A large part of the Jesus narrative is probably true, and some parts of it are verifiably true.

New York exists which means spiderman does also?

I'd be interested to know how you came to the conclusion that a large part of the Jesus narrative is probably true. Aside from a few scraps of dubious origin, the only information comes from the Bible itself and that is called self referencing. The Bible is true because it says so in the Bible. Outside verification does show that the earliest date for the Gospel of Mark to be AD72 with the other three being copies (often verbatim) of Mark. We also know that early copies of Mark did not contain the resurrection narrative which was most likely added around 130AD in order for Christianity to be more appealing to pagan worshipers. There are 2 schools of though regarding falling numbers. One being that the story lacked a resurrection and any belief worth its salt had one. The other is that it was becoming evident that the Jesus figure was not coming back as promised within the lifetime of some who listened to him on the mount. I don't see any reason why both cannot be correct. It certainly kept Christianity ticking along until Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity just before death and then becoming the state religion in 380AD.

I don't think Islam and Christianity are mutually exclusive, and I certainly don't think that either religion has a central or even minor tenet to "spread the word by force if necessary".

It's possible that your worldview may have been tainted by events and propaganda since 911.

Matthew 10:34 "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.". Christianity on the whole has managed to twist it so it becomes a metaphor but this is sleight of hand, see Luke 22:35:38. It doesn't actually matter a jot if it is a physical sword or a metaphor in this instance because either way 'force' is being used. The CC has also apologised for the forced conversion of millions of indigenous people in south America. I presume you are joking about 'force' not being a central tenet of Islam. It is true that not many countries follow such things as death for apostates (Iran does for one) but that does not mean it is not a serious piece of dogma.

Just out of interest, how would these beliefs propagate if not by being foisted on people? I cannot be through reason because it is a faith based position.

Firstly by progeneration (why do you think the CC bans contraception and Islam allows polygamy? (and if we allow those two examples, they make for an interesting contrast, don't you think?)) and secondly by proselytizing. One would hardly have faith and believe with a sword at one's throat; that would just be lip-service and would not indicate conversion.

There are other ways the churches try to ensure the flock increases; eg, To marry a member of the flock, an outsider must first convert (Jews try to enforce this too)

Also, I would imagine that a fair amount of conversion comes about from a desire to emulate. Look at the number of Westerners who come to the East and take up Buddhism; they have not had dogma thrown at them, nor any form of coercion.

A large part of the Jesus narrative is probably true, and some parts of it are verifiably true.

New York exists which means spiderman does also?

I'd be interested to know how you came to the conclusion that a large part of the Jesus narrative is probably true. Aside from a few scraps of dubious origin, the only information comes from the Bible itself and that is called self referencing. The Bible is true because it says so in the Bible. Outside verification does show that the earliest date for the Gospel of Mark to be AD72 with the other three being copies (often verbatim) of Mark. We also know that early copies of Mark did not contain the resurrection narrative which was most likely added around 130AD in order for Christianity to be more appealing to pagan worshipers. There are 2 schools of though regarding falling numbers. One being that the story lacked a resurrection and any belief worth its salt had one. The other is that it was becoming evident that the Jesus figure was not coming back as promised within the lifetime of some who listened to him on the mount. I don't see any recannot be correct. It certainly kept Christianity ticking along until Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity just before death and then becoming the state religion in 380AD.

I think archaeologists and historians generally agree that a man named Jesus did exist and many of the events related in the Bible did occur. The Q'uran acknowledges Jesus as a prophet too.

We have no argument regarding any sort of resurrection, immaculate conception, walking on water, parting of seas, pillars of salt etc. I have no reason to doubt a baby was born in a manger or a bush suddenly caught fire etc.

My personal suspicion is Jesus went to India where he died in Kashmere. There is (to me) compelling evidence of this,

I think archaeologists and historians generally agree that a man named Jesus did exist and many of the events related in the Bible did occur. The Q'uran acknowledges Jesus as a prophet too.

