Richard Carrier on 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16
This is where Paul refers to the end of the Jewish nation and its national cult, even though that occurred at least a decade after he is supposed to have died. In this passage Paul is made to say:
...in Judea...the Jews killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove out us, and pleased not God, and are contrary to all men; forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they may be saved; to fill up their sins always: but the wrath has come upon them to the uttermost.
Most scholars have concluded this was never written by Paul. The arguments are many, and accumulate to a conclusive case:
• Paul never blames the Jews for the death of Jesus elsewhere.
• Paul never talks about God's wrath as having come, but as coming only at the future judgment (see: Romans 2:5, 3:5-6, 4:15).
• Paul teaches the Jews will be saved, not destroyed (see: Romans 11:25-28).
• Paul was dead by the time the "wrath had come upon them to the uttermost" (the destruction of the Jewish nation and temple in 70 A.D.).
1 Thessalonians 2:14-16 is unusual…
Richard Carrier writes, 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16 is very unusual in several ways. Not in any of Paul's 20,000 words, and dozens of discussions of the Jews, is anything like it. That immediately casts it into doubt. Paul blaming the Jews for the death of Jesus is simply unprecedented. Paul also never talks about the Jews as if he wasn't one of them (see: Galatians 2:15; 1 Corinthians 9:20; Romans 9:1-5, 11:1; Philippians 3:4-5). And Paul acknowledged Jews as members of his own church, so he wouldn't damn them as a group like this, and never does (see: 1 Corinthians 1:24, 12:13; 2 Corinthians 11:12; Romans 9:24, 10:12; on how this interpolation is undeniably--and uncharacteristically for Paul--Antisemitic, see the analysis again at Vridar).
Read Richard Carrier’s entire discussion here:
http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com/2011/06/pauline-interpolations.html
Richard Carrier on 1 Corinthians 14:34-35
Most experts again believe this is an interpolation. This passage has Paul command:
Let the women keep silence in the churches: because it is not permitted for them to speak; but let them be in subjection, as also the law says. And if they would learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home: for it is shameful for a woman to speak in the church.
We know this wasn't written by Paul because it directly contradicts what Paul says in the very same letter, where he actually gives rules for when women speak in church (in 1 Corinthians 11). So we can be sure someone else wrote this passage, probably influenced by the forgery of 1 Timothy 2 (where we find this misogyny repeated; notably in the authentic letters of Paul, such misogyny does not appear--it was a feature of later Christianity).
[NOTE: Modern Christians are troubled by this passage as it is considered 'anti-woman' by some and diametrically opposes the modern Christian's fallacious notion that Christianity is compatible with Western norms]
Christian defence of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is refuted by Carrier
Everyone concurs that the passage contradicts Paul's teachings in the very same letter. So the only rebuttal fundamentalists have is that Paul must be quoting his opponents here, and arguing against it, not actually issuing this command himself.
Let the prophets speak by two or three, and let the others discern. But if a revelation be made to another sitting by, let the first keep silence. For ye all can prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be exhorted; and the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets; for God is not a God of confusion, but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints. Let the women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but let them be in subjection, as also saith the law. And if they would learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home: for it is shameful for a woman to speak in the church. What!? Was it from you that the word of God went forth? Or came it unto you alone? If any man thinketh himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him take knowledge of the things which I write unto you, that they are the commandment of the Lord. But if any man is ignorant, let him be ignorant. Wherefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues. But let all things be done decently and in order.
The argument is that the material in bold is a quotation of his opponents and that Paul is denouncing the statement. But this is illogical in several ways, not least being the fact that he doesn't denounce the statement. If he were, he would specifically say the statement is wrong or command them to let women speak in due order. No such remarks are present (obviously, because the interpolator intended us to think this was Paul's commandment).
It's rather lamely said the exclamation "What!?" alone constitutes a denunciation of the statement, which it is not (any author of the period would follow such an exclamation with a declarative sentence were that the case).
Moreover, that exclamation is not actually in the Greek. It's a modern translator's conjecture. So no argument can stand on its presence here. The word that's actually there is simply "or" (and it is exactly so translated everywhere else in Paul's corpus). Nor is indirect speech indicated here, as the argument requires it be: there is simply no grammatical structure indicating Paul is quoting his opponents, unlike other passages where he does (1 Corinthians 7:1, "concerning what you wrote..."; 15:12, "some among you say..."; 15:35, "some say..."; note that in 6:12 he's not quoting his opponents but himself: cf. 10:23 in light of 8:1-9:1 and 9:20-22).
Therefore the "quoting others" argument has no basis in the text itself and in fact goes against all the grammatical and rhetorical practices of the period generally and Paul specifically.
Read Richard Carrier’s entire discussion here:
http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com/2011/06/pauline-interpolations.html
Christians facing facts
Where does this leave Christianity? Not only is it proven that the Gospels are riddled with interpolations and thus we cannot be sure what the originals said but the work of the true founder of Christianity, a man who never met Jesus (Paul of Tarsus, aka Apostle Paul), is thought to have been tampered with too. The lying pen of the scribes…
Given all the research into the New Testament, can Christians really state with a straight face that the Bible is the inerrant word of God? No.
Amazingly, one group of believers in Jesus (p) stated well before modern scholarship (over a thousand years ago!) that the Bible is unreliable. Who were these people blessed with such knowledge that the “Holy Spirit inspired Christians” lack even today? The Muslims!
Feedback: yahyasnow@hotmail.com
Become a Muslim if you love Jesus (p)
Sexism: Reason to change the Bible
Discover Islam
New Testament Discussed
26 comments:
This is really astonishing Yahya on the part of Richard Carrier.He said:
"Richard Carrier writes, 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16 is very unusual in several ways. Not in any of Paul's 20,000 words, and dozens of discussions of the Jews, is anything like it. That immediately casts it into doubt. Paul blaming the Jews for the death of Jesus is simply unprecedented.
Paul also never talks about the Jews as if he wasn't one of them"
The Greek word in 1 Thess is Ioudaios and it means JUDEANS and also JEWS,depending on the context,and sometimes we dont know exactly.Dont take my word for it,read:
http://www.israelect.com/reference/WillieMartin/SamaritanWoman.htm
Certainly Carrier as a Greek scholar knows that.
SO WE HAVE
".in Judea...the Jews/(or better said JUDEANS) killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove out us, and pleased not God, and are contrary to all men; forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they may be saved; to fill up their sins always: but the wrath has come upon them to the uttermost.
Then it says:
"Most scholars have concluded this was never written by Paul. The arguments are many, and accumulate to a conclusive case:
• Paul never blames the Jews for the death of Jesus elsewhere.
• Paul never talks about God's wrath as having come, but as coming only at the future judgment (see: Romans 2:5, 3:5-6, 4:15).
• Paul teaches the Jews will be saved, not destroyed (see: Romans 11:25-28).
• Paul was dead by the time the "wrath had come upon them to the uttermost" (the destruction of the Jewish nation and temple in 70 A.D.)."
DID PAL KNOW OF A PROPHECY BY JESUS THAT JERUSALEM AND THE TEMPLE WOULD BE DESTROYED?
By the way JERSUALEM is in JUDEA the land of the IOUDAIOS(Judeans) like "in JUDEA...the JUDEANS(ioudaios)..."(1 Thess)
I argued before that:
1.Acts-Luke is ONLY one book.
2.Most scholars say Jesus' prediction of the Temple is an invention so put Mark(which has it) at 70-75 and so Paul never knew it.
3.But the supernatural is possible so he said it.Plus most schoalrs believe Jesus was killed in 30 AD,which makes 30+40 years=70 AD.which coincides with the 20 plus times the Bible repeats the number 40.
To continue
5.In 1 TIMOTHY 5:17-18 Paul quotes LUKE and calls it SCRIPTURE:
http://www.avraidire.com/2010/04/about-the-dating-of-the-synoptics-and-2-letters/
If Paul read LUKE he read the TEMPLE PROPHECY by Jesus,it is IN LUKE.
6.Paul there by saying the WRATH HAS COME TO THEM is talking of the JESUS PROPHECY in 30 AD that the Temple-Jerusalem would be destroyed.
Carrier of course does not believe Jesus ever said it.
ABOUT 1 COR 14:34-35
Carrier says he rejects the idea of "it is a quotation by Paul".I reject it also.But he ALSO KNOWS the following,which I dont know why he doesnt state:
To continue
I wrote this in avraidire.com:
"THE SITUATION OF THE GREEK TEXT
In the Greek text we have:
1.ALL the letters are TOGETHER, like: heisgoingtothemarketonsaturdayandhewillseehethen.
It was not till the Middle Ages in Europe that words were separated like today. You can easily see that facilitates grammatical and spelling errors by scribes, plus the cases of INATTENTION due to being TIRED or somewhat BAD EYESIGHT.
2. The were NO PUNCTUATION MARKS in the text: no commas, no periods, no interrrogation sign, no exclamation point, no quotation marks.
WHAT ARE YOU SAYING?
The text can be like this:
CASE 1:
” The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. For God is not a God of DISORDER but of PEACE. ( one way of arranging the punctuation signs )
” As in all the EKKLESIAS of the saints, ” women should REMAIN SILENT in the EKKLESIAS. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the LAW SAYS.If they want to inquire about something, they should ASK their OWN HUSBANDS at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you IS THE LORD’S COMMAND. If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored. ”
OR LIKE THIS:
CASE 2:
” The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. For God is not a God of DISORDER but of PEACE ” as in all the EKKLESIAS of the saints. ” ( here is the difference due to the punctuation sign )
Women should REMAIN SILENT in the EKKLESIAS. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the LAW SAYS.If they want to inquire about something, they should ASK their OWN HUSBANDS at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you IS THE LORD’S COMMAND. If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored. ”
LORD’S COMMAND( order or women not speaking?)
It is more logical to say the text is to be written as in case 2. The EMPHASIS is on having ORDER in the EKKLESIA. THAT is what Paul was referring to ( order in the ekklesia ) when he said ” it is the LORD’S COMMAND “, not to the idea of women not speaking.
STILL NOT CONVINCED
If case 1 is accepted Paul would be CONTRADICTING himself where in 1 COR he says a woman can PROPHESIZE ( speak ) in the assembly but covering her hair."
It is from:
http://www.avraidire.com/2010/06/can-women-preach-and-be-ministers-in-a-church/
FINALLY
In his article Carrier writes:
"Payne shows that scribal marks in one of our earliest manuscripts of this letter indicate the passage was known not to appear in some manuscripts available to the copier."
It says in ONE of the EARLIEST but it does not say it was THE EARLIEST nor that the MAJORITY of the EARLIEST manuscripts have it that way,so the documentary evidence is it was there.
Carrier by saying it was NOT is going BEYOND the documentary evidence.That is how it works.
SO WE HAVE THAT:
Since the emphasis in 1COR 14 is on PEACE and against DISORDER the telling of women to remain silent is in the sense of not making disorder:
"For God is NOT a God of DISORDER but of PEACE as in all the EKKLESIAS of the saints.
Women should REMAIN SILENT in the EKKLESIAS. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the LAW SAYS.If they want to inquire about something, they should ASK their OWN HUSBANDS at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church."
It is disgraceful for women to speak if it contributes to DISORDER and lack of PEACE,that is the emphasis.
THE EMPHASIS IS NOT ON FORBIDING WOMEN TO GIVE A SERMON
We know from the way it is worded:
If they want to INQUIRE(Note:not if the want to PREACH)
about something, they should ASK their OWN HUSBANDS at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to SPEAK in the church
(Note:in the sense of interrupting by questions,INQUIRING,again the emphasis on ORDER).
Why is it that whenever Yahya puts a scholarly article about the Bible and its forgeries, Radical Moderate, Anthony Rogers and others just disappear from the scene? Oh I forgot , there is Minoria, the Christian who write 10 pages without proving anything.
Please , We need a knowledgeable Christian to read Minoria's comment, and translate it into a language that humans can understand.
With the name of Allah,
LoL @ 1MoreMuslim
"We need a knowledgeable Christian to read Minoria's comment, and translate it into a language that humans can understand."
I was thinking that!
@ Minioria "Certainly Carrier as a Greek scholar knows that."
