Catholic Church no longer swears Bible to be all true

[UDawg]

Not in population but number of Mosques/churches. I forget where I read it, but I do recall Muslims buying old churches, leveling the church and building a mosque on top of it, as a mockery. Anglican is the most in population.

I asked my brother, and he said it was on the CBS evening news when they arrested that Muslim cleric with no arms, they just mentioned that little trivia.

I cant find it, I have 56k and it's taking forever...nevermind, my brother has made me look foolish. Now take it with a grain of salt
I think you are right. Christianity in England id dying in fact it is dying all over Europe. As far as active membership I am sure Muslims out number Christians. I could be wrong but It wouldn't surprise me if they did.

[Shamrock]

I think you are right. Christianity in England id dying in fact it is dying all over Europe. As far as active membership I am sure Muslims out number Christians. I could be wrong but It wouldn't surprise me if they did.

correct....based on weekly active members of each religion:

Muslim: 930,000
Christian: 916,000

[AlphaWolf_HK]

Muslims breed faster apparently, as suicide bombing doesn't seem to keep their numbers down :D

[sytaylor]

This is a factually false statement. You can agree or disagree wither there is a God or not but the events in the bible have been proven through acheology.

I'd qualify that with *some* events have been proven.

[sytaylor]

To back up a little of what UDawg has said here...those Catholic priests said that, to appease the muslims in England...in which 63% of England is Islam/Muslim. Christianity in England is a minority

Hardly, hate to pull a UDAWG but try living here. I have no clue where you get this idea from but its utterly wrong. So more christians are less active in their community, boo them. That 63% figure is misleading, basless and wrong. Muslims don't need appeasing here, catholic bishops are being sensible trying to balance against the number of idoits wanting to hunt them with pitch forks.

[Grrrpoop]

Never heard of a single instance of Muslims buying old churches and replacing them with mosques. That would have made the headlines and evening news for sure. Searches on Google news and BBC.com don't show anything up either.

The guy with no arms is probably Abu Hamza (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3752517.stm), but it's just his hands that are missing (and an eye) through being utterly crap at clearing landmines.

Given that Muslims per head of the population are still very much in the minority, the 63% figure seems unlikely.

[Demigod]

There was one in manchester uni where an old chapel was converted to a mosque. (Its now been demolished and a carpark sits on the site. There is also a Sikh temple in manchester that used to be an RC church.

If you go to southern spain you will see the opposite, where mosques have been converted to churches, southern spain was an islamic country for sveral hundred years after all.

I doubt you will see it one the news as to be hionest what is so newsworthy about it?

[Shamrock]

Never heard of a single instance of Muslims buying old churches and replacing them with mosques. That would have made the headlines and evening news for sure. Searches on Google news and BBC.com don't show anything up either.

The guy with no arms is probably Abu Hamza (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3752517.stm), but it's just his hands that are missing (and an eye) through being utterly crap at clearing landmines.

Given that Muslims per head of the population are still very much in the minority, the 63% figure seems unlikely.

http://www.global-prayer-digest.org/monthdetails/2003/md-February-2003.asp
Already, many well-known churches in the U.K. have been converted into mosques. Some Muslims have called for the Islamic evangelization of England, a call that has alarmed Christians and secularists alike.

maybe they mean in times past? who knows

[Ghosthunter]

The bible has been written by over 60 different authors over 1,000 years.

It is a great storybook and has some interesting stories, but is nowhere to be used as historical work. Most of the stories IMO was just older myths from pagan ideas retold.


Just as we think of Greek and Roman mythology as mythology, in 2,000 years or more we can be saying the same thing of Christinaity mythology.

Each era there are different religions for different sets of people.

[sytaylor]

http://www.global-prayer-digest.org/monthdetails/2003/md-February-2003.asp


maybe they mean in times past? who knows

Biased article with a clear agenda. NEXT.

[Tygerwoody]

Oh boy... I can see this getting movied to the politics and religion forum pretty quick :p
umm... Didn't I post this is the P and R forum? This is the first time i have looked at the thread since i posted it. I could have swore i posted it in the P and R forum(which is what it is in now)

[Ninjaman09]

Biased article with a clear agenda. NEXT.
This is coming from the same guy who swears Harry Potter is the spawn of Satan. ;)

I thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster every day that I'm not that dense.

[DaveW]

The Dead Sea Scrolls have confirmed the accurracy of what we know.


The same dead sea scrolls that were written between 200 BC and 68AD, yet don't make any mention to Jesus? They contain text from every book of the Hebrew old testament, except for the book of Esther. Yet the birth and life of a man who was supposedly the son of God was strangely not even mentioned.

[Ghosthunter]

The same dead sea scrolls that were written between 200 BC and 68AD, yet don't make any mention to Jesus? They contain text from every book of the Hebrew old testament, except for the book of Esther. Yet the birth and life of a man who was supposedly the son of God was strangely not even mentioned.


That is true, I dont even believe Jesus historically ever existed. Outside the bible there is no solid evidence of Jesus ever being mentioned in any classical historian text.

