The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum

=> Re: Kris...You don't know

Re: Kris...You don't know
Posted by parhad (Guest) - Thursday, October 21 2004, 7:06:55 (CEST)
from 64.168.26.51 - adsl-64-168-26-51.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net Network - Windows XP - Mozilla
Website:
Website title:

Kris K. wrote:
>***Kris here is one time out of several that Jesus could have denounced himself and set free.

...considering you haven't a shred of evidence that there ever was such a person or events....that's pretty damn stupid of you.



This goes to show you he is in control and this is his destiny to sacrifice himself.
>Yes...he was in so much control, that he was in shackles.

...do you also believe in Easter Bunnies and tooth fairies? Why not?
>
>>The problem with your argument is that it’s full of holes. But I wouldn’t call it Holy (pun intended)
>ahh....swiss, ham on wheat
>
>>The bible is considered a factual historical book.


...rally? By whom? The bible is a mish mash of nonsense so ridiculous no one bothers to read it through....and of those who have read it hardly three of them agree on what it says..this was some lame god who spoke in circles..the way you all do who aspire to be as goofy he was...

As a matter of fact it has more credibility than Plato’s and Socrates combined by a hundred folds.

...and we have this on the authority of a REAL horse's ass...not the fake kind.

If you like we can also use the historians Josephus and Tacitus as a reference just to name a few.

...you'll believe anything if it's ludicrous enough.


>Sorry to break this to you Saint, but it in no way shape or form considered factual. It's considered only HISTORICAL evidence, not FACTUAL evidence. The infallible book is fallibly infallible. It also contains stories that precede the times it claims to have taken place. To name one, Gilgamesh. Also, the many translations it endured through the years. And you want to claim it is factual?
>
>>Let’s take it one more step further. How about witness accounts or forensic science with respect to manuscript evidence, archeology evidence and statistical probability. You would have to come to the conclusion that the Bible can and well hold up as scientific evidence. Your argument is not valid in this case. You did or could not bring out the evidence to show otherwise. As a matter of fact they have been trying to discredit the bible for thousands of years. Some become converts as they go a long and others die rejecting the loving knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

...fuck you and your Jesus Lord Herbert Christ...he is YOUR invention. The bible is too stupid to bother refuting...it's been shown to be a crock more times than you'd care to know...it's just that in the past we left you idiots alone and that was our mistake....Voltaire thought he'd hurt you people permanently and for good....he was wrong. The thing that's left to do is take away your tax status...you people are a political party of god...you are NOT a spiritual anything. It's as easy to blow you people away as it is to prove that St John didn't have the forty three thumbs on display to holy fools in countless churches...neither did it take fifty five thousand nails to put together the TRUE cross...and the Shroud of Turin is a hoax only a little less ludicrous than your errections and such.

...I can refute your idiot book in front of ANY church "intellectual" you'd care to choose...it's easy. What you intellectual frauds do is merely repeat your nonsense....not a one of you can defend it as TRUTH. It is all fable..it is all lies...it is all ranting and raving and dire warnings from a passle of nincompoops such as the world has never seen...it is OUR foolish decency that has allowed you twits to grow till you think your shit don't stink.

Are you kidding me?
>
>No Offense Saint....this is the funniest part.
>Witness Accounts?? (That's the best)
>Forensic Evidence?? (Shroud of Turin)
>Statistical Probability??
>Actually, it is considered to be almost completely inadmissible, because it lacks a single shred of evidence. It is considered a fable in the historical world. I along with the world would love to see this evidence you claim exists.
>
>>I beg to differ…a text without a context is a pretext. In your case you are taking a verse out of context and trying to form a logical argument out of it. It will not hold. In a court of arbitration, you would lose.
>Doubt it

..the bible is barely addmissable as a fairy tale and then maybe next as pure crap...but no one wants that kind of stuff in any court. The church had its one chance when it ruled by terror over people's lives for 1000 years known as the Dark Ages. Never again. You assholes tried it again and it's a good thing too cause you've helped awaken people to what a menace you really are.

Thank god Queers came out of the closet and got you all to pee all over each other....it's over...Bush was your high point and he had to STEAL the election with his brother's help....

Give me any biblical scholar you want...give me ten popes...I'll have them babbling in ten minutes...which is easy to do since that's what they do anyway, Paul hasn't been able to confront the truth about eating a corpse for weeks now...like any good artist...all you need do is hold a mirror up to them...they do the rest themselves...Resurrection INDEED! Who's the fucking Heathen?



---------------------


The full topic:



Content-length: 5766
Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Accept: text/xml,application/xml,application/xhtml+xml,text/html;q=0.9,text/plain;q=0.8,image/png,*/*;q=0.5
Accept-charset: ISO-8859-1,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.7
Accept-encoding: gzip,deflate
Accept-language: en-us,en;q=0.5
Connection: keep-alive
Cookie: *hidded*
Host: www.insideassyria.com
Keep-alive: 300
Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf3/rkvsf_core.php?Re_Kris_You_don_t_know-GUdm.6Uju.QUOTE
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041001 Firefox/0.10.1



Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9