Freethought Nation

presented by Acharya S and TruthBeKnown.com, online since 1995

It is currently Fri Feb 23, 2018 6:21 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


hello

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 137 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:12 pm 
Offline
Hercules

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 9:19 pm
Posts: 63
roger_pearse wrote:

Quote:
Now of course it would have better if no one every called them "disciples" to begin with...


Indeed so. Once people do, they have the little problem that it isn't true. And then they face the difficult problem: "do I keep saying it when people tell me it isn't true, because I like it so much" which makes them liars "or do I admit I was wrong"


i found the irony here astounding, roger, don't you believe in a literal historical jesus as your saviour roger? if that is the case then indeed it is you that faces a difficult problem.

pretty soon you will have to walk around with your eyes closed and your fingers in your ears, oh you've been doing that already in the thread here.

roger_pearse wrote:
-- but "writers", and rather ignorant ones.


roger, you calling writers who have helped unravel one of the most harmful tangles ever "ignorant" is like justin bieber saying jimi hendrix didnt have enough soul, laughable, or cryable, depending on how you look at it.

roger_pearse wrote:
and that's the end of the matter as far as evidence and reason are concerned.


but it isnt roger, unless you want to die believing in a horrible perversion of a mockery of the truth.

what this thread shows me is that YOU are really ignorant concerning the way the christos was perverted into a historical figure (idolatry)

literalism is the poison that is rendering you incapable of acknowledging what so many here are telling you.

roger_pearse wrote:
"or do I admit I was wrong" which such people have difficulty with. Live is a vale of sorrows, in such circumstances.


you've failed roger, you've failed to apprehend that christ is a symbol and the symbol is not the reality. you are like a guy with a great picture of food but cannot recieve nutrition because it is printed on cardboard.

but i wouldn't "wash my hands of you" with a "not my problem"

because it is my problem, i dont like to think of you drowning in your own ignorance clinging to semantic straws to save you from the oncoming deluge.

forsake literalism and live Roger.

Roger, come forth.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:17 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 1:32 am
Posts: 1988
Location: U.S.A.
Roger, you need to look again. Some of those scholars you call writers, do have Ph.D.s. So you really do need to get your facts straight before you jump to conclusions about them.

_________________
Mriana

Nonviolence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man. ~ Gandhi

Non-violence leads to the highest ethics, which is the goal of all evolution. Until we stop harming all other living beings, we are still savages. ~ Thomas A. Edison


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 04, 2010 10:37 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:17 pm
Posts: 2273
Location: Everywhere
tat tvam asi wrote:
Now of course it would have better if no one every called them "disciples" to begin with...


Roger Pearse wrote:
Indeed so. Once people do, they have the little problem that it isn't true. And then they face the difficult problem: "do I keep saying it when people tell me it isn't true, because I like it so much" which makes them liars "or do I admit I was wrong" which such people have difficulty with. Live is a vale of sorrows, in such circumstances.


I know what you're talking about here Roger and yet I don't see these people as "liars" at all. You haven't acknowledged that the 12 disciples of Christianity represent the 12 signs of the zodiac. I know that they do. The myth of Jesus' 12 disciples = representation of the 12 signs of the zodiac that follow the sun around the ecliptic path. The minute some one says that they were wrong for saying Mithras also had 12 disciples they are then immediately up against the underlying truth of the matter which is that the 12 disciples myth and the 12 signs of the zodiac around Mithras in the imagery are the very same reference to the fixed constellations that "follow" the sun around the ecliptic path. It's an allegory about the movement of the heavens above which is making use of the second function of mythology, the cosmological function.
Quote:
Joseph Campbell, a leading scholar in the fields of mythology and comparative religion, explains that myth has four basic functions: metaphysical/mystical, cosmological, sociological, and pedagogical. Its metaphysical function is to awaken us to the mystery and wonder of creation, to open our minds and our senses to an awareness of the mystical "ground of being," the source of all phenomena. Its cosmological function is to describe the "shape" of the cosmos, the universe, our total world, so that the cosmos and all contained within it become vivid and alive for us, infused with meaning and significance; every corner, every rock, hill, stone, and flower has its place and its meaning in the cosmological scheme which the myth provides. Its sociological function is to pass down "the law," the moral and ethical codes for people of that culture to follow, and which help define that culture and its prevailing social structure. Its pedagogical function is to lead us through particular rites of passage that define the various significant stages of our lives-from dependency to maturity to old age, and finally, to our deaths, the final passage. The rites of passage bring us into harmony with the "ground of being" (a term often used by Joseph Campbell to refer to an unnamed, unspecified universal mystical power) and allow us to make the journey from one stage to another with a sense of comfort and purpose.
http://brainstorm-services.com/wcu-2004/mythology.html


It's far deeper than you are acknowledging so far. In both cases we are looking at the cosmological function of mythology when approaching Mithras surrounded by the twelve signs of the zodiac and the 12 tribes of Israel / 12 disciples of Jesus etc. etc. We would be "liars" if we were to suggest that the two (Mithras and Jesus surrounding 12) are not the same and that's the root of the problem here Roger. On one hand I can give you credit for pointing out that no known Mithraic texts refer to the 12 signs of the zodiac - sometimes personified - which are surrounding Mithras as his "12 disciples", but the 12 signs of the zodiac surrounding Mithras are still the very same as the 12 disciples of Jesus in the end.

So you're dealing with a half truth type of argument that crumbles apart in the end of it all and I know that all too well because I've already "reasoned" and "rationalized" my way through this whole thing to the bitter end of it all. You've demonstrated here time and again that you haven't taken this issue to it's full depth and you also reveal to me your personal struggle to understand why certain writers in the past and present have styled the 12 of Mithras as his "disciples" or some other designation which means followers of the sun in the end anyways. And this personal struggle of yours obviously comes from your Christianized perspective. You have the blinders on right now Roger, which is the real root of the problem here in terms of comprehension. The psuedo-skepticism you've been displaying stems directly from that initial problem and that much seems fairly obvious to everyone else posting here in the thread so far. You yourself can't manage to see it "tho". :wink:

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 2:08 am 
Offline
Dionysus

Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 10:56 pm
Posts: 280
I can see that roger isn't interested in honest discourse, he is just willing to shore up his own faith. Ignore the troll and stop feeding him is my advice now and I am going to follow what I say this time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 10:29 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 804
I really enjoyed Acharya’s new article Mithras - The Pagan Christ.

I see Mithraism through the cosmic prism of the esoteric vision of the Great Year as the structure of time. The Tauroctony, symbolising the victory of the man over the bull-scorpion axis, depicts the religious symbolism of the precession of the equinoxes from the Taurus-Scorpio axis to the Aries-Libra axis in about 2150 BC. The constellation Taurus is surrounded by Perseus, Orion and Aries. All three are candidates for the Mithraic man who kills the bull.

Jesus Christ is ascended into the sky as the Aries-Pisces cusp, marking the alpha omega point where the sun precessed from one Great Year to the next at the BC/AD turning point. Mithras is similarly ascended into the heavens as the previous age cusp, the movement of the spring point from the aeon of the bull to the aeon of the ram. The Gnostic cosmology of the aeons is decisive for the mystery religions as the link between cosmic observation of the ages and human history. Christianity aggressively eradicated memory of the mysteries of the aeons as a central goal of the politics of a literal historical false faith, but it is hard to commit the perfect crime, and evidence is abundant throughout the New Testament. The ‘Christ Conspiracy’ that Acharya describes is a church conspiracy so vast and world-defining that it would be hard to imagine it really happened, except that it is the only coherent explanation for the evidence.

The section in Acharya’s essay that I would like to focus on here is this:
Quote:
…Mithra's early Indian role as a sun god. As Francis Legge says in Forerunners and Rivals in Christianity:
The Vedic Mitra was originally the material sun itself, and the many hundreds of votive inscriptions left by the worshippers of Mithras to "the unconquered Sun Mithras," to the unconquered solar divinity (numen) Mithras, to the unconquered Sun-God (deus) Mithra, and allusions in them to priests (sacerdotes), worshippers (cultores), and temples (templum) of the same deity leave no doubt open that he was in Roman times a sun-god. (Legge, II, 240)
By the Roman legionnaires, Mithra—or Mithras, as he began to be known in the Greco-Roman world—was called "the divine Sun, the Unconquered Sun." He was said to be "Mighty in strength, mighty ruler, greatest king of gods! O Sun, lord of heaven and earth, God of Gods!" Mithra was also deemed "the mediator" between heaven and earth, a role often ascribed to the god of the sun.
An inscription by a "T. Flavius Hyginus" dating to around 80 to 100 AD/CE in Rome dedicates an altar to "Sol Invictus Mithras"—"The Unconquered Sun Mithra"—revealing the hybridization reflected in other artifacts and myths. Regarding this title, Dr. Richard L. Gordon, honorary professor of Religionsgeschichte der Antike at the University of Erfurt, Thuringen, remarks:
It is true that one...cult title...of Mithras was, or came to be, Deus Sol Invictus Mithras (but he could also be called... Deus Invictus Sol Mithras, Sol Invictus Mithras...
...Strabo, 15.3.13 (p. 732C), basing his information on a lost work, either by Posidonius (ca 135-51 BC) or by Apollodorus of Artemita (first decades of 1 cent. BC), states baldly that the Western Parthians "call the sun Mithra." The Roman cult seems to have taken this existing association and developed it in their own special way. (Gordon, "FAQ." (Emph. added.))
"Mithra is who the monuments proclaim him—the Unconquered Sun."
As concerns Mithra's identity, Mithraic scholar Dr. Roger Beck says:
Mithras...is the prime traveller, the principal actor...on the celestial stage which the tauctony [bull-slaying] defines.... He is who the monuments proclaim him—the Unconquered Sun. (Beck (2004), 274)
In an early image, Mithra is depicted as a sun disc in a chariot drawn by white horses, another solar motif that made it into the Jesus myth, in which Christ is to return on a white horse. (Rev 6:2; 19:11)

This apparent identity between sun worship and Mithraism helps us to interpret the ancient mentality. The ancients were far more acute in their religious sensibility than they are often depicted. The idiot Christian dogma that insists that imaginary entities are real has poisoned the well regarding understanding the ancients. The apologist logic is, we say God is an entity, therefore ancients who also talk about Gods must also be talking about entities. However, with the Mithraic identification between Mithra and the sun, it seems that the ancient attitude recognised that language about Gods was primarily metaphorical. Socrates was killed for pointing this out, but it remains plausible that his death was more for revealing the mystery than any genuine shock about his observation that the Gods of the Pantheon were not actual entities.
Identification between Mithra and the sun legitimizes further speculation about the attributes of Mithra. Just as the sun travels through twelve months each year, Mithra, like Christ, should logically be expected to sit at the centre of the cosmos surrounded by twelve followers. Just as the sun precessed from Taurus to Aries at the dawn of the age of Aries, Mithra as the sun should be expected to be symbolized by the movement of the spring point from the bull to the ram, as depicted in the tauroctony. It is all a matter of theological logic and coherence of an enframing worldview. Once we see the identity of Mithras as the sun, the images of the tauroctony surrounded by the twelve signs fall into place. Language about disciples, whether in Christianity or Mithraism, is primarily metaphor for the observed reality that the sun has twelve months each year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 11:48 am 
Offline
Hercules
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2008 5:07 pm
Posts: 56
Location: Vaikunta
:x

OH... MY... GOD!!!!!!!! Stop it already, god d**n it!!!! Enough! Just STOOOP!!!

The 12 disciples thing is OVER. NONE of you will bring it up ever again!! We have moved on pages ago, so...

STICK TO THE SUBJECT!!!!


That being said, here, as promised, is the link to Roger's new thread for the 2nd item on the list, which I promised him and he promised you-


Roger Pearse's #2 item on the list


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 12:36 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:17 pm
Posts: 2273
Location: Everywhere
Robert, that was a very comprehensive post displaying an in-depth understanding of the symbolism. How in the world is it possible for a Christian like Roger here to understand this when he's too busy trying to defend the faith from accusations of unoriginality? This entire argument is based on a knee jerk reaction to accusations of the Christ myth copying from Mithras, among others. So I guess Roger thinks that if he can demand textual evidence speaking of Mithra with 12 disciples and there isn't any, then he's somehow proven that the Jesus myth did not copy from the Mithras mythology. And this is a very deceptive apologetic tactic because it serves to try and distract attention away from what the 12 disciples of Jesus are representing in the Jesus myth. Notice how Roger will <snip> all of the relevant sections of my and FTL quotes when reposting them back at us? He's consciously trying to be a sneaky dick, or sneaky "roger" as it were. And he's taken a bit of a "rogering" along the way. :lol:

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 12:40 pm 
Offline
Hercules
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2008 5:07 pm
Posts: 56
Location: Vaikunta
Tat Tvam Asi wrote:
there is no textual data that confirms Mithra had two torchbearers. There is only imagery to go by


WRONG! There is neither text OR imagery that "Mithra had two torchbearers". We only ever see him with astrological bodies- the zodiac, the sun and moon, and THE EQUINOXES!!!!

There is NO EVIDENCE from primary sources that proves Mithras had two torchbearers!

Zodiac=/="disciples"

Equinoxes=/="torchbearers"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 2:17 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:17 pm
Posts: 2273
Location: Everywhere
Actually, Vishnu:

A) The 12 disciples = the 12 signs of the zodiac and

B) The two men bearing torches (one pointed up and one pointed down) = the two equinoxes of increasing and decreasing light.

Image

Now according to Rogers logic regarding the 12 signs surrounding Mithra we must also reject the personified images of the two equinoxes as referring to two torchbearers because we have no texts speaking of Mithras having two torchbearers, we only have these images (shown above) to go by. We have the images of two torchbearers, just as we have images of the zodiac personified, but we have no written texts that give Mithra 12 human followers or 2 human torchbearers. But it's obvious that there was some aspect of the mythos which causes images like the one's we've been seeing which GodAlmighty pointed out earlier, concerning the importance of imagery which can reveal variants in the mythologies which didn't survive as text.

Roger doesn't seem to want to engage you in this little exercise because he either doesn't understand what you're getting at by using his own logic applied to the personified equinox imagery or he does realize what it does to his argument about the 12 disciples of Mithra and is consciously ignoring you in order to avoid embarrassment. In the process you've thrown several people through a loop and it's been fun, but if you care to drop the sarcasm now and make the argument clearly perhaps Roger and others will better understand where this is all going and how the equinox / torchbearer argument effects Roger's 12 signs of the zodiac / disciples argument.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 6:21 pm 
Offline
Hercules
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2008 5:07 pm
Posts: 56
Location: Vaikunta
Tat Tvam Asi wrote:
Actually, Vishnu:

A) The 12 disciples = the 12 signs of the zodiac and

B) The two men bearing torches (one pointed up and one pointed down) = the two equinoxes of increasing and decreasing light.

Image


:facepalm

To quote Bohemian Rhapsody- "No! No! No! No! No! No! No!"

For the umpteenth time, there is NOTHING in that pic that indicates Mithras had two torch bearers. Those two figures you project your false claim upon are obviously the representatives of the equinoxes just as the two figures in the upper corners are obviously the representatives of the sun & moon.

I see no torches in there and no text or inscription to interpret to us just what they are holding. I mean, lol, for crying out loud, the figure on the left has the end of his object covered up by the bull, so just how in the hell you presume to know that's a torch when you can't even see it is just dumbfounding. And what's worse, is, did you not even notice or take into account the fact that he's holding it UPSIDE DOWN!!! Who would hold a torch that way?

And as for the figure on the right, same as above, I see nothing remotely resembling a torch there nor any text interpreting for us just what it is he is holding. Looks to me much like a duster or a broom, even perhaps like a leafy branch, and that would actually make sense, seeing as how the waving of leafy branches, for example, like palm branches, in adoration of kings and deities was a common practice back in those times.

But the honest assessment is that we just don't know, and can never know since just as with the zodiac/disciples dilemma, no text exists that tells us what they are holding, and so we cannot just assume, since, you know, I'm merely very resistant to inference in place of data.

So there still remains no evidence that Mithras had two torchbearers or twelve disciples.

We only ever see him with astronomical representatives- sun & moon, equinoxes, and zodiac, etc.

So.. you know the deal... stick to the subject, etc.

Roger Pearse's #2 item on the list

All the best,
Roger's #1 fan & emulator of his argumentative logic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 7:48 pm 
Offline
Hercules

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 9:19 pm
Posts: 63
it's interesting, while we were waiting for roger to hand us our ass on a platter (an interesting variation on the john the baptist motif), i was looking at mithras giving that bull a hard time (metaphor anybody?) and i was reminded of a bible verse of all things...

Rev 17:11 and the beast that was, and is not, he also is eighth, and out of the seven he is, and to destruction he doth go away.

a wild animal being destroyed, how mithraic

and of course one thing leads to another

Exo 32:20 And he took the calf which they had made, and burnt it in the fire, and ground it to powder, and strawed it upon the water, and made the children of Israel drink of it.

once you ditch literalism (the ditch the blind lead the blind into) the themes and motif's start to appear, it's like having new eyes to see and new ears to hear.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 7:55 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:17 pm
Posts: 2273
Location: Everywhere
Quote:
For the umpteenth time, there is NOTHING in that pic that indicates Mithras had two torch bearers. Those two figures you project your false claim upon are obviously the representatives of the equinoxes just as the two figures in the upper corners are obviously the representatives of the sun & moon.

