Thursday, 8 May 2008

Blood Line

There's been a lot of interesting tv documentaries and movies coming our way recently. Be it Zeitgeist or The lost tomb of jesbus. Blood Line looks like another must watch coming our way.

37 comments:

John W. Locust said...

Excellent blog! This site is doing good things in the face of a noble and honorable cause for the human race to let go of its silly superstitions. I've subscribed and your blog has been added to my list of recommendations!

P.S. I happen to know that you are a fan of Sam Harris and other popular atheist writers. If you need any scholarly materials on philosophy, be sure to check out my almost award-winning book "Why I Left Christianity". It's even recommended by Christian apologists it's such a devestating piece of work!

Nick said...

Oh geez. Another Christ conspiracy thing? Sorry Mikey. This doesn't faze us at all. I read the God Delusion for a laugh and it was quite funny. What Christian works have you read? Any?

Mike is Wright said...

if you look at my other article dan brown days he is an xian so I have read some. I tend to find most xian writers are very biased unlike freethinking ones.

Nick said...

Right. Supposed freethinkers are never biased. I asked for names. Got any?

Mike is Wright said...

I gave you dan brown as a name of an xian author that i've read.

spacefoetus said...

So, you usually find Christian authors to be biased, yet the only "Christian" author you've read is Dan Brown whose work you've praised in previous blogs?

you DO realised that athiests can be biased too?

Nick said...

Dan Brown would hardly count as a Christian author. If you want an informed opinion on resurrection in the ancient world, try N.T. Wright's "The Resurrection of the Son of God." It's only a little over 800 pages. Should be easy for "the intelligent zone."

Mike is Wright said...

Dan brown says he is an xian on his website and who are you to say that he isn't. You know that telling me to read an 800 page book is a convenient way to avoid engaging with me as by the time id read it you would have long gone.

Nick said...

One who understands what orthodox Christianity is. Dan Brown denies the tenets of it in his book so I am one to say he is wrong.

I also see you're too big of a wuss to read N.T. Wright. What a shock. Sorry bub. I won't be long gone and you can track me down anytime. You linked to my blog to show how stupid Christians are. Instead, you simply showed how ignorant you are.

Mike is Wright said...

well if xians can't agree what an xian is then that's typical. You are trying to win this argument by getting me to do some irrelevant task like reading an 800 page book.

Nick said...

Sure we can agree to what a Christian is. Go look at Chalcedon sometime. A Christian is something specific and since Dan Brown's book denies the deity of Christ, he does not fall into that category.

And reading a huge book is irrelevant. Yeah bub. It's irrelevant that you actually educate yourself on some topic.

By the way, I've already won because you are totally outmatched and don't stand a chance. Unlike you, I have gone and read the books and educated myself.

Mike is Wright said...

so jebus wasn't an xian, or anybody in the early church, as it was only after consintine had a vote on the subject that it because official belief.

Nick said...

Well, you're partially right. Jesus wasn't a Christian. How could he be? A Christian is one who accepts Christ's sacrifice for their sins. Jesus had no sins.

As for your idea of Constantine, it's completely false. What was done was merely a ratification of what the Early Church Fathers said. The deity of Christ is all throughout their writings. The creeds just put that in concrete form.

Also, Constantine was not at Chalcedon seeing as he was DEAD at the time. Go study the history some before you make ignorant statements like that.

Mike is Wright said...

i have studied the history.

Nick said...

If you had studied the history, you would not have made ignorant statements like Constantine and Chalcedon. You claimed earlier you haven't read primary documents anyway. Sorry bub. You don't impress me in anyway. You simply amuse me.

Mike is Wright said...

and hat's why dan brown often gets historians coming up to him telling him how factually accurate his books are? Stop reading your narrow band of deluded xian historians.

Nick said...

He does? Do tell which historians you're speaking about. I want to see names. Dan Brown didn't even get right the date of the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, something he could have found by looking for two minutes on Google. Dan Brown said it was a close vote at the Council of Nicea when it was 326-2 in the vote. Hardly close.

Mike is Wright said...

