Billy Graham was once asked 'What if he was wrong in what he believed".
His answer was he would still believe and would not choose another lifestyle as he enjoyed it so much. However what if he is right, then he would be enjoying eternity in heaven and where would that leave you?

You choose what you believe. I have made my choice for now and for eternity.

Jeshua

Yabby,
The 'Dark Age' was a period of incredible innovation and invention. The negative image ascribed to it that you have just repeated is just more propoganda from the materialist 'enlightenment'.
http://www.worldmag.com/displayarticle.cfm?id=11322

So actually, Philo is not pushing his luck.

Trying to claim that science blossomed in spite of religion is an even worse misrepresentation of reality. I know it is the standard atheist line, but any real scholar of history and science knows it is complete rubbish and you would do well to avoid repeating the claim.

It seems from yours and j506hn's claims that if I meet an irrational, easily duped atheist this is proof that atheism is rubbish. Hopefully a reasonable person like yourself can see the fallaciousness of this sort of claim.

I have only just joined this forum and have been reading members' comments with interest.

Howver, I must respond to Kenny's allegation in his post of December 31st that Jesus advocated the killing of children. (I presume you were not referring to baby goats, Kenny - maybe I'm facetious, sorry!)

The reference given (Mark 7:10) indicates that you have completely misinterpreted the passage. According to my copy of the New Testament (Confraternity translation), Mark was describing one of Jesus's disputes with the Pharisees. Jesus accused the Pharisees of hypocrisy and used as an example the Mosaic law 'Honour thy father and mother' (from the Ten Commandments) together with the further prescription, reputedly also from God (Exodus 21:17), 'Whoever curses his father or mother shall be put to death'. He made absolutely no comment about the appropriateness or otherwise of such a drastic punishment, but used the law to display the hypocrisy of the Pharisees in permitting adult sons to evade their legal responsibility to support their aged parents (there being no Age pension at that time) by declaring their property 'corban', a gift to God which could be used for no other purpose. The Pharisees therefore abetted the frustration of a law of Moses aimed at preventing the destitution and starvation of the aged.

Please note I am not a 'CR'; I'm just a stickler for facts.

Well said Kephren !

STEEL was your 'end of the world' predictions some kind of poke at my 'prediction' ? :) If yes, it's misguided, my 'prediction' has nothing to do with my faith, it is simple social and historical observation mate.

I'm seeing the signs already in many places and we have even had our apoligists for 'stigmatizing the gays' getting VERY close to justifying it on OLO.

Jesua
I'm not sure I understand you. You said "I've made my choice for here and eternity".... can you give us an insight into what choice that is ? Your nick is close enough to Joshua and in fact is a variant of it. A very Biblical name.

J506N
Which indeed ?.... perhaps the better term would be 'Translation' rather than 'version'. Language by its very nature means that the same idea can be expressed in various meaningful forms. With changing culture the impact and meaning of older words changes. The 'youth' speak of something which is WIKID or SICK is in fact something great/cool is an example of this.

The issue of Biblical sources encompasses thousands of documents and fragments and sources including quotations in the literature of the Church fathers. All are taken into account in order provide the best and most reliable text. There are still some minor textual issues, but none of these takes away from the central point of the gospel that God has visited us in Christ, who died for our sins and rose from the dead. Please look at Pauls letter to the Corinthians chapter 15 for a good indication of how the tradition was passed down.

Verse 3 "For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance..."
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=15&version=31

Do you look at the Televangelists and use that as evidence for/against Christ ? I sure hope not, because while some may use 'religion' for gain and popularity, a quick read of the New Testament (gospels especially) will show where these people stand in relation to Christ.. don't hide behind them mate.

I would recommend the ministry of Chuck Swindoll http://www.insight.org/Broadcast/Archives.asp

Philo, in most of Europe, religion plays a part in name only, in terms of governance. The new European Constitution does not even mention Christianity. Its a bit like the Queen of Australia. She is there in name only. In reality, she has little to do with Australia's laws etc.

Only in America, the most religious country in the West, does religion still play a role. Politicians are not yet free to admit their real religious beliefs, for they would not be elected. But compare say Clinton, with Mullah Bush and the difference is bleeding obvious :)

Here we have had agnostic Prime Ministers, AFAIK both Keating and Hawke are, Australia still had good governance. So your theory that religion needs to be involved in good governance is out the window :)

David, a book written by a Christian, based at a Christian University, trying to sell it to other Christians, is surely open to question even by you! Read your history! Medicine for instance made huge strides under Greek and Roman rule. Once the Christians gained power, things like epilepsy suddenly became people possessed by "demons" . The soul became more important then the flesh. Disease signified the wrath of God etc, sin was assumed to perhaps be a cause of sickness etc. Freethinkers have existed all along. They were just not free to express their views. Right up to the time of Darwin. He waited for years before publishing anything, as he knew how the religious lobby would react.

Jesua
I'm not sure I understand you. You said "I've made my choice for here and eternity".... can you give us an insight into what choice that is ? Your nick is close enough to Joshua and in fact is a variant of it. A very Biblical name.

My choice is to follow Jesus by acknowledging Him as my Lord and Saviour, now and for eternity. Jeshua.