We have no argument regarding any sort of resurrection, immaculate conception, walking on water, parting of seas, pillars of salt etc. I have no reason to doubt a baby was born in a manger or a bush suddenly caught fire etc.

My personal suspicion is Jesus went to India where he died in Kashmere. There is (to me) compelling evidence of this,

The prophet 'Issa' is recognised in Islam and is synonymous with Jesus.

With regard to the Kashmir story, this was mostly a refugee flight in 73 A.D. when the Romans put down the Maccabees revolution, which led to the diaspora. Many Jews fled to the Indian sub-continent and their descendants are still living there. However, Jews had traded there prior to the revolution and it is reasonable to suppose that many settled there in earlier days, as did Zoroastrians from Persia.

A large part of the Jesus narrative is probably true, and some parts of it are verifiably true.

New York exists which means spiderman does also?

I'd be interested to know how you came to the conclusion that a large part of the Jesus narrative is probably true. Aside from a few scraps of dubious origin, the only information comes from the Bible itself and that is called self referencing. The Bible is true because it says so in the Bible. Outside verification does show that the earliest date for the Gospel of Mark to be AD72 with the other three being copies (often verbatim) of Mark. We also know that early copies of Mark did not contain the resurrection narrative which was most likely added around 130AD in order for Christianity to be more appealing to pagan worshipers. There are 2 schools of though regarding falling numbers. One being that the story lacked a resurrection and any belief worth its salt had one. The other is that it was becoming evident that the Jesus figure was not coming back as promised within the lifetime of some who listened to him on the mount. I don't see any recannot be correct. It certainly kept Christianity ticking along until Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity just before death and then becoming the state religion in 380AD.

I think archaeologists and historians generally agree that a man named Jesus did exist and many of the events related in the Bible did occur. The Q'uran acknowledges Jesus as a prophet too.

We have no argument regarding any sort of resurrection, immaculate conception, walking on water, parting of seas, pillars of salt etc. I have no reason to doubt a baby was born in a manger or a bush suddenly caught fire etc.

My personal suspicion is Jesus went to India where he died in Kashmere. There is (to me) compelling evidence of this,

Well put.

Jesus was quite a common name at that time (Somchai?) and the supposed Messiah was popping up all over the place. I think it highly likely that that the Jesus figure as depicted in the Bible is an amalgamation of 2, perhaps more, people. One of the most compelling evidences for this is the convoluted way of getting Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem. There are certainly many details which are corroborated but to me these are outside of what I would consider the Jesus narrative. Bethlehem exists as does Jerusalem... so what (New York and batman). It says nothing about the divinity of Jesus or that his teachings are moral. I think the biggest nail in the cross is not returning before the passing of a generation. This has been written about for many hundreds of years and some of the excuses make a wonderful read, if you are into that kind of thing. There are many Christians who think that there is still one person alive who walks among us. He would make Noah look like a teenager.

" I think the biggest nail in the cross i..."

Reminded me of the chaps in the Phillipines who practice self-crucifiction every Easter.

Which reminded me of Neil from The Young Ones; "Self crucifiction is a real bad buzz, man, I can never get the last nail in."

refugee flight in 73 A.D. when the Romans put down the Maccabees revolution, which led to the diaspora. Many Jews fled to the Indian sub-continent and their descendants are still living there. However, Jews had traded there prior to the revolution and it is reasonable to suppose that many settled there in earlier days, as did Zoroastrians from Persia.

The Maccabees were 2nd to 1st Centuries B.C. The siege of Masada in 73 A.D. was the final flaring up of Jewish nationalism against the Romans. I'm not sure how this affects the diaspora into India, though.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/holy-see-announces-new-economic-communications-framework-30024/

Cardinal Pell of Sydney is appointed Prefect of the Secretariat of the Economy, and Chris Patten as Chairman on a new committee on improving the Vatican's communications with the rest of the world. While most of their work will be behind the scenes, they are important steps towards improving the Vatican'spublic relations.

Chris Patten has just resigned as Chairman of the BBC Trust for health reasons. He had a heart bypass in April.

Chris Patten has just resigned as Chairman of the BBC Trust for health reasons. He had a heart bypass in April.

This was referred to in the link (or was it in the Guardian?). Evidently it was felt that he could still manage a reasonable workload.

I think the significance of these appointments, and the other committees which have been formed, is a change in outlook. Instead of waiting for things to come to it, the Vatican is being more proactive.

It's not just the Vatican.

There are now potential changes in attitude by the CofE hierarchy.

Women bishops may be approved soon and there is also a change of mind by ex-archbishop Carey on euthanasia for those who wish it.

I disagree with both, but then that is my right as well as my opinion.

It's not just the Vatican.

There are now potential changes in attitude by the CofE hierarchy.

Women bishops may be approved soon and there is also a change of mind by ex-archbishop Carey on euthanasia for those who wish it.

I disagree with both, but then that is my right as well as my opinion.

Why do you disagree with women bishops? (I'd ask the same about euthanasia, but I suspect that would spark a whole new debate and derail the thread).

It's not just the Vatican.

There are now potential changes in attitude by the CofE hierarchy.

Women bishops may be approved soon and there is also a change of mind by ex-archbishop Carey on euthanasia for those who wish it.

I disagree with both, but then that is my right as well as my opinion.

Why do you disagree with women bishops? (I'd ask the same about euthanasia, but I suspect that would spark a whole new debate and derail the thread).

I have asked fellow member HB this very same question before and was given an answer.

Pope Agrees With Scientific Theory On Origin Of Universe; Also Admits To Altar Boys Having A Particular Charm After All

Let it be known that every single one of Christs children in his green Earth must repent for their sinful actions, should they ever want to see the gates of Eden, he stated; By this, I particularly mean dignitaries of the Church and all those who, in their quest to serve God, have fallen to the temptations of Satan and have molested young children in Gods houses around the world, the pope frowned while pronouncing these words.

Although, he unexpectedly continued, I must admit that there is something special about a young altar boy wearing a robe. I would certainly never do something of the sort, but I cannot say I dont understand priests around the world who have taken vows of celibacy, but were powerless at the charms of innocent, young catholic boys, he finished.

http://www.newslo.com/pope-agrees-with-scientific/

Oh dear.

I think I know what perhaps he was trying to convey, but he failed.

I suppose it would be like me saying..... nope, I can't frame the words properly, so I won't put myself in the Pope's unfortunate position.

Actually, thinking about it more...there are no words, and no way to frame them, that can try to mitigate paedophilia, homosexual or not.

However if he was talking about 16 year old alter boys......I guess whatever floats your boat, and his gist was regarding. the vows of celibacy.

It would be a plus for gay rights though.

Oh dear.

I think I know what perhaps he was trying to convey, but he failed.

I suppose it would be like me saying..... nope, I can't frame the words properly, so I won't put myself in the Pope's unfortunate position.

Actually, thinking about it more...there are no words, and no way to frame them, that can try to mitigate paedophilia, homosexual or not.

However if he was talking about 16 year old alter boys......I guess whatever floats your boat, and his gist was regarding. the vows of celibacy.

It would be a plus for gay rights though.

Not one of his smarter remarks, was it? I wonder what his exact words were. (I don't know how accurate the source is).

Oh dear.

I think I know what perhaps he was trying to convey, but he failed.

I suppose it would be like me saying..... nope, I can't frame the words properly, so I won't put myself in the Pope's unfortunate position.

Actually, thinking about it more...there are no words, and no way to frame them, that can try to mitigate paedophilia, homosexual or not.

However if he was talking about 16 year old alter boys......I guess whatever floats your boat, and his gist was regarding. the vows of celibacy.

It would be a plus for gay rights though.

Not one of his smarter remarks, was it? I wonder what his exact words were. (I don't know how accurate the source is).

Oh dear.

I think I know what perhaps he was trying to convey, but he failed.

I suppose it would be like me saying..... nope, I can't frame the words properly, so I won't put myself in the Pope's unfortunate position.

Actually, thinking about it more...there are no words, and no way to frame them, that can try to mitigate paedophilia, homosexual or not.

