In a message dated 4/24/02 5:26:48 AM !!!First Boot!!!, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well Hammurabi, if the history of Christianity and Judaism was as simple as
you make it out to be, it probably wouldn't have taken thousands of years for
it to be debunked by you and your peers. They say a good aca
-Caveat Lector-
Well Hammurabi, if the history of Christianity and Judaism was as simple as
you make it out to be, it probably wouldn't have taken thousands of years for
it to be debunked by you and your peers. They say a good academic is one who
learns more and more and less and less. You appe
In a message dated 4/22/02 1:25:50 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hammurabi, you are so sure of yourself. Every statement is a major
pronouncement of "The Truth." You have come as a messiah to save us from our
lives based on ignorance of "The Truth" or at least that is how
-Caveat Lector-
Hammurabi, you are so sure of yourself. Every statement is a major
pronouncement of "The Truth." You have come as a messiah to save us from our
lives based on ignorance of "The Truth" or at least that is how your writing
appears to me. All of the scholars of the past in the are
Hi,
Well, I am not talking about Catholic history. I am talking about Christian history and like it or not after about 350CE Christian history became Catholic but before that it was Christian history. There were Christians over a hundred years before the supposed birth of Jesus. There were no Ca
-Caveat Lector-
I dispute the word "christian" in this so-called
history, and request that the word "catholic" be used
instead.
--- "Don S. Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
> Well, I appreciate the compliment. I have spent a
> lot of time and money in
> researching this field. I am ho
Hello,
Well, I appreciate the compliment. I have spent a lot of time and money in researching this field. I am however a part of no movement expect to try and eliviate ignorance and help people seperate from their superstitions whenever I can.
When we talk about this, "here is a big
academic rel
Hello,
No. It cannot be proven by Roman tax records. All documents that have been recovered from that time have no reference to Jesus. If you know of some then you are the only person in this area of study that has seen them.
I do not mean to be trite, those are just the facts.
The introduction o
Hello,
Well, this is an interesting question. When you ask which is the most serious I suppose that depends on ones standards.
Certainly the myth that Joseph and Mary were fleeing to avoid the killing of male Jewish babies by Herod is a myth. This was built upon the fact that Herod had married a
-Caveat Lector-
Hammurabi did a nice academic presentation of what some academics know about
that part of history. Those who read here should know that there is a big
academic religious movement bent on saying that nothing in Jewish or
Christian history can be accepted with certainty. No Jesus,
-Caveat Lector-
> Hello,
> Sorry for chiming in here, but a couple of points. One, this is a very
nice
> sentiment that Jesus was a groovy, hip, make love not war kind of guy that
> became misrepresented. I like that. However, point 2 is that he is and
has
> always been a myth.
well, sorry to
-Caveat Lector-
Of all the alleged historical errors in the Gospels, which would you say
is the most serious?
POC
On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, Don S. Brown wrote:
> Hello,
> Sorry for chiming in here, but a couple of points. One, this is a very nice
> sentiment that Jesus was a groovy, hip, make love
Hello,
Sorry for chiming in here, but a couple of points. One, this is a very nice sentiment that Jesus was a groovy, hip, make love not war kind of guy that became misrepresented. I like that. However, point 2 is that he is and has always been a myth.
I am reacting to all of the pontificating a
-Caveat Lector-
> Crucifixion was a punishment reserved by the Romans for those condemned of
> high crimes against the Roman state, usually treason; they definitely
would
> NOT have crucified someone just because some local religious leaders asked
> them to kill someone they deemed heretical...
-Caveat Lector-
From: inri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>the romans had no problem with jesus; in fact, they really liked the guy -
>he told everybody to pay taxes and be good citizens. it was the jewish
>leaders that requested he be crucified as he was, by definition, a heretic;
>and the punishment for h
-Caveat Lector-
--- andrew hennessey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -Caveat Lector-
>
> no no - its you who miss the point -
> did they actually throw colleen off the list for
> saying things like nazis crucified christ ??
No, it was for getting into a huge flame war with June. As I understood
it,
-Caveat Lector-
no no - its you who miss the point -
did they actually throw colleen off the list for
saying things like nazis crucified christ ??
its unbelievable that folks are so ignorant
as to take it literally.
for instance we know that fascistii comes
from the roman rods of rulership.
we k
-Caveat Lector-
John 10:17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because
I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
John 10:18 NO MAN taketh it from me, but I lay it
down OF MYSELF. I have power to lay it down, and I
have power to take it again. This commandment have I
received of my Father.
-
In a message dated 4/20/02 11:36:03 AM Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
the romans had no problem with jesus; in fact, they really liked the guy -
he told everybody to pay taxes and be good citizens. it was the jewish
leaders that requested he be crucified as he was, by definition
-Caveat Lector-
- Original Message -
From: inri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 5:35 PM
Subject: Re: [CTRL] Why not be Anti, Semites?
> > Nazism is pagan, not Christian.
> > http://www.sasquatch.com/~kory/occult_roots.
-Caveat Lector-
> > it was
> > obviously *not* "nazi assholes" that nailed christ up to the cross.
>
> It was the ROMANS. Crucifixion was a ROMAN punishment given for treason
> against the ROMAN empire. Going after the "Jewish" authorities who were
> in bed with Rome at the time, would have been
-Caveat Lector-
--- inri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> it was
> obviously *not* "nazi assholes" that nailed christ up to the cross.
It was the ROMANS. Crucifixion was a ROMAN punishment given for treason
against the ROMAN empire. Going after the "Jewish" authorities who were
in bed with Rome at
-Caveat Lector-
> With a name like INRI better watch out; for it was "nazi assholes" who
> nailed Christ the first time and I do not think he would turn the other
> check for a second time.
for fuck's sake saba, you were banned because people don't want to read your
inane ramblings. take the hin
-Caveat Lector-
> > > I use the term "Jew-hatred." Much more precise.
> >
> > i use the term "nazi asshole", which is even better...
>
> Both are "kosher" I would say. Aren't you glad this is the free world and
> we can be "anti" so as to express ourselves this way? There is NO LAW
> AGAINST HATR
-Caveat Lector-
Hate and Love are two sides of the same coin, of equal emotional
intensity.
Tenorlove
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DIS
Shelby:
Oh so, INRI you prefere "nazi
assholes" to jew haters?
I prefer Nazi pricks and Jewish/Palestinian apes of late
:-)
With a name like INRI
better watch out; for it was "nazi assholes" who
nailed Christ the first time
Not unless the Romans (with help from the Sanhedrin) were Nazi ass
ho
POC:
> > I use the term
"Jew-hatred." Much more precise.
>
> i use the term "nazi asshole", which is even
better...
Hmmm, hatred might have been a tad too strong a descriptor as such
relates to feelings of dislike for a particular race. Hatred
usually implies obsessive machination or rumination
: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 7:00 PM
Subject: Re: [CTRL] Why not be Anti, Semites?
> -Caveat Lector-
>
> Oh so, INRI you prefere "nazi assholes" to jew haters?
>
> With a name like INRI better watch out; for it was "nazi assholes" who
-Caveat Lector-
Oh so, INRI you prefere "nazi assholes" to jew haters?
With a name like INRI better watch out; for it was "nazi assholes" who
nailed Christ the first time and I do not think he would turn the other
check for a second time.
Ought to change your name INRA - how about Jew Baiter?
-Caveat Lector-
On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, inri wrote:
> > I use the term "Jew-hatred." Much more precise.
>
> i use the term "nazi asshole", which is even better...
Both are "kosher" I would say. Aren't you glad this is the free world and
we can be "anti" so as to express ourselves this way? There i
-Caveat Lector-
> I use the term "Jew-hatred." Much more precise.
i use the term "nazi asshole", which is even better...
inri
np:
http://chat.carleton.ca/~jparent2/
"there ought to be limits to freedom" - george w. bush
"if this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so lon
-Caveat Lector-
I use the term "Jew-hatred." Much more precise.
Tenorlove
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a
-Caveat Lector-
Still awaiting an answer from the list Semites or others. One can be
against or anti-, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Scientologists,
Communists, Nazis and who knows what and for all kinds of reasons. As long
as the expression of that anti- position is not illegal, so what? Will th
33 matches
Mail list logo
