Nonsense.
All your opinions regarding christianity is so defective precisely because you conjure them without their context.
Like this one right here -- utterly devoid of context -- hence the conclusion is wrong.
If jesus' teachings were entirely spiritual, then there wouldn't be any need for his ministry. He would have removed himself from the world like the essenes.
But he did not, did he? In fact, he sought to change the world, not forsake it.
You are -- in the other thread.
Is there something wrong with what I said -- that the will/mind is what gives actions the principle of their volition?
Again, an utter lack of context.
The messiahnic phenomenon during that time was due to the jew's inability for renewal -- perhaps ever since the jewish monarchy of david.
What I think is irrelevant to this fact.
Again, devoid of context.
That particular miracle happened prior to the sermon on the mount, which took place in the region perhaps a number of days walk west of the sea of galilee. So, sharing their food (which would have been packed for this particular trip) with strangers would have been at the expense of their own well-being, no?
How in heaven's name does that compare to woodstock, hmmm?
Of course you don't know.
But buddha didn't preach in palestine at that time, did he?
Jesus did.
Why didn't you simply kill yourself when you found out your brain's gender didn't fit your body's? Isn't death powerless against you? Your god could simply give you a body that matches your brain's gender via reincarnation, no?
Of course it is part of life. That doesn't mean they're not afraid to die, does it?
And who's fault is that, hmmm?
But christianity doesn't frighten people. How exactly is a 'good news' frightening?
Of course. He is a god of love, after all.
And you heap blasphemy at the religion who brought you this idea after the fact.
Don't flatter yourself.
The catholic clergy are trained philosophers -- not some fundamentalist ***** from some street corner. If you had any aptitude for the subject, your arguments wouldn't be utter nonsense.
Which proves my point, exactly.
Eh?
I have explained kantian ethics, have I not? I have said that christian ethics is a positive reformulation of it, have I not?
Is it still my fault that you don't understand?
And what particular work of thomas hobbes did you have in mind, hmmm?
And it is a lot like his work because....?
And what statements in humanae vitae, exactly, do you think is wind-baggery, hmmm?
It really won't do you any good to bluff your way out.