PDA

View Full Version : The Reason for the Season


irishjayhawk
12-10-2007, 08:25 PM
http://fukung.net/images/6925/2158.jpg

Thoughts?

irishjayhawk
12-10-2007, 10:21 PM
No thoughts at all?

banyon
12-10-2007, 10:25 PM
The reason for the season is Coca-Cola?

Taco John
12-10-2007, 10:26 PM
That's one of the cooler santa outfits I've seen.

patteeu
12-10-2007, 10:39 PM
His beard looks like it needs to be combed.

Taco John
12-10-2007, 10:40 PM
His beard looks like it needs to be combed.



I had no idea you were a metero... ;)

Mr Luzcious
12-10-2007, 11:17 PM
Is there something we're supposed to know about Santa? Is he a child molester?

chagrin
12-11-2007, 10:53 AM
I don't think anyone with a decent amount of sanity left believes that Christmas was the day Jesus was born; some choose to look at Christmas differently than others. Get over it already, move on.

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 11:12 AM
I don't think anyone with a decent amount of sanity left believes that Christmas was the day Jesus was born; some choose to look at Christmas differently than others. Get over it already, move on.

Whoooosh. That was point of the poster which just flew over your head.

Nightwish
12-11-2007, 11:22 AM
Whoooosh. That was point of the poster which just flew over your head.
I dunno, I guess it went over my head, too. It seems the message of the poster is, "Yeah, Santa is fine and dandy, but don't forget that it's really all about Jesus."

trndobrd
12-11-2007, 11:22 AM
I think I gave that guy some change on the way into the office this morning.

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 11:31 AM
I dunno, I guess it went over my head, too. It seems the message of the poster is, "Yeah, Santa is fine and dandy, but don't forget that it's really all about Jesus."

List the qualities of Santa. And then list the qualities of Jesus. Virtually the same. Yet one is laughable to believe in past a certain age and one is applauded to believe in past a certain age.

I never looked at it that way.

Nightwish
12-11-2007, 11:44 AM
List the qualities of Santa. And then list the qualities of Jesus. Virtually the same. Yet one is laughable to believe in past a certain age and one is applauded to believe in past a certain age.

I never looked at it that way.Ah, now I see what it's getting at. Makes sense, though, that the qualities of Santa would mirror those of Jesus. He is, after all, based largely on the Bishop of Myra (except those qualities that are based on the Clement Moore poem and the old Coke ads), and the church fathers are ostensibly called upon to emulate the life of Christ, n'est ce-pas (with faith, of course, that Jesus didn't go around diddling altar boys)?

banyon
12-11-2007, 11:48 AM
List the qualities of Santa. And then list the qualities of Jesus. Virtually the same. Yet one is laughable to believe in past a certain age and one is applauded to believe in past a certain age.

I never looked at it that way.

Yeah, Santa promises us toys if we give him milk and cookies, Jesus offers eternal salvation to those who have faith.

Yeah, same thing. :shake:

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 12:08 PM
Yeah, Santa promises us toys if we give him milk and cookies, Jesus offers eternal salvation to those who have faith.

Yeah, same thing. :shake:

Again, the point sails over your head.

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 12:09 PM
Ah, now I see what it's getting at. Makes sense, though, that the qualities of Santa would mirror those of Jesus. He is, after all, based largely on the Bishop of Myra (except those qualities that are based on the Clement Moore poem and the old Coke ads), and the church fathers are ostensibly called upon to emulate the life of Christ, n'est ce-pas (with faith, of course, that Jesus didn't go around diddling altar boys)?

True, about the basis. But still, it's interesting that one is laughable to believe past a certain age and one is applauded to believe in past a certain age. And they're basically of the same thing.

HolmeZz
12-11-2007, 12:09 PM
I'd say toys to kids is eternal salvation to adults. ;)

And the absence of the milk and cookies is supposed to prove Santa's existence.

Nightwish
12-11-2007, 12:29 PM
True, about the basis. But still, it's interesting that one is laughable to believe past a certain age and one is applauded to believe in past a certain age. And they're basically of the same thing.
True, there is a distinct irony there.

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 12:37 PM
I'd say toys to kids is eternal salvation to adults. ;)

And the absence of the milk and cookies is supposed to prove Santa's existence.
ROFL

I didn't see your edit til just now. That's pretty damn funny.

stevieray
12-11-2007, 12:41 PM
But still, it's interesting that one is laughable to believe past a certain age

I'm sure that the now deceased Secret Santa would've disagreed...

...laughing at someone for believing in santa says more about the person laughing than it does the child that believes in something that represents giving to one another.

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 12:51 PM
I'm sure that the now deceased Secret Santa would've disagreed...

...laughing at someone for believing in santa says more about the person laughing than it does the child that believes in something that represents giving to one another.

Point goes flying right past your head.

And we're not talking about a 5 year old believing in Santa. You know it and I know it.

banyon
12-11-2007, 12:51 PM
Again, the point sails over your head.

Not really. You asked us to list the qualities, so I listed a couple of them.

The main point that you are bringing across quite clearly in this thread and others is that you are apparently so angry and intolerant of other views on this issue that you are incapable of having a civil discourse about it.

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 12:54 PM
Not really. You asked us to list the qualities, so I listed a couple of them.

The main point that you are bringing across quite clearly in this thread and others is that you are apparently so angry and intolerant of other views on this issue that you are incapable of having a civil discourse about it.

Having civil discourse with Kotter or Stevie is impossible. I had a civil discussion with you in the other thread about faith.

Did you read HolmezZ post? I think it was a nice refutation of your qualities.

HolmeZz
12-11-2007, 01:04 PM
There are definitely some similarities, with Santa being this omniscient being who judges whether you've been good or bad and rewards you accordingly.

I'm sure there's a reason you're supposed to get coal in your stocking when you're bad too, likely a representation of the fires in Hell.

stevieray
12-11-2007, 01:06 PM
Point goes flying right past your head.

And we're not talking about a 5 year old believing in Santa. You know it and I know it.

Sure we are..you're using them in your analogy....and I'm pointing out that adults believe in the spirit of giving, and gave you an example..

stevieray
12-11-2007, 01:07 PM
Having civil discourse with Kotter or Stevie is impossible..

deflection

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 01:07 PM
There are definitely some similarities, with Santa being this omniscient being who judges whether you've been good or bad and rewards you accordingly.

I'm sure there's a reason you're supposed to get coal in your stocking when you're bad too, likely a representation of the fires in Hell.

He's making a list
and checking it twice.
He's going to find out who's naughty and nice.

Sounds an awful lot like God and Heaven....

He sees when you are sleeping.
He knows when you're awake.
He knows if you've been bad or good.
So be good for goodness sake!


Umm, seriously?

It's pretty obvious.

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 01:09 PM
Sure we are..you're using them in your analogy..

Where did I say this?

deflection

If you read your own posts sometimes, I think you'd see why. You can rarely get a complete thought out. Or else assume the other person can complete it for you. ..... doesn't just get your point across.

stevieray
12-11-2007, 01:15 PM
Where did I say this?



If you read your own posts sometimes, I think you'd see why. You can rarely get a complete thought out. Or else assume the other person can complete it for you. ..... doesn't just get your point across.

my goodness man, come up with something new..when confronted with your anger and inability to have a civil discourse, you deflected to others...

Sincerely, you've now had two intelligent, well respected posters mention your anger...

I hope you put that down that wheelbarrow of resentment..otherwise it's going to continue to be with you and effect your life in extremely negative ways...

Cochise
12-11-2007, 01:17 PM
Seems like a fellow with a lot of frustration in his life or something.

Nightwish
12-11-2007, 01:21 PM
On the other hand, there is a certain sensibility in stopping believing in Santa at a certain age, but retaining a belief in Jesus. Scientifically speaking, belief in one is as illogical as belief in the other, as the qualities of both defy rational, scientific thought (which doesn't preclude them from existing, it just precludes them from withstanding rational testing). But because the application of the Santa myth is much more mundane than the application of the Jesus myth, it would be easier to compile immediate and rational evidences against the existence of Santa Claus, because he supposedly comes physically right into your home, and one would have to expand the myth considerably to account for modern technology and means of surveillance (the myth as I recall has never said he's invisible to cameras, for instance) in order to keep the belief alive. And eventually, even to a child, the constant moving of the goalposts would strain credulity. Because the Jesus myth happens on a cosmic scale, rather than an earthly one, it can claim the same unfalsifiability that it always has, the goalposts don't have to be moved, at least not until such time as the Second Coming is supposed to occur, if someone were to be able to nail that down to a place and time.

