Skip to comments.
Prove Christ exists, judge orders priest
Times Online UK ^
| January 3, 2006
| Richard Owen
Posted on 01/02/2006 4:30:26 PM PST by InvisibleChurch
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-174 next last
To: InvisibleChurch
Is this the modern version of Miracle on 34th Street? I wonder what William Frawley is telling this judge?
21
posted on
01/02/2006 4:43:29 PM PST
by
nickcarraway
(I'm Only Alive, Because a Judge Hasn't Ruled I Should Die...)
To: keithtoo
" This judge is a typical secularist who 'thinks he is thinking' when he spouts this Atheist nonsense."
I'm confused. Which judge is that?
22
posted on
01/02/2006 4:44:59 PM PST
by
Bob J
(RIGHTALK.com...a conservative alternative to NPR!)
To: All
Prove Jesus Christ existed, or what? I didn't get the "or what" part.
To: InvisibleChurch
"Signor Cascioli maintains that early Christian writers confused Jesus with John of Gamala, an anti-Roman Jewish insurgent in 1st-century Palestine. Church authorities were therefore guilty of substitution of persons."
Palestine, insurgent? huh?
To: InvisibleChurch
"God is dead."
- Nietzsche
"Nietzsche is dead."
- God
25
posted on
01/02/2006 4:48:23 PM PST
by
AnAmericanMother
(Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment))
To: InvisibleChurch
Father Righi just needs to go to court and read the book "A Case for Christ" to the judge. That should take approximately 2 years out of this courts' life as the plaintiff and the judge question different aspects of the reading.
26
posted on
01/02/2006 4:49:46 PM PST
by
taxesareforever
(Government is running amuck)
To: NormsRevenge
Italy has its own version of the 9th Circuit Circus, I see. There I fixed it for you.
27
posted on
01/02/2006 4:50:38 PM PST
by
p23185
(Why isn't attempting to take down a sitting Pres & his Admin considered Sedition?)
To: InvisibleChurch
Wouldn't you love to be the priest that hears this judges "confession"?
I think there is a line in CS Lewis' "Chronicles of Narnia" that basically says "Just because you cannot see it, does not mean that it is not there."
To: InvisibleChurch
29
posted on
01/02/2006 4:53:22 PM PST
by
Alex Murphy
(Proverbs 12:10)
To: AnAmericanMother
I finally found someone else who remembers that. ;)
To: InvisibleChurch
1st-century Palestine Very telling!
Prove there was such a thing.
To: Appalled but Not Surprised
Heh, heh. Not bad.
But don't forget, It was God who called for the contest, not Elijah. He was just following orders.
32
posted on
01/02/2006 4:55:13 PM PST
by
labette
(Continually discovering things I am completely ignorant about...since 1959)
To: InvisibleChurch
I believe that Josephus writings alone proves there was a historical Jesus. As far as I'm concerned, I don't believe that almost all of Jesus disciples died horrible deaths believing in a myth.
33
posted on
01/02/2006 4:56:00 PM PST
by
fish hawk
(creatio ex nihilo)
To: EveningStar
That graffito was written in the old Fifth Street Tunnel under the Downtown Connector, between the Georgia Tech campus and Midtown, back in the early 70s.
Saw it with my own eyes while going over to get the five for $5 roast beef sandwich special at Arby's.
34
posted on
01/02/2006 4:56:06 PM PST
by
AnAmericanMother
(Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment))
To: lexington minuteman 1775
Roger that.
It's Puddleglum confronting the witch in The Silver Chair.
35
posted on
01/02/2006 4:56:56 PM PST
by
AnAmericanMother
(Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment))
To: InvisibleChurch
Here's an interesting question --
Why does he get to discount the Gospels? Why should he be able to do that?
36
posted on
01/02/2006 4:57:52 PM PST
by
AnAmericanMother
(Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment))
To: InvisibleChurch
Under this atheist's logic no one can prove anything by writing a testimony down today, because tomorrow he will reject it. He is saying because the people who wrote their testimonies of Jesus are dead, we can't really prove they actually knew and saw him. By his rule we can't prove Hitler existed--those photos and written reports by people who are now dead can't be trusted.
37
posted on
01/02/2006 4:58:12 PM PST
by
Auntie Dem
(Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Terrorist lovers gotta go!)
To: fish hawk
Exactly.
12 men did not go out into the world to convert people to a Lie. Nobody risks their life for an idea that they know is a lie.
That's the real Proof that there was a Resurrection (and that He existed).
38
posted on
01/02/2006 5:01:50 PM PST
by
Nabber
To: Bob J
Well, here is a reference point for you: "AN ITALIAN judge has ordered....."
39
posted on
01/02/2006 5:04:08 PM PST
by
keithtoo
(Leftists/Democrats - Traitors, Haters and Vacillators)
To: InvisibleChurch
No, really...If I understand this correctly, he's basically saying that at least two and perhaps three respected and influential historians of the era either got conned or made stuff up. Is that right?
I'm sort of reminded of the Washington Mutual commercial about Jen, the integrity-challenged lawyer:
"Is DNA really [finger quotes] 'evidence'?"...[shakes head, mouths "no"]
40
posted on
01/02/2006 5:04:54 PM PST
by
RichInOC
("Kudos, Jen. We appreciate your bold honesty.")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-174 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson