The Catholic Church must be destroyed...

[Shallow]

Of course there is evidence, but it's not in the same league as the fact that 2 + 2 =4. We created 2+2=4. It cannot be anything else. My mind is open to the fact that Christianity may be wrong. You're the one with the closed mind. You are presenting a theory as fact and cannot admit that maybe your theory is wrong.

There is a saying; the painting is evidence of the painter. If you saw a painting pop up in your room painted on your wall and it looked exactly like an elephant let's say. Not kind of like one but exactly like one with different colors and eyes, and a trunk, etc. And everyone in your house says they didn't do it, and no one went into your room and trhe door was locked, but you found the window open and paint cans on your floor. You can think one of two things; someone came into your room trough the window and painted it then left or it was painted by chance. That the wind blew the paint onto the wall and it just happened to look exactly like an elephant.

If you saw a robot walking around the streets you'd wonder who built it because it cannot just build it self with out human intervention. So when I see life created I wonder who or what created it. You can believe it was created by chance, but you can never prove it, and neither can any big bang scientist on earth and they'll gladly admit that. You see because the great scientists are wise enough to know the difference between probable theory and fact. It's the unscientific skeptics that pervert the word of science.

OK, so let's start with a pre-curser...

read this interview....
http://www.sabon.org/reptiloid/index3.html

nevermind the context of the interview, pay attention to the information presented in it.... It's long so I suggest you wait till you have 3 or 4 hours to dedicate to read it..... Most of the interview has to do with technology, but there are small parts of it that have to do with religion (you can skip around, but I suggest you read the whole thing)

Then take a stroll over to one of my favorite websites of all time, The Info Vault, and read this:
http://www.theinfovault.net/vault/spirituality/genesisrevised.html

Much shorter, but relevant.... and, while your at The Info vault, read some of the other stuff too....

After you read that stuff, let me know, I'll get ya some more reading.... obviously I can't force you to do anything, but if you really do have an open mind, you'll read it....

I have no problem reading anything. It make take me a while but I will read it and I will get back to you. One huge error I found upon first glimpse of the Genesis revised article was how it said it was translated from Hebrew to Latin. That's just dead wrong. Greek was the sophisticated language of Ancient Rome and anything translated from any other language would have been translated to Greek because all educated Romans had Greek tutors. It would later be translated to Latin for the common folk. As a Greek speaker and moderate Greek reader of very early Bible scriptures let me just say that there are no signs in the old Greek texts that imply multiple Gods. and I'm not even saying that there is only one God or that there has to be. I'm saying that translations that pre-date the Roman texts say one God.

Anyway, I'll try and read everything some time this week and give my thoughts. I'm eager to see if this ends up being as cut and dry as 2+2.

the language verses the age of it's creator is irrelevant to this....

and, the original bible was written in Aramaic (I know that's not the right spelling, but you get the point) everything else is a translation after that including Hebrew, which coincidentally became the Torah (again, sorry for my spelling) for the Jews..... Now, in some of my studies, I have found that some of the stories in the bible originated from Greek writers... It is a generally excepted theory among scholars that the bible is hugely plagiarized.....

and the Bible was translated into Latin using the Rosetta stone, a very popular and accurately documented event... there was no mention of the greek language before that point. Greek may be an older language, but it was not part of the change of command (so to speak) with regards to translating the bible...

No mention of the Greek language before what? It was the main language of Rome's elite and it's a lot easier to prove that than it is to prove God is false. Educated Roman writers wrote in Greek, spoke Greek. It was too complicated of a language for the Germanic Tribes that adopted Latin after conquering Rome and the Greek texts were lost in western Rome, but looking through the history of Eastern Rome it's very obvious.

The Rosetta Stone? The artifact written in three languages? One of those languages was Greek. None of those languages were Latin. How does it make sense that something would be translated to Latin before Greek? Where does Hebrew or Aramaic fit in here? If the Rosetta Stone was used to translate into latin it would have been used like this; The Septuagint which had been a Torah translated into Greek for Ptolemy by Jewish scholars would have been translated from Greek to Latin.

Teach me because I'm confused.

[Nigga_With_An_Additude]

guys look at the big bang theory...............

something must have started it right?Then there has to be God

[Hey Ma]

guys look at the big bang theory...............

something must have started it right?Then there has to be God

shut up fat ass, God wanted your children to be taken by someone else because he hates you.