Ok, I'll continue to play along here. So we have established that the two people holding something in these images represent the equinoxes. And the equinoxes mark where day light becomes more dominant than night at the vernal equinox, and where the night becomes more dominant than day light at the autumnal equinox. On one side of the image light is going up signified by the person holding something up, while on the other side day light is going down signified by the person holding something down. That's what the two equinoxes are just to set the record straight before moving forward. So let's now proceed from that point of clarification.
Quote:
I see no torches in there and no text or inscription to interpret to us just what they are holding. I mean, lol, for crying out loud, the figure on the left has the end of his object covered up by the bull, so just how in the hell you presume to know that's a torch when you can't even see it is just dumbfounding. And what's worse, is, did you not even notice or take into account the fact that he's holding it UPSIDE DOWN!!! Who would hold a torch that way?

According Roger Pears's logic that is. But here is yet another image of the same scene starting at 19:20 in this video LINK.

Now in the case of both the image provided above from Rogers own website and in the video link I've just given, we must ask the question of what do the equinoxes mean once again? They have to do with solar day light increasing and decreasing during a given year. And so it's more than obvious that the two personified images which do represent the two equinoxes - as we all agree - and which are holding something pointing up on one side and pointing down on the other, are being used to represent the increasing and decreasing of day light during the annual year. And for this reason it's more than obvious to Mithraic scholars that we are looking at two torchbearer images which represent the light of the sun rising and falling throughout the annual year. Palm branches do not symbolize what is happening to day light at the two equinoxes in a way that compares to interpreting these images as two torches, and therefore can be ruled out as what these two figures which are representing the two equinoxes are holding in their hands. And the fact that one of the obvious torchbearer's are holding a torch down - which is hidden in some images but visible in others - shows that we are not dealing with a literal person who holds a literal torch down because torches are not held that way. The torch represents the light of the sun decreasing into the winter solstice time of year and that's why it's held downward which doesn't make sense if taken literally. If the idea is to analyze this argument from the perspective of how Roger himself would be making it, then that's what I'm trying to do here.

The biggest question of all is why has Roger been so quite about the torchbearer scene through all of this? Perhaps it's because he's concerned only with the 12 signs of the zodiac as being referred to as the 12 disciples of Mithras by some writers. But wait, the same applies to the two torchbearer's as well. You see, they are likewise reflected into the Christ myth specifically as the two criminals that were placed on either side of Jesus during the crucifixion scene myth. One criminal was going up to heaven or paradise with Jesus as it were, while the other was destined to hell below. The NT writers were able to sneak the two equinox motif found in Mithraic imagery as well as the 12 signs of the zodiac motif surrounding it all. So it is very relevant to this discussion of Mithra as the pagan Christ to include the two torchbearer's and Roger ought to start commenting on the issue so that we can all follow how he tries to "reason" his way through this problem as well. Using "logical" deduction of course. :wink:

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 8:48 pm 
Offline
Hercules
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2008 5:07 pm
Posts: 56
Location: Vaikunta
Image
Oh yeah!? Well... uh... well... um...

*emulation of typical flustered knee-jerk response in 3... 2... 1...*

Tat Tvam Asi wrote:
Ok, I'll contin<SNIP!><ABUSE!><DODGE!><SNIPFTW!>


So... uh... YEAH! Take that! Uh... just... um...

STICK TO THE SUBJECT!!!!


All the best,
Roger's #1 fan & emulator of his argumentative logic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 10:16 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:17 pm
Posts: 2273
Location: Everywhere
I thought so... :lol:

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 5:43 am 
Offline
Thor

Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 10:37 am
Posts: 48
I notice that my comments have been edited so that they are out of order, incomplete, and thereby the argument I was making is lost. This is rather silly. I've reattached two pieces of my comment. Whether posters here feel quite comfortable with the counter "argument" made against my comment is not for me to say, of course.

youkrst wrote:
roger_pearse wrote:
Quote:
Now of course it would have better if no one every called them "disciples" to begin with...


Indeed so. Once people do, they have the little problem that it isn't true. And then they face the difficult problem: "do I keep saying it when people tell me it isn't true, because I like it so much" which makes them liars "or do I admit I was wrong"


i found the irony here astounding, roger, don't you believe <snip irrelevant religious insults>

roger_pearse wrote:
"or do I admit I was wrong" which such people have difficulty with. Live is a vale of sorrows, in such circumstances.


you've failed roger, you've failed ... you are like a guy with ...


I don't think this is about me. It's about the argument being made, which is worthless. It doesn't acquire worth from being defended like this, either.

Quote:
roger_pearse wrote:
Not "scholars" -- but "writers", and rather ignorant ones.


roger, you calling writers who have helped unravel one of the most harmful tangles ever "ignorant" is like justin bieber ... <snip irrelevant claims>


Wouldn't it be more rational to find out whether what I say about these people is true? Research the subject, in other words?

All the best,

Roger Pearse


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 137 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group