Surpeme Court Gay Marriage Cases....

[Sava]

Your words were, and I quote them - that the existence of Jesus Christ could be disproven.

Imagining things again?

"Demonstrably false" != disproven

I can demonstrate you don't exist by plugging my ears (or my eyes) and going LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA

[Ben Kenobi]

"Demonstrably false"

Well, then. Have at it Sava. Show us why this is demonstrably false.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Good question. I see no evidence in the common law barring remarriage.

So you agree that secular law need not conform with or subordinate itself to ecclesiastical law?

[Ben Kenobi]

I don't care if it comes from the Catholic church. Only a few people on this site care.

Well, then if you don't care, why are you lying about it?

[MichaeltheGreat]

I can demonstrate you don't exist by plugging my ears (or my eyes) and going LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA

Wouldn't it be nice if it was that easy?

[Kidlicious]

The gospels are an advocate, propagandist source which have an agenda. It's early fan fiction, in other words. Something you should be familiar with, given your namesake. They have no particular authority, other than that given by their promoters and adherents. The accuracy or inaccuracy of a gospel doesn't affect the accuracy or inaccuracy of any other source, unless both sources are relating the same alleged event.

Funny how they conveniently agree on Pontius Pilatus, with a description of him that is entirely inconsistent with every other description of him. i.e. vacillating, being reluctant to crucify Jesus and deferring to the Jewish mob (placing blame on the Jews, not Rome) when all the other descriptions of Pilatus indicate he was forceful, arrogant, and contemptuous of the Jews. So much so that he had his chains yanked from Rome for stirring up too much ****. Not real consistent with the notion of a man who felt obligated to placate a Jewish mob on this occasion, when he otherwise seemed to delight in antagonizing them.

Maybe you don't know that the reason that he got his "chain yanked" is continued Jewish revolts. Why don't you believe that he would give in to a mob? You seem to be just trolling. You aren't making much sense.

[Ben Kenobi]

The gospels are an advocate, propagandist source which have an agenda.

So does everything else.

It's early fan fiction, in other words. Something you should be familiar with, given your namesake. They have no particular authority, other than that given by their promoters and adherents. The accuracy or inaccuracy of a gospel doesn't affect the accuracy or inaccuracy of any other source, unless both sources are relating the same alleged event.

Other than the fact that the Gospels contain historical evidence about this period in the Mideast that has been shown through outside evidence to be accurate, refers to real places and people and things throughout?

Funny how they conveniently agree on Pontius Pilatus, with a description of him that is entirely inconsistent with every other description of him. i.e. vacillating, being reluctant to crucify Jesus and deferring to the Jewish mob (placing blame on the Jews, not Rome) when all the other descriptions of Pilatus indicate he was forceful, arrogant, and contemptuous of the Jews.

If you read the Gospel account, does it appear to you that Pilate is at all vacillating? I don't see that. He's willing to condemn a man that he believes to be innocent to death on the word of the Jewish High Priests.

Not real consistent with the notion of a man who felt obligated to placate a Jewish mob on this occasion, when he otherwise seemed to delight in antagonizing them.

Did it serve the benefit of Pilate to 'wash his hands of the matter?' Absolutely. When his agenda and the agenda of the High Priests coincided, why would Pilate deviate from it?

[Kidlicious]

Well, then if you don't care, why are you lying about it?

Unfortunately there is no smiley for the expression I just made when I read this, and that's about all I can say about it.

[MrFun]

Unfortunately there is no smiley for the expression I just made when I read this, and that's about all I can say about it.

How about this one?

Or this one?

[PLATO]

Oh, cause I don't think Socrates was a real person. I think Plato made him just in case someone started questioning his theories.

[Ben Kenobi]

So you agree that secular law need not conform with or subordinate itself to ecclesiastical law?

Says right in that Constitution thingy that it is the supreme law of the United States.

[Ben Kenobi]

Unfortunately there is no smiley for the expression I just made when I read this, and that's about all I can say about it.

Seriously. You asked me where I was getting it from. I say the Catechism. You argue that this cannot be true. I prove that this is so. Then you say, "well that is stupid".

Then you turn around and lie, after I already proved it to be part of what the Catholic church teaches by attributing the interpretation to me and me alone.

So, yeah, you do care.

[Sava]

Well, then. Have at it Sava. Show us why this is demonstrably false.

Okay. My demonstration involves you killing yourself. My hypothesis is that you won't see Jesus or St. Peter or any of that other bull****. Do you agree to these terms?

[Kidlicious]

How about this one?

Or this one?

No. Those are for normal people, not BK. We need a BK smiley.

[Ben Kenobi]

Okay. My demonstration involves you killing yourself. My hypothesis is that you won't see Jesus or St. Peter or any of that other bull****. Do you agree to these terms?

Even if this were so - it would only prove that I was not saved by Jesus. It would not disprove the existance of Jesus.

Also - how do you plan to get information from me to you after I am dead?