[El the Self Image]

Of course there is evidence, but it's not in the same league as the fact that 2 + 2 =4. We created 2+2=4. It cannot be anything else. My mind is open to the fact that Christianity may be wrong. You're the one with the closed mind. You are presenting a theory as fact and cannot admit that maybe your theory is wrong.

There is a saying; the painting is evidence of the painter. If you saw a painting pop up in your room painted on your wall and it looked exactly like an elephant let's say. Not kind of like one but exactly like one with different colors and eyes, and a trunk, etc. And everyone in your house says they didn't do it, and no one went into your room and trhe door was locked, but you found the window open and paint cans on your floor. You can think one of two things; someone came into your room trough the window and painted it then left or it was painted by chance. That the wind blew the paint onto the wall and it just happened to look exactly like an elephant.

If you saw a robot walking around the streets you'd wonder who built it because it cannot just build it self with out human intervention. So when I see life created I wonder who or what created it. You can believe it was created by chance, but you can never prove it, and neither can any big bang scientist on earth and they'll gladly admit that. You see because the great scientists are wise enough to know the difference between probable theory and fact. It's the unscientific skeptics that pervert the word of science.

OK, so let's start with a pre-curser...

read this interview....
http://www.sabon.org/reptiloid/index3.html

nevermind the context of the interview, pay attention to the information presented in it.... It's long so I suggest you wait till you have 3 or 4 hours to dedicate to read it..... Most of the interview has to do with technology, but there are small parts of it that have to do with religion (you can skip around, but I suggest you read the whole thing)

Then take a stroll over to one of my favorite websites of all time, The Info Vault, and read this:
http://www.theinfovault.net/vault/spirituality/genesisrevised.html

Much shorter, but relevant.... and, while your at The Info vault, read some of the other stuff too....

After you read that stuff, let me know, I'll get ya some more reading.... obviously I can't force you to do anything, but if you really do have an open mind, you'll read it....

I have no problem reading anything. It make take me a while but I will read it and I will get back to you. One huge error I found upon first glimpse of the Genesis revised article was how it said it was translated from Hebrew to Latin. That's just dead wrong. Greek was the sophisticated language of Ancient Rome and anything translated from any other language would have been translated to Greek because all educated Romans had Greek tutors. It would later be translated to Latin for the common folk. As a Greek speaker and moderate Greek reader of very early Bible scriptures let me just say that there are no signs in the old Greek texts that imply multiple Gods. and I'm not even saying that there is only one God or that there has to be. I'm saying that translations that pre-date the Roman texts say one God.

Anyway, I'll try and read everything some time this week and give my thoughts. I'm eager to see if this ends up being as cut and dry as 2+2.

the language verses the age of it's creator is irrelevant to this....

and, the original bible was written in Aramaic (I know that's not the right spelling, but you get the point) everything else is a translation after that including Hebrew, which coincidentally became the Torah (again, sorry for my spelling) for the Jews..... Now, in some of my studies, I have found that some of the stories in the bible originated from Greek writers... It is a generally excepted theory among scholars that the bible is hugely plagiarized.....

and the Bible was translated into Latin using the Rosetta stone, a very popular and accurately documented event... there was no mention of the greek language before that point. Greek may be an older language, but it was not part of the change of command (so to speak) with regards to translating the bible...

No mention of the Greek language before what? It was the main language of Rome's elite and it's a lot easier to prove that than it is to prove God is false. Educated Roman writers wrote in Greek, spoke Greek. It was too complicated of a language for the Germanic Tribes that adopted Latin after conquering Rome and the Greek texts were lost in western Rome, but looking through the history of Eastern Rome it's very obvious.

The Rosetta Stone? The artifact written in three languages? One of those languages was Greek. None of those languages were Latin. How does it make sense that something would be translated to Latin before Greek? Where does Hebrew or Aramaic fit in here? If the Rosetta Stone was used to translate into latin it would have been used like this; The Septuagint which had been a Torah translated into Greek for Ptolemy by Jewish scholars would have been translated from Greek to Latin.

Teach me because I'm confused.

I'll have to double check my own info on the Rosetta stone, you just told me somethin I had never heard/seen before....

but Aramaic is the original language that was spoken by Jesus, his disciples, and a small group of people (apparently the small group of people who put the bible together) because all of my research point to it as the original language of the bible....


