Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Kosh · 10-28-2002, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Douglas J. Bender:
Wyz_sub10,

<"Mirroring" on> Well, on behalf of Christian apologists everywhere, I thank you for acknowledging us. I can tell you'd be an objective, fair-minded debate opponent, right off the bat. You so exemplify the attitudes and character of atheists - I salute you. <"Mirroring" off>

Hey, Dougies back! Hey dougie, I was gonna get one of those really cool hollywood-style realistic latex appliances demon masks and wear it to work on Halloween, even while driving, but I figured that there would be some fundies that would think it was real and try to run me off the road. I don't know, people don't REALLY see demons any more, do they?

In Situ,

Kosh

Butters · 10-28-2002, 12:26 PM

Here is part of an old post, by Peter Kirby I believe. Appearently Mr. Epog has not read it.

Quote:

FunkyRes writes: We have documentation in the Talmud saying that Mary the daughter of Heli was damned to hell for her blasphemy.
You learn something new everyday. Christian apologist Mark McFall has looked into this a bit, and this is what he has to say:
quote:

The present writer feels obligated to inform readers of the often cited reference from the Talmud concerning the mention of a "Mariam" (thought to be the virgin Mary by popular apologists). In John Haley’s book _Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible_, we see Mr. Haley make reference to the Jewish Talmud’s in support that the genealogy in Luke is that of "Mary the daughter of Heli." Mr. Haley writes:
"It is indirectly CONFIRMED [emphasis mine] by Jewish tradition. Lightfoot cites from the Talmudic writers concerning the pains of hell, the statement that Mary the daughter of Heli [sic] was seen in the infernal regions, suffering horrid tortures. This statement illustrates, not only the bitter animosity of the Jews toward the Christian religion, but also the fact that, according to received Jewish tradition, Mary was the daughter of Heli; [sic] hence, that it is her genealogy which we find in Luke." (John Haley, Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible, page 326.)
Notice that this assertion is without a citation to the Talmud, but instead admittedly references John Lightfoot’s (A.D. 1602-1675) four-hundred year old work Horae Hebraicae on Luke 3:23 ( i.e._A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica_). The present writer spent some time tracking down Lightfoot’s work cited by Mr. Haley and this is what I found concerning the preceding context in which he cites the Talmud:
"There is a discourse of a certain person who in his sleep saw the punishment of the damned. Amongst the rest which I would render thus, but shall willingly stand corrected if under a mistake;" (John Lightfoot (1602-1675). A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica. Exercitations upon the Evangelist St. Luke Chapter 3. Or, Horae Hebraicae on Luke 3:23. ( <a href="http://philologos.org/__eb-jl/luke03.htm" target="_blank">http://philologos.org/__eb-jl/luke03.htm</a> ).
After that comment, Lightfoot cites the Talmudian passage as he understands it:
"He saw Mary the daughter of Heli amongst the shades. R. Lazar Ben Josah saith, that she hung by the glandules of her breasts. R. Josah Bar Haninah saith, that the great bar of hell's gate hung at her ear." (Ibid. Lightfoot on Hagigah, 77d).
Directly after Lightfoot cites the alleged Talmudian passage (i.e. Hagigah 7d), Lightfoot writes:
"If this be the true rendering of the words, which I have reason to believe it is, then thus far, at least, it agrees with our evangelist, that Mary was the daughter of Heli...." (Ibid.)
This is interesting because Mr. Haley is basing his appeal on Lightfoot’s admittedly questionable text that Lightfoot has either never personally seen (meaning that he heard it from somewhere), or, is unsure of the textual reading. Moreover, MANY apologists are following suit without checking the original Talmudian source nor Lightfoot’s unsure comments. After spending some time doing some more research and correspondence, the present writer finally located the Talmudian passage in _The Talmud of the Land of Israel_ (Vol.20) of "Hagigah and Moed Qatan" (section 77d). Here we read:
"R. Eliezer bar Yos’e said that he saw Miriam, the daughter of 'LYBSLYM [Jastrow—the leeklike sprouts of onions], hanging the nipples of her breasts. R. Yost b. Hanina said, "The pin of the gate of Gehenna was fastened to her ear." (_The Talmud of the Land of Israel_, Vol. 20: Hagigah and Moed Qatan. Translated by Jacob Neusner University of Chicago Press, 1986 ISBN 0-226-57679-5. Passage: "L." Note: Tim Taylor of Errancy located this reference to make this example possible.)
Professor Rabbi Neusner, the translator of this passage, has left the ALL important Hebrew word "LYBSLYM" untranslated leaving us without a definitive answer. So the question still looms: Does "LYBSLYM" translate to Heli/Eli? As an aid in helping us answer this question, Rabbi Neusner cites in brackets "[ ]" professor Marcus Jastrow (Marcus Jastrow is author of the authoritve Jewish source, A Dictionary of the Targumim, Talmud Babli, Talmud Yerushalmi and Midrashic Literature) as what appears to be a play on words in the Hebrew (i.e. "Jastrow - the leeklike sprouts of onions"). Seeking clarification on this textual anomaly, the present writer contacted the academic department of the Jewish Theological Seminary with the intentions of speaking to the distinguished scholar Dr. David Kraemer who currently resides as Professor of Talmud and Rabbinics (Short Bio: Dr. Kraemer’s articles have appeared in a wide variety of journals, both scholarly and popular, as well as having authored numerous books that deal extensively with Rabbinic Judaism). Dr. Kraemer responded to my request concerning the translation of the Hebrew "LYBSLYM" (Hagigah, 77d), he writes:
"The term you ask about translates most simply into "the leaves of onions." The Hebrew words (and there are two words here) are 'alei betzalim. This is admittedly a very odd name, and it may well be a play on some other phrase. (The story itself suggests that something very odd is going on here.) There is nothing obvious that demands that we read this story as referring to Mary [of the New Testament], but it is not impossible." (E-mail correspondence 8/09/01).
While Dr. Kraemer does not entirely exclude the Talmudian passage from referencing the Mary of the New Testament. What seems to be certain here, is that "LYBSLYM" more accurately "alei betzalim," does NOT translate as "Heli/Eli." Furthermore, scholars who have extensively studied the contextual evidence see no connection. Herford Travers in his work _Christianity in Talmud and Midrash_, comments:
"There is, in Jerusalem Hagigah 77d, a reference to a certain Miriam the daughter of 'Eli, whom, on account of the name (cf. Luke iii.23), one might be tempted to connect with the story of Jesus; but there seems to be no suspicion on the part of the Talmud of any such connection, and what is told about her does not seem to me to point in that direction." (_Christianity in Talmud and Midrash_, by Herford Travers pg, 43. Note: Book available on-line: <a href="http://www.messianicart.com/messiah/intalmud.htm)." target="_blank">http://www.messianicart.com/messiah/intalmud.htm).</a>
Scholar Norvall Geldenhuys echoes this sentiment as he leans on the work of respected German scholars Strack and Billerbeck who also do not see any connection:
"The Miriam, daughter of Eli, who is referred to in the Talmud (Chagigah 77d), has in all probability nothing to do with Mary the mother of Jesus, as is made plain in Strack-Billerbeck ( in loc .)" (Geldenhuys, Gospel of Luke , 154 n. 5).
While the evidence is not totally conclusive at this point. What has been shown here is the HUGE question mark (i.e. appealing to authority) that is placed after the assertion made by those who appeal to Mr. Haley whom appeals to Mr. Lightfoot that "according to received Jewish tradition, Mary was the daughter of Heli/Eli." There are simply to many complications surrounding this Talmudian reference to make such a claim. If, indeed the Bible does contain demonstrable errors, it would show that at least those parts could not have come from a perfect, all-knowing God.” –Josh McDowell

The most obvious contradiction in the Bible is the genealogy of Jesus. Even the early church fathers had to deal with it. In Matthew, Joseph’s father is Jacob. In Luke he was Heli. I am offering the conservative church a sane sensible way out of this dilemma. Joseph was raised by a pair a male homosexuals. The name Heli comes from the Greek word for sun, helios, implying that Joey’s Dad was a flamer.

As simple as this explanation is, the church never adopted it. Rather they chose something less believable. They decided that one of the genealogies should belong to Mary. Luke won out as the genealogy that belonged to Mary because in Luke 3:23 it uses the phrase “as was supposed.” Never mind that the rest of the verse states “the son of Joseph.” Very clever, except they forgot one thing.

There seems to be a prophecy that the messiah would be descended from Salathiel and Zerubbabel (probably somewhere from Zechariah or Haggai). They are included in the midst of both genealogies. In other words Salathiel had two fathers also. Neri, in Luke and Jechonias for those who prefer Matthew. (The gay explanation is starting to look better).

1 Chronicles 3:17 claims Jechoniah to be Salathiel’s father. The Old Testament doesn’t know Luke’s Neri. Zerubbabel’s sons listed in 1 Chr. 3:19 are “Meshullam, and Hananiah, and Shelomith their sister: And Hashubah and Ohel, and Berechiah, and Hasadiah, Jushab-hesed five” (Grumpy, Sleepy, and Dopey). Luke claims Zerubbabel’s son to be “Rhesa,” Matthew prefers “Abiud.” Apparently they were both illegitimate since Chronicles never mentions them. Zerubbabel lived about 500 B.C., meaning about 500 years passed between him and the birth of Jesus. During this time Luke lists 20 generations, Matthew 11. Under Matthew’s plan the average age a man would have to be in siring the son for the next generation would be 45, Luke’s is 25. Forty-five does seem a little high, but let us abandon reason, after all it is the Bible.
The problem of the genealogy was addressed by Eusebius. He claimed Heli and Jacob were half brothers with the same Mother (Estha). Heli died childless, and Jacob married Heli’s widow and begat Joseph. Heli was Joseph’s legal father, Jacob his blood line father. Unfortunately Eusebius never tells us who is Salathiel’s real half father, or whatever. This explanation allegedly came from Africanus. Since Herod the Great burnt the official temple registers of all the families, it is impossible to say what is really the truth, although some people will try.

Now heres what confuses me. Why would Christians accept the fact the the Mother of God was hanging by her breasts in hell, rather than give up the notion that one genology is hers! Mr. eggnog might not be a Christian, but if he is not, I wonder why he can accept such nonsense.

Novowels · 10-28-2002, 12:47 PM

Joseph has two daddies!

Geoff Hudson · 10-28-2002, 01:21 PM

THE GENEALOGY OF THE SPIRIT IN LUKE

Chapter 3
In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar -- when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene -- during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the Spirit of God came to John son of Zechariah in the desert. He went into all the country around Judea preaching the Spirit. As the Spirit says in the words of Isaiah the prophet: "A voice of one calling in the desert, 'Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him. Every valley shall be filled in, every mountain and hill made low. The crooked roads shall become straight, the rough ways smooth. And all mankind will see God's salvation.'"

John said to the crowds coming out to him, "Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? Produce fruit in keeping with the Spirit. And do not begin to say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father.' For I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham. The axe is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire." "What should we do then?" the crowd asked. John answered, "The man with two tunics should share with him who has none, and the one who has food should do the same."

Tax collectors also came to him. "Teacher," they asked, "what should we do?" "Don't collect any more than you are required to," he told them. Then some soldiers asked him, "And what should we do?" He replied, "Don't extort money and don't accuse people falsely -- be content with your pay." The people were waiting expectantly and were all wondering in their hearts if John might possibly be the Prophet. John answered them all, "I preach repentance. But the Spirit will come. He will purify you. His winnowing fork is in his hand to clear his threshing-floor and to gather the wheat into his barn, but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire." And with many other words John exhorted the people and preached the message of the Spirit to them.

23Now John himself was about thirty years old when the Spirit began his ministry. He was the Spirit of Zechariah, 24the Spirit of Heli, the Spirit of Matthat, the Spirit of Levi, the Spirit of Melki, the Spirit of Jannai, the Spirit of Joseph, 25the Spirit of Mattathias, the Spirit of Amos, the Spirit of Nahum, the Spirit of Esli, 26the Spirit of Naggai, the Spirit of Maath, the Spirit of Mattathias, the Spirit of Semeof, the Spirit of Josech, the Spirit of Joda, 27the Spirit of Joanan, the Spirit of Rhesa, the Spirit of Zerubbabel, the Spirit of Shealtiel, 28the Spirit of Neri, the Spirit of Melki, the Spirit of Addi, the Spirit of Cosam, the Spirit of Elmadam, the Spirit of Er, 29the Spirit of Joshua, the Spirit of Eliezer, the Spirit of Jorim, the Spirit of Matthat, 30the Spirit of Levi, the Spirit of Simeon, the Spirit of Judah, the Spirit of Joseph,the Spirit of Jonam, the Spirit of Eliakim, 31the Spirit of Melea, the Spirit of Menna, the Spirit of Mattatha, the Spirit of Nathan,32the Spirit of David, the Spirit of Jesse, the Spirit of Obed, the Spirit of Boaz, the Spirit of Salmon, the Spirit of Nahshon, 33the Spirit of Ammofadab, the Spirit of Ram, the Spirit of Hezron, the Spirit of Perez, 34the Spirit of Judah, the Spirit of Jacob, the Spirit of Isaac, the Spirit of Abraham, the Spirit of Terah, the Spirit of Nahor, 35the Spirit of Serug, the Spirit of Reu, the Spirit of Peleg, the Spirit of Eber, 36the Spirit of Shelah, the Spirit of Cainan, the Spirit of Arphaxad, the Spirit of Shem, the Spirit of Noah, the Spirit of Lamech, 37the Spirit of Methuselah, the Spirit of Enoch, the Spirit of Jared, the Spirit of Mahalalel, 38the Spirit of Kenan, the Spirit of Enosh, the Spirit of Seth, the Spirit of Adam, the Spirit of God.

The purpose of the genealogy in Luke was to trace the work of the Spirit of God in individuals from creation. There are three other such "mini Antiquities" passages in the NT with a similar purpose. This main work of Josephus was originally meant to do the same before the editors got at it. The genealogy in Matthew is a later fabrication that the editors used to link the ficticious Jesus with the kingly line of David.

Geoff

Ion · 10-28-2002, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by epoq:
you're the mother of all morons BUT KEEP TRYING

))
...

epoq,

do they have electricity now, in the swamp where you live over there in Australia?

Quote:

Originally posted by Geoff Hudson:

...
The genealogy in Matthew is a later fabrication that the editors used to link the ficticious Jesus with the kingly line of David.

Geoff

I see.

epoq, you didn't know this, did you, and nobody told it to you, right?

Man, people over there in Australia are cruel with you, because they should inform you too, and not just leave you behind civilization like this.

[ October 28, 2002: Message edited by: Ion ]

offa · 10-28-2002, 03:50 PM

Offa; Luke's genealogy is correct. Luke is a Samaritan. Jacob is always the patriarch and Joseph means "junior". Jacob's real name is Heli. Joseph's real name is Clophas (even though Luke does not reveal this secret). Matthew is a Jew and he is using a Jewish chronology with a generation of forty years with names being super-imposed. The "Virgin" is a Samaritan as is her cousin, the wife of Zachariah. Zachariah is an "Angel" and is not allowed to screw, thus, when Elisabeth started showing she had to go into hiding at 5 months. Mary was screwed by Joseph (Clophas) but he was not an "Angel". He was a "Holy Spirit" and a member of the "All". Clophas was the one who crossed the genealogy lines and took a Samaritan as a wife. Jesus is thus stuck with a Samaritan mother and a Jew father ... inter-racial. Jesus "knocks-up" Mary Magdaline who may very well be his aunt (the Virgin's sister - half sister). It is called "harem intriques".

thanks, Offa

Ion · 10-28-2002, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by offa:

...
Joseph's real name is Clophas (even though Luke does not reveal this secret).
...
thanks, Offa

Now it makes sense.

Also God's real name is Buddha-el-Salaam.

10-28-2002, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Baidarka:
OK. Apologists, here it is the Mother of NT contradictions. Apologists go first.

But there is no contradiction at all, Baidarka. How can you even suggest such a thing if Jesus was the reborn Joseph and Mary was the womb of Joseph to give birth to his first begotten identity who always was the son of God because it is in the image of God that son of man is created.

The lineage of Jesus Christ in Matthew is given to show how Jesus Christ was from the line of David and this same Jesus Christ finds his origen through Joseph to Adam to God in Luke. Matthew is the Jewish perspective and Luke is the omniscient Christian perspective.

The significance of this is that Jesus was from Judaism and returned to God in Luke to show that Christianity is a offshoot from Judaism but finds its origen through Adam to God. This makes it a new religion without any obligation or loyalty towards Judaism.

[ October 28, 2002: Message edited by: Amos ]

Baidarka · 10-28-2002, 07:39 PM

epoq

I would like to offer my humble apology for offending your highly refined intellectual sensibilities. I am incredibly impressed by your obvious mind reading ability. Where and how did you arrive at the number “498276429140921734”? How do you know who I think I am wiser than? How did you ascertain what research I did or didn’t do? You are truly an amazing phenomenon, a truly astute Biblical apologist capable of deep incites into the minds of the living and the dead. When I first read "HAY SUM1 TOLD 2 ME THA BIBEL IS NOT CORREKT ^_^" I thought that this must have been Latin or Greek but then I realized that you must have inadvertently shut off your spell-check. Please Mr. Epoq don’t ever turn off your spell check again you just mustn’t let Australia down that way! You are of course quite right in pointing out all of the very interesting points that I could have made, which would have elevated me onto your rarified high falutin plain. I guess my just posting a title and 2 quotes and than just saying “apologists go first” is just too obvious and that I am deserving of all your vituperations. Oh, I was very impressed with your ability to find such a very interesting web site full of so much interesting bull crap(this is of course an American compliment).
As for the rest of you out there please don’t be so hard on Epoq he’s an Aussie and we all know that they have to struggle with insults and innuendos about being the offspring of convicts and all that. We must be careful of his obvious sensitive and delicate nature.

Baidarka

Ion · 10-28-2002, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Baidarka:

...
As for the rest of you out there please don’t be so hard on Epoq he’s an Aussie...
...
Baidarka

epoq rocks!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-28-2002, 12:47 PM	#23
Novowels Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,658	Joseph has two daddies!

10-28-2002, 01:21 PM	#24
Geoff Hudson Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: UK Posts: 318	THE GENEALOGY OF THE SPIRIT IN LUKE Chapter 3 In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar -- when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene -- during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the Spirit of God came to John son of Zechariah in the desert. He went into all the country around Judea preaching the Spirit. As the Spirit says in the words of Isaiah the prophet: "A voice of one calling in the desert, 'Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him. Every valley shall be filled in, every mountain and hill made low. The crooked roads shall become straight, the rough ways smooth. And all mankind will see God's salvation.'" John said to the crowds coming out to him, "Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? Produce fruit in keeping with the Spirit. And do not begin to say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father.' For I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham. The axe is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire." "What should we do then?" the crowd asked. John answered, "The man with two tunics should share with him who has none, and the one who has food should do the same." Tax collectors also came to him. "Teacher," they asked, "what should we do?" "Don't collect any more than you are required to," he told them. Then some soldiers asked him, "And what should we do?" He replied, "Don't extort money and don't accuse people falsely -- be content with your pay." The people were waiting expectantly and were all wondering in their hearts if John might possibly be the Prophet. John answered them all, "I preach repentance. But the Spirit will come. He will purify you. His winnowing fork is in his hand to clear his threshing-floor and to gather the wheat into his barn, but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire." And with many other words John exhorted the people and preached the message of the Spirit to them. 23Now John himself was about thirty years old when the Spirit began his ministry. He was the Spirit of Zechariah, 24the Spirit of Heli, the Spirit of Matthat, the Spirit of Levi, the Spirit of Melki, the Spirit of Jannai, the Spirit of Joseph, 25the Spirit of Mattathias, the Spirit of Amos, the Spirit of Nahum, the Spirit of Esli, 26the Spirit of Naggai, the Spirit of Maath, the Spirit of Mattathias, the Spirit of Semeof, the Spirit of Josech, the Spirit of Joda, 27the Spirit of Joanan, the Spirit of Rhesa, the Spirit of Zerubbabel, the Spirit of Shealtiel, 28the Spirit of Neri, the Spirit of Melki, the Spirit of Addi, the Spirit of Cosam, the Spirit of Elmadam, the Spirit of Er, 29the Spirit of Joshua, the Spirit of Eliezer, the Spirit of Jorim, the Spirit of Matthat, 30the Spirit of Levi, the Spirit of Simeon, the Spirit of Judah, the Spirit of Joseph,the Spirit of Jonam, the Spirit of Eliakim, 31the Spirit of Melea, the Spirit of Menna, the Spirit of Mattatha, the Spirit of Nathan,32the Spirit of David, the Spirit of Jesse, the Spirit of Obed, the Spirit of Boaz, the Spirit of Salmon, the Spirit of Nahshon, 33the Spirit of Ammofadab, the Spirit of Ram, the Spirit of Hezron, the Spirit of Perez, 34the Spirit of Judah, the Spirit of Jacob, the Spirit of Isaac, the Spirit of Abraham, the Spirit of Terah, the Spirit of Nahor, 35the Spirit of Serug, the Spirit of Reu, the Spirit of Peleg, the Spirit of Eber, 36the Spirit of Shelah, the Spirit of Cainan, the Spirit of Arphaxad, the Spirit of Shem, the Spirit of Noah, the Spirit of Lamech, 37the Spirit of Methuselah, the Spirit of Enoch, the Spirit of Jared, the Spirit of Mahalalel, 38the Spirit of Kenan, the Spirit of Enosh, the Spirit of Seth, the Spirit of Adam, the Spirit of God. The purpose of the genealogy in Luke was to trace the work of the Spirit of God in individuals from creation. There are three other such "mini Antiquities" passages in the NT with a similar purpose. This main work of Josephus was originally meant to do the same before the editors got at it. The genealogy in Matthew is a later fabrication that the editors used to link the ficticious Jesus with the kingly line of David. Geoff

