The other explanation makes more sense. Thats just odd. But I guess thats why there are different sects of Christianity.

And its literal.

 

whoa, i didn't realize we had so many historians on HAN. :chuckles:

seriously, people have been studying this stuff for generations and generations, dedicating their lives and souls, and you people think you can accurately answer was is legitimate, and what is not.. what is reliable, what isn't. what is "fact", etc.. in one evening, with a few paragraphs? :lmao:

oh, the arrogance..

 

i think you are irrogant right now. i dont think the debate here is about "accurately answering" something it's about getting other peoples opinions on this subject and some member think that this finding could be inacurate, some think it is accurate. calling these members arrogant is kind of pushing it dont you think?

 

the people i'm calling arrogant are the ones that are saying, "this is legit because of..." "the bible is inaccurate because of..." "what really happened is..."

etc..

 

i know still... i think you're pushing it when you call them arrogant. it is just their opinions, i think everyone understands that.

 

aint quite sure who youre referring to, but if im one of the more "arrogant" members trying to share what ive learned, then im guilty as charged. just thought i could try to possibly help clear things up. never said i was the sh*t or that i knew what was right or wrong. wanted to to lend a hand? :dunno:

 

Takeone your the shit in my eyes

 

Takeone your full of shit in my eyes

 

nah, i think you've been pretty objective..

 

yup... i have a huge head h: :chuckles: