Since it IS Christmas time......

Actually a whole lot of faith and a lot of closemindedness.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

[Deleted]Edited by roger pearse, : No reason given.

[Deleted]Edited by roger pearse, : No reason given.

Basically, my worldview is a 3 part system:A) Acceptance
B) Skepticism
C) RejectionThe 3 are based on evidence physical versus hearsayIn the A Category are items which have physical evidence and which can be falsified. examples:Plate-Tectonics
Gravity
Evolution
Oxidation-Reduction
Periodic LawIn the B Category are items which have some evidence but not enough or concrete enough to be in category A. examples:Abiogenesis
String Theory
Alien Abduction
Bigfoot
ESPIn the C category are items which have no concrete evidence only hearsay. examples:Magic
Supernatural Beings
Faith Healing
Homeopathy
Young Earth

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

[Deleted]Edited by roger pearse, : No reason given.

roger pearse:Your allegations that I could conceivably be acting "in good faith" are utterly baseless and constitute a vile misrepresentation of my character. You have my glove, sir.Catholic Scientist:For whatever tiny aspect of your didactic lesson might be construed as "defending me", I thank you.In case there is any confusion on the part of our readers as to the actual content of this disagreement, I will summarize. After a complaint from Indo-Iranian scholars in 1971 to the effect that western understanding of eastern religious thought was crippled by classical emphasis on western mystery religions, a group of academics at the First International Congress of Mithraic Studies agreed to be the goat and take advantage of sloppy research by 19th-century compiler Franz Cumont to systematically challenge every single conclusion about Mithras that had been propagated by icons like J G Frazer and Jessie Weston. This revival in a stagnant field was a great success, producing wonderful cooperation with living religions and opening up a dialogue that has improved our understanding of Mazdaism in particular. But some of the underlying challenges were doomed to fail on simple grounds of philological continuity. The current champion of this approach, Roger Beck, has happily conceded that pre-CE interactions between Parthia/Anatolia and the western empires do support the minimal position that the name and superficial attributes of Roman Mithraism are reflective of the Achaemenid sun deity, not simply made up on the spot in the Capitol.Arguing that Mitra and Mithras are different people because the one has a thousand ears and the other heads a secret society is similar to arguing that Yeshu and Jesus are distinct entities because one celebrates the Passover while the other transubstantiates his body and blood in the miracle of the Real Presence. That is, while useful as a pederastic technique, to emphasize profound contrasts between the views of different religions, it requires a suspension of disbelief to deny the equal validity of the numerous similarities subject to comparison. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen, there's currently a strong movement to insist that Yeshu has nothing to do with Jesus, and that the name is actually an acronym for yimmach shemo vezikhro "May his name be obliterated". But no one who is really in the know takes these approaches as absolutes. The numerous pseudo-Christian scholars who quote-mine the work of Beck, Merkelbach, Hinnels and Gordon are no better than the people dragging Woese and Ruse in out of context to claim that they support "Intelligent Design".The relationship between Mitra, Mithra, and Mithras is very similar to the evolution of Hastur in the work of Ambrose Bierce, Robert W Chambers, and August Derleth. In Bierce he is a pithy shepherd-god, in Chambers an eponymous allusion from which the name of a culture is derived, and in Derleth a monstrous sky-being who has a material influence on earth whenever his celestial latitude lines up properly with his victim. In much the same way, in Hindu texts Mitra is one among many gods, in post-Zarathustra Mazdaism he becomes a powerful subordinate to the dualistic representation of fire and light, and in the Empire he is reworked in light of the emphasis on precession to take on the position of the "new" deity responsible for spinning the sky. He's currently the Laughing Buddha honored by numerous people with incense, regardless of their avowed religion. He has, in short, come a long way from his original conceptualization. (No, I will not entertain the argument as to who the current "future Buddha" is, under any circumstances.) RCS:Sorry man, no offense to the Vedanta. You may not be aware of the context of my post. I'm replying to someone on "the same side" as me, with the specious argument that Nuh uh, Saturnalia isn't Christmas, Christmas is actually Mithras. This is a parody of recent funny moments when people on "the other side" have been ambushed by nit-picks from their allies on similar lines, as for example No the kingdom isn't the apocalypse, the church is actually the kingdom. Clues as to what I'm up to include indirect allusions to Robert E Howard's character Conan, who swears by Crom and Mitra, reference to a Zoroastrian "angel", and an improper pluralization of the Seinfeld fictional holiday Festivus. And a song, the song is really the whole point of my particular selection.Immediately above me, also just moments after midnight Eastern Standard Time, you will see Buzsaw, a rather devout person and the main victim of these "friendly fire" attacks, pushing a pagan synthesis as an explanation for the holiday with a much better overview than myself and equally good wishes for everyone in the fray. This sort of "Feast of Fools" role-reversal is part of the traditional celebration of the winter holidays in our culture, and counter-intuitively helps promote "peace on earth, good will to men" and other good things I'm sure Jesus and Mitra and whoever else may or may not be paying attention would be inclined to approve of. You can see this renewed good fellowship in action a bit later in the thread, when I request the whys and wherefores of the persecution of seculars and support my ignorance by exalting the humble Christmas pine, and Buz immediately steps in to back up my reference with a splendid verse from Jeremiah and a side-swipe at the shepherds watching over their sheep in the field. Chestnuts roasting over an open fire, for everyone!. . . A monk asked Ummon, "What is Ummon's melody?" Ummon replied: "The twenty-fifth of December!"Edited by Iblis, : the master of souls, before whom emperors have bowed

[Deleted]Edited by roger pearse, : No reason given.

