I spent my Sunday evening in the usual ritual--reading at Barnes & Noble. A question had crossed my mind lately about the foundation for the fulfillment of OT prophecy in the NT. Quite conveniently, I pulled a book off the shelf called Jesus: One Hundred Years Before Christ, by Alvar Ellegard, The Overlook Press, Peter Mayer Publications, Inc., Lewis Hollow Road, Woodstock, NY 12498, 1999, and began to read through it.

It states that Paul, knowing the prophecies of the OT writings, of course, simply created the fulfillment of these prophecies when he wrote (or had someone else write) parts of the NT. Now it all made sense! The prophecies haven't been fulfilled, yet! It's only a smoke screen as I suspected.

As I continued reading, I came across another interesting theory that the disciples chosen by Jesus were actually the followers of Paul and not Jesus! I always knew there was a different time-span between Paul and Jesus, but this would explain Paul's mythological creation of Jesus's disciples who lived in the time of Paul, not Jesus.

The more I read, the more I believe that Jesus was just a fictional character; yet, there is still a part of my conscious that tells me Jesus was a real person but not the savior Paul created. What this means to me is that the story of the Annunciation is a lie. The story of Jesus's miraculous birth is a lie. The story of the Wedding at Cana is a lie. The story of the Last Supper is a lie. The story of the crucifixion is a lie. The story of the resurrection is a lie. The story of Pentecost is a lie. The story of Jesus's Ascension is a lie. The story of the Ascension of Mary, Jesus's Mother, is a lie. The story of the Son of God is a lie. The story of salvation is a lie. Now I wonder just what part of Christianity can be true? How have these lies survived 2000 years? How was Paul inspired to create this myth so people would believe it for centuries? Was it really Paul who wielded that kind of power or was it the ignorance of the believers who were afraid to question it? If one-third of the human race can still believe this story is true, what else are we duped to believe? If none of the tenets of Christianity are true, why do people still defend them? What are they afraid of? The truth?

Are you ok M*W?
<i><b>
How was Paul inspired to create this myth so people would believe it for centuries? Was it really Paul who wielded that kind of power or was it the ignorance of the believers who were afraid to question it?</b></i>
Your story does not make sense. If everything was Paul's creation then Paul would not have had to write about the Jewish christians trying to make the Gentiles observe Jewish Law. Clearly there was a christian tradition before Paul became Christians.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by okinrus
[B]Are you ok M*W?
<i><b>
How was Paul inspired to create this myth so people would believe it for centuries? Was it really Paul who wielded that kind of power or was it the ignorance of the believers who were afraid to question it?</b></i>
Your story does not make sense. If everything was Paul's creation then Paul would not have had to write about the Jewish christians trying to make the Gentiles observe Jewish Law. Clearly there was a christian tradition before Paul became Christians.
----------
M*W: I'm fine, thank you. Of course, "my story" wouldn't make sense to you. I didn't say Paul created "everyting." I said Paul created the myth of Christianity. Paul was a Jew that terrorized the Pagans and Gentiles who may or may not have been Christian. Paul didn't live in the time before Jesus. He didn't even live in Jesus's time. He took the prophecies of the OT and created myths of fulfillment in the NT. There may have been a "Christian tradition" before Paul, and it was most likely from the teachings of M. Magdalene and James, the Brother of Jesus. I don't expect you to believe or concur with anything I post.

The point of my post was to reference what I had read tonight about Paul creating the mythical "fulfillments" to the OT prophecies. They really didn't occur nor were they fulfilled. It appears that Paul was an authentic historical person, but Jesus was not.

Jesus could've been a myth like Odysseus and Heracles. His life isn't fully documented, and some stories in the Bible do resemble ancient Roman/Greek stories. The stories could be purely fictional or they could be completely true...there's really no way to know for sure.

Paul was a Jew that terrorized the Pagans and Gentiles who may or may not have been Christian.

Your going to have to explain this one. Paul terrorized the Gentiles but the romans could not?


Paul didn't live in the time before Jesus. He didn't even live in Jesus's time.

My speculation is that Paul was fairly old when he wrote his letter's. We know that his eye site was failing.

Ha, yeah, Paul....