This is a great dialog, someone should sticky this......

[Shallow]

I'm no Rosetta Stone expert but I'll I've ever known of it was that it was discovered by the French a few hundred years ago in the time of Napoleon and it was used to translate Egyptian. Greek was known to Europe by that time and finding a scripture written in Greek and two Egyptian writings made it possible to understand old Egyptian.

As for Jesus; I'm not doubting they spoke Aramaic but the existing Gospels were written decades after Jesus, after the Christian movement started, and after Greeks joined it by the truck load. The Apostle Luke who was not one of the 12 with Jesus was Greek himself. There is absolutely no chance in my mind that the new testament was written in Aramaic first then years later translated to Greek. They would have been written at the same time. And the Old Testament was not originally written in Greek but was definitely translated to Greek before it was translated to Roman.

That's all I'm saying. The point is what the point was in the beginning; it's not quite as simple as 2+2.

[El the Self Image]

I'm no Rosetta Stone expert but I'll I've ever known of it was that it was discovered by the French a few hundred years ago in the time of Napoleon and it was used to translate Egyptian. Greek was known to Europe by that time and finding a scripture written in Greek and two Egyptian writings made it possible to understand old Egyptian.

As for Jesus; I'm not doubting they spoke Aramaic but the existing Gospels were written decades after Jesus, after the Christian movement started, and after Greeks joined it by the truck load. The Apostle Luke who was not one of the 12 with Jesus was Greek himself. There is absolutely no chance in my mind that the new testament was written in Aramaic first then years later translated to Greek. They would have been written at the same time. And the Old Testament was not originally written in Greek but was definitely translated to Greek before it was translated to Roman.

That's all I'm saying. The point is what the point was in the beginning; it's not quite as simple as 2+2.

I can dig your point of view even though I don't agree with it.....

Nameste Shallow.....

[Shallow]

I'm no Rosetta Stone expert but I'll I've ever known of it was that it was discovered by the French a few hundred years ago in the time of Napoleon and it was used to translate Egyptian. Greek was known to Europe by that time and finding a scripture written in Greek and two Egyptian writings made it possible to understand old Egyptian.

As for Jesus; I'm not doubting they spoke Aramaic but the existing Gospels were written decades after Jesus, after the Christian movement started, and after Greeks joined it by the truck load. The Apostle Luke who was not one of the 12 with Jesus was Greek himself. There is absolutely no chance in my mind that the new testament was written in Aramaic first then years later translated to Greek. They would have been written at the same time. And the Old Testament was not originally written in Greek but was definitely translated to Greek before it was translated to Roman.

That's all I'm saying. The point is what the point was in the beginning; it's not quite as simple as 2+2.

I can dig your point of view even though I don't agree with it.....

Nameste Shallow.....

You mean you don't agree that there is a Christian God. We've already shown that it is harder to disprove God than it is to prove 2+2=4.

[El the Self Image]

I'm no Rosetta Stone expert but I'll I've ever known of it was that it was discovered by the French a few hundred years ago in the time of Napoleon and it was used to translate Egyptian. Greek was known to Europe by that time and finding a scripture written in Greek and two Egyptian writings made it possible to understand old Egyptian.

As for Jesus; I'm not doubting they spoke Aramaic but the existing Gospels were written decades after Jesus, after the Christian movement started, and after Greeks joined it by the truck load. The Apostle Luke who was not one of the 12 with Jesus was Greek himself. There is absolutely no chance in my mind that the new testament was written in Aramaic first then years later translated to Greek. They would have been written at the same time. And the Old Testament was not originally written in Greek but was definitely translated to Greek before it was translated to Roman.

That's all I'm saying. The point is what the point was in the beginning; it's not quite as simple as 2+2.

I can dig your point of view even though I don't agree with it.....

Nameste Shallow.....

You mean you don't agree that there is a Christian God. We've already shown that it is harder to disprove God than it is to prove 2+2=4.

No we haven't, we've both added to each other's knowledge, but neither of us has completely proven either theory...

I believe and I live by a theory that everything in life is simple, people make it complicated, but it initially is simple....

so it is my belief that it can be simply proved that God does not exist, however, it is complicated to get someone to excepted it....

Nameste, Shallow!

