Archaeologica.org

Curious.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/s ... 042984.ece

One way that the Romans grew their empire was by identifying local leaders they could work with, (okay, bribe) to serve their interests. I do agree with the underlying theme of the article. Racism is a relatively modern concept.

Uh . . . no.

At least the Bible and the related literature written off as "pseudographia," "apocrypha" &c. contradict that generalisation.

You know that I don't put much stock in the bible.

A hard point for people to grasp : the category (= "religion") (= unpleasing) you file it under in your head doesn't have any bearing on the factuality (or otherwise) of its content.

I have no use for the fantastic imaginings of iron age goatherders.

Once again, you substitute your mental image of people who were no less intelligent than you are for who they were, condemn your own image as unpleasing, and flush the entire. It's a short-circuit of thought.

Otherwise known as a straw man rebuttal.

uniface wrote:Once again, you substitute your mental image of people who were no less intelligent than you are for who they were, condemn your own image as unpleasing, and flush the entire. It's a short-circuit of thought.

2,000 years ago in the middle east there was a beggar/messiah on every street corner, uniface. They were a dime a dozen. There were thousands of them. The messiah business was a cottage industry.
So not much different from today, only we call them 'politicians' now.
The fact that, of all those beggars/messiahs, JC came out floating on top is pure coincidence.
It could just as easily have been Hassan, Simon, or Bartholomew.

So, yes, people were primitive and backward then.
Just like today.

There you have it uni, judgement handed down!

Roy.

uniface wrote:Once again, you substitute your mental image of people who were no less intelligent than you are for who they were, condemn your own image as unpleasing, and flush the entire. It's a short-circuit of thought.

Otherwise known as a straw man rebuttal.

More impressive if archaeology had not trashed it. How many bible tales have to be debunked before you give up on it?

Digit wrote:There you have it uni, judgement handed down!

Shame you don't seem to know the difference between a judgement and an observation, Roy.

Where dogmas taken as axiomatic are concerned, it can be difficult to tell them apart.

I couldn't agree more.