circa 56 CE Died 117 CE > > > > > > > > So, he was on the scene 23 years after the traditional death date for > > > > the Nazarene, 33 CE. He wasn't a contemporary of Jesus. > > > > > > > > Thank you for playing. > > > > > > > > Kevin R > > > > > > > > > 23 years??? > > > > > > The story of Jesus Christ...the new testament wasn't even writen until 50 years after Jesus Christ died. > > > > So what. We were talking about non-biblical verification that someone > > called "Jesus" or something close to it had lived and either founded a > > religion or had been the example for a religion founded by his followers. > > Tacitus wasn't alive when JC was, so he would only have heard about any > > Jewish Messiah after the fellow was said to have died. He isn't, as the > > historians say, a primary source. That's not to say he didn't encounter > > Christians in his lifetime. > > > > Kevin R > > Born circa 56 CE Died 117 CE > > Doesn't CE mean Before Christ? You wrote: "Tacitus wasn't alive when JC was..." The Common Era, also known as the Christian Era,[1][2] is the name of the stretch of time from somewhere around the alleged birth of Jesus Christ. Now when was Jesus born? Maybe 86 CE???
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-08 09:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55C63281.18AC@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #359990 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > Kevrob wrote: > > > > > > On Friday, August 7, 2015 at 7:19:45 PM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote: > > > > Kevrob wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, August 7, 2015 at 2:14:51 AM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Attila < wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 01:10:45 -0700, The Starmaker > > > > > > > > > <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id > > > > > > > > > <55C31685.54A6@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Attila < wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 15:02:34 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> in > > > > > > > > > >> alt.atheism with message-id > > > > > > > > > >> <9g62sat66jooq00mg9ro6fktj8qmg7stdi@4ax.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> >On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 17:56:09 -0700, talishi <talishi@example.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >>On 08/03/2015 02:42 PM, duke wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> >>> Prove the American War of Independence occurred. Same difference. No eye > > > > > > > > > >> >>> witnesses to testify. Just documents, accounts of others, paintings, artifacts, > > > > > > > > > >> >>> etc. > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >>And third party verification (ie France), unlike your gospels. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >What 3rd party verification. I have the same types of verification for Jesus > > > > > > > > > >> >Christ - documents, accounts of others, paintings, artifacts, etc. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> What do you have that has absolutely no connection, directly or > > > > > > > > > >> indirectly, with your bible? Direct verified accounts or 'paintings' > > > > > > > > > >> by people who never heard of that bible or any person or organization > > > > > > > > > >> connected to it? > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> What 'artifacts' what are independent of such sources? > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Do you understand what 'independent' or 'verified' means? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >"Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to > > > > > > > > > >call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works--a teacher of such > > > > > > > > > >men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of > > > > > > > > > >the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when > > > > > > > > > >Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned > > > > > > > > > >him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, > > > > > > > > > >for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine > > > > > > > > > >prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things > > > > > > > > > >concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not > > > > > > > > > >extinct at this day." > > > > > > > > > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is the opinion of many scholars his writings were altered centuries > > > > > > > > > ago to fit the necessary pattern. There is no independent > > > > > > > > > verification from any other sources supporting him. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm shocked. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://alivecampus.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/shocked_face.jpg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > how about this guy? > > > > > > > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus#Tacitus_on_Christ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and > > > > > > inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their > > > > > > abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the > > > > > > name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of > > > > > > Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a > > > > > > most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke > > > > > > out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, > > > > > > where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find > > > > > > their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made > > > > > > of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense > > > > > > multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as > > > > > > of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their > > > > > > deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and > > > > > > perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and > > > > > > burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus#Tacitus_on_Christ > > > > > > > > > > GoTo the 1st para @ > > > > > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus > > > > > > > > > > Born circa 56 CE Died 117 CE > > > > > > > > > > So, he was on the scene 23 years after the traditional death date for > > > > > the Nazarene, 33 CE. He wasn't a contemporary of Jesus. > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for playing. > > > > > > > > > > Kevin R > > > > > > > > > > > > 23 years??? > > > > > > > > The story of Jesus Christ...the new testament wasn't even writen until 50 years after Jesus Christ died. > > > > > > So what. We were talking about non-biblical verification that someone > > > called "Jesus" or something close to it had lived and either founded a > > > religion or had been the example for a religion founded by his followers. > > > Tacitus wasn't alive when JC was, so he would only have heard about any > > > Jewish Messiah after the fellow was said to have died. He isn't, as the > > > historians say, a primary source. That's not to say he didn't encounter > > > Christians in his lifetime. > > > > > > Kevin R > > > > Born circa 56 CE Died 117 CE > > > > Doesn't CE mean Before Christ? > > You wrote: "Tacitus wasn't alive when JC was..." > > The Common Era, also known as the Christian Era,[1][2] is the name of > the stretch of time from somewhere around the alleged birth of Jesus > Christ. > > Now when was Jesus born? Maybe 86 CE??? Or maybe Jesus Christ was born 56 CE, in the same hospitol that Tacitus was born. It must be in the Times Roman newspaper...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | talishi <talishi@example.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-08 04:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <mq4qtg0ecl@news6.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #359989 |
On 08/07/2015 10:21 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > Doesn't CE mean Before Christ? It translates to AD, and we use it because we can't quite bring ourselves to say "The Year of Our Lord". Particularly since he isn't our Lord. By the same token we use BCE, Before Common Era, rather than BC, Before Christ, since we're not entirely sure there was a Christ, and even if there was, we don't think his birth was such a watershed. If I had my druthers we'd use Ab Urbe Condita and add 753 years to every date.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-08 08:32 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <p31csa5vhnssns2uvqmbj369sjtahp1thv@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #360002 |
On Sat, 08 Aug 2015 04:57:29 -0700, talishi <talishi@example.net> wrote: >On 08/07/2015 10:21 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >> Doesn't CE mean Before Christ? Idiot. >It translates to AD, and we use it because we can't quite bring >ourselves to say "The Year of Our Lord". Particularly since he isn't >our Lord. By the same token we use BCE, Before Common Era, rather than >BC, Before Christ, since we're not entirely sure there was a Christ, and >even if there was, we don't think his birth was such a watershed. If I >had my druthers we'd use Ab Urbe Condita and add 753 years to every date. It's actually the international standard term, because the rest of the world isn't as god-soaked.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-09 14:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55C7CCFF.69BE@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #360008 |
Kevrob wrote: > > On Saturday, August 8, 2015 at 2:03:32 PM UTC-4, Lawrence Watt-Evans wrote: > > On Sat, 8 Aug 2015 12:44:16 -0400, "J. Clarke" > > <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >In article <83518017-2da0-4489-8010-531a44d244fa@googlegroups.com>, > > >kevrob@my-deja.com says... > > >> > > >> On Saturday, August 8, 2015 at 9:32:38 AM UTC-4, Christopher A. Lee wrote: > > >> > On Sat, 08 Aug 2015 04:57:29 -0700, talishi <talishi@example.net> > > >> > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > >On 08/07/2015 10:21 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > > >> > >> Doesn't CE mean Before Christ? > > >> > > > >> > Idiot. > > >> > > > >> > >It translates to AD, and we use it because we can't quite bring > > >> > >ourselves to say "The Year of Our Lord". Particularly since he isn't > > >> > >our Lord. By the same token we use BCE, Before Common Era, rather than > > >> > >BC, Before Christ, since we're not entirely sure there was a Christ, and > > >> > >even if there was, we don't think his birth was such a watershed. If I > > >> > >had my druthers we'd use Ab Urbe Condita and add 753 years to every date. > > >> > > >> The founding of Rome doesn't strike me as a better Year 1. They had > > >> their pantheon, slavery, and gave imperialism its name. > > > > > >What's wrong with a pantheon? And you say "imperialism" like it's > > >automatically bad. It is said that in the Roman Empire a virgin could > > >walk alone from Londinium to Alexandria carrying a purse of gold and > > >would arrive in Alexandria with both virginity and gold intact. Is that > > >true in our "civilized" era? > > > > a) Probably, assuming she's bright enough to not tell anyone what's > > in the purse. Might take some luck, and of course there's the issue > > of walking across the Channel, same as there was in Augustan Rome. > > > > (I note, not that it's relevant, that the only place I've ever > > actually had my pocket picked was Rome.) > > > > b) That was said of a lot of times, places, and cultures (such as > > Arthur's Britain), and usually wasn't true. > > > > During the reign of Vlad the Impaler, it was said that a > > jewel-encrusted golden cup was left on the side of a fountain in his > > capital city of Tirgoviste, for the use of thirsty travelers, and no > > one dared steal it. (It allegedly vanished forever as soon as news of > > his death arrived.) Outside Rumania this is not generally seen as an > > endorsement of Vlad's policies. > > > > Those points aside, I have no problem with well-run empires. > > > > >> > It's actually the international standard term, because the rest of the > > >> > world isn't as god-soaked. > > >> > > >> Or is soaking in a different flavor of god(s), more's the pity. > > > > > >Personally I don't believe in Christianity but I learned it as "BC" and > > >"AD" and somebody can't deal with that he's really more interested in an > > >argument than in the sequence of events, so screw him. > > > > One trivial issue with AD/BC is that "Anno Domini" is Latin and > > "Before Christ" is English; shouldn't they match? > > Some have used A.C. or A.C.N. (ante Christum natum) for > "before the birth of Christ." > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ante_Christum_Natum > > Kevin R > > Kevin R > . Well, I was born in the 1900's, but I don't know if it is A.D., A.C., A.C.N., B.E., G.E., or M.C.W....or L.S.D.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-08 18:12 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <d2mo3rF176vU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #360002 |
On 08/08/2015 13:57, talishi wrote: > On 08/07/2015 10:21 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >> Doesn't CE mean Before Christ? > > It translates to AD, and we use it because we can't quite bring > ourselves to say "The Year of Our Lord". Particularly since he isn't > our Lord. By the same token we use BCE, Before Common Era, rather than > BC, Before Christ, since we're not entirely sure there was a Christ, and > even if there was, we don't think his birth was such a watershed. If I > had my druthers we'd use Ab Urbe Condita and add 753 years to every date. It's a bit of political correctness bum fluff. So now we use a non-Christian term invented to avoid giving potential offence to non-Christians and used it to date events when we fucked up the non-Christian world sixteen ways from Sunday. It's also quite inconsistent. We are expected to switch from AD to BCE but we keep the same count-from-the-birth-of-the allege-saviour numbering of years, and we do not bother to change religious names of days or months...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-08 13:13 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mq5db3$5cm$1@panix3.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #360017 |
In article <d2mo3rF176vU1@mid.individual.net>, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> said: > It's also quite inconsistent. We are expected to switch from AD > to BCE but we keep the same count-from-the-birth-of-the > allege-saviour numbering of years, and we do not bother to change > religious names of days or months... Well would *you* want to piss off Thor by changing "Thursday" to something else? -- wds
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <nobody@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-08 16:13 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <5qtxx.9419$jj4.531@fx28.iad> |
| In reply to | #360017 |
On 08/08/2015 12:12 PM, Alex W. wrote:
> On 08/08/2015 13:57, talishi wrote:
>> On 08/07/2015 10:21 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>> Doesn't CE mean Before Christ?
>>
>> It translates to AD, and we use it because we can't quite bring
>> ourselves to say "The Year of Our Lord". Particularly since he isn't
>> our Lord. By the same token we use BCE, Before Common Era, rather than
>> BC, Before Christ, since we're not entirely sure there was a Christ, and
>> even if there was, we don't think his birth was such a watershed. If I
>> had my druthers we'd use Ab Urbe Condita and add 753 years to every date.
>
> It's a bit of political correctness bum fluff.
> So now we use a non-Christian term invented to avoid giving potential
> offence to non-Christians and used it to date events when we fucked up
> the non-Christian world sixteen ways from Sunday.
>
> It's also quite inconsistent. We are expected to switch from AD to BCE
> but we keep the same count-from-the-birth-of-the allege-saviour
> numbering of years, and we do not bother to change religious names of
> days or months...
Alex, you just don't get it. To Jews some Jews are more equal than
others. Yeshua (Jesus) being one considered less equal.
It's funny there are those who can't bring themselves to say "AD" even
though it's in Latin and today nobody can even read cursive let alone
Latin! OF course what I see is a subconscious fear that just perhaps
Jesus just MIGHT have been the messiah and they didn't recognize it so
they have to censor out of their lives any hint that they might have
made a mistake. And they don't care if they have to reject all of human
history to keep their little minds comfortable!
Personally most Christians and even non-Christians find this blatant
political manipulation of historical fact to be offensive. Every time I
hear CE or BCE I find it totally offensive that a minor group is using
nothing but loud talking to fly in the face of centuries of Historical
usage.
So are Jews part of human history or not? It seems they really don't
want any part of any history but their own. And if they aren't part of
human history then we don't have to pay attention to them, do we?
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\_:/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
\/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-09 08:16 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mq7g7s$1ev$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #360047 |
On 8/8/2015 4:13 PM, benj wrote: > > Alex, you just don't get it. To Jews some Jews are more equal than > others. Yeshua (Jesus) being one considered less equal. > > It's funny there are those who can't bring themselves to say "AD" even > though it's in Latin and today nobody can even read cursive let alone > Latin! OF course what I see is a subconscious fear that just perhaps > Jesus just MIGHT have been the messiah and they didn't recognize it so > they have to censor out of their lives any hint that they might have > made a mistake. His truth is marching on! Glory, glory hallelujah. Harlow hit BJ with his ruler Harlow bopped him off the bean with a rotten tangerine He ain't gonna kook no more! -- Cut off one head, two more shall take its place. HAIL HYDRA! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZcG5UOY224
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-08 13:11 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mq5d82$ag0$1@panix3.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #360002 |
In article <mq4qtg0ecl@news6.newsguy.com>, talishi <talishi@example.net> said: >> Doesn't CE mean Before Christ? > > It translates to AD, and we use it because we can't quite bring > ourselves to say "The Year of Our Lord". Particularly since he > isn't our Lord. By the same token we use BCE, Before Common Era, > rather than BC, Before Christ, since we're not entirely sure there > was a Christ, and even if there was, we don't think his birth was > such a watershed. If I had my druthers we'd use Ab Urbe Condita > and add 753 years to every date. And then we can sit here arguing about whether there's any evidence that this "Rome" ever actually existed... -- wds
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-08 14:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <u3hcsad7icave51jt5mgs5rnt7v92ak89r@reader80.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #360022 |
On 8 Aug 2015 13:11:30 -0400, wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote: >In article <mq4qtg0ecl@news6.newsguy.com>, >talishi <talishi@example.net> said: > >>> Doesn't CE mean Before Christ? >> >> It translates to AD, and we use it because we can't quite bring >> ourselves to say "The Year of Our Lord". Particularly since he >> isn't our Lord. By the same token we use BCE, Before Common Era, >> rather than BC, Before Christ, since we're not entirely sure there >> was a Christ, and even if there was, we don't think his birth was >> such a watershed. If I had my druthers we'd use Ab Urbe Condita >> and add 753 years to every date. > >And then we can sit here arguing about whether there's any evidence >that this "Rome" ever actually existed... Except, of course, we can go and look at the buildings and read the inscriptions, which is much better evidence than any sort of written accounts. -- My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-08 14:58 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <sancsa98tdcg4q8175q5n0e2sk25mvtp8g@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #360028 |
On Sat, 08 Aug 2015 14:06:21 -0400, Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> wrote: >On 8 Aug 2015 13:11:30 -0400, wdstarr@panix.com (William December >Starr) wrote: > >>In article <mq4qtg0ecl@news6.newsguy.com>, >>talishi <talishi@example.net> said: >> >>>> Doesn't CE mean Before Christ? >>> >>> It translates to AD, and we use it because we can't quite bring >>> ourselves to say "The Year of Our Lord". Particularly since he >>> isn't our Lord. By the same token we use BCE, Before Common Era, >>> rather than BC, Before Christ, since we're not entirely sure there >>> was a Christ, and even if there was, we don't think his birth was >>> such a watershed. If I had my druthers we'd use Ab Urbe Condita >>> and add 753 years to every date. >> >>And then we can sit here arguing about whether there's any evidence >>that this "Rome" ever actually existed... > >Except, of course, we can go and look at the buildings and read the >inscriptions, which is much better evidence than any sort of written >accounts. They always use these stupid, dishonest analogies that insult the intelligence - because they are utterly certain their religious beliefs are true and cannot think outside the box. In the real world, Jesus is a religious belief. A possible composite character based on several different people who may or may not have existed. But Christians can't grasp the fact that non-Christians see it somewhat more objectively than Christians do. And in spite of the subject line, if Christians could think outside the box, they would understand that atheists are people outside it. They are people who don't happen to be any sort of theist, and cannot be describes as if they were inside it using doctrinal presumptions from inside it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-09 04:38 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ra4esahkghtpoamgnlc0mt6n1cochv54v0@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #360045 |
On Sat, 08 Aug 2015 14:58:41 -0500, Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> in alt.atheism with message-id <sancsa98tdcg4q8175q5n0e2sk25mvtp8g@4ax.com> wrote: >In the real world, Jesus is a religious belief. A possible composite >character based on several different people who may or may not have >existed. > >But Christians can't grasp the fact that non-Christians see it >somewhat more objectively than Christians do. Very well said. -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor Ass. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 12 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web