Man kind has the know how,and power to neutralize violence without taking human life.They refuse to do so,because of the cost of the technology.Nothing wrong with using force to stop killing.It is the way Man kind kills,and kills to neutralize a problem that is the ongoing paradox.It can be done;but that cost too much money.Greed,Religion,Power. There is no majority to step in,and stop it.War,and killing is all that man wants to do to gain control,and power.
There is proof of that he was here in the writings that you seem to place so much value in both books;Other wise you would not have a debate.You use the words of a history book to discount them;yet you do not acknowledge the books as being actuall history.So then what is true,and false? If i use a document to prove something when i do not regard the document to be valid? Then that would make me a total idiot. This may be over your head;I do not know? How or why would you use a book that you say is not history to discount some one who wrote in the book.Or whoever wrote the book? If the document is not valid then you have no evidence.
No more jokes for me on the subject;Do not get rid of them,and be a friend to them anyway.It is up to all of us with the knowledge of what true friendship is to teach other people the true meaning of love.......
However i have read real things,and seen much on tv about the horrid things that Muslims do,and i find them to be much more barbaric than the violence of the so called Christians.Either way both kill in the name of there God's
Physical proof or no physical proof the Muslims seem to think he was real enough to kill in his name;Therefore my point remains that men kill in the name of there God's.How can you in turn say that a history book is real history or not?Men write things,and we read them to gain knowledge; Not to go around killing other people.
Reading one history book,and moving to another history book there are BOOKS!.Who knows who is true or false in there writings of things that happened so long ago where a single word or sentence can be changed,and altered by ones perception.
Murder,death ,kill.and murder ;All in the name of a God!!!!And if i thought that any good man was false;Then i would be the one who is ignorant.One who they say is false;Laid down his life to save his people from Rome,and is not recorded that he killed any one.Muhammad who they say is false in history was guilty of many Murders.The prophet Jesus who they claim is false;The people who say that they follow his teaching have been killing each other for hundreds of years.So it would seem to me that people must kill each other; Man kind dose not need a God to destroy himself;I think they are going to do that all by them selves...Murder,death,Kill........
I think every one has missed the point of my Thread?There is an idiot with a thread asking was Jesus a false messiah?I never commented on the subject until reading about this man they called Jesus.He gave his own life to save his people from Rome.This other man uses the words of this prophet to discount him as a good man.So if he is so against this man Jesus whereby i have not read where he killed anyone!Yet if he is against this prophet then why dose he place fact value in the words of this prophet called Jesus.For he uses the words of the prophet to discount him.However there have been many men to kill people in the name of this man.And according to history Muhammad lead people to kill other people.So why would a man spend so much time discounting one prophet while over looking the one who is a murderer according to the history that i have read.So i put forth a different question?How do we know who had red hair,and who may have had black hair for something we can only read about that happened so long ago.I say nay; All religions kill other people,and that is fact with a period at the end of the sentence.
Men wrote books,and men read books;But who knows this God? The name you keep trowing around?Men kill men! Is it in the name of your Gods?Or the name of your prophets?
You are a very wise man,and your point is very well made unlike the others.Yet the question at hand is left? Should this woman warn people or not????Should this Man come forward,and apologize for the way she took his offer of friendship?
RE: are you an introvert or an extrovert?
I meant converting anglshman.I have had way too much to drink,and i dont evn drinkk