But you know this will be debated forever, if you believe in the bible then no amount of proof showing otherwise will realize, and the opposite is true as well.

I say believe what you want as long as you dont force your values on me.

[sytaylor]

This is coming from the same guy who swears Harry Potter is the spawn of Satan. ;)

I thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster every day that I'm not that dense.

Yeah normally I would have gone to lengths to make sure it was clear why the article was biased, but in this case its so obvious it would be a watse of my time. So I'm at work trashing superklye on aim instead...

[Sazar]

Yeah normally I would have gone to lengths to make sure it was clear why the article was biased, but in this case its so obvious it would be a watse of my time. So I'm at work trashing superklye on aim instead...

You loose by default. He'll spam you into oblivion :afro:

[Sazar]

The same dead sea scrolls that were written between 200 BC and 68AD, yet don't make any mention to Jesus? They contain text from every book of the Hebrew old testament, except for the book of Esther. Yet the birth and life of a man who was supposedly the son of God was strangely not even mentioned.

Honestly its a matter of interpretation and the fact is very few people have access to the whole lotta the scrolls.

You can't say one way or the other definitively what the scrolls say so it is not out of the realm of possibility that a historical link might exist.

[Zelda_fan]

In fact, I know that my sig has made people email me and ask me to delete it, but I'm not...because it's the truth.

It's amazing. What I could argue for pages and pages, the Bible simply sums up in one verse.

[DiscipleDOC]

It's amazing. What I could argue for pages and pages, the Bible simply sums up in one verse.
Heh...and the nice thing about it is, I don't have to say a word.

[CybrSage]

That is true, I dont even believe Jesus historically ever existed. Outside the bible there is no solid evidence of Jesus ever being mentioned in any classical historian text.

But you know this will be debated forever, if you believe in the bible then no amount of proof showing otherwise will realize, and the opposite is true as well.

I say believe what you want as long as you dont force your values on me.

Josephus was a Jewish historian who lived circa 37-100 AD. His Hebrew name was Joseph ben Mattathias, and he received an excellent education in Jerusalem. After leading a failed revolt of the Jewish forces against Rome, Josephus was captured and became a Roman citizen. He served as pensioner of several Flavian emperors and is most widely known by the name he then acquired, Flavius Josephus.

Around 93 AD., Josephus published Jewish Antiquities, a history of the Jews in twenty books. Though not a prominent subject of his writing, John the Baptist, Jesus of Nazareth, and Jesus' brother James are all mentioned in Jewish Antiquities. This represents the earliest historical record of Jesus from someone who was a professional historian.
http://www.jesus-institute.org/life-of-jesus-ancient/jesus-josephus.shtml

Here is more info on Josephus:
http://members.aol.com/FLJOSEPHUS/home.htm

He was a well respected historian. Modern historians cite his works in their own works.

[Ghosthunter]

http://www.jesus-institute.org/life-of-jesus-ancient/jesus-josephus.shtml

Here is more info on Josephus:
http://members.aol.com/FLJOSEPHUS/home.htm

He was a well respected historian. Modern historians cite his works in their own works.


Have you read his work? If you have you would know he briefly mentions Jesus, I mean briefly..and it does not even fit in with his writing. Many scholars believe his work was tempered with by Constantine and when the Church was being formed.

Josephus covers the roman jewish war, and you would think there would be a lot more about Jesus if he really existed, was crucified and rose from the dead.



Like I said earlier we can debate this forever

[UDawg]

umm... Didn't I post this is the P and R forum? This is the first time i have looked at the thread since i posted it. I could have swore i posted it in the P and R forum(which is what it is in now)
This was in the open forum bro and it was later moved into here. ;)

[UDawg]

The same dead sea scrolls that were written between 200 BC and 68AD, yet don't make any mention to Jesus? They contain text from every book of the Hebrew old testament, except for the book of Esther. Yet the birth and life of a man who was supposedly the son of God was strangely not even mentioned.
Oh for Pete's sake. They were written by JEWS NOT CHRISTIANS. They DID NOT BELIEVE Jesus was the Son of God so why would they put His name in there. They believe he was a blasphemer. So it isn't strange.

Again I am tired of the bubble gum approach to the bible. People with little actual knowledge spewing poo form their rectums.

[UDawg]

That is true, I dont even believe Jesus historically ever existed. Outside the bible there is no solid evidence of Jesus ever being mentioned in any classical historian text.

Yes and we didn't actually land on the moon either. It was a sound stage in Area 51 that had hand puppets and jelly doughnuts for union break time. BAHAHAHAHA!!!1

What you just said is such utter non-sense. There isn't any respectable archeologist that believes Jesus didn't exist. Now put on your tin-foil hat cuz they mind suckers are coming. :udawg: thanks for the laugh.

[DiscipleDOC]

Again I am tired of the bubble gum approach to the bible. People with little actual knowledge spewing poo form their rectums.
That's gotta hurt! :eek:

The bible says that arguing with people that are not knowledgeable is foolish. I will take that approach from now on.