Are you saying than dan brown is lying when he says lots of historians agree with him? For a start his wife is an art historians and she agrees with him.

Nick said...

I said I want the names of the historians who agree with him. Give them to me so I can check their credentials.

By the way, his wife is an art historian and not an art historians. Learn to use some grammar also.

Mike is Wright said...

O.K, here's two more. Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh. (click here) the article even calls them historians and shows that they agreed with the da vinci code so much they accused dan brown of plagiarism.

Nick said...

Baigent has a degree in psychology and not history. I can't find any reference to a degree for Leigh. Can you point me to a peer-reviewed paper by these two?

Mike is Wright said...

can you point me to a peer reviewed paper that you've written?

Nick said...

Nope. Of course, I never claimed to be a historian. If someone wants to make that claim, they need to have the credentials to back it. Baigent and Leigh have all right to comment as laymen in the field, but not to take themselves up as authorities in history if they do not have the education to back it.

You've made the claim about Baigent and Leigh. I've made no such claim about myself. You back the claim.

Mike is Wright said...

does someone hve to have published peer reviewed papers to be a historian? why? who says so?

Nick said...

Yes they do if they want to be accepted in the field. It's a way of checking one's own theories out. If one is certified in the field and accepted, they will gladly let their work be reviewed by those who are authorities to see if they can get the right-hand of fellowship.

Unless Baigent and Leigh are afraid to do such....

Mike is Wright said...

Baigent and Leigh peer reviewed each others work

Nick said...

Um. No. peer review is by outside sources. Those without accepted peer review cannot give it.

Mike is Wright said...

you could dismiss anyone's credentials by saying that they're not outside enough

Nick said...

Yep! You can! That's the point! Baigent and Leigh have NO credentials in the field.

Mike is Wright said...

oh well, i'll dismiss your, cs lewis and the 800 page book guy's credentials in that way then. Look, just admit it, you've lost this debate.

Nick said...

lol. Cute. Sorry dude. N.T. Wright is peer-reviewed. Also, C.S. Lewis was educated in his field as he was an Oxford Don. You wanna get a clue sometime?

Spacefoetus said...

http://www.historyvsthedavincicode.com/

Here is a nice website I'm sure you'll enjoy showing how historically crappy the Da Vinci Code really is.

Mike is Wright said...

I realise that some historians might not think much of the da vinci code but others like it. I'm not saying that the Da Vinci Code must be true but that it is one option some historians agree with and others disagree with it. That website gives one view on the subject and i offer a different one.

Spacefoetus said...

Then what IS the view you offer on the subject? And trust me, the Da Vinci Code is HORRIBLY innacurate and the "historians" that you have cited that commend it are NOT trustworthy sources.

If you don't believe the Da Vinci Code, then why did you post a blog about how historically accurate it is?

And did you ever stop to think that perhaps the view that us orthodox xians offer may be the right one?

Listen, you probebly think I'm brainwashed or something, or that I don't think for myself and for a while, yeah, maybe you would have been right in that accusation.

But then I began to seriously doubt Christianity- even theism.

So, what did I do? I decided to reaserch it with an open mind, and realised that God existed. Now, I could have stopped there and become a deist- wouldn't have really minded, means i could do all sorts of things like swear, have sex, get drunk yanno the usual and still hold some kind of faith. But as I reaserched I found that Christianity is true. Thats it. ITs true.

JB said...

Here I am again... taunting Miiiiikeeeeeeeeey...... *whistles*

SF Sok Puppet said...

omg u have THE john locust commentin on ur blog!!! hes tthe guy that made de-bunking crap!!! no u no ur on the road to fame!!!

Anonymous said...

Do you think maybe that locust guy could help me out with my new blog: The Velvet Evolver.

I know makes you weak in the knees. Mike if you answer a few of my questions I could be bigger than you. I would give you proper acknowlegements. You are kinda like my mentor. I figure there will be a revolver and the bullets will have letters that spell out evolution. You know the bullets in xians beliefs.

Amyway Mike even if I get bigger than you I will always remember you.