An answer to Stella's Question; what would it take for me to convert to Christ-

[Deicide]

ianty? Stella asked me this question and I have decided to answer at length here. Give me this and I am a Christian tommorow.

I often say that if I were given good evidence that Christianity were true I would convert in a heart beat. What would it take to convince me that Christianity is true? Well, it’s a rather long list, but before we get to very specific pieces of evidence I have begin with the absolute prerequisites (at least one would have to be fulfilled) for even entertaining the thought. They would be:

1. Contemporaneous documentation (eyewitness or otherwise) by secular/Roman authorities of the events described in the Gospels (miracles, trial, resurrection, etc.), yes, I said contemporaneous. Nothing written decades or centuries after the ‘fact’ is acceptable, particularly given the nature of the claims made in the Gospels.

2. Contemporaneous coins and/or inscriptions making very clear references with great detail to the alleged Jesus of Nazareth.

3. Contemporaneous art work (sculpture, fresco, etc.) physically depicting the alleged Jesus of Nazareth.

4. Contemporaneous biographical information written by those who knew him as a child and witnessed the first 3 decades of his life prior to his alleged resurrection; childhood details would be very relevant. 

Of course #1 would be the best but if conditions 2 and 3 were fulfilled I might entertain the notion and 4 would be great as well. By contemporaneous I mean within the time frame that the alleged Christ Jesus is supposed to have lived; from 6 BCE (when Matthew claims he was born) or 6 CE (when Luke claims he was born); note the contradiction in birth dates; to 33 CE.

So those conditions would have to be fulfilled.

Another important requirement would be a lack of contradictory information/data, but as it is the Bible contradicts itself on a thousand fronts (see the example mentioned above).

1. No informational contradictions.

This too would have to be fulfilled.

Now assuming that these conditions had been met to even consider the notion of Christianity seriously, I will now list various examples of things which the Bible would have to contain to utterly convince me that Christianity is true. At least three of these conditions would have to be met; any less than three I would consider a coincidence and of course the more the better, e.g. six conditions were met. Here are some examples of what would utterly convince me to become a Christian:

Predictions and Prophecies

The prophecy/prediction cannot be vague or nebulous in nature, allowing for still vaguer interpretations and illegitimate claims of fulfillment. They would have display pinpoint accuracy in terms of both time, place and factual information as befits a book originating from an omniscient/omnipotent author. Here are some examples; they are by no means limited to ones I mention; if others surfaced they would have to conform to the same standards.

1.The Bible predicts the American Revolutionary War; this includes the exact date of its commencement and its end (1775-1781, including day and month). Important personages such as George Washington, Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson would need to be mentioned as well as all important places (obviously North America would have to be mentioned) Details of the various battles, including total casualties, victories and loss as well as financial expenditures would have to be mentioned and they would have to correlate with the data we have from that time. Furthermore related events would have to be mentioned, such as the Boston Tea Party.

2.The Bible predicts the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki; this includes the exact date of the bombing (August 6th, 1945), the total number of casualties, the blast radius of each respective A-bomb as well as the reasons for bombing and the persons involved in the decision and creation (Truman, Oppenheimer, etc.). The prediction correlates exactly to the data we have on the subject to a T. (Of course Japan would have to be mentioned as well).

3.The Bible predicts the emergence of the Internet; with pinpoint accuracy the Bible mentions and describes the emergence of a new form of telecommunications system, arising in the late 20th century. It describes how it functions (on a fiber optic level) and calls it by name (Internet); detailed mention and description of e-mail, blogs, web pages and Internet forums is made. All information corresponds exactly to the data we have on hand.

4.The Bible predicts an earthquake; the prediction includes precise data concerning seismic activity, the exact number on the Richter scale and precise geographical data, including latitude and longitude as well as the nearest fault line; total deaths, number of injured people, property destruction are mentioned in great detail and correspond exactly to the data we have on record (as must the scientific information, e.g. seismic activity)

5. The Bible predicts a volcanic eruption; same as earthquake with relevant geological terminology for volcanoes (VEI, Volcanic Explosivity Index).

Knowledge and Information

The Bible would have to contain precise knowledge that could not possibly have been known at the time, in particular advanced scientific knowledge that only an omniscient super being could know. Some examples (but not limited to) below:

1. Any mention of one the 4 laws of thermodynamics, including their description, application and mathematical details in a specific context.

2. Any mention of one of the 3 of Newton’s laws of motion; same as with the laws of thermodynamics.

3. Precise descriptions and understanding of matter, including all levels; the molecular, atomic, sub-atomic, etc. The periodic table is included as well as melting and freezing points of various forms of matter. All data must correspond to the facts as we know them.

4. Precise description and understanding of DNA and Genetics; all data must be accurate to a T.

5. Instructions for the construction of an aircraft that can achieve escape velocity; details must include aerodynamics, materials and precise engineering details and must correlate with the data we have on the matter.

If at least three of the conditions mentioned above (the more the better) were met in the Bible and the aforementioned prerequisites were fulfilled as well I would convert to Christianity tomorrow.



         



         

[Butterbean]

Thank you for your answer Deicide

[MCWAY]

ianty? Stella asked me this question and I have decided to answer at length here. Give me this and I am a Christian tommorow.

I often say that if I were given good evidence that Christianity were true I would convert in a heart beat. What would it take to convince me that Christianity is true? Well, it’s a rather long list, but before we get to very specific pieces of evidence I have begin with the absolute prerequisites (at least one would have to be fulfilled) for even entertaining the thought. They would be:

1. Contemporaneous documentation (eyewitness or otherwise) by secular/Roman authorities of the events described in the Gospels (miracles, trial, resurrection, etc.), yes, I said contemporaneous. Nothing written decades or centuries after the ‘fact’ is acceptable, particularly given the nature of the claims made in the Gospels.

2. Contemporaneous coins and/or inscriptions making very clear references with great detail to the alleged Jesus of Nazareth.

3. Contemporaneous art work (sculpture, fresco, etc.) physically depicting the alleged Jesus of Nazareth.

4. Contemporaneous biographical information written by those who knew him as a child and witnessed the first 3 decades of his life prior to his alleged resurrection; childhood details would be very relevant. 

Though you've given a detailed definition of what you would call "good evidence", your demands are rather odd, given the cultural context of the subject at hand.

1. As has been demonstrated on multiple occasions, you have, in fact, accepted the existence of historical figures, the biographical information of whom has been penned decades/centuries after his reported lifetime (i.e. Alexander the Great).

2&3 Coins/inscriptions are for earthly monarchs, which Jesus Christ was not, nor did He intend to be. And last time I checked, people don't make coins for carpenters. The same can be said for artwork. Again, who is going to sculpt or paint a carpenter?

4. The problem with your 4 requests has one simple root: You inaccurately assume that the "celebrity" (for lack of a better term) that Jesus Christ has now, He had back then. The Gospel of John states that "He went unto His own and His own received Him not". As for the biographical information, please indicate why anyone would spend 20 years, writing down the life and times of a carpenter's young son, especially one living in Nazareth ("Can anything good come from Nazareth?" was a quote from one of Jesus' disciples). With Nazareth's reputation as a poor city, odds are that many who knew Jesus as a child couldn't read or write. Even if they could, with the expectation that the Messiah would be a regal figure, jotting down the sawing and nailing of a carpenter from Nazareth would be quite LOW on the priority list.

Of course #1 would be the best but if conditions 2 and 3 were fulfilled I might entertain the notion and 4 would be great as well. By contemporaneous I mean within the time frame that the alleged Christ Jesus is supposed to have lived; from 6 BCE (when Matthew claims he was born) or 6 CE (when Luke claims he was born); note the contradiction in birth dates; to 33 CE.

That alleged contradiction has been discussed before. Luke doesn't claim that Jesus was born in 6 A.D.

Now assuming that these conditions had been met to even consider the notion of Christianity seriously, I will now list various examples of things which the Bible would have to contain to utterly convince me that Christianity is true. At least three of these conditions would have to be met; any less than three I would consider a coincidence and of course the more the better, e.g. six conditions were met. Here are some examples of what would utterly convince me to become a Christian:

Predictions and Prophecies

The prophecy/prediction cannot be vague or nebulous in nature, allowing for still vaguer interpretations and illegitimate claims of fulfillment. They would have display pinpoint accuracy in terms of both time, place and factual information as befits a book originating from an omniscient/omnipotent author. Here are some examples; they are by no means limited to ones I mention; if others surfaced they would have to conform to the same standards.

1.The Bible predicts the American Revolutionary War; this includes the exact date of its commencement and its end (1775-1781, including day and month). Important personages such as George Washington, Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson would need to be mentioned as well as all important places (obviously North America would have to be mentioned) Details of the various battles, including total casualties, victories and loss as well as financial expenditures would have to be mentioned and they would have to correlate with the data we have from that time. Furthermore related events would have to be mentioned, such as the Boston Tea Party.

2.The Bible predicts the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki; this includes the exact date of the bombing (August 6th, 1945), the total number of casualties, the blast radius of each respective A-bomb as well as the reasons for bombing and the persons involved in the decision and creation (Truman, Oppenheimer, etc.). The prediction correlates exactly to the data we have on the subject to a T. (Of course Japan would have to be mentioned as well).

3.The Bible predicts the emergence of the Internet; with pinpoint accuracy the Bible mentions and describes the emergence of a new form of telecommunications system, arising in the late 20th century. It describes how it functions (on a fiber optic level) and calls it by name (Internet); detailed mention and description of e-mail, blogs, web pages and Internet forums is made. All information corresponds exactly to the data we have on hand.

4.The Bible predicts an earthquake; the prediction includes precise data concerning seismic activity, the exact number on the Richter scale and precise geographical data, including latitude and longitude as well as the nearest fault line; total deaths, number of injured people, property destruction are mentioned in great detail and correspond exactly to the data we have on record (as must the scientific information, e.g. seismic activity)

5. The Bible predicts a volcanic eruption; same as earthquake with relevant geological terminology for volcanoes (VEI, Volcanic Explosivity Index).

None of these events have anything to do with the destiny of Israel or events leading to the appearance of Christ. With that said, the Bible already has prophecies concerning events that were the "Revolutionary Wars" and the "Hiroshimas and Nagasakis" of its era.

A prime example would be the prophecies of Daniel (i.e. the four-beast prophecy and the image of Nebuchadnezzar). The accuracy of those prophecies is well-documented.

The book of Daniel predicted the order of world empires that would follow, first that the Medo-Persia would succeed Babylon as the next world empire, followed by Greece, and later Rome.

Jeremiah states that the dynasty of Nebuchadnezzar would last through his son and grandson but would end after that. Historically, we know that, after Nebby's death, we know the monarchs of Babylon, with regards to Nebby's lineage, to be:

Evil-Merodach (son)
Nerglisssar (son-in-law)
Labashi-Merodach (grandson)
Nabonidus (son-in-law)
Belshazzar (grandson)

Back to Daniel, he also was foretold that, while the Medo-Persian empire would be a joint one, the Persians would be slightly stronger than the Medes (which is an historical fact). Daniel is also told that when Greece overtakes Rome, the Grecian empire would be split FOUR ways (symbolized in the ram-goat prophecy and the four-headed leopard from the four-beast prophecy). You do recall what happened after the death of Alexander the Great. His kingdom was divided among his four generals.

And speaking of Alexander the Great, his conquest of a certain coastal city (Tyre) is depicted in the book of Ezekiel. He is not mentioned by name. But, look at the history of Tyre. The only king that completely dominated what was once the heart of the Phoenician empire is Alexander the Great. And he did so, by fulfilling Bible prophecy, as his Greece is one of the "many nations" that destroys Tyre by casting its stones, timbers, and dust into the sea.

There was a great slaughter in the midst of Tyre, as was told to Ezekiel (i.e. the 40,000+ killed and enslaved). And, as history has shown, the end of the Phoenician empire occured with the Alexander's conquest of Tyre. And all this happened nearly 250 years after Ezekiel penned his book.

Again, these were the "Hiroshimas", "Nagasakis" and "Revolutionary Wars" of the time. The Bible predicted how it would go down, who would be victorious, and how they would attain victory. These have been verified as accurate, which is why some skeptics, unable to deny that, have to result to claiming that it was written after the fact, especially with regards to the book of Daniel.

Knowledge and Information

The Bible would have to contain precise knowledge that could not possibly have been known at the time, in particular advanced scientific knowledge that only an omniscient super being could know. Some examples (but not limited to) below:

1. Any mention of one the 4 laws of thermodynamics, including their description, application and mathematical details in a specific context.

2. Any mention of one of the 3 of Newton’s laws of motion; same as with the laws of thermodynamics.

3. Precise descriptions and understanding of matter, including all levels; the molecular, atomic, sub-atomic, etc. The periodic table is included as well as melting and freezing points of various forms of matter. All data must correspond to the facts as we know them.

4. Precise description and understanding of DNA and Genetics; all data must be accurate to a T.

5. Instructions for the construction of an aircraft that can achieve escape velocity; details must include aerodynamics, materials and precise engineering details and must correlate with the data we have on the matter.

If at least three of the conditions mentioned above (the more the better) were met in the Bible and the aforementioned prerequisites were fulfilled as well I would convert to Christianity tomorrow.

Personally, I don't think you would. You'd find a reason to "explain" that away. Jesus' own disciples witnessed His miracles firsthand. Still, one betrayed Him; another denied Him; and the rest ran like scalded dogs. Go back to the Old Testament, less than two months after being delivered from Egypt, witnessing some of the most awesome supernatural acts in the process, the Israelites reject God and revert to idolatry.

BTW, exactly who put those 4 laws of thermodynamics into place? Are those laws of motion really those of Newton (did he actually create them or did he merely discover them)?

 
"All data must correspond to the facts as we know them".......   Key words: "as we know them". That would mean that these facts are based on principles, put into place and set into motion by a supernatural being, which flies right in the fact of your core beliefs that no such being exists.     



         

[Deicide]

Using the Bible is as a reference for evidence is circular. External evidence please.

Come to think of it, I would also require DNA samples from Jesus.

[MCWAY]

Using the Bible is as a reference for evidence is circular. External evidence please.

Come to think of it, I would also require DNA samples from Jesus.

Come again!!!


We have the external evidence of the world empires: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome....and that they came to power in that order.

We have external evidence that Grecian empire was divided among four generals after the death of Alexandar the Great, which corresponds to the prophecies in the book of Daniel.

The destruction of Tyre was written nearly 250 years before it occured. When it happened, the stones, timbers, and dust of the city were thrown into the sea. A great slaughter occured within its midst, and the Phoenician empire came to an end.

All of that can be verified historically outside the Bible. And, in many cases, there were details about these events that, at one time, were found almost exclusively in the Bible (thus causing skeptics to think they were fabricated) only to be verified, with archaeological finds.

Example: The co-regency of Nabonidus and Belshazzar in Babylon was mentioned only in the Bible, until the Nabonidus Chronicles were found in the mid-19th century. Certain skeptics claimed that Belshazzar was an imaginary character. But, historical evidence concurred that, not only did he exist, but he ruled Babylon in his father's absence.

Again, the question is raised as to why you would expect coins, artwork, and detailed childhood memoirs to be done, regarding a carpenter from Nazareth, with no plans for an earthly monarchy, whose fame and "celebrity" (as we know it) did not come until after His death and reported resurrection.

[Deicide]

Come again!!!


We have the external evidence of the world empires: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome....and that they came to power in that order.

We have external evidence that Grecian empire was divided among four generals after the death of Alexandar the Great, which corresponds to the prophecies in the book of Daniel.

The destruction of Tyre was written nearly 250 years before it occured. When it happened, the stones, timbers, and dust of the city were thrown into the sea. A great slaughter occured within its midst, and the Phoenician empire came to an end.

All of that can be verified historically outside the Bible. And, in many cases, there were details about these events that, at one time, were found almost exclusively in the Bible (thus causing skeptics to think they were fabricated) only to be verified, with archaeological finds.

Example: The co-regency of Nabonidus and Belshazzar in Babylon was mentioned only in the Bible, until the Nabonidus Chronicles were found in the mid-19th century. Certain skeptics claimed that Belshazzar was an imaginary character. But, historical evidence concurred that, not only did he exist, but he ruled Babylon in his father's absence.

Again, the question is raised as to why you would expect coins, artwork, and detailed childhood memoirs to be done, regarding a carpenter from Nazareth, with no plans for an earthly monarchy, whose fame and "celebrity" (as we know it) did not come until after His death and reported resurrection.

And all the other prophecies that were never fulfilled...just gloss over them, huh?

[Butterbean]

Good posts MCWAY!

  @ "Nebby"

And all the other prophecies that were never fulfilled...just gloss over them, huh?

Which ones?



Another question Deicide....If the "rapture" occurred would you believe?

[Dos Equis]

Is this the same person?  Word for word the same post. 

http://www.koreabridge.com/forums/index.php?act=Print&client=printer&f=21&t=6257

[Butterbean]

Is this the same person?  Word for word the same post. 

http://www.koreabridge.com/forums/index.php?act=Print&client=printer&f=21&t=6257

It looks to be Deicide but I guess we'll let him answer.



Deicide, may I ask you some questions about your parents?  (don't feel you need to answer anything you're uncomfortable with and if you prefer we could PM)

[Deicide]

It looks to be Deicide but I guess we'll let him answer.



Deicide, may I ask you some questions about your parents?  (don't feel you need to answer anything you're uncomfortable with and if you prefer we could PM)

Spies in Korea, eh? Yes, I am that poster there. I took a long break from KB because it nauseated me (for non-religious resons).

What do you wish to know about my progenitors Stella?

[Hugo Chavez]

Sorry Deicide, stupid answer


oohh oohhh STELLA ASK ME ASK ME PLEASE PLEASE OHH OHH...

ok well since you ask, I'll convert when I'm forced to get a lobotomy and full course of shock treatment.

[Butterbean]

Sorry Deicide, stupid answer


oohh oohhh STELLA ASK ME ASK ME PLEASE PLEASE OHH OHH...

ok well since you ask, I'll convert when I'm forced to get a lobotomy and full course of shock treatment.

That can be arranged

What do you wish to know about my progenitors Stella?

These are things I've become curious about since reading some of your posts about how you feel about marriage and also how you call your parents your progenitors..as well as your strong interest in spiritual things and negative views of what you would consider religions.

Do you feel you had a good childhood?

Did you feel both of your parents loved/love you?

Do you have a relationship with them now?

If so, would you describe it as strained or loving etc?

Do you respect your parents?

Are they practicing Jews?

What do they think of your tattoos?

Were they disappointed that you moved so far away from them?

Did/do they have a loving relationship with each other?

Do you feel their marriage is representative of most marriages?


---Please keep in mind you don't have to answer any of these ...or we can PM also.  If you decide to answer please feel free to elaborate.  Thanks Decide!

[Deicide]

That can be arranged



These are things I've become curious about since reading some of your posts about how you feel about marriage and also how you call your parents your progenitors..as well as your strong interest in spiritual things and negative views of what you would consider religions.

Do you feel you had a good childhood?

Did you feel both of your parents loved/love you?

Do you have a relationship with them now?

If so, would you describe it as strained or loving etc?

Do you respect your parents?

Are they practicing Jews?

What do they think of your tattoos?

Were they disappointed that you moved so far away from them?

Did/do they have a loving relationship with each other?

Do you feel their marriage is representative of most marriages?


---Please keep in mind you don't have to answer any of these ...or we can PM also.  If you decide to answer please feel free to elaborate.  Thanks Decide!

I shall answer the general marriage question first.

I regard marriage as a primitive/unnecessary/religious institution that has outlived its usefulness. Biologically it is incompatible with human beings' drives and behaviour. Humans are by nature polygamous in their sexual relations. Moreover, sexual love has a half life of approximately 3 years, after which 'love' becomes an issue of convenience, habit and the need for security (and security is an illusion many crave). Desire withers and little remains of what once was; one can attempt to fight it but fighting one's own biology is truly a doomed task. On a philosophical level I think it the ultimate abrogation of personal freedom and liberty. I shall quote Thomas Jefferson here.

It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others: or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own.

The acquiescence to marriage is, in my opinion, tantamount to a form of socially sanctioned domestic slavery. It is the greatest deprivation of individual freedom one can engage in since true equality in the envisioned sense of the word is unattainable. Ultimately one partner lords over the other, making demands, issues edicts and orders, and due to the nature of such slavery, the failure to comply with such demands generally earns the dominated the ire of the dominator; thus we see it in countless examples where men have subverted their freedom and their individual choice to that of their wives, submitting themselves to curfews, terms of whom they can associate with, phone call protocols, what he may eat or where he may travel, to name only a few. I have observed this in many friends who have sold themselves into domestic slavery. I also see how happy these men are when they are allowed to escape the suffocating presence of their wives. He who values freedom, the ability to decide for himself, what is best and what he wishes to do, does not enter into such arrangements as marriage. Those who value the illusion of security, the slavish devotion to tradition for tradition's sake, the subjugation of the self to that of the other because it is couched in such terms as compromise, they can freely marry and suffer all the consequences which that decision entails. I shall quote Thomas Jefferson once more; this does not merely apply to nations:

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.

Rousseau observed well that:

L'homme est né libre, et partout il est dans les fers.

Man is born free; and everywhere he is in shackles.

And marriage is simply another instrument of control and enslavement. To yield one's own will to that of another, no matter how well intended, cannot be a correct decision because foresight shows us that we cannot know what will happen; power corrupts and habit sets in to dull the edges of the sharpest love. No, I have no intention to ever marry and I do not sympathise with the enslaved; their foolery is of their own making. I love my personal freedom too much to ever sacrifice it to another person.

My parents are my progenitors just as yours are your progenitors. You and I are the result of their respective copulation. I don't understand your question there.

As for your other questions:

1. Good Childhood? It is a meaningless term. I cannot say it was bad or good, merely that it was.

2. Love is a term I also have not use for; there is the sexual 'love' that has a half life of approximately 3 years. Do I feel they loved me? I think, as all parents generally do, they invested a decent amount of resources into their DNA (me).

3. I have occasional phone contact with my progenitors.

4. The relationship is neither strained nor warm; I would describe it as quite professional. I think they are content with the investment in the product for the most part.

5. I respect my parents for instilling into me the ability to think freely and to constantly ask questions.

6. My parents are entirely secular. They practise nothing. I grew up in a 'godless' household. The term Jew is overused. I use it as a term of convenience because my father is a Holocaust survivor and was classified as such by the Nazis. I have been corresponding with geneticistsat  Cambridge University and received this:

The mtDNA test traces your ancestry down your direct maternal lineage
(mother, grandmother, great-grandmother, great-great-grandmother, etc.).
The Y-DNA test traces your ancestry down your direct paternal lineage
(father, grandfather, great-grandfather, great-great-grandfather, etc.).
Therefore the suspected possible Jewish ancestry needs to be down either
the direct maternal or paternal line to be able to be detected.

So far no specific "Jewish" DNA marker has been discovered and I am
fairly confident there never will be. However the Y-DNA test can show
possible Cohen descent by comparing your haplotype (your Y-DNA markers)
to the Cohen Modal Haplotype. Even if your haplotype matches, this does
not necessarily mean you are a Cohen or even that you are Jewish - DNA
ancestry testing is always supportive of a theory rather than proof for
a theory. On another level the haplogroup (both mtDNA and Y-DNA) can
indicate possible Jewish ancestry. 40 percent of the total Ashkenazi
population are descended from just four women, so having the same mtDNA
haplogroup as these women is an indicator. When we match your mtDNA or
Y-DNA markers with our database of known Jewish DNA samples we might
also get a match which would indicate a common ancestor with the
matching person sometime more than 500 years ago.

To answer your question directly: A DNA test will not give you cold hard
evidence. If we find something, it is an indication rather than proof,
if we find nothing it does not mean you do not have Jewish ancestry.

If you decide to take the tests, please contact me again when you get
the results and we will take a closer look in respect to possible Jewish
ancestry.

Regards,
Andrew Forster

Lacking in any hard scientific evidence, I don't really see myself as 'Jewish'. Jewish haplotypes, as described above are not unique to 'Jews'.

7. They don't care about my tattoos or my piercings. It's none of their business.

8. Disappointed? No. It's none of their business. It's my life and the entire party finds consensus in this attitude.

9. They, as all people who have been married many decades, have a marriage of habit and convenience.

10. Statistically it is very representative of marriage as a principle in general.

I should also mention that marriage is a financially costly affair; divorce can ruin a man; I have friends whose ex-wives tried to ruin them and turned their very progeny against them. Just as a side note.

[Hugo Chavez]

That can be arranged

hey now   Gimme some hot ass bdsm bitches to do the shock treatment and I'll think about it

[tonymctones]

first off deicide i have to say your outlook on life is quite depressing, no offense.

secondly have you never thought of the invention of marriage from a biological standpoint. Love doesnt fade after three years, chemicals fade after 3 yrs, Love isnt all chemicals. Marriage could have come about as a way of increasing an individuals chance of sucessful reproduction. Parental investment is extremely high in humans when compared to almost any other species b/c it is needed. So perhaps marriage before it was "marriage" was just away of helping to increase offspring survival.

[Deicide]

first off deicide i have to say your outlook on life is quite depressing, no offense.

secondly have you never thought of the invention of marriage from a biological standpoint. Love doesnt fade after three years, chemicals fade after 3 yrs, Love isnt all chemicals. Marriage could have come about as a way of increasing an individuals chance of sucessful reproduction. Parental investment is extremely high in humans when compared to almost any other species b/c it is needed. So perhaps marriage before it was "marriage" was just away of helping to increase offspring survival.

I don't find my outlook on life depressing; quite the opposite, it is invigorating, but then again, a Christian finds many things depressing without believing in myths and fables.

I have considered marriage from a biological standpoint. I conclude that, whilst it was once useful, it is no longer the case. One can have a 'long term' relationship to propagate one's DNA without being married, all without the high financial risk and cost of the (likely) divorce that will ensue.

[tonymctones]

I don't find my outlook on life depressing; quite the opposite, it is invigorating, but then again, a Christian finds many things depressing without believing in myths and fables.

I have considered marriage from a biological standpoint. I conclude that, whilst it was once useful, it is no longer the case. One can have a 'long term' relationship to propagate one's DNA without being married, all without the high financial risk and cost of the (likely) divorce that will ensue.

it just seems that you wouldnt be at any loss if your parents or close friend/mate died is all, this maybe wrong but thats what i get from your previous post

Why do you say likely divorce? I certainly hope you dont cite the divorce rate as an accurate indication.

[Deicide]

it just seems that you wouldnt be at any loss if your parents or close friend/mate died is all, this maybe wrong but thats what i get from your previous post

Why do you say likely divorce? I certainly hope you dont cite the divorce rate as an accurate indication.

A loss? Define loss. I'm not sure I get you.

Divorce is very common. Why bother marrying (unless for entitlements) if divorce is likely?

One can have DNA and raise it without marriage.

[Deicide]

it just seems that you wouldnt be at any loss if your parents or close friend/mate died is all, this maybe wrong but thats what i get from your previous post

Why do you say likely divorce? I certainly hope you dont cite the divorce rate as an accurate indication.

Don't you mean 'when'? If?!

[tonymctones]

A loss? Define loss. I'm not sure I get you.

Divorce is very common. Why bother marrying (unless for entitlements) if divorce is likely?

One can have DNA and raise it without marriage.

ya, you could replace my "if" with a "when"

Loss as in death, going of seperate ways do to arguements, fights, any number of other things...

Staying together is very common as well, again what makes you say that divorce is likely?

[Deicide]

ya, you could replace my "if" with a "when"

Loss as in death, going of seperate ways do to arguements, fights, any number of other things...

Staying together is very common as well, again what makes you say that divorce is likely?

Look at average statistics...

[tonymctones]

Look at average statistics...

lol you mean the divorce rate? do you know how they calculate that?

[Butterbean]

I shall answer the general marriage question first.

I regard marriage as a primitive/unnecessary/religious institution that has outlived its usefulness. Biologically it is incompatible with human beings' drives and behaviour. Humans are by nature polygamous in their sexual relations. Moreover, sexual love has a half life of approximately 3 years, after which 'love' becomes an issue of convenience, habit and the need for security (and security is an illusion many crave). Desire withers and little remains of what once was; one can attempt to fight it but fighting one's own biology is truly a doomed task. On a philosophical level I think it the ultimate abrogation of personal freedom and liberty. I shall quote Thomas Jefferson here.

