The bible... why take it seriously?

[psychoslice]

Irrelevant to the topic at hand. People can believe in leprechauns for all I care...as long as they don't try to shove a shamrock up my ass.

Jesus freaks have this overwhelming desire to sprinkle jesus shit wherever they go.

You also have to understand that you yourself shouldn't shove your shit on them, no matter if its right or wrong.

[Minimalist]

If they come here and start with their jesus routine they better have a fucking umbrella.

They are HERE. I do not go looking for them.

It's distressing enough when one of the morons wanders through the door.


This would give polecat a diarrhea hemorrhage.

http://listverse.com/2014/09/08/10-theor...the-bible/

From studying the texts themselves, Bible scholars have come up with many theories on who actually wrote the scriptures. These theories provide serious challenges to traditional assumptions on Bible authorship.

[psychoslice]

If they come here and start with their jesus routine they better have a fucking umbrella.

They are HERE. I do not go looking for them.

It's distressing enough when one of the morons wanders through the door.

So you own this forum, you make all the rules ?, come off the grass, what are you really trying to hide ?.

[Minimalist]

Fuck you.

When the mods complain I'll pay attention.

[psychoslice]

Fuck you.

When the mods complain I'll pay attention.

I thought you were a jerk.

[Polaris]

Such as?

Modern archaeology has dismissed the patriarchs, exodus, the conquest, David, and Solomon. Genesis is an absurd fable.

WTF is left?

Polecat will cite a bunch of holy joes who desperately need this shit to be true so that they still have a job but the evidence is not there.

The shakiest piece of archaeological evidence they have is the Merneptah stele which purports to say "Israel" but in reality says "Ysirir" in Egyptian and it is a word which appears no where else in the entire corpus of Egyptian writing so no one really knows what it means....or who it refers to. Even if it did mean exactly what they want it to mean they carefully neglect the rest of the sentence which says they were exterminated.
Cherry-picking as normal.

David and Solomon? Are you instead thinking of Solomon's stables. The only conquest they really doubt is that of Jericho (or what is believed to be Jericho) which shows signs of destruction by fire.

The best evidence outside the Biblical record from the Assyrians....they even describe the Biblical events (like Lachish) in much more detail. You need to stop visiting blogs of questionable academic validity and actually open a book....yes, I know that's hard for you to do, but at least try to be competent every once in a while.

And for the Star Trek comment, http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/reso...prise.html