10-28-2002, 03:50 PM	#26
offa Regular Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Monroeville, Ohio, USA Posts: 440	Offa; Luke's genealogy is correct. Luke is a Samaritan. Jacob is always the patriarch and Joseph means "junior". Jacob's real name is Heli. Joseph's real name is Clophas (even though Luke does not reveal this secret). Matthew is a Jew and he is using a Jewish chronology with a generation of forty years with names being super-imposed. The "Virgin" is a Samaritan as is her cousin, the wife of Zachariah. Zachariah is an "Angel" and is not allowed to screw, thus, when Elisabeth started showing she had to go into hiding at 5 months. Mary was screwed by Joseph (Clophas) but he was not an "Angel". He was a "Holy Spirit" and a member of the "All". Clophas was the one who crossed the genealogy lines and took a Samaritan as a wife. Jesus is thus stuck with a Samaritan mother and a Jew father ... inter-racial. Jesus "knocks-up" Mary Magdaline who may very well be his aunt (the Virgin's sister - half sister). It is called "harem intriques". thanks, Offa

10-28-2002, 07:39 PM	#29
Baidarka Senior Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: NYC Posts: 590	epoq I would like to offer my humble apology for offending your highly refined intellectual sensibilities. I am incredibly impressed by your obvious mind reading ability. Where and how did you arrive at the number “498276429140921734”? How do you know who I think I am wiser than? How did you ascertain what research I did or didn’t do? You are truly an amazing phenomenon, a truly astute Biblical apologist capable of deep incites into the minds of the living and the dead. When I first read "HAY SUM1 TOLD 2 ME THA BIBEL IS NOT CORREKT ^_^" I thought that this must have been Latin or Greek but then I realized that you must have inadvertently shut off your spell-check. Please Mr. Epoq don’t ever turn off your spell check again you just mustn’t let Australia down that way! You are of course quite right in pointing out all of the very interesting points that I could have made, which would have elevated me onto your rarified high falutin plain. I guess my just posting a title and 2 quotes and than just saying “apologists go first” is just too obvious and that I am deserving of all your vituperations. Oh, I was very impressed with your ability to find such a very interesting web site full of so much interesting bull crap(this is of course an American compliment). As for the rest of you out there please don’t be so hard on Epoq he’s an Aussie and we all know that they have to struggle with insults and innuendos about being the offspring of convicts and all that. We must be careful of his obvious sensitive and delicate nature. Baidarka

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.