The acquiescence to marriage is, in my opinion, tantamount to a form of socially sanctioned domestic slavery. It is the greatest deprivation of individual freedom one can engage in since true equality in the envisioned sense of the word is unattainable. Ultimately one partner lords over the other, making demands, issues edicts and orders, and due to the nature of such slavery, the failure to comply with such demands generally earns the dominated the ire of the dominator; thus we see it in countless examples where men have subverted their freedom and their individual choice to that of their wives, submitting themselves to curfews, terms of whom they can associate with, phone call protocols, what he may eat or where he may travel, to name only a few. I have observed this in many friends who have sold themselves into domestic slavery. I also see how happy these men are when they are allowed to escape the suffocating presence of their wives. He who values freedom, the ability to decide for himself, what is best and what he wishes to do, does not enter into such arrangements as marriage. Those who value the illusion of security, the slavish devotion to tradition for tradition's sake, the subjugation of the self to that of the other because it is couched in such terms as compromise, they can freely marry and suffer all the consequences which that decision entails. I shall quote Thomas Jefferson once more; this does not merely apply to nations:
 

Rousseau observed well that:
 

And marriage is simply another instrument of control and enslavement. To yield one's own will to that of another, no matter how well intended, cannot be a correct decision because foresight shows us that we cannot know what will happen; power corrupts and habit sets in to dull the edges of the sharpest love. No, I have no intention to ever marry and I do not sympathise with the enslaved; their foolery is of their own making. I love my personal freedom too much to ever sacrifice it to another person.

My parents are my progenitors just as yours are your progenitors. You and I are the result of their respective copulation. I don't understand your question there.

As for your other questions:

1. Good Childhood? It is a meaningless term. I cannot say it was bad or good, merely that it was.

2. Love is a term I also have not use for; there is the sexual 'love' that has a half life of approximately 3 years. Do I feel they loved me? I think, as all parents generally do, they invested a decent amount of resources into their DNA (me).

3. I have occasional phone contact with my progenitors.

4. The relationship is neither strained nor warm; I would describe it as quite professional. I think they are content with the investment in the product for the most part.

5. I respect my parents for instilling into me the ability to think freely and to constantly ask questions.

6. My parents are entirely secular. They practise nothing. I grew up in a 'godless' household. The term Jew is overused. I use it as a term of convenience because my father is a Holocaust survivor and was classified as such by the Nazis. I have been corresponding with geneticistsat  Cambridge University and received this:

Lacking in any hard scientific evidence, I don't really see myself as 'Jewish'. Jewish haplotypes, as described above are not unique to 'Jews'.

7. They don't care about my tattoos or my piercings. It's none of their business.

8. Disappointed? No. It's none of their business. It's my life and the entire party finds consensus in this attitude.

9. They, as all people who have been married many decades, have a marriage of habit and convenience.

10. Statistically it is very representative of marriage as a principle in general.

I should also mention that marriage is a financially costly affair; divorce can ruin a man; I have friends whose ex-wives tried to ruin them and turned their very progeny against them. Just as a side note.

 my father is a Holocaust survivor and was classified as such by the Nazis.

!  How old was he when he was freed?  Does/did he ever talk to you about what he saw/went through? 

[Deicide]

!  How old was he when he was freed?  Does/did he ever talk to you about what he saw/went through? 

Of all the questions you could ask me after my lengthy response, you ask me this?

He was 5 years old going on 6.

He has mentioned a few things.

His grandparents were shot in front of him and their bodies were dumped into the Danube for example.

[Butterbean]

Of all the questions you could ask me after my lengthy response, you ask me this?

He was 5 years old going on 6.

He has mentioned a few things.

His grandparents were shot in front of him and their bodies were dumped into the Danube for example.

I will be asking more questions as I have time but this stood out to me.

That is horrible!  Were his parents there also?  What happened to them?  Where had your father lived prior to incarceration?  Have you ever read the book "The Hiding Place" by Corrie Ten Boom?