HolmeZz
12-11-2007, 01:24 PM
if someone were to be able to nail that down to a place and time.

double-nintenuendo

Nightwish
12-11-2007, 01:26 PM
double-nintenuendo
Heh, you're right, it is redundant. I never noticed that before, and I use it all the time. And here I am, a former English major!

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 01:44 PM
On the other hand, there is a certain sensibility in stopping believing in Santa at a certain age, but retaining a belief in Jesus. Scientifically speaking, belief in one is as illogical as belief in the other, as the qualities of both defy rational, scientific thought (which doesn't preclude them from existing, it just precludes them from withstanding rational testing). But because the application of the Santa myth is much more mundane than the application of the Jesus myth, it would be easier to compile immediate and rational evidences against the existence of Santa Claus, because he supposedly comes physically right into your home, and one would have to expand the myth considerably to account for modern technology and means of surveillance (the myth as I recall has never said he's invisible to cameras, for instance) in order to keep the belief alive. And eventually, even to a child, the constant moving of the goalposts would strain credulity. Because the Jesus myth happens on a cosmic scale, rather than an earthly one, it can claim the same unfalsifiability that it always has, the goalposts don't have to be moved, at least not until such time as the Second Coming is supposed to occur, if someone were to be able to nail that down to a place and time.

How is it cosmic? I've honestly never heard anyone say that or use that word in this context.

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 01:45 PM
Seems like a fellow with a lot of frustration in his life or something.

Nope. Happy as can be. Although, I can see why someone who doesn't believe in a god can seem like he's frustrated or angry or you know, whatever. ;)

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 01:49 PM
my goodness man, come up with something new..when confronted with your anger and inability to have a civil discourse, you deflected to others...

Sincerely, you've now had two intelligent, well respected posters mention your anger...

I hope you put that down that wheelbarrow of resentment..otherwise it's going to continue to be with you and effect your life in extremely negative ways...

Your "...." is the same as Kotter's use of smiley after smiley in an effort not to address things or to leave meaning ambiguous.

I have had civil discourse. Mine with banyon in the other thread was a good example. So far, the one with Nightwish has been civil too. So, really, you have no leg to stand on here.

Well respected has nothing to do with this. And intelligence is in the eye of the beholder. So I don't hold much stock with that.

On a positive note, this post is the closest you've come to a rational post. One that leaves no ambiguity and leaves out most of the "...." shenanigans - at least in the way you've used them previously. To that, I congratulate you.

Jenson71
12-11-2007, 01:51 PM
In the days of ancient Judea, a popular folk tune "I Saw Mommy Kissing The Messiah" was sung by Jewish children much to the chagrin of their parents.

memyselfI
12-11-2007, 01:53 PM
http://staffweb.psdschools.org/clund/Ecuador%20Website/images/dollar.bmp

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 01:54 PM
http://staffweb.psdschools.org/clund/Ecuador%20Website/images/dollar.bmp

Yep. I expect it will be taken off sooner or later. Plus, it wasn't originally on there, IIRC.

stevieray
12-11-2007, 01:54 PM
Your "...." is the same as Kotter's use of smiley after smiley in an effort not to address things or to leave meaning ambiguous.

I have had civil discourse. Mine with banyon in the other thread was a good example. So far, the one with Nightwish has been civil too. So, really, you have no leg to stand on here.

Well respected has nothing to do with this. And intelligence is in the eye of the beholder. So I don't hold much stock with that.

On a positive note, this post is the closest you've come to a rational post. One that leaves no ambiguity and leaves out most of the "...." shenanigans - at least in the way you've used them previously. To that, I congratulate you.

thanks for proving my point.

most of things we're discussing here have been discussed ad nausem four years before you even arrived...most of our views aren't classified information.

Cochise
12-11-2007, 01:55 PM
Hey, could you please find a larger picture to link in the thread? I can't quite see that one.

:rolleyes:

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 01:57 PM
thanks for proving my point.

most of things we're discussing here have been discussed ad nausem four years before you even arrived.

There's no anger there. So what point did I prove?

Jenson71
12-11-2007, 02:01 PM
Yep. I expect it will be taken off sooner or later. Plus, it wasn't originally on there, IIRC.

1864 it was on the 2 cent coin.

http://www.coinfacts.com/two_cents/1864_two_cents.html

For 51 years, our official national motto has been "In God We Trust"

I didn't know that until just right now.

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 02:03 PM
1864 it was on the 2 cent coin.

http://www.coinfacts.com/two_cents/1864_two_cents.html

For 51 years, our official national motto has been "In God We Trust"

I didn't know that until just right now.

Thanks for the info. :thumb:


Do you think it will end up coming off? Like the Pledge...

Taco John
12-11-2007, 02:09 PM
List the qualities of Santa. And then list the qualities of Jesus. Virtually the same. Yet one is laughable to believe in past a certain age and one is applauded to believe in past a certain age.

I never looked at it that way.


The key difference being that Jesus's Toy Shop is located in Palistine, wheras Santa's Toy Shop is at the North Pole. Other than that, virtually the same.

Jenson71
12-11-2007, 02:13 PM
I'm not sure, but I wouldn't be surprised. "Unconstitutionally promotes monotheism" like the argument for the Pledge.

I was reading Dawkin's "The God Delusion" a little this weekend. He says in the preface that atheists are independent minded people, and therefore, hard to group together and make a strong difference. So instead of Newdow fighting, it would be a large mass, I think is Dawkin's hope.

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 02:20 PM
The key difference being that Jesus's Toy Shop is located in Palistine, wheras Santa's Toy Shop is at the North Pole. Other than that, virtually the same.

Well played. :)

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 02:21 PM
I'm not sure, but I wouldn't be surprised. "Unconstitutionally promotes monotheism" like the argument for the Pledge.

I was reading Dawkin's "The God Delusion" a little this weekend. He says in the preface that atheists are independent minded people, and therefore, hard to group together and make a strong difference. So instead of Newdow fighting, it would be a large mass, I think is Dawkin's hope.

Great book, by the way. Taught me a lot about different, fallacious arguments made by believers. Pascal's Wager is definitely the #1. I was actually confronted with this weeks before reading the book. If only I had known... :(

Nightwish
12-11-2007, 02:42 PM
How is it cosmic? I've honestly never heard anyone say that or use that word in this context.I mean it in the sense that, according to Christians, for the past 2000 or so years, Jesus has resided in heaven, or "the heavens," if you prefer. He hasn't made, nor does the myth purport that he has made any earthy appearances or direct intercession into the lives of humans during the time since his ascension into heaven (not to be confused with "The Ascension," with a capital "A," which I understand in Catholic doctrine actually refers to the ascension of Mary, not the ascension of Jesus) - faces on toast notwithstanding. Santa is purported to intercede with us in an earthly sense, whereas Jesus is purported to intercede only in the spiritual sense, at least until the Second Coming, 2nd Advent, or whatever you want to call it that the Christians are awaiting. That's what I meant by cosmic, rather than that word's application to astronomy.

a1na2
12-11-2007, 02:49 PM
irishjayhawk][/b]
List the qualities of Santa. And then list the qualities of Jesus. Virtually the same. Yet one is laughable to believe in past a certain age and one is applauded to believe in past a certain age.

I never looked at it that way.

I think you are getting some really strange people telling you about Jesus and Santa.

The funniest part about it all is that you are willing to buy off on something you don't believe in.

Nightwish
12-11-2007, 02:54 PM
[/i]

I think you are getting some really strange people telling you about Jesus and Santa.

The funniest part about it all is that you are willing to buy off on something you don't believe in.
What is the "something" we're buying off on? For my part, admitting the similarities between the two, and analyzing how relatively reasonable it is to believe in one or the other past a certain age in no way implies that I believe in either one of them, or that I believed in one of them any longer than I believed in the other. I think I probably quit believing in both of them about the same time, if only a little longer for Jesus, but not much.

Jenson71
12-11-2007, 04:00 PM
He hasn't made, nor does the myth purport that he has made any earthy appearances or direct intercession into the lives of humans during the time since his ascension into heaven (not to be confused with "The Ascension," with a capital "A," which I understand in Catholic doctrine actually refers to the ascension of Mary, not the ascension of Jesus)

That's the "Assumption" of Mary. The "Ascension" of Jesus is basic Christian theology (it's found in the Bible a few times) and is capitalized. Easy to confuse.

