To understand Christ should be the focus of Christianity not the study of history of those that claim to follow him. Human behaviour gives little resemblence to his message in most of history, so to understand his message we need to study his words.
___________________________

Scout you love to take a directly opposite position. I have made no such statement or implication as: "It is Philo telling me ... I am a woman apparently that makes me a baby machine." Beside that I have not met a man who has been pregnant, or has delivered a baby. As far as I know only women give birth, so stop degrading the role of a woman in the procreation of our species. It rather reflects on your attitude toward childbirth, and children.

Scout you ought to get out more the atheists are there spouting their atheism at every opportunity [visit your local university during orientation]. "Strange how one never see groups of athiests ... spout an nauseum about their beliefs."

Your preference for ignorance of historical fact is appalling. Read the record of the Jewish historian Josephus, the letters of Pilate to Ceasar etc. The first century martyrs of christianity tell their story they certainly believed he existed and changed societies beliefs without threat or coercion.

Quote, "Besides we don't even know that JC ever actually existed. There is nothing that really substantiates in historical tetxt. I think it is this shaky foundation that makes some christians so defensive, what if JC never existed at all? What a house of cards is christianity.

Yabs.. were you on the turps when u did that post mate ? :) quite a few sloppy constructions and spellings etc.. unlike your usual self.

OK.. Time to deal with SCOUT .. *grrr*
hey.. Diane, can you quote me accurately if ur going to use quotes...
I do not call people to 'come into' Jesus, I speak of people "In Christ" and invite people to have FAITH in him, but you will have to leave aside the homo-erotic imagery please.. its not appropriate for the subject.

So, I say "non Christians don't have any sense of right and wrong" do I ? Not a chance. I've often said that apart from divine revelation, all morality is culturally or socially relative, and I've said that without a moral anchor such as we have in the scriptures, people will 'make-it-up-as-they-go' and surprise surprise.. Alistair Nicholson .. family court judge has come out with the idea that Marraige being between a man and woman is a peculiarly 'Christian' idea ? thus, same sex marraige is ok... well.. thin end of the wedge I say.. but more like a blunt object in reality. The man needs to get out more and see if there is ANY culture in the WORLD (apart from trendy modern western nations) where 'marraige' is anything other than male and female....

Scout.. u need to actually read what I write and not impose on my writings your predetermined biases about what I stand for.

p.S... I'm getting into the swing of a decent round house back kick... check this link out.. it will blow yor mind.. have a real close look at how it does down. (Taikwando)
http://media.putfile.com/Moon-Tae-Kwon-Do-Korea-vs-Greece
I reckon its about the best kick I've seen.

and check out this one too....
http://media.putfile.com/knockout_girl

Brain is too tired to engage on the topic tonight.

There is one positive aspect of religion,it had a lot of people scared in the past and honesty was really good for the growth and success of an economy,by producing drastic reductions in both crime and corruption.It this respect,it is going to be hard to replace.

http://www.abc.net.au/religion/stories/s1517040.htm

David H. Lewis opens debate on the historicity of Jesus, arguing that New Testament and contemporaneous writings give very little evidence that Jesus actually ever lived.

“Under such an avalanche of ecclesiastical information, we should now all be extremely well-informed about Jesus and Christianity. But we’re not. And the reason we’re so ill informed…………….. they all draw their portrait of Jesus almost exclusively from the gospels.

……………….. But the problem that no-one seems to appreciate is that the gospels are not our very earliest Christian records. Just as we would expect an archaeologist to dig down to the deepest levels to give us a true picture of an ancient scene or event, so we should also expect historians or theologians to consult the earliest written records of Christianity. However, almost without exception they become fixated on the gospels and virtually ignore the very earliest or independent Christian evidence from Paul and others. This gives us a very distorted and inaccurate picture……”

This article is refuted by William Loader at:

http://www.abc.net.au/religion/stories/s1517046.htmhttp://www.abc.net.au/religion/stories/s1517046.htm

I did not find that Loader offered any real proof of JC’s existence. No doubt there are many who will disagree with me and that's fine, for a religious to doubt their religion would mean the entire crashing of their belief system. I understand that this would be terrifying.

However both articles make for an interesting read. At least Loader doesn’t take Lewis’ critique PERSONALLY.

Philo & BD – I admit I did not quote you EXACTLY merely the meanings I have extracted from your posts. Perhaps you should be more succinct if I have misinterpreted you.

Sells - the J.W’s et al are more than pesky they violate my privacy. You frequently display such a double standard – vilifying atheists for having their opinions and excusing Christians for thumping on and on about theirs.

But thanks for the entertainment people.

So gods now an event, not a being. How do you talk to an event, describe this event if its only a happening.

“This is the why the history of Israel is important and why theology can be judged by its fruits, its outcomes and also why this tradition cannot be tied to other theistic traditions. ”

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the outcomes, the constant wars, invasions, destroyed indigenous cultures, inter-religious conflict, fruits of the events works. Judaism and your event are tied to other theistic traditions by the events of history, are you denying that connection.

Sells you all have this habit of self-righteous indignation and the belief your entitled to change your interpretations to suit yourself any time you like. Explain the event, god, without personifying it as you have been doing until now.

“Duped by secular rationalism”. How can being rational deceive you. Secularism is the acceptance of all beliefs, wheres the deceit in that. The again, your not talking about free choice are you, but the fact that secularism has taken away your beliefs ability to control.

Arjay, Christianity had nothing to do with the formulation of decent laws. It has a lot to do with the formulation of restrictive and vengeful laws. As well as implementation of many despotic, barbaric and cruel laws throughout its history. Its been non believers who have pushed for decency in law and the removal of personal choice restrictive laws.

Sadly the believers in god can't conceive of how non believers think, free thought isn't a part of the theology, repetitive thought is its backbone.

John Warren may like to read my article on evolutionary psychology and religion. You may find it at:

http://petersellick.nationalforum.com.au/data/Evo%20herm.htm

However interesting and explanatory this material may be, it does not as Boyer and the likes of Tooby, and someone who should know better, Daniel Dennett would have it erase the significance of religion as a cultural phenomenon. None of these authors understand that culture cannot be explained entirely by nature and thus reduce all religion to nature.