Well, of course it is just a theory; I mean, we have no real proof of this. But, as I've always said, it does seem to make a whole lot of sense. Look at the stories, most of the ones that involve the supernatural usually have a moral to the story. Same thing happened with the Buddha. When he meditated for seven days straight, I'm pretty sure that his shadow didn't actually stay still the whole time, it was a symbolic representation of his calmness/stillness. Jesus wasn't a God-Man, he was a good man.

So yeah, the story of Jesus was probably augmented a little.

Originally posted by Medicine*Woman
It states that Paul, knowing the prophecies of the OT writings, of course, simply created the fulfillment of these prophecies when he wrote (or had someone else write) parts of the NT. Now it all made sense! The prophecies haven't been fulfilled, yet! It's only a smoke screen as I suspected.
What is your authority about the fulfilment of prophecy? Can you tell me how the following prophecy should be fulfilled - literally or figuratively?

Lev. 26:11 I will put my dwelling place among you, and I will not abhor you. 12 I will walk among you and be your God, and you will be my people.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jenyar
[B]What is your authority about the fulfilment of prophecy? Can you tell me how the following prophecy should be fulfilled - literally or figuratively?

Lev. 26:11 I will put my dwelling place among you, and I will not abhor you. 12 I will walk among you and be your God, and you will be my people.
----------
M*W: I am not claiming personal "authority," but I cited the source last night. Once again, Jesus: One Hundred Years Before Christ, by Alvar Ellegard, 1999. Before you start with your cat and mouse game, why don't you look up the source and read what it says about Paul purposefully doing some creative writing to make it seem that the OT prophecies were fulfilled in the NT.

Why would you care what I think about the above prophecy and how it should be fulfilled? I think you already have a good idea how I would interpret this. My point is that Paul created the fulfillment to many of these OT prophecies. In no way am I saying the OT prophecies are invalid.

My point is that you would believe Elvar Ellegard's claims at face value simply because they agree with your own ideas. But you have no reason to say Paul invented fulfilments. The prophesies are there in the OT to look up for yourself. My illustration shows that you can't expect a literal fulfilment without agreeing with Paul, and you can't expect a figurative fulfilment without some kind of interpretation - to which Paul was just as entitled as you are.

If you don't agree with Paul's interpretation of fulfilment (neither did fundamentalist Jews), then that's fine. But it doesn't give you the ground to claim Paul "invented" those interpretations. And what about the prophesies claimed to be fulfilled by the other authors of the NT?

Originally posted by Jenyar
If you don't agree with Paul's interpretation of fulfilment (neither did fundamentalist Jews), then that's fine. But it doesn't give you the ground to claim Paul "invented" those interpretations.

Is Paul so innocent of guile that he is above inventing his own interpretations? Paul even admited his tendency toward craftiness in 2 Corinthians 12:16:

But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.

As I see it, MW's accusations against Paul are quite valid.

Originally posted by Jenyar
Lev. 26:11 I will put my dwelling place among you, and I will not abhor you. 12 I will walk among you and be your God, and you will be my people.

Reading this in context, you will see this is just more of the jealous god warning his people not to worship idols. If they would just behave themselves and worship only him, then he would see to it that their harvests would be so abundant that they would not be able to use up all the old store before the new came in. He would "dwell" among them, metaphorically speaking, and continue to be their god. But if they worshipped idols - then beware the awful consequences! For one thing, he would send a sword among them (sound familiar?), which threat was repeated in this chapter several times. I know how you interpret it, Jenyar, but that is only because you are reading the entire bible through gospel-colored glasses, and so you see only what you want to see.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jenyar
[B]My point is that you would believe Elvar Ellegard's claims at face value simply because they agree with your own ideas. But you have no reason to say Paul invented fulfilments. The prophesies are there in the OT to look up for yourself. My illustration shows that you can't expect a literal fulfilment without agreeing with Paul, and you can't expect a figurative fulfilment without some kind of interpretation - to which Paul was just as entitled as you are.

