Jolt Country

Vitriola wrote:But this is only my recollection, and he WAS drunk.

You recall him being drunk that one time? Wow.

Wait.

When WASN'T he drunk?

What a great reality check! Jesus, if you're going to post under the fucking name Reality Check at least post something that shuts everyone else up and makes us look up at you in awe over your golden reasoning. PS im so fucking drunk right now lol

Lysander wrote:PS im so fucking drunk right now lol

Does that mean you're my father?

If your father was BLIND DRUNK, yes.

(Lysander is blind LOL!!, and the wittiest motherfucker on this forum, btw).

Ok, wait, I did not post the LOL!!. What did I actually post that some replacement BS thing RobB did switched it to that?

Oh, wait, was it just Lysander is dr&nk? Hey, sometimes we just have to use those words to explain that to peeps.

itgirl wrote:I don't really give a fuck, I'm Jewish anyway.

That's funny, you don't look Jewish.

I'll be here all week. Tip your waitress.

Bruce

Religion, alcohol and comedy. It just doesn't get and better than this. Whuch is funny because the rule at the dinner table was always: 'No politics or religion at the table'. The two things that are guaranteed to start arguments.


THE
INTERIOR
INTELLIGENT
DESIGN
AARDVARK

I thought it was "no toys at the table"?
goddamnit.

No, No. That was the Brady Bunch episode when Bobby brings a cap pistol for dinner because he idolized Billy the Kid.


THE
OVERDOSE ON TV
AARDVARK

Lysander is blind LOL!!. Robb put that there at my request, as a subconscious way to remind people that "because he's blind" is not, by itself, funny. Thanks, by the way, y'all're makin' me blush. Anyway, about the whole Jesus was real thing, is it so horrific for me to decide taht I just don't care either way? I mean, who on this board has any actual stake in the argument?

Me, motherfucker!

I heard you were dead. It was on the New york times on a Christmas Day.



THE
REG
DWIGHT
AARDVARK

Lysander wrote:Anyway, about the whole Jesus was real thing, is it so horrific for me to decide taht I just don't care either way? I mean, who on this board has any actual stake in the argument?

No one. However, having someone "PSH" so heavily that spittle actually flies at me from my speakers over essentially what is claiming that "Santa Claus obviously existed" because of Saint Nicholas will just set me off.

It's the fucking internet, I don't need to be invested it something to find it patronizing, obnoxious, and wrong. I'm not invested in the specific issue as I argue against it either. I'm invested in a conflict against error.

Yeah, but saying that Jesus of Nazareth never existed is pretty stupid and retarded. It's like a bunch of dumbass atheists, all of whom never did any original research themselves, got tired of "proving" the non-existence of God, so they went for the #2 guy next.

I'm just saying that this is like your kind telling us that Pope John Paul II never existed. If you want to tell us that legends associated with PJP2 didn't happen (like say, getting his own comic book) then that's fine. But taking it further into doubting the man's life makes you all look very stupid. No offense, but anyone doubting if Christ was real is far more gullible than your typical Christian Fundamentalist who thought the guy had the sort of powers you see in a Yu-gi-oh episode.

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:Yeah, but saying that Jesus of Nazareth never existed is pretty stupid and retarded. It's like a bunch of dumbass atheists, all of whom never did any original research themselves, got tired of "proving" the non-existence of God, so they went for the #2 guy next.

er, again. Never said I was sure he didn't exist. I'm just sure that no one has any reason to be sure either way. It's a two pronged argument. Not only was Vx in complete and utter error for acting as if there is incontrovertible evidence of Jesus, but I feel that the reasoning behind him existing as a Jewish rabble rouser is weak. Sadly her ace up the sleeve "daughter of a drunk history professor" isn't really on your side. What ever are you guys going to do?

If Jesus was an amalgamation with possibly one alpha character who played a great inspiration how is it fair to use the names from a fictional account (as you all agree) and say that person existed? Conclusion, it's not fair.
It's an attempt to use bluster and nonsense to ground an unsubstantiated document in truth.

Everyone hates atheists because they think they smash pumpkins and start G8 Summit riots. So you just want to figure that the opposite of that must be backed up by *someone*, and just flip your lid when someone points out that it's not backed up at all.

Try to remember all I did to bring on this shit storm was doubt his existence. Not have a fit about christers and state that Jesus absolutely did not exist. Frankly, I am behaving pretty well. I wish you would remember that before you drag out this kind of shit.

I'm just saying that this is like your kind telling us that Pope John Paul II never existed. If you want to tell us that legends associated with PJP2 didn't happen (like say, getting his own comic book) then that's fine. But taking it further into doubting the man's life makes you all look very stupid. No offense, but anyone doubting if Christ was real is far more gullible than your typical Christian Fundamentalist who thought the guy had the sort of powers you see in a Yu-gi-oh episode.

Ah, so you think a figure who has no historical verification outside of a highly edited religious text fufills the same burden of proof as guy of whom I can GOOGLE A PHOTOGRAPH OF?

Let's do a test!


BOOM, okay. EXISTS. There are lots more photographs of the guy, even some with other contemporary figures.


Hmm, I dunno.

Come on. At least the second picture you linked had no artifacting. Photographs are this century's paintings: they can easily be manipulated to reflect whatever you want. In fact, I'd give a Renaissance Era painting (at the masterpiece level) more credibility because one would have had to have commissioned it, whereas any moron that can get to the Pirate Bay can install Photoshop.

The last time I consulted the Wikipedia entry on Jesus it said that there was a small contigent of researchers who think that there was no real person. This puts them into the same category as people who believe we faked the moon landing.

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:The last time I consulted the Wikipedia entry on Jesus it said that there was a small contigent of researchers who think that there was no real person. This puts them into the same category as people who believe we faked the moon landing.

Yeah, or the category of people who CITE WIKIPEDIA FOR MOTHERFUCKING PROOF. The problem is that the people who are editing wikipedia are the same kind of joe/jeff common sense that you and v are.

I never said there was no Jesus. However there is sure no fucking way for you to claim the high ground against someone who thinks the opposite of you with just as little evidence.

Worm wrote:Yeah, or the category of people who CITE WIKIPEDIA FOR MOTHERFUCKING PROOF. The problem is that the people who are editing wikipedia are the same kind of joe/jeff common sense that you and v are.

I didn't use Wikipedia as a source, I simply said the last time I was there your contingent of Spirited Non-Believers had a mention which put them in the same category as The Guy That Thinks That Jack the Ripper Was Lewis Carroll, The Guy Who Thinks Pete Rose Didn't Bet on Baseball and The Guy That Thinks That That Episode Of The X-Files Was Real.

Yeah, V and I have the shitty common sense here. Jesus Fuck, the reason you think it's just me and her is because the subject is too retarded for anyone else to weigh in on.

Here's a quote from some asshole.

"Some writers feel a need to justify this assumption at length against people who try from time to time to deny it. It would be easier, frankly, to believe that Tiberius Caesar, Jesus' contemporary, was a figment of the imagination than to believe that there never was such a person as Jesus.

- N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Fortress, 1996)"

Worm wrote:I never said there was no Jesus.

Worm from earlier wrote:He probably didn't exist. That's the joke. I'm using my temporal dimensional magic dinner to CHECK FOR MYSELF, you stupid fuck.

Even thinking that there was probably no cult leader carpenter named "Jesus" at year zero puts you in line with these other atheists, who apparently think the world began at January 1st, 1970 and that every text that came from an apostle can and should be discounted because, hey, it was all a big PLOY.

However there is sure no fucking way for you to claim the high ground against someone who thinks the opposite of you with just as little evidence.

It's not 50/50 that the man existed. Come on. Both "sides" aren't equal.

pinback wrote: Thich Nhat Hahn

Who is this guy? Was he the one that got executed in that famous Vietnam-era photo? Is your dinner to be an endless "What was the last thing going through your mind?" series of jokes?