This is an "open statement" regarding various "biblical" interpretations that I felt are being used inappropriately to misguide people throughout the world. If you do not like the subject of clarification of Christian wrong/wrong-doing, then please look away. This page can only enlighten you.

First, when you hear the statement "Moses parted the Red Sea," one should know that a typical military tactic against chariots was to ruse them into a low-lying area and then breach a dike/dam, flood them, then go in for the cleanup. Iraq did this against the Iranians wherein they would goad Iranian men and machines into gullies and valleys, and then proceed to wipe them out (the Afghans did it against the Russians as well). One must also not discount the fact that Moses' people poisoned the Nile as part of their rebellion against the Pharaohs. Really, its nothing different than what the CIA was doing in Nicaragua and San Salvador during the 80s, or in Columbia or Bolivia today.

Second, please make sure that when anyone says, "Rose from the grave," that really, one should understand that this act involved "a few good men," a lot of intention, and eventually, a stolen body and a private wake. References to any other kind of interpretation is super-phenomenal-- in other words, it didn't happen that way, and the word "resurrection" is a super-phenomenal statement.

Third, a lot of people continue to hold onto (emotionally) to obsolete, redacted and embellished "truths." As a social historian, I know that the farther back you go in society, the less "trustworthy" are accounts of events because of the limited people that recorded them, as well as the method of interpretation used by that particular ethnic person.

Fourth, when referring to time, many christians say that people used to live to be 1000 years old. They fail to take into account that several thousand years ago, almost everyone, including the Egyptians and Hebrews, counted time in moons, 13 to the year. Somewhere along the way, the interpretation of a time span became distorted to show that each one of those moon cycles was a "solar year." That is pattentedly false. They counted in moons then, and therefore, when saying "1000" (lunar years/months), one should divide by 13, and there will arrive at the average age referred to in the bible, which was about 72 years. For anyone that lived well-off back then, that was a normal life-span.

If you have any other clarifications, please feel free to email me your contentions/arguments/conclusions.

I'm afraid I'm a little baffled by all this. Quite apart from your nebulous reasons for starting the whole thread, what does this mean:

What "support" to these things do you have?

Where did you find this? Or is it only you?

I´m not religious, but why try to destroy a belief religious people have, for comfort and support in their often hard lifes....

I don´t get it.... Pointless....

If it is only a book to you...so be it. It still is important to some people.
Let them who needs it, have it.
I wish i had a strong belief in something, I´m jealous of it, but I don´t judge them.

Well he's disappeared. He spent a good while looking at it and then disappeared. And I can only suspect he didn't know what he was talking about. I objected, anyway, to the supercilious tone of his post.

Does anybody else know what vdesbld meant when he used 'super-phenomenal' in this context?

Sorry, Aslan, I don't have a clue.

its bash the Christians week on Unexplained Mysteries! come everyone, enjoy the festivities and create as many threads trashing faith as you possibly can. it will make for great conversation and fun

Aslan,

Clearly the phrase super-phenomenal refers to an event that is so ultra-amazing that it's mega-fantastical characteristics cause it to go off the normal "phenomenon-measuring" scale, looping back round to zero and thus becoming normal again.

And you an english teacher too. I pity your students, I really do.

And I'd only just arrived at the conclusion that 'super-phenomenal' meant:

A zippy-sounding pseudo-scientific word that doesn't actually mean anything but can be used as a blanket explanation to baffle people whom you consider less intelligent than yourself and therefore easily wowed by zippy-sounding pseudo-scientific words.

Nancy,

Sorry, but I think you've missed the heavy sarcasm in my post. I was entirely agreeing with Aslan that the phrase was nonsense, hence my use of equal rubbish like "ultra-amazing" and "mega-fantastical".

If anything I should be apologising to the original poster.

Anyhoo, no hard feelings to Aslan, Nancy, vdesbld, anyone at all. I was only joshing. I'll play nice from now on!

I'm going to shut this one down, several people have already stated that they are offended by the content of the original post, and since the person who started it has long since disappeared, I don't think there's any reason to let this continue.