Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

[FBM]

It was a metaphor.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Like a kitteh playing with a wounded mouse...

I had typed out something I thought perhaps a little entertaining, but in the end, it just didn't feel right to pile onto him.

Well, if you go poking around a hornet nest, can't blame the hornets for doing what comes natural.

Actually, I would have felt more like the ants cleaning up after the lions feast. That carcass has been pretty much stripped by the time I came around.

[Thumpalumpacus]

It was a metaphor.

This is a relief, because black and yellow make for a terrible color combination. I would have thought I stumbled upon a Stryper reunion or something.

[FBM]

I can't figure out why he came back just to resurrect a 2-yr-old thread in the first place, especially after the response he got the first time.

It was a metaphor.

This is a relief, because black and yellow make for a terrible color combination. I would have thought I stumbled upon a Stryper reunion or something.

My high school's football uniforms were black and yellow.

[Hermit]

It was a metaphor.

I read it as such.

In a way though, you are right. At least some of us are metaphorically speaking, hornets.

[fretmeister]

I'm not reading that lot.

But Resurrection is definitely real.

But then again, I am a Cylon.

[FBM]

I resurrected last night's beer for lunch. Bad move.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I look at the Resurrection like the Who, not knowing when to fucking quit. Look, you had your moment, You should have hung it up when Mooney died anyway.

I mean, how the hell are you gonna top crucifixion for the sequel anyway?

[Svartalf]

Which of the 1,342,234,822 one true gods is it proof of?

I stay with the ontological one, it's still the best.

[Svartalf]

And it gets worse:

The image of Jesus on the Shroud of Turin has certain features that would arise in the neutrino de-materialization process, according to Tipler.

Seems Tipler is rejecting the results of carbon dating of the shroud in 1988. I say results, plural, because three universities were given samples of the shroud and independently from each other determined that the shroud was made somewhere between 1260 and 1390. Of course believers promptly came up with the ad hoc theory that the samples must have been taken of a section of the cloth that was just a medieval repair job.

Bleh, you deliberately ignore the fact that the samples unwittingly came from a later reparation of the shroud, the main body of which IS of early 1century AD manufacture (or so say detractors of the dating)

[Svartalf]

You should stick to this flavour of gibberish, Mr Redford...

The teachings and actions of Jesus Christ (Yeshua Ha’Mashiach) and the apostles recorded in the New Testament are analyzed in regard to their ethical and political philosophy, with analysis of context vis-a-vis the Old Testament (Tanakh, or Hebrew Bible) being given. From this analysis, it is shown that Jesus is a libertarian anarchist, i.e., a consistent voluntaryist. The implications this has for the world are profound, and the ramifications of Jesus’s anarchism to Christians’ attitudes toward government (the state) and its actions are explicated.

Sorry to seemingly answer to you Clinton, but I couldn't be bothered to look for the original post you quote.

Redford, if you want to quote stuff, please quote creditable one. Yeoshuah bar Yosif never, and I do forcefully state NEVER been referred to as "Yeshua Ha’Mashiach" in Hebrew or Aramaic language sources... if only because all sources that call him Messiah are in Greek, so use the "Iesous Christos" form, and all evidence we have of how his disciples reffered to him point to him being called "rav", or "ravi" (teacher/master, possibly with first person possessive).

The fact that most Jews classify Jesus as a false messiah, assuming they accept his actual existence in the first place, due to the OT prophecies definitely NOT having been fulfilled is of course moot... after all, David Ben Gourion is closer to qualifying as Mashiach than Jesus ever was, since HE did raise the Land of Israel from nothing to a thriving state, rather than coming dying, and having it be annihilated as even a puppet state 40 years later.

Then again, Jesus' anarchism is pretty doubtful when you see him counsel people to pay their taxes and not get the Roman occupier cross at them... though I'm not sure I can really make full sense of that word salad, which is seriously lacking in blue cheese (we already have croutons don't we?)

[FBM]

The Official GOD FAQ

[Hermit]

And it gets worse:

The image of Jesus on the Shroud of Turin has certain features that would arise in the neutrino de-materialization process, according to Tipler.

Seems Tipler is rejecting the results of carbon dating of the shroud in 1988. I say results, plural, because three universities were given samples of the shroud and independently from each other determined that the shroud was made somewhere between 1260 and 1390. Of course believers promptly came up with the ad hoc theory that the samples must have been taken of a section of the cloth that was just a medieval repair job.

Bleh, you deliberately ignore the fact that the samples unwittingly came from a later reparation of the shroud, the main body of which IS of early 1century AD manufacture (or so say detractors of the dating)

Huh?

[Hermit]

You should stick to this flavour of gibberish, Mr Redford...

The teachings and actions of Jesus Christ (Yeshua Ha’Mashiach) and the apostles recorded in the New Testament are analyzed in regard to their ethical and political philosophy, with analysis of context vis-a-vis the Old Testament (Tanakh, or Hebrew Bible) being given. From this analysis, it is shown that Jesus is a libertarian anarchist, i.e., a consistent voluntaryist. The implications this has for the world are profound, and the ramifications of Jesus’s anarchism to Christians’ attitudes toward government (the state) and its actions are explicated.

Sorry to seemingly answer to you Clinton, but I couldn't be bothered to look for the original post you quote.

Redford, if you want to quote stuff, please quote creditable one.

Maybe you should have searched for the original quote. You would have discovered that Clinton is the first person to use it in this thread. Your mistaken assumption makes your second sentence egg-on-face material.

[Clinton Huxley]

Mr Redford had to get to us eventually, he's been touting his pseudo-mystical poppycock on every other sceptical/atheist forum on the world-wide intertubes