If you don't agree with Paul's interpretation of fulfilment (neither did fundamentalist Jews), then that's fine. But it doesn't give you the ground to claim Paul "invented" those interpretations. And what about the prophesies claimed to be fulfilled by the other authors of the NT?
----------
M*W: Jenyar, why are you always so argumentative? Why do you have an obsessive need to contradict every non-xian idea? Do you have a deep-seated fear of the truth? How can you know what is in my mind when you don't even know what is in yours? For your information, I held this viewpoint before I saw it in print, so I am not alone in my thinking. I do not believe with anything Paul said or did. He was accused of being a liar by the people of his time. Why should now be any different? You've missed the whole point. Expecting a literal fulfillment of OT prophecies has absolutely nothing to do with Paul's false fulfillments of OT prophecies nor does it imply agreement with Paul's interpretation. You are in no position to tell me what I can rightfully say about Paul inventing false fulfillment of OT prophecies. I am allowed the right of free speech in this country, and there is nothing you can do about that! If you don't like what I post, then don't read what I post, and don't make any comments. You obviously don't want to know the truth, so keep your head stuck in the sand, but don't tell me what I can and cannot say!

posted by Nehushta
He would "dwell" among them, metaphorically speaking, and continue to be their god.
posted by M*W
Expecting a literal fulfillment of OT prophecies has absolutely nothing to do with Paul's false fulfillments of OT prophecies nor does it imply agreement with Paul's interpretation. You are in no position to tell me what I can rightfully say about Paul inventing false fulfillment of OT prophecies.
If Nehushta can apply a prophecy metaphorically, why can't Paul? Paul was trained by the Jewish rabbi Gamaliel - he would know how to interpret prophecy. But you have no reason to assume he interpreted them wrongly. He didn't create the prophecies, he didn't invent the events, he had just as much right to his interpretations as you have.

Paul was not a liar - he was aware of the slanderous remarks against him:

Romans 3:8
Why not say–as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say–"Let us do evil that good may result"? Their condemnation is deserved.

Nehushta, the "trickery" Paul refers to is a response to trickery he has been accused of (that he was pretending not to be a burden to the church while in the meantime exploiting them by other means). He refutes this, "because what I want is not your possessions but you." He caught them trying to slander him, and responds to the rumours by challenging them to substantiate their accusation (2 Cor. 13:18).

I think your translation might have confused you. Here is a scholarly discussion about the chapter which, while on a different subject, might clarify the context for you: X-letter and 2 Corinthians 12 (http://www.paulonpaul.org/annex/2cor_x_letter_c.htm).

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jenyar
[B]If Nehushta can apply a prophecy metaphorically, why can't Paul? Paul was trained by the Jewish rabbi Gamaliel - he would know how to interpret prophecy. But you have no reason to assume he interpreted them wrongly. He didn't create the prophecies, he didn't invent the events, he had just as much right to his interpretations as you have.
----------
M*W: Well, let's see. Nehusta has had @ 2000 years more of history to reference than Paul did. Paul "claimed" to be trained by Gamaliel, but how do we know he didn't lie about that, too? He "claimed" to be a Rabbi when it was convenient for him, but history doesn't prove he was a Rabbi. Paul didn't "interpret them wrongly," Paul a "created" the fictional fulfillments in the NT based on the prophecies of the OT. How can YOU prove that Paul DIDN'T do some creative writing since you believe the hearsay that the NT fulfillments of the prophecies really happened? The only "proof" you have is what Paul wrote himself! If Paul were on trial in a court of law for fraud and perjury, what Paul himself wrote wouldn't hold up in his defense because it's "hearsay evidence." Paul's "jury" in the 21st century has @ 2000 years of evidential history to put under a microscope to see the truth about Paul--as well as the lies.
----------
Paul was not a liar - he was aware of the slanderous remarks against him:
----------
M*W: Where there's smoke, there's fire.
----------
Nehushta, the "trickery" Paul refers to is a response to trickery he has been accused of (that he was pretending not to be a burden to the church while in the meantime exploiting them by other means). He refutes this, "because what I want is not your possessions but you." He caught them trying to slander him, and responds to the rumours by challenging them to substantiate their accusation (2 Cor. 13:18).
----------
M*W: More smoke, more fire, but this sounds like a classic case of "mind control!"
----------
I think your translation might have confused you.
----------
M*W: Why is it that Christians think they can interpret scripture correctly (but NOT consistently) until hell freezes over, but that everybody else must be "confused" in their interpretation of scripture! You are implying that only Christians can discern OT or NT scripture correctly. Christian interpretation is subjectively biased, and the rest of the inhabited world interprets it objectively.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Medicine*Woman


MW, I have written something while back about it. I will look it all up and will post them soon. I don't think they full fill according to christians and some jews are still waiting for them to be full fill. Anyways, will post some stuff soon.

