@MikeYohe wrote:
What did you think of Mr. Wilson’s idea that Paul never meet Jesus.Mike: This wasn't "Mr Wilson's idea."
NO ONE ever claimed Paul knew Jesus.
Paul’s conversion (his vision of the risen Christ on the Road to Damascus) happened AFTER THE CRUCIFIXION.
That means Mr. Wilson was correct. Of course none of my friends or family will believe Paul never met Jesus.???
Dude NO ONE EVER claimed Paul met Jesus
That is the point of the story
Paul had a VISION of the risen Christ AFTER the CRUCIFIXION
That was the WHOLE IDEA
@Lausten wrote
There is no right pathway. There were multiple sects from the start. Of course Paul didn’t know Jesus, according to his own account. It was Augustine who brought those letters to the forefront.Exactly.
And @MikeYohe… EVERYTHING you said about the purple arrow I put on that timeline was incorrect. Every single thing. You clearly misunderstood what it was pointing to and what it means.
Tee, thanks for bring that up. I get in a hurry. It is 1600, not 1200 for argument sake. What we have is about 400 years till the Niece Christianity was formed. Then Europe had some wars caused by the Rules of Laws. And slavery was no longer allowed in Europe. The monasteries had big investments in the New World and the slaves from Africa were sent to the New World. These slaves brought with them the missionary religion they had been taught in Africa. They in turn taught the missionary religion to people of America. Thus, the New World had a change in religion that was different from the European and founding American religions. This happen about 400 years ago.400 years till Niece Christianity, then 1200 years of European Christianity, and then 400 years of Maghreb type of Christianity. Just so you know where I got the 1200.
Well, Maghreb is a region in Africa where there was Christianity. That’s factual.
That’s the thing. Sometimes you think you have him pants down and inside out, and recognize that he is just another chump. But then something he says seems to fit in. I don’t know what to make of him. He must truly have a general perspective that is profoundly different from the norm.
While working on building an outhouse yesterday, I listened to Robert Price, an actual scholar, who despite failing health is still sharp and able to bring up data like the computer on Star Trek. This is what Mike wishes he sounded like. The major difference being, you can look up what Price says and find the references.
Here is traces the Christ myth from Vedic Hinduism through Zorastrianism to Judaism in about 5 minutes.
Excellent scholar. I love Robert Price. Met him once and we talked Trek and other subjects together.
Did GK Chesterton’s work fail to rise to the mark as words that truly moved you as you describe beautifully in your post? I trust you know me well enough by now to know I ask for my own edification, out of a strong respect for the thoughtfulness of your inquiry.
Did GK Chesterton’s work fail to rise to the markThis is an old thread. What are you referring to? You can hover over the post # in the upper right and copy the link.
where does ur moral conscience come from?
our lemur like ancestors
@lausten - our lemur like ancestorsWhy Lemurs?
What Can Social Behavior in Lemurs Tell Us About Ourselves? By Krystal D'Costa on July 2, 2013… In a Current Anthropology paper published last December, Gowett, Gamble and Dunbar note that to fully complete the sociality puzzle we need to cover about 15 million years of evolutionary history beginning with the divergence of the great apes. One method of doing this has involves finding primate analogies. Duke University evolutionary anthropologist Evan MacLean recently published a paper in PLoS ONE examining the social brain hypothesis in six lemur species using two tasks: a social cognition task adapted from human infant tests requiring subjects to understand and take advantage of a competitor’s visual awareness, and a non-social task where subjects were required to leverage learnings about how to retrieve an object in different environmental contexts.
Why lemurs? Most of the primate studies done previously has focused on species that live in similarly sized groups and whose brain sizes are generally correlated to group size. However, lemurs live in groups of varying sizes, and those groups don’t seem connected to brain size. So there are two advantages offered by lemurs in this case: the first is that they offer the chance to observe the influences of group size within a species in relation to sociality and the second is that it offers a chance to observe these influences independent of ties to brain size. …
Why Lemurs?Well, really, we diverged from sponges a much longer time ago, but if I say "sponges", people don't know what I'm talking about.
I buy that lemurs were social animals and thus, this lead to what we humans have that we call a “moral conscience”.
Idk, about sponges. Are they social?
I assume we are referring to the God who created everything. There is nothing whatsoever that could convince me that God created anything or even has a throne in a cloud.
@halster I guess we’re talking about Uranus. He was horrible, so we moved on to Cronos. Or maybe it’s Atum, an Egyptian deity involved with creation. So I don’t know which god they’re talking about. I’m sure there are others who have creation stories, but those are the two that come to mind.
@Timb Idk, about sponges. Are they social?Well, ... consider that sponges can get totally macerated through a sieve, leaving a milky substance in the water. Then stand a round for many hours and the freaked thing has reconstituted itself. Is that social enough for you? ;-)
Okay, guess reaggregation is actually different than reconstitute. I stand corrected.