> Neil, you made me crack open my Bible for the first time in ages. Well, I've achieved something today! ;-)
This is such a difficult medium for this kind of discussion, but I'll try and be brief: We are dealing with matters of truth here. Either something is true or it is not. There is discoverable truth about Jesus, because he was a real historical figure, and therefore we can employ the same approach to examining him and his claims as we do any historical figure. If we do that, our primary texts are those of the New Testament - a very thoroughly analysed and researched set of documents, respected as an accurate historical source by the vast majority of historians of any scholarly repute (Christian or not). One thing is very, very clear: Jesus claimed to be the incarnate Son of God, and any other conclusion as to his nature and role was unacceptable to him. So, if you want a discussion about that, we have to start there and use the best source material available: the Bible. Any other approach is just opinion and therefore of limited value in the real world. Also happy to continue this off list is that is preferable. Respectfully. ____________________________________ Neil Atwood - Sydney, Australia http://westserve.org - Blog, Christianity, Coffee and Tech Stuff. -----Original Message----- From: Stan Zaske [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 23 December 2005 5:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; The Hardware List Subject: Re: [H] OT - Intelligent Design dealt harsh blow by NJ Judge Neil, you made me crack open my Bible for the first time in ages. <lol> Listen man, that's all very poetic and flowery but it doesn't really mean or say anything! Anyway, I'm one of the cowards who picks and chooses what to believe who happens to be a follower of Jesus *but* not the Christ (Messiah) because there's absolutely no evidence that any of it is true! The fact that so many obviously intelligent folk believe says a lot about us humans and how terrifying the Universe is to us. It's a pretty daunting thing to realize that the Cosmos is an inanimate object that doesn't have human feelings and won't swoop in to rescue us if we fuck up. Species die all the time and most past extinctions occurred long before Human beings evolved on this world. The world around us is a harsh and emotionally bankrupt place where people make every possible effort to associate human attributes. Sad to think that @ some point in the future human beings will also cease to exist. I'd like to think that if God is real he made the Universe into a giant petri dish just to see what would result and I seriously doubt he gives a Rat's ass about you and me personally. On the level of species he might find the Human Race mildly interesting. @:D> Neil Atwood wrote: > ? You know, whether Jesus was deity or man is really irrelevant! He still > ? changed the world for the better and he was exactly right about love and > ? tolerance being the answer. @:D> > > While I agree with your conclusion (mostly) Stan, Jesus himself didn't allow > for the first comment (Read Matthew 11:25-28 amongst other places) > > Regards > > ____________________________________ > Neil Atwood - Sydney, Australia > > http://westserve.org - Blog, Christianity, Coffee and Tech Stuff. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stan Zaske > Sent: Friday, 23 December 2005 4:45 PM > To: The Hardware List > Subject: Re: [H] OT - Intelligent Design dealt harsh blow by NJ Judge > > It is presumptive of us to sit in judgment of Evolution when we don't > have all the facts. Remember that science is always evolving our > understanding of the way things *really* work. > > You know, whether Jesus was deity or man is really irrelevant! He still > changed the world for the better and he was exactly right about love and > tolerance being the answer. @:D> > > > Gary VanderMolen wrote: > >>>At 03:49 PM 22/12/2005, Gary VanderMolen wrote: >>> >>> >>>>>>Of course we are supposed to use the (limited) logic we have. Even >>>>>>ants have logic, but can you explain the theory of relativity to an >>>>>>ant? >>>>>>Humans may be a little smarter than ants, but our capability to >>>>>>understand things like higher dimensions is very limited. >>>>> >>>>>But I've never said to an ant "Act this way, and I'll get you into >>>>>heaven." Plus we were given reason, the ability to discern between >>>>>good and evil. >>>> >>>> >>>>And your point is...? >>> >>> >>>That your argument that one can't compare the relationship between an >>>ant and a human and the supposed relationship between man and god. >> >> >>My argument is that the difference in intelligence level between man >>and ant is at least as large as the difference between man and God. >>Since it's no surprise that the ant can't understand man's designs, >>so likewise it should be no surprise that man can't fully understand or >>appreciate God's designs. >> >> >>> Saying that ants don't understand what we are doing (which is a >>>conclusion you have no proof of, btw) and therefore we shouldn't >>>expect to have any understanding of god makes no sense, and isn't an >>>argument. >> >> >>I never said that we don't have any understanding of God. >>Our understanding of him is limited, because humans are not omniscient. >>It is presumptive of us to sit in judgment of God when we don't have >>all the facts. >> >> >>Gary VanderMolen >> >> >> > > > > >
