Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google Log In with Steam      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Photo

Hi there!


  • Please log in to reply
96 replies to this topic

#81 DarkShadow6

DarkShadow6

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 127 posts

Posted July 06 2013 - 08:20 AM

Wes-Bike2.gif

Do_Want.png


Signature%20New.png

#82 Benjamoose

Benjamoose

    Om nom nom!

  • Administrators
  • 1,384 posts

Posted July 07 2013 - 09:46 AM

Wes-Bike2.gif

Do_Want.png

 

Creepy-face.jpg

 

creepy-face-swaps-1_thumb.jpg?imgmax=800

 

sealampreys9ko.jpg

 

63872d1191881472-hijack-thread-creepy.jp

 

bert-20110421-082506.jpg

 

3511_1756_creepy-tiger-costume.jpg

 

313173d1319846326-creepy-thread-creepy-m\

 

e14d921a0f4a75a939285322857574b3-magical

 

creepy-creepy-25.jpg?w=500

 

One-of-several-creepy-puppets-used-in-Mi


dolphin.png


#83 DarkShadow6

DarkShadow6

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 127 posts

Posted July 21 2013 - 02:09 AM

Jesus (I-am-not-a-historical-fact) Christ


Signature%20New.png

#84 DarkShadow6

DarkShadow6

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 127 posts

Posted July 21 2013 - 02:10 AM

uh Jesus (I-am-not-a-historical-fact) Christ is actually a historical fact

i find that to be offensive and incorrect


Signature%20New.png

#85 Benjamoose

Benjamoose

    Om nom nom!

  • Administrators
  • 1,384 posts

Posted July 21 2013 - 06:17 AM

uh Jesus (I-am-not-a-historical-fact) Christ is actually a historical fact

i find that to be offensive and incorrect


When the censor says "is not a historical fact" It is talking about the Biblical Jesus.

There have been thousands of people with the name "Jesus", so it's perfectly plausible that a man named "Jesus (I-am-not-a-historical-fact) Christ" existed.


That being said, there is no evidence of THE Jesus, and his existence. There is nothing dated to the time of his life. The only references to him being real come after his death, so it's sort of uncertain if there truly was a man (religious or not) at that specific time, doing those specific things. One thing is certain however, he was not the son of God, and even if you choose to believe he was; said belief is not a historical fact.

Badum-tshh

 

xJdCK.jpg


dolphin.png


#86 DarkShadow6

DarkShadow6

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 127 posts

Posted July 21 2013 - 09:48 PM

There have been thousands of people with the name "Jesus", so it's perfectly plausible that a man named "Jesus (I-am-not-a-historical-fact) Christ" existed.

That being said, there is no evidence of THE Jesus, and his existence. There is nothing dated to the time of his life. The only references to him being real come after his death, so it's sort of uncertain if there truly was a man (religious or not) at that specific time, doing those specific things.
Most scholars, religious or not, agree nowadays that there was a man named Jesus and that he taught people about holy scripture and the like.
In a 2011 review of the state of modern scholarship, Bart Ehrman (a secular agnostic) wrote, "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees". Richard A. Burridge states: "There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church's imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that any more". Robert M. Price (an atheist who denies Jesus' existence) agrees that this perspective runs against the views of the majority of scholars. James D. G. Dunn calls the theories of Jesus' non-existence "a thoroughly dead thesis". Michael Grant (a classicist) writes, "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary". Robert E. Van Voorst states that biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of non-existence of Jesus as effectively refuted.
http://en.wikipedia....us#cite_note-24
There are also plenty of documentaries and research on the subject, some of which I suggest you look at before giving such claims.
 
One thing is certain however, he was not the son of God, and even if you choose to believe he was; said belief is not a historical fact.
I'm pulling the average card here: There's no proof he isn't. Or, rather, there's no feasable way for us, as human beings, to know for 100% sure that there is no such thing as to what all these various religions proclaim, and there probably never will. Not to mention, it's called "faith" for a reason.
b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
http://www.merriam-w...ictionary/faith
 
The only references to him being real come after his death
You can say the same about a lot of people that are a part of history. History in itself is a record of observations of situations, people, locations, and the like, all by other people (unless autobiography, but even then it's from their standpoint and they could have a different idea of what went on in the things they write about). There are a lot of unsolved and/or disputed historical writings, recordings and such that have been contested, even some that were once believed to be true. Jesus is no exception. There probably never will be completely undeniable evidence that a lot of things that went down in history were completely true, but that's the world we live in.
 
Badum-tshh
I have lost a little respect for you. Of all the topics you could choose to be the least neutral in (in pretty much every discussion I've seen you undertake you've remained mostly to completely neutral and largely fair), I would have expected religion, it being a very touchy subject, to be the last.
Signature%20New.png

#87 Benjamoose

Benjamoose

    Om nom nom!

  • Administrators
  • 1,384 posts

Posted July 22 2013 - 11:11 AM

"I have lost a little respect for you. Of all the topics you could choose to be the least neutral in (in pretty much every discussion I've seen you undertake you've remained mostly to completely neutral and largely fair), I would have expected religion, it being a very touchy subject, to be the last."

Yikes really?!

To lose any amount of respect for me for clarifying my stance/why the auto correct does that, is silly. As is creating such a rebuttal, with Wikipedia style reference links, on a gaming forum that frequently uses terms like "Nigger" in a humorous fashion.

At the end of the day, I don't care what you believe, and I don't care what anyone believes. If you choose to believe in these things, than that's yours and yours alone, and regardless of what I think, nobody is challenging said view your end.

I don't even proclaim to know what I say to be the ultimate truth, but I believe in facts and facts alone when it comes to the origin, and I merely stated that religion, whether you believe or not, is not fact and never will be. Nobody can prove the universe isn't contained inside a giant fish either, or the classic example; the flying spaghetti monster. Should I be challenged and fought for mocking those too?

To put you at ease by no means am I trying to shake your views on this subject. I believe pure and simple, that everything is okay to laugh at and make fun of, or nothing is, and my auto-correct is nothing more than a humorous jab.


So to clarify:
1) The Biblical Jesus is not a historical fact (I refer to the beliefs of miracles and "son of god-ness", not the existence of a man who taught others). Which is why I stand by the auto-correct, it is a belief not a fact, and that's all I was commenting on with the joke.

2) If you wish to believe in this, then that's fine. I take no issue with it.

So really, I'm not sure what you're so offended about. You massive negro you.

 

 

-SUBJECT CHANGE-


dolphin.png


#88 DarkShadow6

DarkShadow6

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 127 posts

Posted July 22 2013 - 11:29 AM

"I have lost a little respect for you. Of all the topics you could choose to be the least neutral in (in pretty much every discussion I've seen you undertake you've remained mostly to completely neutral and largely fair), I would have expected religion, it being a very touchy subject, to be the last."

Yikes really?!

To lose any amount of respect for me for clarifying my stance/why the auto correct does that, is silly. As is creating such a rebuttal, with Wikipedia style reference links, on a gaming forum that frequently uses terms like "Nigger" in a humorous fashion.
I feel like a hypocrite, really. I don't know why, but you pressed the right buttons I guess. I think part of it was how hard you defended your views and you still were pretty rude about it (in my eye).
At the end of the day, I don't care what you believe, and I don't care what anyone believes. If you choose to believe in these things, than that's yours and yours alone, and regardless of what I think, nobody is challenging said view your end.
Things would have gone differently if you had stated that in your first reply.
I don't even proclaim to know what I say to be the ultimate truth, but I believe in facts and facts alone when it comes to the origin, and I merely stated that religion, whether you believe or not, is not fact and never will be. Nobody can prove the universe isn't contained inside a giant fish either, or the classic example; the flying spaghetti monster. Should I be challenged and fought for mocking those too?
I don't really have much faith in fact.
Fact changes daily, and that's far too viscous a situation for me to believe in.
Funny, huh?
To put you at ease by no means am I trying to shake your views on this subject. I believe pure and simple, that everything is okay to laugh at and make fun of, or nothing is, and my auto-correct is nothing more than a humorous jab.
For the longest time, I never could really understand what people felt when they were truly offended, because I haven't been since I was much younger.
I think I get it, now.
So to clarify:
1) The Biblical Jesus is not a historical fact (I refer to the beliefs of miracles and "son of god-ness", not the existence of a man who taught others). Which is why I stand by the auto-correct, it is a belief not a fact, and that's all I was commenting on with the joke.
2) If you wish to believe in this, then that's fine. I take no issue with it.
See, I had no idea that's what you meant by "Biblical Jesus". You really should have phrased that first post better.
No, there is no proof that any of that happened. I'll agree.
So really, I'm not sure what you're so offended about. You massive negro you.
Not too sure, either.
 
-SUBJECT CHANGE-
Gbprintercreepy.jpg
Signature%20New.png

#89 Benjamoose

Benjamoose

    Om nom nom!

  • Administrators
  • 1,384 posts

Posted July 23 2013 - 11:08 AM

I feel like a hypocrite, really. I don't know why, but you pressed the right buttons I guess. I think part of it was how hard you defended your views and you still were pretty rude about it (in my eye).
Things would have gone differently if you had stated that in your first reply.
I don't really have much faith in fact.
Fact changes daily, and that's far too viscous a situation for me to believe in.
Funny, huh?
For the longest time, I never could really understand what people felt when they were truly offended, because I haven't been since I was much younger.
I think I get it, now.
See, I had no idea that's what you meant by "Biblical Jesus". You really should have phrased that first post better.
No, there is no proof that any of that happened. I'll agree.
Not too sure, either.
 Gbprintercreepy.jpg



Religious debates are always the worst, so a subject change is always the best solution :D!

apskaviens-prieks-4.jpg

 

LET'S HUG AND MAKE UP!


dolphin.png


#90 DarkShadow6

DarkShadow6

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 127 posts

Posted July 23 2013 - 02:12 PM

apskaviens-prieks-4.jpg

LET'S HUG AND MAKE UP!
preferably not in that fashion
Signature%20New.png

#91 Top Dogfish

Top Dogfish

    Server Admin

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 384 posts

Posted July 23 2013 - 02:36 PM

09apr.jpg


slap_fight_sm.gif


#92 BowTiesAreCool28

BowTiesAreCool28

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 51 posts

Posted July 25 2013 - 04:15 PM

3rn5mi.jpg


 Posted Image


#93 Brownie

Brownie

    TDC Facebook Announcer

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 150 posts

Posted July 26 2013 - 12:54 AM

every-60-seconds-in-africa-a-minute-pass



#94 DarkShadow6

DarkShadow6

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 127 posts

Posted September 02 2013 - 01:11 PM

I almost forgot to visit this thread today


Signature%20New.png

#95 Top Dogfish

Top Dogfish

    Server Admin

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 384 posts

Posted September 03 2013 - 09:23 AM

N6GzxXa.png


slap_fight_sm.gif


#96 Benjamoose

Benjamoose

    Om nom nom!

  • Administrators
  • 1,384 posts

Posted September 03 2013 - 01:31 PM

I almost forgot to visit this thread today

 

iz_dat_cake-294477.jpg


dolphin.png


#97 Saint Ziggy

Saint Ziggy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 116 posts

Posted September 30 2013 - 03:53 PM

I just read this entire thread in one go,

 

Thanks for reminding me why I still play on TDC servers :D

 

I love this disfunctional family


The wages of sin is death. I'll throw in a candy bar, so work for me instead.
Minecraft username: ToastyPanda or Saint Ziggy


Posted Image





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users