[Shallow]

I'm no Rosetta Stone expert but I'll I've ever known of it was that it was discovered by the French a few hundred years ago in the time of Napoleon and it was used to translate Egyptian. Greek was known to Europe by that time and finding a scripture written in Greek and two Egyptian writings made it possible to understand old Egyptian.

As for Jesus; I'm not doubting they spoke Aramaic but the existing Gospels were written decades after Jesus, after the Christian movement started, and after Greeks joined it by the truck load. The Apostle Luke who was not one of the 12 with Jesus was Greek himself. There is absolutely no chance in my mind that the new testament was written in Aramaic first then years later translated to Greek. They would have been written at the same time. And the Old Testament was not originally written in Greek but was definitely translated to Greek before it was translated to Roman.

That's all I'm saying. The point is what the point was in the beginning; it's not quite as simple as 2+2.

I can dig your point of view even though I don't agree with it.....

Nameste Shallow.....

You mean you don't agree that there is a Christian God. We've already shown that it is harder to disprove God than it is to prove 2+2=4.

No we haven't, we've both added to each other's knowledge, but neither of us has completely proven either theory...

I believe and I live by a theory that everything in life is simple, people make it complicated, but it initially is simple....

so it is my belief that it can be simply proved that God does not exist, however, it is complicated to get someone to excepted it....

Nameste, Shallow!

The fact that you even consider my side of the argument a theory proves it's more complicated than 2+2. If I was arguing that 2+2=6 would you waste any time responding to me? I know I wouldn't if you were saying that.

[El the Self Image]

I'm no Rosetta Stone expert but I'll I've ever known of it was that it was discovered by the French a few hundred years ago in the time of Napoleon and it was used to translate Egyptian. Greek was known to Europe by that time and finding a scripture written in Greek and two Egyptian writings made it possible to understand old Egyptian.

As for Jesus; I'm not doubting they spoke Aramaic but the existing Gospels were written decades after Jesus, after the Christian movement started, and after Greeks joined it by the truck load. The Apostle Luke who was not one of the 12 with Jesus was Greek himself. There is absolutely no chance in my mind that the new testament was written in Aramaic first then years later translated to Greek. They would have been written at the same time. And the Old Testament was not originally written in Greek but was definitely translated to Greek before it was translated to Roman.

That's all I'm saying. The point is what the point was in the beginning; it's not quite as simple as 2+2.

I can dig your point of view even though I don't agree with it.....

Nameste Shallow.....

You mean you don't agree that there is a Christian God. We've already shown that it is harder to disprove God than it is to prove 2+2=4.

No we haven't, we've both added to each other's knowledge, but neither of us has completely proven either theory...

I believe and I live by a theory that everything in life is simple, people make it complicated, but it initially is simple....

so it is my belief that it can be simply proved that God does not exist, however, it is complicated to get someone to excepted it....

Nameste, Shallow!

The fact that you even consider my side of the argument a theory proves it's more complicated than 2+2. If I was arguing that 2+2=6 would you waste any time responding to me? I know I wouldn't if you were saying that.

I consider all sides of all arguments to be theories... if it was fact, there would be no argument/debate/etc....
It makes my ability to argue a point that much more open-minded and potent at the same time....

and it allows me to Dig your opinions without being upset and feeling that I have to prove you wrong, because I don't.... I tell you my theories, you tell me yours, and hopefully we'll both grow...

[Shallow]

I'm no Rosetta Stone expert but I'll I've ever known of it was that it was discovered by the French a few hundred years ago in the time of Napoleon and it was used to translate Egyptian. Greek was known to Europe by that time and finding a scripture written in Greek and two Egyptian writings made it possible to understand old Egyptian.

As for Jesus; I'm not doubting they spoke Aramaic but the existing Gospels were written decades after Jesus, after the Christian movement started, and after Greeks joined it by the truck load. The Apostle Luke who was not one of the 12 with Jesus was Greek himself. There is absolutely no chance in my mind that the new testament was written in Aramaic first then years later translated to Greek. They would have been written at the same time. And the Old Testament was not originally written in Greek but was definitely translated to Greek before it was translated to Roman.

That's all I'm saying. The point is what the point was in the beginning; it's not quite as simple as 2+2.

I can dig your point of view even though I don't agree with it.....

Nameste Shallow.....

