David F

Does anyone have an opinion on the Revelation of gabriel and the idea of the messiah of Joseph?

What is the difference between baruch and birchat?

We have many differences I know that . But history shows that we have gotten along as a community maqny times over the centuries ( including places that are now considered war zones) But a study of history shows this was usually more politics than theology. It seems we are having some ofvthe same happen here. I think We would be serving ourselves and G-d better by getting along with each other and defending each other against the "unbelievers" No matter their type. Would G-d not be better served? Would humanity not be better served. And we could learn more about each other so there is less confusion and more of what G-d expects from His followers (i.e. a contrite heart.) So what do you think? Any takers ?

It seems dome disbelievers won't take alternative to their answers no matter how solid the evidence or open mided they claim. So I thought I would put up a proof one or two at a time ans see if you can ( with documentation disprove it all. So here is the beginning Dr James Strange( University of South Florida)has noted that after the fall of Jerusalem in Ad ( or CE) 70 priests were no longer needed in the temple so they were sent out to various places Arcahaeologists have found an Aramaic list describing the 24 "courses or families of priests and where they were relocated. One of those families were registered as being to the city of Nazareth. This was a city of apprix 60 acres with a population of about 480 people. I will be attempting to give more proofs later. Do you have the documentation to disagree or will you concede this one?

Of what i have read of Mohammed ( please excuse spelling and typing eerrors I have a neurological problem) and his perceptionof Christian beliefs I have often wondered if the "Christians" he met were actually Gnostics ( a group that mixed many different belief systems together but some of them still called themselves Christian) From what you have studied about him ,which I am sure is much more than I could know is this a possibility? This is not a trick question. I am sincere in trying to understand this because it does not sound like the Christianity I know and understand but some of it does sound like the things found in the Nag Hamadi library. Please Do not take offence I amjust trying to learn and know. Thank you!

If you can refute please do I am interested But only serious answers please!

1)Everything that had a begining had a cause

2) The universe had a begining

3) Therefore, the universe had a cause.

As to the personality of the first cause

1)The universe had a first cause

2)This first cause's act to create was either determined,undetermined,or self determined.

3) But it can not be determined because there is nothing before the first cause

4)neither can it be undetermined since that is contrary to the principal of causality

5) Hence,the act to create must have been self determined.

Please give clear reasoning to why( if you do ) disagree.

If as a materialist/atheist you only believe in what you can see, touch, hear,or use your other senses to perceive how can you believe you are thinking about thiese things? Since you thought has no ( or should I say thinking) has noability to be sensed how can you think about things?

I ask this mostly of Thso who are Jews by belief. It is not meant to incite or cause any anger,merely though and reflection. History says Christianity was,at one time a sect of Judaism. But I also understand that many Jews over the centuries see and have seen Christianity as a heresy of Judaism. My question is this Is there a way that Christians might at some point be,again considered as a sect of Judaism? Please try to focus not on theyears of repression ( do the sons pay for the sins of the father?) Can you give me theological reasoning? And ifI have a questionit will be to clarify things. My intent is not proselytation. It is intellectual curiosity and a feeling of loss that we have been sepersted for these centuries.

I bring this up as a starting point of discussion. Is it not more logical to be agnostic( admitting one doesn't know) than atheist (asserting that one has checked all information and knows there is no God ) ? It would appear one is a statement of fact while the other is an act of faith.

Are you willing to have an open discussion ( it appears there are some out there) or do the rest of us just have to put up with the smug comments by those whop hold to the same belief? I know some of you are decent respectful people and I would love to have an open discussion on religion with you, but so far answers are either ignored, mocked or given an ad hominem answer. Are there any of you willing to just discuss the subject without this? I doubt I would end up changing your basic mind on theology but I might change your mind on those of us who hold those ideas and we both might learn something.This is not an attack on all of you, but you know that there are some who you wish would believe something else so they don't embarass you with their conduct (been there done that) Is anyone up to discussion rather than mudraking?

I have seen lots of comments by many intelligent people here about the silliness of the debate on how life got on earth. Please explain the scientific process behind Sir Francis Crick's theory of how life originated on earth.

Hoping you have a sense of humor. 1)I have not seen any of you 2) All I have seen is supposed writing by you 3) I ahve seen no actions that can be proven to be directly attributal to you Therefore You must not exist. Can you prove your existence?

comment I made that someone's fascetious remark was unfair because it was basically taken from an old Bill Cosby routine about Noah. the old"How long can you tread water" routine. Now is this how things are to be handled? Christians are referred to as uneducated and illiterates but point out someone isn't original is reason for complaint? I thought that there was a set of rules about speec. Or is only a hecklers veto the ones that count?

taking it as an act of faith? This is a legitimate question I see people arguing but not using any data It would seem that if you really wanted to discuss the point you would be knowledgable about the counter argument not just gainsay negating it.