Originally posted by Medicine*Woman
I spent my Sunday evening in the usual ritual--reading at Barnes & Noble.
You really should get out more. :D

A question had crossed my mind lately about the foundation for the fulfillment of OT prophecy in the NT. Quite conveniently, I pulled a book off the shelf called Jesus: One Hundred Years Before Christ, by Alvar Ellegard, The Overlook Press, Peter Mayer Publications, Inc., Lewis Hollow Road, Woodstock, NY 12498, 1999, and began to read through it.
Hmmmmm, And your conclusions are????

It states that Paul, knowing the prophecies of the OT writings, of course, simply created the fulfillment of these prophecies when he wrote (or had someone else write) parts of the NT. Now it all made sense! The prophecies haven't been fulfilled, yet! It's only a smoke screen as I suspected.
Ah, I see. You've picked up a detective book from Barnes and Noble.

As I continued reading, I came across another interesting theory that the disciples chosen by Jesus were actually the followers of Paul and not Jesus! I always knew there was a different time-span between Paul and Jesus, but this would explain Paul's mythological creation of Jesus's disciples who lived in the time of Paul, not Jesus.
The writer of that detective book you're reading has a great imagination

The more I read, the more I believe that Jesus was just a fictional character; yet, there is still a part of my conscious that tells me Jesus was a real person but not the savior Paul created. What this means to me is that the story of the Annunciation is a lie. The story of Jesus's miraculous birth is a lie. The story of the Wedding at Cana is a lie. The story of the Last Supper is a lie. The story of the crucifixion is a lie. The story of the resurrection is a lie. The story of Pentecost is a lie. The story of Jesus's Ascension is a lie. The story of the Ascension of Mary, Jesus's Mother, is a lie. The story of the Son of God is a lie. The story of salvation is a lie. Now I wonder just what part of Christianity can be true? How have these lies survived 2000 years? How was Paul inspired to create this myth so people would believe it for centuries? Was it really Paul who wielded that kind of power or was it the ignorance of the believers who were afraid to question it? If one-third of the human race can still believe this story is true, what else are we duped to believe? If none of the tenets of Christianity are true, why do people still defend them? What are they afraid of? The truth?
You have missed one vital ingredient in your hail of hatred for Christianity, it's called Faith.

Oh and by the way,if all the things you mentioned are lies then you have debunked the entire Christian and Muslim faiths. Well done old girl, Why hasn't someone done this before...LOL. :D

Originally posted by Vienna
mentioned are lies then you have debunked the entire Christian and Muslim faiths. Well done old girl, Why hasn't someone done this before...LOL. :D


Don't get super hyper about it. She simply debunked the so called christianity. By they where were you hiding all this time?? i miss your ignorant islam bashing. hahaha
:D

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vienna
You really should get out more. :D
----------
M*W: Thanks for the advice, but I've spent the entirety of my life, as you suggested, "getting out." There's not a whole lot left that I haven't already done. But since you don't know me, how would you know the extent of my life's experiences? Maybe you should take your own advice.
----------
Hmmmmm, And your conclusions are????
----------
M*W: My conclusions are the same as the last time you appeared on this forum. Why do you ask?
----------
Ah, I see. You've picked up a detective book from Barnes and Noble.
----------
M*W: No, it was in the Religion section filed specifically under the heading of Christianity. I don't read detective stories, I read science, religion, and non-fiction.
----------
The writer of that detective book you're reading has a great imagination
----------
M*W: No, he had great resources and researched them quite well.
----------
You have missed one vital ingredient in your hail of hatred for Christianity, it's called Faith.
----------
M*W: I have no hatred for something that means nothing to me. And it also seems that it means nothing to almost 3/4 of this inhabited planet. Christianity doesn't hold the patent on faith. Faith is a pretty broad subject and is limited to one type of belief.
----------
Oh and by the way,if all the things you mentioned are lies then you have debunked the entire Christian and Muslim faiths. Well done old girl, Why hasn't someone done this before...LOL. :D
----------
M*W: I cannot take credit for debunking Islam, because I do not know enough about Islam to debunk it. However, I do know a whole hell of a lot about Christianity, and I stand by my convictions. Apparently, YOU don't get out enough, because if you did, you would be aware of all the research that has been done and is ongoing that well debunks Christianity. I certainly cannot take credit for that (yet). Perhaps you've been blind to the reality of Christianity declining worldwide, and you just haven't seen it happening.

An Editorial Review
From Jesus to Christ: The Origins of the New Testament Images of Jesus by Paula Fredriksen

Jesus - One Hundred Years Before Christ: A Study in Creative Mythology
by Alvar Ellegard

From Library Journal
These two books offer an enormous contrast. While Fredriksen provides a balanced, carefully reasoned, scholarly study of the historical Jesus, Ellegard's conclusions can only be described as preposterous. Ellegard (formerly dean, Univ. of G?teburg, Sweden) is clearly familiar with some mainline biblical scholarship, but he always opts for the minority view and stretches it beyond reason. For example, he believes that the Gospels were written in the second century C.E. and traces the origin of Christianity to "a group of pious Jews called the Essenes" (the Dead Sea Scrolls group). Then, based on this highly questionable and twisted "evidence," he leaps to several unjustified conclusions: that Jesus lived long before he was supposed to have and that his disciples had only "ecstatic visions" of him and never knew him in the flesh. The Gospel writers, he suggests, then mistook their visions for real events and created fictitious accounts of Jesus' life. Fredriksen (scripture, Boston Univ.), on the other hand, explores the conundrum of a well-established historical fact--namely, that Jesus was executed by the Roman prefect Pilate as a political insurrectionist while his followers were not. She concludes that it was the volatile mix of excited pilgrims in Jerusalem for Passover and their acclaim of Jesus at a time when Pilate was especially interested in keeping the peace that led to his death. Her balanced, well-written work could serve as a kind of introduction to the content and methodology scholars use in the study of the historical Jesus and is highly recommended for any library. Ellegard's work would only be useful as an example of the false conclusions that result when questionable opinion is stretched beyond reasonable limits.
-David Bourquin, California State Univ., San Bernardino
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1585672521/103-5627084-6543847?v=glance

Originally posted by skywalker
Don't get super hyper about it. She simply debunked the so called christianity. By they where were you hiding all this time?? i miss your ignorant islam bashing. hahaha
:D
Lol...and when do I ever get super-hyper about things. She hasn't simply done anything apart from advertise her hatred for the whole idea of Christianity, whereas I hate Islam. But there is a good side to this, at least Islam makes Christianity appear civilised.......lol. :D

Originally posted by Medicine*Woman

M*W: Thanks for the advice, but I've spent the entirety of my life, as you suggested, "getting out." There's not a whole lot left that I haven't already done. But since you don't know me, how would you know the extent of my life's experiences? Maybe you should take your own advice.
No need dear, Christian haters are ten a penny
M*W: No, it was in the Religion section filed specifically under the heading of Christianity. I don't read detective stories, I read science, religion, and non-fiction.
I think your list should read non-religious and science fiction, the Dr. Who series should suit you down to the ground.
M*W: No, he had great resources and researched them quite well.
HA! says who??
M*W: I have no hatred for something that means nothing to me. And it also seems that it means nothing to almost 3/4 of this inhabited planet. Christianity doesn't hold the patent on faith. Faith is a pretty broad subject and is limited to one type of belief.
You hypocrite!!!! Any excuse to have a go at Christians and your in front of the rest.

M*W: I cannot take credit for debunking Islam, because I do not know enough about Islam to debunk it. However, I do know a whole hell of a lot about Christianity, and I stand by my convictions. Apparently, YOU don't get out enough, because if you did, you would be aware of all the research that has been done and is ongoing that well debunks Christianity. I certainly cannot take credit for that (yet). Perhaps you've been blind to the reality of Christianity declining worldwide, and you just haven't seen it happening.
I couldn't give a stuff if it is declining, and I wouldn't waste my time highlighting the fact, I have better things to do like keeping my kids away from the teachings of Islam.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vienna
No need dear, Christian haters are ten a penny
----------
M*W: Why do you think this is?
----------
I think your list should read non-religious and science fiction, the Dr. Who series should suit you down to the ground.
----------
M*W: I AM non-religious, and I carefully select the religion books I read. I don't like science fiction. I like science fact, and I'm in to ancient history.
----------
You hypocrite!!!! Any excuse to have a go at Christians and your in front of the rest.
----------
M*W: If you had read my post in the tone I had written it, which you didn't, you would know that I wrote about something interesting I had read. This has nothing to do with "having a go at Christians." I reported what I read. Three-fourths of the world is "having a go at Christians." Why must you assume that I am the only one? I haven't published an anti-Christian book (yet), but that is another goal I have. But by the time I get around to that, Christianity will just be vaguely remembered as a demigod mystery religion.
----------
I couldn't give a stuff if it is declining, and I wouldn't waste my time highlighting the fact, I have better things to do like keeping my kids away from the teachings of Islam.
----------
M*W: And you call me a hypocrite!!!

Originally posted by Medicine*Woman
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vienna
No need dear, Christian haters are ten a penny
----------
M*W: Why do you think this is?
Probably the same reason that so many people hated Jesus.

M*W: I AM non-religious, and I carefully select the religion books I read.
The qu'ran would suit you, I bet you'd make a great muslim.

This has nothing to do with "having a go at Christians." I reported what I read. Three-fourths of the world is "having a go at Christians."
What !!!!

THREE QUARTERS OF THE WORLD IS AGAINST CHRISTIANITY.

Have you got anything to back this up?

Why must you assume that I am the only one? I haven't published an anti-Christian book (yet), but that is another goal I have.
You answer your own questions so well. Only an anti-Christian would want to write an anti-Christian book.....LOL!

But by the time I get around to that, Christianity will just be vaguely remembered as a demigod mystery religion.
So when exactlly will you be writing this "best-seller" 4850 AD.......LOL :D

M*W: And you call me a hypocrite!!!
Yes, you must be the biggest hypocrite on Sciforums.com

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vienna
Probably the same reason that so many people hated Jesus.
----------
M*W: Who were these people who hated Jesus and why?
----------
The qu'ran would suit you, I bet you'd make a great muslim.
----------
M*W: I'd make a great anything that is anti-xian!
----------
What!!! THREE QUARTERS OF THE WORLD IS AGAINST CHRISTIANITY.
Have you got anything to back this up?
----------
M*W: http://www.ghg.net/phf/religions_origins.htm

http://www.ReligiousTolerance.org

http://adherents.com

http://www.noharmm.org/religiouspop.htm

http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/stats.html

http://www.geocities.com/richleebruce/mystat.html

http://www.missionfrontiers.org/2000/03/pdf/overview.pdf
----------
You answer your own questions so well. Only an anti-Christian would want to write an anti-Christian book.....LOL!
----------
M*W: No caca, Sherlocka!
----------
So when exactlly will you be writing this "best-seller" 4850 AD.......LOL :D
----------
M*W: Well, thank you for your vote of confidence my book will be a best seller. By 4850 AD, Christianity will be but a footnote in the history of the ancients.
----------
Yes, you must be the biggest hypocrite on Sciforums.com
----------
M*W: A hypocrite is someone who believes one thing and says another, so I'm definitely NOT a hypocrite. I'd more likely be labeled the most verbal anti-xian on sciforums.com. When I believe something, I admit it. That's NO hypocrite! But, please feel free to call me anything you like, just don't call me a Christian.

M*W: No caca, Sherlocka!
ROFLMAOOOOOOO!!!!!! Thank you for the great laugh, MW!

Perhaps I have had a few drinks...but, that was hilarious :D

Rock on MW

What!!! THREE QUARTERS OF THE WORLD IS AGAINST CHRISTIANITY.
Have you got anything to back this up?
----------
M*W: http://www.ghg.net/phf/religions_origins.htm

According to the website:


Christians (total) ....... 1,955,229,000 .. 33.7%

100% - 33.7%= 66.3% total non-Christian

3/4 = 75%

75% minus 66.3% = 8.7%

Amazing! 8.7% of all Christians are against Christianity!

Perhaps Medicine-Asterix-Woman took math lessons from Kenneth Lay and the boys from Enron?

Awww, any one against christianity becomes your worst enemy...grrrrr.. Come one kid, no one hates christianity people are just realizing the truth. I know it is hurting you but just deal it. You will be fine.:D :p

M.W awesome. I know you are making lots of people upset and vienna hates the fact that you are not muslim. But very interesting posts.

Originally posted by Medicine*Woman
What!!! THREE QUARTERS OF THE WORLD IS AGAINST CHRISTIANITY.
Have you got anything to back this up?
----------
M*W: http://www.ghg.net/phf/religions_origins.htm

http://www.ReligiousTolerance.org

http://adherents.com

http://www.noharmm.org/religiouspop.htm

http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/stats.html

http://www.geocities.com/richleebruce/mystat.html

http://www.missionfrontiers.org/2000/03/pdf/overview.pdf
----------
I said have you got anything to back up - THREE QUARTERS OF THE WORLD IS AGAINST CHRISTIANITY. Those links are useless.

M*W: No caca, Sherlocka!
Yup, no shit cowgirl.

M*W: Well, thank you for your vote of confidence my book will be a best seller. By 4850 AD, Christianity will be but a footnote in the history of the ancients.
Ha ha Roflmao, your trumpet sure hits some bum notes.

M*W: A hypocrite is someone who believes one thing and says another, so I'm definitely NOT a hypocrite. I'd more likely be labeled the most verbal anti-xian on sciforums.com. When I believe something, I admit it. That's NO hypocrite! But, please feel free to call me anything you like, just don't call me a Christian.
You'd have to be the most verbal at anything - youre a woman, lol.
So I shall call you anti - Christian, a Christian basher, Christian hater, ex-Christian (lol). By the way, is it the Christians you hate or the Faith itself, possibly both eh?...lol :D

Originally posted by 567
M.W awesome. I know you are making lots of people upset and vienna hates the fact that you are not muslim. But very interesting posts.
I couldn't give two monkeys if she's muslim or not. But I kind of get the idea she was the sort of kid who couldn't get her own way, you know the type of kid who said " I'm gonna scweam and scweam till I get my own way, and then I'm gonna hold my breath till I'm sthick so there, nur"
Must admit, she's funny in a sour way. :D

Maybe Vienna can comment constructively on this on-topic post.

Jews do not accept Jesus as the messiah because:

1) Jesus did not fulfill the messianic prophecies.
2) Christianity contradicts Jewish theology.
3) Jesus did not embody the personal qualifications of the Messiah.
4) Biblical verses "referring" to Jesus are mistranslations.
5) Jewish belief is based on national revelation.

Further detail here: www.bamidbar-shel.org/whydont.htm

Can Vienna or anyone else clear this up for me?

Originally posted by stretched
Maybe Vienna can comment constructively on this on-topic post.

Jews do not accept Jesus as the messiah because:

1) Jesus did not fulfill the messianic prophecies.
2) Christianity contradicts Jewish theology.
3) Jesus did not embody the personal qualifications of the Messiah.
4) Biblical verses "referring" to Jesus are mistranslations.
5) Jewish belief is based on national revelation.

Further detail here: www.bamidbar-shel.org/whydont.htm

Can Vienna or anyone else clear this up for me?

Are you kidding me? He can't go against his own religion, your questions will put his faith in jeapordy. Don't expect any serious answers. :D

Originally posted by stretched
Maybe Vienna can comment constructively on this on-topic post.

Jews do not accept Jesus as the messiah because:

1) Jesus did not fulfill the messianic prophecies.
2) Christianity contradicts Jewish theology.
3) Jesus did not embody the personal qualifications of the Messiah.
4) Biblical verses "referring" to Jesus are mistranslations.
5) Jewish belief is based on national revelation.

Further detail here: www.bamidbar-shel.org/whydont.htm

Can Vienna or anyone else clear this up for me?
Stretched, I am not a Christian or a Jew although I do respect the Jewish and Christian faiths.

If you want answers to the above questions why not write to the Vatican. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by heart
ROFLMAOOOOOOO!!!!!! Thank you for the great laugh, MW!

Perhaps I have had a few drinks...but, that was hilarious :D

Rock on MW

Thank you, dear heart! I love to make people laugh, and I become quite entertaining when I've had a few drinks!

Originally posted by Bridge
What!!! THREE QUARTERS OF THE WORLD IS AGAINST CHRISTIANITY.
Have you got anything to back this up?
----------
M*W: http://www.ghg.net/phf/religions_origins.htm

According to the website:




100% - 33.7%= 66.3% total non-Christian

3/4 = 75%

75% minus 66.3% = 8.7%

Amazing! 8.7% of all Christians are against Christianity!
---------
M*W: There's more thn 8.7% of professed Christians who don't follow their own religion, so you're wrong again.

Perhaps Medicine-Asterix-Woman took math lessons from Kenneth Lay and the boys from Enron?

Originally posted by 567
Awww, any one against christianity becomes your worst enemy...grrrrr.. Come one kid, no one hates christianity people are just realizing the truth. I know it is hurting you but just deal it. You will be fine.:D :p

M.W awesome. I know you are making lots of people upset and vienna hates the fact that you are not muslim. But very interesting posts.
----------
M*W: Thank you 567! I don't intend to upset them, I just want them to hear the truth. Vienna is filled with negativity. That's what I call "Satan." I really appreciate your stance, because it is people like you who will be bringing the message of truth to the world. I'm glad you're on board.

OK lets make it simple for you M*W.

There is a BIG difference between people who are NOT Christian to those who are AGAINST Christianity.

Lets have your figures again M*W - and with back up.

Originally posted by Medicine*Woman
----------
M*W: Thank you 567! I don't intend to upset them, I just want them to hear the truth. Vienna is filled with negativity. That's what I call "Satan." I really appreciate your stance, because it is people like you who will be bringing the message of truth to the world. I'm glad you're on board.
You call me Satan because you hate my comments on your hatred for Christianity - you are the one filled with hate.

I point out the truth when I call you a Christian hater

FYI, I am not a Christian or a Jew but I respect both faiths, I have no respect for the so called faith such as Islam which brings violence upon the world. And I have no respect for people filled with hate against Christianity or Judiasm. You see a faith must earn respect, not hold the worlds society to ransom with violence and hatred.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vienna
I said have you got anything to back up - THREE QUARTERS OF THE WORLD IS AGAINST CHRISTIANITY. Those links are useless.
----------
M*W: See my recent reply to Bridge.
----------
Yup, no shit cowgirl.
----------
M*W: You know, you Brits, especially those like you who never "get out" of the house, think all those in Texas are country bumpkins, but you're wrong (like most Europeans). I'm not originally from Texas, and I'm no cowgirl. You won't find this broad wearing a hat and boots. You might be surprised to know that Texas is a more conservative state than it used to be and its more cosmopolitan than cowboy. If you think I just fell off the turnip truck, you're wrong. I can assure you, this is not my first rodeo.
----------
Ha ha Roflmao, your trumpet sure hits some bum notes.
----------
M*W: It's all in the perception, my dear.
----------
You'd have to be the most verbal at anything - youre a woman, lol.
----------
M*W: Well, THAT's a compliment!
----------
So I shall call you anti - Christian, a Christian basher, Christian hater, ex-Christian (lol). By the way, is it the Christians you hate or the Faith itself, possibly both eh?...lol :D
----------
M*W: I don't expend energy "hating" anything. I see the human factor as a victim of their false man-made religion. I am an ex-Christian, and I don't deny that fact, but its the teachings of the "faith" that contradicts logic and reason.

Originally posted by Medicine*Woman

M*W: You know, you Brits, especially those like you who never "get out" of the house, think all those in Texas are country bumpkins, but you're wrong (like most Europeans). I'm not originally from Texas, and I'm no cowgirl. You won't find this broad wearing a hat and boots. You might be surprised to know that Texas is a more conservative state than it used to be and its more cosmopolitan than cowboy. If you think I just fell off the turnip truck, you're wrong. I can assure you, this is not my first rodeo.
No shit cowgirl. Yeeehaw

I see the human factor as a victim of their false man-made religion.
And you can apply this comment to all faiths on this planet, try to be more specific in future.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vienna
[B]No shit cowgirl. Yeeehaw
And you can apply this comment to all faiths on this planet, try to be more specific in future.
----------
M*W: I believe I have made my stance clear about false man-made religions as well as explained in depth about the efficacy of the One Spirit of God (or whatever one calls their higher power). Religions limit the abundant power of God within.

M*W.

There is a BIG difference between people who are NOT Christian to those who are AGAINST Christianity.

Lets have your figures again M*W - and with back up.

Originally posted by Vienna
M*W.

There is a BIG difference between people who are NOT Christian to those who are AGAINST Christianity.

Lets have your figures again M*W - and with back up.

Look who is talking about back up. lol:p

Originally posted by Markx
Look who is talking about back up. lol:p

Making sense isn't your area of expertise, is it?

Originally posted by Vienna
Making sense isn't your area of expertise, is it?

Nor logic is the area of yours!

M*W, you're back.

Full moon tonight is it?

Anyway as I was saying

There is a BIG difference between people who are NOT Christian to those who are AGAINST Christianity.

So lets have your figures again M*W - and with back up.

Don't ignore the question anymore - you said three quarters of the population of this planet are against Christianity.

Originally posted by Vienna
Making sense isn't your area of expertise, is it?


I am enjoying every bit of it sir. :o