Nightwish
12-11-2007, 04:03 PM
That's the "Assumption" of Mary. The "Ascension" of Jesus is basic Christian theology (it's found in the Bible a few times) and is capitalized. Easy to confuse.
Ah, I stand corrected.

a1na2
12-11-2007, 04:06 PM
What is the "something" we're buying off on? For my part, admitting the similarities between the two, and analyzing how relatively reasonable it is to believe in one or the other past a certain age in no way implies that I believe in either one of them, or that I believed in one of them any longer than I believed in the other. I think I probably quit believing in both of them about the same time, if only a little longer for Jesus, but not much.

I'd give you the answer I thought of but I'm sure you would turn it into something that is totally different than what was said.

It is simply amazing that non believers will go to all lengths to speak against something and then in return make comparisons between the things he doesn't believe in.

You have the right to think and believe the way you want to.

Nightwish
12-11-2007, 04:09 PM
I'd give you the answer I thought of but I'm sure you would turn it into something that is totally different than what was said.

It is simply amazing that non believers will go to all lengths to speak against something and then in return make comparisons between the things he doesn't believe in.

You have the right to think and believe the way you want to.Who has spoken against anything in this thread? A person doesn't have to believe in something to have an interested and informed conversation about it. Sociology, Anthropology, History, Philosophy and Comparative Religions classrooms are full of people doing exactly that. Lots of people draw comparisons between the Greek and Roman gods, but don't believe in either. Do you find that equally strange?

a1na2
12-11-2007, 04:34 PM
Who has spoken against anything in this thread? A person doesn't have to believe in something to have an interested and informed conversation about it. Sociology, Anthropology, History, Philosophy and Comparative Religions classrooms are full of people doing exactly that. Lots of people draw comparisons between the Greek and Roman gods, but don't believe in either. Do you find that equally strange?

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 05:10 PM
I mean it in the sense that, according to Christians, for the past 2000 or so years, Jesus has resided in heaven, or "the heavens," if you prefer. He hasn't made, nor does the myth purport that he has made any earthy appearances or direct intercession into the lives of humans during the time since his ascension into heaven (not to be confused with "The Ascension," with a capital "A," which I understand in Catholic doctrine actually refers to the ascension of Mary, not the ascension of Jesus) - faces on toast notwithstanding. Santa is purported to intercede with us in an earthly sense, whereas Jesus is purported to intercede only in the spiritual sense, at least until the Second Coming, 2nd Advent, or whatever you want to call it that the Christians are awaiting. That's what I meant by cosmic, rather than that word's application to astronomy.

Didn't he appear to Thomas?

I guess I'm just unsure how this makes them that much different - other than they're different stories/myths/whatever.

Nightwish
12-11-2007, 05:41 PM
Didn't he appear to Thomas?
If I'm not mistaken (and I could be, I'm not a bible scholar), he appeared to Thomas after the resurrection, but before the Ascension. He appeared to Paul in a vision after the Ascension, but not bodily.

I guess I'm just unsure how this makes them that much different - other than they're different stories/myths/whatever.
I'm just saying that because Santa's reputed intercession with man occurs in the physical world, it would be much easier to monitor to find out if there is really something going on, other than just daddy dressed in a red suit (which would only remain convincing for a time). You could fairly easily set up monitors, cameras, various tests to measure if there was some magical being popping into your home and leaving presents under a tree. And when those testing measures failed to reveal that Santa is indeed popping here and about, flying in with reindeer, hopping down chimneys, and all that good stuff, then you're left with the choice of either rewriting the myth over and over again to keep up with advances in technology and our capacity to test and monitor (all of sudden, Santa would have to be invisible to cameras - but strangely visible to radar, according the evening news, his reindeer and sleigh would suddenly be able to land without leaving tracks, and so on, so that the goalposts would have to keep moving to keep belief alive ... or stop believing in him.

However, despite all our abilities to test the physical realm, in which Santa operates, we don't have a comparable ability to test the spiritual realm, in which Jesus operates. So you don't have quite the same conundrum with belief in Jesus that you have with Santa. Now, if someone could pinpoint the exact hour and place of Jesus' prophesied return, and it didn't happen, then you would have to move the goalposts a bit to keep that belief alive. But until then, you don't have to change anything in the story to keep people believing in it all through their lives. Since the realm in which Jesus is reputed to operate isn't testable in the way that the realm in which Santa is reputed to operate is, then the story of Jesus doesn't have to follow the rules of logic or the rules of physics to remain valid in the minds of those who are predisposed to believe in him. Does that make sense?