Certainly Carrier as a Greek scholar and someone who interacts with Christians is also familiar with your arguments.
Great post brother Yahya!
AI, AM, AOMIN, We got them coming and going. Clearly they are on the run!
Admins, hello! here are having problems with your site. malware warning Write me. icq 674465674567
haaaa, is that the best you guys have?
You guys complain that you aren't getting attention from AI, AM, and AOMIN, but Minoria responded and you guys say it was over your head.
Something tells me that might be part of the reason why you aren't being taken seriously by the aforementioned groups/people.
The epistle to the Thessalonians is certainly one of the most ancient Christian documents in existence. It is typically dated c. 50/51 CE. It is universally assented to be an authentic letter of Paul.
Thessalonica was the capital of the province of Macedonia and a large seaport. The letter to the Thessalonians is thought to have been written by Paul from Corinth a few months after founding a congregation there.
Burton Mack writes of 1 Thess. 2:14-16 in his Who Wrote the New Testament? (p. 113): "The person who made this change was interested in directing Paul's apocalyptic preachments against those who opposed the Christian mission and did so by inserting a small unit aimed specifically at the Jews who 'killed Jesus' and 'drove us out,' for which reason 'God's wrath has overtaken them at last.' Nothing in all of Paul's letters comes close to such a pronouncement (Pearson 1971). The idea seriously tarnishes the inclusive logic of the Christ myth, and it presupposes the logic of Mark's passion narrative which, as we shall see, runs counter to that of the Christ myth. And since, according to this addition, it was the Jews upon whom God's wrath had (already) fallen, the reference must surely be to the destruction of the temple in 70 C.E., an event that Paul did not live to see."
"The Greek word in 1 Thess is Ioudaios and it means JUDEANS and also JEWS"
That is obvious in JOHN 7:1:
"After this Jesus went about in Galilee. He would not go about in Judea, because the Ioudaios(JEWS?) were seeking to kill him."
It is generally translated as JEWS but it should be JUDEANS since JESUS gos FROM JUDEA into GALILEE.
GALILEE was JEWISH,full of Jews,all his disciples were Jews from GALILEE.
AGAIN ABOUT:
wrath has come upon them to the uttermost.
It is even possible Paul here refers to what is in the TALMUD.
That for 40 YEARS before 70 AD the YOM KIPPUR(Day of Atonement) sacrifice was REJECTED by God.
The Talmud was written down in 500 AD but scholars says it has information from centuries earlier.If the information here is correct PAUL also had THAT in mind.Here is an article that gives info about it:
http://www.hebrewroot.com/Articles/Yoma39b.htm
Udo Schnelle comments on the same passage (The History and Theology, p. 48):
I Thess. 2.14-16 has often been regarded as a post-Pauline interpolation. The following arguments have been based on the content: (1) the contradiction between Romans 9-11 and 1 Thess. 2.14-16. (2) The references to what has happened to Jews as a model for a Gentile Christian church. (3) There were no extensive persecutions of Christians by Jews in Palestine prior to the first Jewish war. (4) The use of the concept of imitation in 1 Thessalonians 2.14 is singular. (5) The aorist eftasen (has overtaken) refers to the destruction of Jerusalem.
Schnelle maintains that these arguments are insufficient (op. cit., p. 48):
(1) The tension between 1 Thessalonians 2.14-16 and Romans 9-11 goes back to Paul himself. It is a problem that needs to be explained, not a problem to be set aside by interpolation hypotheses. (2) Paul's ecclesiology presupposes a church of Jewish and Gentile Christians, so that Jewish Christians in Palestine can in fact serve as a model for Gentile Christians elsewhere. (3) Prior to 70 CE there were already conflicts between Jews and Christians in Palestine (cf. Luke 6.22). (4) The concept of imitation in 1 Thessalonians 2.14 is found already in 1 Thessalonians 1.6. (5) 1 Thessalonians 2.16c does not have the destruction of Jerusalem in view, but Paul sees in the hostile conduct of the Jews that the wrath of God has come to completion.
Raymond Brown mentions two additional reasons that the passage might be considered to be an interpolation. The first is that, "It constitutes a second Thanksgiving in the letter" (An Introduction, p. 463). The second is that, "The statement that the Jews 'are the enemies of the whole human race' resembles general Pagan polemic, scarcely characteristic of Paul." Yet Brown goes on to mention arguments in favor of authenticity (op. cit., p. 463):
(a) All mss. contain it; (b) Paul speaks hostilely of 'Jews' as persecutors in II Cor 11:24, and he is not incapable of polemic hyperbole; (c) In Rom (2:5; 3:5-6; 4:15; 11:25) Paul speaks of the wrath of God against Jews, so that the hope of their ultimate salvation does not prevent portrayal of divine disfavor.
It is also sometimes suggested that 5:1-11 is "a post-Pauline insertion that has many features of Lucan language and theology that serves as an apologetic correction to the Pauline expectation of the parousia and thus already reflects the problem of the delay of the parousia" (Schnelle, p. 48).
Paul had clearly taught that Jesus would be coming within the lifetimes of those alive at the time. This teaching led to concerns in the Thessalonian church over the fate of those who had died before the coming of the Lord. Would they share in the joy of the parousia? Paul writes to assure the Thessalonians that those who had fallen asleep in Christ would also profit from the coming of the Lord. Paul instructs them that the dead would come to life first and that they would join the living with the Lord when he comes.
First Epistle to the Corinthians
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the book in the New Testament of the Bible. For the Brazilian football (soccer) team, see Sport Club Corinthians Paulista. For other uses, see Corinthian.
The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, often referred to as First Corinthians (and written as 1 Corinthians), is the seventh book of the New Testament of the Bible. Paul of Tarsus (with the help of Sosthenes),[1] composed this letter in Greek, to the Christians of Corinth, Greece.
This epistle contains some of the best-known phrases in the New Testament, including (depending on the translation) "all things to all men" (9:22), "without love, I am nothing" (13:2), "through a glass, darkly" (13:12), and "when I was a child, I spoke as a child, I felt as a child, I thought as a child" (13:11).
Here is the quote from the TALMUD:
From "b. Yoma 39b", and reads as follows (Neusner’s translation):
"Forty years before the destruction of the sanctuary:
1.The lot did not come up in the right hand,
2.And the thread of crimson never turned white,
3.And the westernmost light never shone,
4.And the doors of the courtyard would open by themselves,
Till Rabban Yohanan b. Zakkai rebuked them."
NOTE:
ZAKKAI was simple one of the GREATEST JEWISH teacher of his time,he was in effect the founder of modern Judaism,rabbinic Judaism,every religious Jew knows him.He escaped from the siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD in a coffin pretending to be dead.
Then he went to Vespasian and said he would be the next Emperor of Rome.Then later founded a famous academy in Palestine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johanan_ben_Zakai
TO CONTINUE WITH THE TEXT:
"He (NOTE:Zakkai)said, “Temple, Temple, why will you yourself give the alarm.
I know that in the end you are destined to be destroyed. For Zechariah b. Eido has already prophesied concerning you: ‘Open your doors, Lebanon, that fire may devour your cedars’ (Zec. 11: 1).”"
1moreMuslim wrote...
"Why is it that whenever Yahya puts a scholarly article about the Bible and its forgeries, Radical Moderate, Anthony Rogers and others just disappear from the scene?"
I'm still waiting for the "SCHOLARLY ARTICLE".
Please let me know when you guys post one.
Radical Moderate:
A scholar according to RM, is one who believes that God was born changed diapers everyday. if not , he is not a scholar.
To add more:
There are 2 TALMUDS,the JERUSALEM TALMUD and the BABYLONIAN TALMUD.I quoted from the more famous,more authoritative Babylonian Talmud(20 volumes,2.5 million words).
But the JERUSALEM one(called the YERUSHALMI) also says:
"Forty years before the destruction of the Temple:
1.The western light went out,
2.The crimson thread remained crimson,
3.And the lot for the Lord always came up in the left hand.
4.They would close the gates of the Temple by night and get up in the morning and find them wide open"
(Jacob Neusner, The Yerushalmi, p. 156-157).
It may be there is a historical core to the story,because it has a second attestation.
1moremuslim said...
"Radical Moderate:
A scholar according to RM, is one who believes that God was born changed diapers everyday. if not , he is not a scholar."
I'm just curious what do you mean by "God was born"?
Please elaborate.
Reading more on the subject to my surprise I found there is a report by JOSEPHUS(37-100) who wrote around 90 AD,in his WAR OF THE JEWS(about the Jewish rebellion of 66-70 AD) about a heifer giving birth to a lamb.
Now since we know sometimes there are calfs with 2 HEADS or 4 LEGS it should not be too surprising that a calf looked like a lamb.He also mentions about PEOPLE THINKING of DOOM related to an event in the TEMPLE.
Says Josephus, in his Wars of the Jews:
“Thus also, BEFORE the Jewish rebellion, and before those commotions which preceded the war, when the people were come in great crowds to the feast of unleavened bread, on the eighth day of the month Xanthicus [Nisan] and at the ninth hour of the night:
1.So great a light shone round the altar and the holy house, that it appeared to be bright day-time; which light lasted for half an hour.
2.This light seemed to be a good sign to the unskillful, but was so interpreted by the sacred scribes as to portend those events that followed immediately upon it (Note:destruction of the city and Temple).
3.At the same festival also, a heifer, as she was being led by the high priest to be sacrificed, brought forth a lamb in the midst of the temple.
4.Moreover, the eastern gate of the inner, [court of the temple,] which was of brass, and vastly heavy, and had been with difficulty shut by twenty men
and rested upon a basis armed with iron, and had bolts fastened very deep into the firm floor, which was there made of one entire stone,
was seen to be opened of its own accord about the sixth hour of the night.
Now, those that kept watch in the temple came thereupon running to the captain of the temple, and told him of it; who then came up thither, and not without great difficulty was able to shut the gate again.
This also appeared to the vulgar to be a very happy prodigy, as if God did thereby open them the gate of happiness. But the men of learning understood it, that the security of their holy house was dissolved of its own accord
, and that the gate was opened for the advantage of their enemies. So these publicly declared, that this signal foreshewed the DESOLATION that was coming upon them (Note:deswtruction of Temple and Jerusalem)” - (IV,5,3).
I think the 2 Talmuds may be right about the 40 year thing.
NET Romans 10:13 For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord [in context, Jesus] will be saved.
PT Joel 2:32 It will so happen that everyone who calls on the name of YHWH will be saved.
Here Paul quotes the tetragrammaton and applies it to Jesus!
Join them one to another into one stick, that they may become one in your hand!
HalleluJah! מרן אתא
1MM - "The Word, the Creator of all things, the Eternal One, became flesh. Maybe we think so highly of ourselves that we are not properly struck by such a statement. We need to be amazed by the assertion, "The Word became flesh." How can the unlimited enter into limitation? John does not tell us. The mechanics of how are not revealed to us, for God is under no obligation to answer every prying question. We are simply told that the eternal Word became flesh. Faith rests in God's revelation."
James White. Forgotten Trinity, The (Kindle Locations 553-556). Kindle Edition. Emphasis mine.
By “God being born” and the diaper comment I believe he was referring to your false god impregnating his adolescent mother, then being pushed out of her nether regions, and as a baby taking ample amounts of feces as most babies do. You know, sometimes I wonder what I would believe in, had Islam not been there. I cannot possibly be an atheist, for they believe in a grand fairy tale, that by some unknown magic dust the universe came into being, by even stronger magic dust, life came into being and slowly cells morphed into whales, horses, cute bunnies and man. Reading Retarded Moderately’s comments I am inclined to believe they may have some truth--at least partially, perhaps this chap and his christian brethren truly do share ancestry with apes. I could not possibly belong to the far east religions, for a mind motivated and driven by intellect, thirsting and hungering for a truth that satiates all the senses, cannot possibly find comfort in any of them. However, above all things I could not be a christian. For how can I believe in a god, who--again--impregnated his own mother, to be born out of her loins, eat, drink, defecate with gay abandon, Pray to ANOTHER yet HIGHER authority known as the “Father”, yet he himself is supposedly no different from that father. I must stop now, because a human mind can only process a certain measure of stupidity before it finds itself afflicted with antagonism, and utter frustration. Oh and..cheers
Post a Comment