Aren't you the same fellow who was attacking some poor brother's literary laud to the Lord of Light on his own feast day with still-unsubstantiated self-stroking? You're just a mass of contradictions lately, aren't you? Where's my glove, felon? You are using it to do "the stranger" right now, aren't you?

You did not not ask my moral view. It is simply whatever I would not want done to me, my family my friends or my possessions, would be immoral. ie: murder, robbery, rape, assault, arson, etc. ie, that which would be immoral to anyone with any scruples at all, no religious views required, because I have none. Also none of the list I gave in my last post are beliefs or disbeliefs , as I said I need concrete physical evidence, not faith.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

[Deleted]Edited by roger pearse, : No reason given.Edited by roger pearse, : No reason given.

No ma'am, the 7-year periods referred to in tractate Sanhedrin and throughout the Mishna and Gemara are the ones specified in the Torah. These differ from the superficially similar periods in Daniel not only in that there is an extra super-sabbatical year thrown after each group of seven sevens; but also, more importantly, in that there isn't any limited number of them specified in the text. That's why they are debating which particular septenate, and their specifications differ profoundly from what Daniel says about his "weeks". This shouldn't come as a surprise. The Talmud is a commentary on the Law, with some interpretive reference to the Prophets. To get any serious discussion of the content of the disputed texts like Daniel you have to go to the Midrash.

Roger,Glad you decided to add to our diversity. We have a wide variety of forums for your debating pleasure.As members, we are guests on this board and as guests we are asked to put forth our best behavior.
Please read the Forum Guidelines carefully and understand the wishes of our host. Rule #4: Points should be supported with evidence and/or reasoned argumentation. Address rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration. Avoid bare assertions. Readers like to learn as well as debate. Stating that someone's position is wrong without reasoned argument or supporting evidence, does nothing to move the discussion forward or to educate/inspire readers.We also frown on useless one word or one line posts. If you have any questions or comments concerning this post, please send a message to AdminPD using the messaging link at the top of the page. Again, welcome and fruitful debating.

---

Usually, in a well-conducted debate, speakers are either emotionally uncommitted or can preserve sufficient detachment to maintain a coolly academic approach.-- Encylopedia Brittanica, on debate

quote:

---

As members, we are guests on this board and as guests we are asked to put forth our best behavior.

---

Such a policy would seem entirely appropriate. But post #113 and others by "Iblis" appear to be trolls, designed (in vain) to produce an angry response. I must ask why you have directed this to me?

quote:

---

Rule #4: Points should be supported with evidence and/or reasoned argumentation. Address rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration. Avoid bare assertions.

---

Um, why do you direct this to *me*, when the post to which I responded was guilty of these? Or do you assert that your forum requires visitors to treat any assertion as requiring an essay?Let people justify their assertions if they can. When they cannot, there is no obligation on anyone to write essays about it.

quote:

---

Readers like to learn as well as debate. Stating that someone's position is wrong without reasoned argument or supporting evidence, does nothing to move the discussion forward or to educate/inspire readers.

---

This is sad stuff. Either apply this policy to the original poster, or else not to me either.

quote:

---

We also frown on useless one word or one line posts.

---

Do you? But I notice no rebuke of intentionally abusive ones, to which I replied in that polite manner if brief manner. That's OK, then?I have rarely seen a moderator intervention that was quite as contemptible as this. A moderator who attacks the courteous poster, while allowing crude trolling of that poster without remark; that demands I prove things, while allowing assertion without evidence, is beneath contempt.Kindly remove all my posts from this forum. No forum can operate with this level of bias.Sincerely,Roger Pearse

If you are experiencing problems with other posters (or even with moderators)... you can express your issues over here:
Message 1Will not happen, and thankfully so.This place does not ever delete or remove posts. Well, sometimes useless advertising spam is removed... but never any real user posts. Censorship of the sort you speak of has no place in a mature setting. I don't think that the "level of bias" you're thinking of is actually present. But, again, if you're having posting issues, you can request moderation at the above link.

I am catching up on EvC threads so sorry for the mid-thread reply. Daniel is not in the Prophets in the Hebrew Bible it is in the Writings. Some Christian reorderings put Daniel next to other books that are originally from the Prophets.

---

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson