I was raised as a devout catholic and by the time I turned 18 thought I would be a priest. And I have never ever said the Crucifixion was a fable, just not proven fact. Albeit has some truth that many historians have attributed to two probable persons who fit the description of the Jewish Rabi J.C. And when I revealed my ambitions to a fellow worker, he suggested I read a number of history books available at the local book store. And given the first council of Nicosia was when the current official bible was recorded in print, and given that took place some 350 ad I stand by my assertions. Moreover, the oldest known bible resides, I believe in Munich and could be an entirely different book we recognize today. There is no similarity whatsoever!

Spencer reminds me of a story Sir Richard Bramston tells of a highly placed flat earth official he invited onto one of his low obit space fights. The official accepted and spent the entire journey glued to a portal and watched as a round globe unfolded beneath him. When the landed, Sir Richard inquired, and what do you think now? Whereupon the official replied, the special effects were extremely lifelike as were the graphics. And walked off, his errant and entire untested beliefs unchanged.

It is said and unchallenged life is not worth living. And equally an unchallenged/untested belief system, is not worth believing!
Alan B.

Thanks Spencer,

Oh what a Saviour......how can it be that He would die for me.
May the message of the cross continue to go out from all who have breath and may the Lord bless you for using the life He gave you to Glorify Him.

Simon Rossic

Alan B sounds like the type of person that would situate fire teams across the road from one another for an ambush.

A system that doesn't protect itself will be destroyed- Communists don't challenge their ideas- Stalin said we don't allow people to have guns so why should we allow them to think. The British system in the Industrial Revolution seemingly created a sandbox of creative destruction. I think that Alan B has bastardized Socrates here. Socrates probably needs to be understood in it's context.

OzSpen,

There is nothing assumed by me at all concerning the claims of Christs resurrection and ascension, I simply state the evidence, if that's what you can call it, is only contained within the Gospels. It widely accepted that the Gospels are not historical accounts, and any belief that one obtains from those accounts which are not corroborated from other independent sources is supposition.

What evidence do you have to offer for the validity of Christs resurrection and ascension.

Kudos Kid,

I know you are big on Socrates, but how about putting a Sockinit?

He has risen and is coming again? And I thought he was just breathing heavy?
Alan B.