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 06:05 PM
If I'm not mistaken (and I could be, I'm not a bible scholar), he appeared to Thomas after the resurrection, but before the Ascension. He appeared to Paul in a vision after the Ascension, but not bodily.

But wouldn't the interaction after the resurrection be considered earthly?


I'm just saying that because Santa's reputed intercession with man occurs in the physical world, it would be much easier to monitor to find out if there is really something going on, other than just daddy dressed in a red suit (which would only remain convincing for a time). You could fairly easily set up monitors, cameras, various tests to measure if there was some magical being popping into your home and leaving presents under a tree. And when those testing measures failed to reveal that Santa is indeed popping here and about, flying in with reindeer, hopping down chimneys, and all that good stuff, then you're left with the choice of either rewriting the myth over and over again to keep up with advances in technology and our capacity to test and monitor (all of sudden, Santa would have to be invisible to cameras - but strangely visible to radar, according the evening news, his reindeer and sleigh would suddenly be able to land without leaving tracks, and so on, so that the goalposts would have to keep moving to keep belief alive ... or stop believing in him.

However, despite all our abilities to test the physical realm, in which Santa operates, we don't have a comparable ability to test the spiritual realm, in which Jesus operates. So you don't have quite the same conundrum with belief in Jesus that you have with Santa. Now, if someone could pinpoint the exact hour and place of Jesus' prophesied return, and it didn't happen, then you would have to move the goalposts a bit to keep that belief alive. But until then, you don't have to change anything in the story to keep people believing in it all through their lives. Since the realm in which Jesus is reputed to operate isn't testable in the way that the realm in which Santa is reputed to operate is, then the story of Jesus doesn't have to follow the rules of logic or the rules of physics to remain valid in the minds of those who are predisposed to believe in him. Does that make sense?

Got ya. I can buy that.

Adept Havelock
12-11-2007, 06:28 PM
The main point that you are bringing across quite clearly in this thread and others is that you are apparently so angry and intolerant of other views on this issue that you are incapable of having a civil discourse about it.

Dead.Solid.Perfect.

IJ, I share part of your belief system. Where we differ is you seem to feel a crusade to persuade others is needed. I guess I can kind of understand where you come from with that, but your method simply won't work. Flies/Honey/Vinegar and such.

It's obvious (at least to me) you have a great deal of anger over the concept of religion. I suggest you find a healthier way to cope with it. You'll end up with a happier life.

Not a slam...JMO.

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 07:03 PM
Dead.Solid.Perfect.

IJ, I share part of your belief system. Where we differ is you seem to feel a crusade to persuade others is needed. I guess I can kind of understand where you come from with that, but your method simply won't work. Flies/Honey/Vinegar and such.

It's obvious (at least to me) you have a great deal of anger over the concept of religion. I suggest you find a healthier way to cope with it. You'll end up with a happier life.

Not a slam...JMO.

Fair enough, but I am more than capable of having a rational conversation about it. I've shown that many times. Some people I can't have one with.

However, I don't understand where everyone gets all this "anger" business. I wouldn't confused anger with passion.

Adept Havelock
12-11-2007, 07:16 PM
Fair enough, but I am more than capable of having a rational conversation about it. I've shown that many times. Some people I can't have one with.

However, I don't understand where everyone gets all this "anger" business. I wouldn't confused anger with passion.


Sometimes that nuance can be lost in text communication. We primates are conditioned to use body language as a significant part of communication. Ook Ook, buddy.

listopencil
12-11-2007, 07:16 PM
It's no big deal, but couldn't you Christians make up your own damn holidays instead of stealing them from the pagans?

irishjayhawk
12-11-2007, 07:29 PM
Sometimes that nuance can be lost in text communication. We primates are conditioned to use body language as a significant part of communication. Ook Ook, buddy.

I think I'll take a break from the DC. I get sucked in too easily anyway.

Nightwish
12-11-2007, 10:56 PM
But wouldn't the interaction after the resurrection be considered earthly?
After the resurrection, yes. But I was basically pointing at the time frame. Between the resurrection and the Ascension, was basically just a matter of a few days. Between the Ascension and the next presumed time of earthly interaction, well, it's been at least 2000 years, and still counting, meaning that the unfalsifiable aspect of the Christ story (the part that attempts to explain away the untestable quality of the story) has not had to change, adapt or adjust to keep up with changing times over that entire time span.