However if he was talking about 16 year old alter boys......I guess whatever floats your boat, and his gist was regarding. the vows of celibacy.

It would be a plus for gay rights though.

Did you not read the article at the link? It's satire.

Oh dear.

I think I know what perhaps he was trying to convey, but he failed.

I suppose it would be like me saying..... nope, I can't frame the words properly, so I won't put myself in the Pope's unfortunate position.

Actually, thinking about it more...there are no words, and no way to frame them, that can try to mitigate paedophilia, homosexual or not.

However if he was talking about 16 year old alter boys......I guess whatever floats your boat, and his gist was regarding. the vows of celibacy.

It would be a plus for gay rights though.

Did you not read the article at the link? It's satire.

No I didn't, because I've always taken NMS's posts seriously.....I just accepted what he had quoted.

More fool me?

Yeah...upon a milisecond of reflection, had I not trusted NMS, I would have completely doubted the source.

Yeah...upon a milisecond of reflection, had I not trusted NMS, I would have completely doubted the source.

It goes to show how people view the CC in that people such as yourself and IB can even consider this as a reasonable statement. In the event it was true would either of you been surprised? Obviously not.

There are so many crazy things posted on TV that I'm not surprised at anything.

Sarcasm I've tried myself. It never works. I never recognise it, and nobody ever seems to spot mine.

There are so many crazy things posted on TV that I'm not surprised at anything.

Sarcasm I've tried myself. It never works. I never recognise it, and nobody ever seems to spot mine.

Are you being sarcastic?

Warning: satire.

I have mentioned a number of time that religious institutions often plead for dispensation. Well that needs to stop.

Catholic Church Argues It Doesn't Have to Show Up in Court Because Religious Freedom

[...]

"What the diocese is saying is, 'We can fire anybody, and we have absolute immunity from even going to trial, as long as we think they're violating our religion. And to have civil authorities even look into what we're doing is a violation.'It's astonishing."

[...]

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/11/catholic-school-fires-teacher-using-ivf-unusual-religious-freedom-defense

Perhaps Pope Insanity IX would care to take a moral high ground on this issue.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30339699

The Vatican finds hundreds of millions of Euros squirreled away!

The Vatican's finances were well-known to be Byzantine in their complexity. Pope Francis appointed a commission, under Australian Cardinal Pell, to sort them out. This is part of what he found.

And before some smart Alick says, Give it all to the poor, let's find out exactly what the situation is first, shall we?

In related news..

Pope Rummaging Through Vatican Basement For Plastic Nativity Scene Figures

VATICAN CITY: Hoping to have all his holiday decorations up by the weekend, His Holiness Pope Francis has spent the past two hours rummaging through the basement of the papal apartments in search of the Vaticans plastic nativity scene figures, sources confirmed Friday.

[...]

Oh, come on, wheres the third wise man? the spiritual leader of 1.2 billion Roman Catholics said as he pushed aside several priceless Raphael and Fra Angelico paintings to peer into a cardboard box, aided by the dim light of a bare bulb hanging overhead. I couldve sworn I put him away with everybody else. Theres a ton of donkeys and sheep in here, but a lot of good that does me with only two wise men. Jeez.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/pope-rummaging-through-vatican-basement-for-plasti,37608/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=LinkPreview:1:Default

Sorry, back on topic.

The Pope has calmed the fears of many Catholics as they well indeed meet up with their pets in heaven. Does not say what happens if there have been 2 owners. Does not say what happens if the owner dies and the pet is taken in by other people. Presumably they don't get to spend eternity with it? This stuff quite simply cannot be believed by a thinking person.

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/12/09/the-dog-delusion-pope-francis-proclaims-that-all-animals-will-go-to-heaven/

Sorry, back on topic.

I have to say that you pursue your anti-religion crusade with an almost religious fervour...

Sorry, back on topic.

I have to say that you pursue your anti-religion crusade with an almost religious fervour...

Thank you very much.

I notice his Popeiness has been on a Jolly to Turkey for some interfaith dialog. Both parties agree that any faith, even the wrong faith, is better than no faith.