You mean you don't agree that there is a Christian God. We've already shown that it is harder to disprove God than it is to prove 2+2=4.

No we haven't, we've both added to each other's knowledge, but neither of us has completely proven either theory...

I believe and I live by a theory that everything in life is simple, people make it complicated, but it initially is simple....

so it is my belief that it can be simply proved that God does not exist, however, it is complicated to get someone to excepted it....

Nameste, Shallow!

The fact that you even consider my side of the argument a theory proves it's more complicated than 2+2. If I was arguing that 2+2=6 would you waste any time responding to me? I know I wouldn't if you were saying that.

I consider all sides of all arguments to be theories... if it was fact, there would be no argument/debate/etc....
It makes my ability to argue a point that much more open-minded and potent at the same time....

and it allows me to Dig your opinions without being upset and feeling that I have to prove you wrong, because I don't.... I tell you my theories, you tell me yours, and hopefully we'll both grow...

Exactly. I feel the exact same way. (Still haven't read those articles you sent my way but that's more on my own procrastination. I could overload this board and crash the server just listing the things I haven't gotten around to yet.)

I am a Christian yes, but I never argue with non-Christians in an attempt to convert or present my Christian beliefs as absolute facts.

I am however also a math tutor on occasion and if someone I was tutoring said 2+2=6, I'd definately present 2+2=4 and absolute fact and tell them they were wrong.

[El the Self Image]

I'm no Rosetta Stone expert but I'll I've ever known of it was that it was discovered by the French a few hundred years ago in the time of Napoleon and it was used to translate Egyptian. Greek was known to Europe by that time and finding a scripture written in Greek and two Egyptian writings made it possible to understand old Egyptian.

As for Jesus; I'm not doubting they spoke Aramaic but the existing Gospels were written decades after Jesus, after the Christian movement started, and after Greeks joined it by the truck load. The Apostle Luke who was not one of the 12 with Jesus was Greek himself. There is absolutely no chance in my mind that the new testament was written in Aramaic first then years later translated to Greek. They would have been written at the same time. And the Old Testament was not originally written in Greek but was definitely translated to Greek before it was translated to Roman.

That's all I'm saying. The point is what the point was in the beginning; it's not quite as simple as 2+2.

I can dig your point of view even though I don't agree with it.....

Nameste Shallow.....

You mean you don't agree that there is a Christian God. We've already shown that it is harder to disprove God than it is to prove 2+2=4.

No we haven't, we've both added to each other's knowledge, but neither of us has completely proven either theory...

I believe and I live by a theory that everything in life is simple, people make it complicated, but it initially is simple....

so it is my belief that it can be simply proved that God does not exist, however, it is complicated to get someone to excepted it....

Nameste, Shallow!

The fact that you even consider my side of the argument a theory proves it's more complicated than 2+2. If I was arguing that 2+2=6 would you waste any time responding to me? I know I wouldn't if you were saying that.

I consider all sides of all arguments to be theories... if it was fact, there would be no argument/debate/etc....
It makes my ability to argue a point that much more open-minded and potent at the same time....

and it allows me to Dig your opinions without being upset and feeling that I have to prove you wrong, because I don't.... I tell you my theories, you tell me yours, and hopefully we'll both grow...

Exactly. I feel the exact same way. (Still haven't read those articles you sent my way but that's more on my own procrastination. I could overload this board and crash the server just listing the things I haven't gotten around to yet.)

I am a Christian yes, but I never argue with non-Christians in an attempt to convert or present my Christian beliefs as absolute facts.

I am however also a math tutor on occasion and if someone I was tutoring said 2+2=6, I'd definately present 2+2=4 and absolute fact and tell them they were wrong.

We are in agreement, righteous.....

[white Boy]

i was sitting in the sauna when some dude tried to recruit me to his church

[Shallow]

i was sitting in the sauna when some dude tried to recruit me to his church

That sounds about right.

[Jared Taylor]

Look, the bottom line is, Catholics cannot be considered Americans. America was founded upon Enlightenment values, which the Church opposed. Today, Catholics remain some of the stupidest people in the world. They basically support any injustice, have little concern about government interference in the economy or anything else as long as the government bans abortion and homosexuality, and generally cannot be counted on to defend white civilization. I want all Catholics out of this country. Fucking Taigs.