@Masa_Lee:

I have replied to this on the "Proof Disproving Christianity" thread. I suspect that most people are not replying because there are no well-formed arguments in your post, but I took the time to address a couple of points.

Why is it that when you look up many ancient messiahs, many of them all have the same corresponding events...

Born 25th December
12 Disciples
Three Kings (Originally referring to an old Orion constellation resembling a cross.)
The Three Kings or Wise Men all followed the same star in the sky to lead their way.
Born of a Virgin
Risen on the third day
Others also show the messiahs being deceived by an disciple, with the named messiah knowing this beforehand.

Why don't we hear about all of these messiahs? Because originally they were said to be placed here by the devil, only hiding the truth from themselves in the process.

By all means, I myself believe Christ was here, and that he did what he did...

but, there are solid mythological and ancient cizilization evidence to back up all of these other claimed messiahs.

I can only speculate Christ is a much broader meaning, but nobody knows its significance. If only it were all figured out before hand.

It is amazing the truths people will hide from themselves only in order to maintain their own security and comfort.

There are 35,000+ different Christian sectors...how does the old saying go?
"A religion divided is no religion at all"

BTW Christ originally stated he would be with us until the end of the "Aeon" meaning Zodiac Ages, not until the end of "Time". This current "Aeon" of Pisces ends on 2050.

The most basic elements of information are key to figuring these things out. You can see many religions and cultures have very similar creation myths as to how everything began. Though it is the elaborating, altering, revising, damaging, or loss of this information over time that becomes the very complex religions we see today.

Hmm go figure.

Thank you for your time.

3rd thread I've posted this on now lol.

omg

Um, I can't think of a word (or set of words) that, when placed there, makes it into a sensible sentence.

Including laundry.

Um... because you are supposed to fill in the dots with whatever you like.

laundry.

I am pretty bored today, being as I am at work on a quiet afternoon. I also enjoy chatting sometimes. Why do you do it?

the dots are open for interpretation.

It's not so much the dots as the five words that precede them formed a phrase that didn't make sense.

the dots are open for interpretation.

I'm sure you can connect them, based on my statements - then stating I can even though I disagree.

Tell me, do you just enjoy chatting with me? Or are you that bored today?

Pay attention.

I was. It's just that:

Maybe by sense you mean "bend to this barter of ...."

...didn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Literally. So I switched to what I hoped were mutually sensible terms.

"Which obviously I can do. Whether or not I disagree with it's implications."

Pay attention.

That won't work. I have no issue using the same vocabulary with them.

But surely you have some awareness of general social standards dealing with language and minors, yes?

That won't work. I have no issue using the same vocabulary with them.

Maybe by sense you mean "bend to this barter of .... "

Which obviously I can do. Whether or not I disagree with it's implications.

[E]xactly where can I find a list of censored words?

Just imagine the audience includes pre-teens, and use some sense.

Try the Universe thread.

And, exactly where can I find a list of censored words?

So far everything seemed to follow naturally from the conversation. We're not particularly strict about keeping things on topic, in any case.

And that includes not derailing them? Right?

A bit, I guess. This community never needed much moderating, so there never was much need. It's like being a sheriff in a sleepy little hamlet. Mostly we're here just to make sure that threads by-and-large end up in the right categories.

So, bringing it up instead of "temper temper" never occurred to you? Slacking on your moderation aren't you el?

Honestly it almost didn't occur to me, as it has never come up. You're the first person I've ever had to tell to chill on the profanity.

Surprising you waited so long to say something. And when you did.

I don't personally care much about profanity, but Daniel likes to keep the forums and blog on a PG-13 sort of level, so please ease up. Sparingly is the key, if at all.

lighten the fuck up.

Okay...

[Backs away slowly]

Did you just make that up?

You must have, or you don't get out much.

FUCK is a fantastic word. FUCKING is a fantastic word.

That it fucking bothers you speaks fucking probably more to your fucking sensitivities than any fucking thing else.

I have no problem with the word, but when used as an expletive it usually means one of three things:

1. the person is angry
2. the person is poorly socialized
3. the person is attempting to misdirect from the fact that they have nothing meaningful to say

Angry was the most charitable option.

Who's got a temper?

What's the matter? You don't like the word FUCK?

Temper, temper. It sounds like you've taken this a little personally.

The term when used dealt with a turning from the God of Abraham, in rebellion. It means our modern day version of "back slidden". It was rebellion against the god. Not atheism.

If an atheist claims they are apostate, in that context, they instantly give credibility to the fucking God of Abraham.

And a modern dictionary isn't going to do squat for your argument, since the biblical text was cited. Go to the fucking bible text or concede you sounded like an idiot just trying to bitch on me again.

Again: Sorry you failed.

A Christian believes there is a God, and so would interpret apostasy, i.e. losing the belief in God, as turning away from the actual entity. Atheists don't believe in God, and so apostasy to them is understood only as a change in belief.

Either way an Atheist who was once a Christian is an apostate.

For what it's worth, unlike 'faith', there is only one definition for apostasy listed in the dictionary:

a·pos·tate   [uh-pos-teyt]
–noun
1. a person who forsakes his religion, cause, party, etc.

And once again, a good example of a word that has an identical surface meaning but disparate deep structure depending on who is using the word.

Bullshit. He can use that word to some folks. He can even cite those verses - just not to define an atheist.

I didn't say "god does not exist" either.

Sorry you are bent out of shape because you didn't get to show me incorrect (yet again). But deal with it.

I was speaking directly to that point, and was accurate in my statement. That you tried to shoot me down and were thwarted is something you'll have to get over.

Then your response and "clarification" was nonsense. Caddy, being a Christian, meant the word exactly the way he meant it, and so your point about apostasy not being a coherent concept because God does not exist is at best trivial.