mIRC/IRC is still going, right? Haven’t used that in probably a decade.

Every religion apart from Christianity dies without lies

Quoted for posterity.

There it is. Your true colors.

I guess religion and atheism are on equal footing, then.

“Me when I lie”?

Go talk to the wiki I got that from if you want to argue with someone else about whether something is true or not.

That’s not what I said.

However, like Arthurian Legend, it doesn’t mean some guy like Jesus didn’t exist, or an aggregate of characters weren’t assembled to be him on story.

That’s what I said.

I used Arthur as a fellow mythology, along with a conditional “or” he could be an aggregate character.

The moment of resurrection itself is not described in any of the gospels, but all four contain passages in which Jesus is portrayed as predicting his death and resurrection, or contain allusions that “the reader will understand”. The New Testament writings do not contain any descriptions of a resurrection but rather accounts of an empty tomb.

So therefore I stand by the premise that changes have been made, and what existed in 100 is not what we have today.

You’ll have to forgive me if I bow out. I do not share your beliefs, nor am I willing to continue to argue over religious texts that are self-referencing to constitute proof.

And they get pretty obvious in big subs like /cars and /gaming. So many posting opinions like car magazines or gaming reviews do - point out nit-picky negatives that are relatively inconsequential to the product, softball other criticism, but give an overall decent review. Heaven help you if you actually voice an opinion critical of the object, because you’re allowed to have that opinion as an individual, that doesn’t toe the line and you get instant downvotes.

See, now you’re moving the goalposts. You made a sweeping statement that Christianity is as-is compared to the first century CE. Yet here you are breaking it down and excluding things.

Let’s just face it, you don’t mean Christianity as a whole is same as 2kyr ago. It isn’t. They held on to some facets of it, got rid of others, but kept the main themes like resurrection and the like. Heck, there are even some that suggest the resurrection story was added centuries later.

Nonetheless they are different. And you skipped past the whole “little is known” part, not to mention all the parts that got tossed out along the way.

Once the hive mind takes over and the downvote train starts it’s all but impossible to turn your post positive regardless of contrition. It’s unfortunate because it removes some incentive to publicly self-correct.

You said:

An interesting thing about what we have now in Christianity though is that it basically spawned as-is in the first century

The article says:

Little is fully known of Christianity in its first 150 years; sources are few.

So you’re making a huge, sweeping statement that Christianity as we know it today is based on something…we don’t know much about? There are 6 major Christian denominations, not to mention hundreds of smaller ones. Which one is the “as-is” one? The one that is exactly “as-is” from CE 100?

You mean besides a couple dudes running around telling us to be cool to each other?

You didn’t even read the wiki entry, did you.

I think “as-is” is a bit of a stretch.

No.

There’s lots of ambiguous information. There is no firsthand, historically agreed upon data that supports his existence in the form we know him today. In other words, there was no magical guy doing magical things.

There is no Roman record of “nailed 3 prisoners to the posts today; Bill, Roger, and Jesus the magic guy who was a pain in the ass.”

However, like Arthurian Legend, it doesn’t mean some guy like Jesus didn’t exist, or an aggregate of characters weren’t assembled to be him on story. Arthur was possibly just a chieftain of a group who fought a couple of hefty battles and made a name for himself, but he ended up being an almost magical figure with wizards and witches in the story and - guess what, he will “rise again” from the dead when needed. And no, rising from the dead isn’t owned by Christian religious figures, Osiris of Egypt did it, Dionysius of the Greek Pantheon among many others. So maybe some dude, who probably wasn’t named Jesus, caused a stir and got a few people to take note. That grew over hundreds and even thousands of years to what we have now.

Want to know why King Arthur isn’t a competitor to Jesus? He a) doesn’t offer the opportunity to control people in this life for the hope of an afterlife, b) he isn’t profitable.

I understand there’s a right way to do it, but allow me to assure that the two murky trays behind this bar were not acceptable by any means. I didn’t want to get too graphic, but glasses went from the customer hand, a quick slosh and a rub in liquids that would make any civilized health department shriek, wiped “dry” with a filthy rag that had just wiped the bar top, filled with the next drink and handed to the next customer.

This is the kind of stuff where you see it in a movie like so: the scoundrel hero walks into a dive bar in the spaceport, orders a drink, the camera makes sure you see the pustulent, greasy alien clean the vessel using the above process. The alien pours a questionable liquid into it, and slides it to the observing hero who has been keeping a stone-faced expression but for a hint of discomposure as he receives the drink. After the briefest pause in frame to let you know he questions what he is about to do, he downs the beverage. You can’t help but cringe along with the hero and think licking the alien might have been safer.

(Am not comparing or suggesting Montenegrins are in any way shape or form like the hypothetical alien)

This was my thought. DNA isn’t stable so it’s a lousy storage medium. Degrades over time, mutations in living organisms, etc.

I wouldn’t say at all cost, but Montenegro isn’t fun. Russians have built massive hotel resorts on the beaches there, the locals are unhappy that they’re there so they don’t like tourists. They’ll try to fight you on the beach because you’re not local. Get hassled by the cops because you’re not local, but you’ll be able to buy your way out of your problem if you’re lucky. People don’t want to talk to you, everyone is pretty cold and borderline rude. Go to a bar for a drink and you get a glass nominally washed/rinsed in tubs of soapy water behind the bar that the previous 100 glasses went through and hasn’t been changed out. The landscape is beautiful in a hostile sort of way, but there’s just not much reason to visit. It’s not even particularly inexpensive. The hotels will try to charge you for everything, including a scuff on the wall that you didn’t do, a chip on a planter on the balcony, etc. ridiculous money grabs.

So unreliable except for what 98% of the world uses it for?

I’m not interested in a tu quoque discussion.

This thread isn’t /changemymind, this is “what pisses you off”.

I’ve made my reasons clear.

I don’t think you understand “arbitrary.” The process of applying standard spelling to words began in the mid-1500s, whereas how you spelled a word prior the formalization of the words in these early “dictionaries” was indeed arbitrary. The efforts to standardize English are the exact opposite of arbitrary.

…and I disagree with that MO too. Because your audience chooses to write poorly or cannot spell I disagree that “dumbing yourself down” to perpetuate it or popularize yourself is helpful. That’s why I find it irritating. I’m not trying to make a sweeping discussion where we go down the rabbit hole of how intelligent people have to talk like “normal” people or how a politician might try to speak differently to pander to an audience, I get stuff like that happens. However, the point of this whole thread was essentially about what pisses us off. This is mine. If I had accepted the rationalizations for people being unwilling/-able to correctly use language learned prior to middle school I wouldn’t have posted this.

E: and I very much disagree that poor spelling and grammar is any stereotypical indication of someone’s skill regarding spelling because they’ve deliberately chosen to write poorly. A quick trip through plenty of forums other than tech-minded people like Nextdoor, mechanical-related, or even Facebook will turn up plenty of material from people that didn’t or shouldn’t have made it out of high school.

That’s not really what I’m talking about. I don’t care about whatever the latest slang is or the shorthand we use while texting, that’s fine. It’ll all be different again in 20 years.

I mean just the basics. “Could of” instead of could’ve, can’t figure out “too” or “to”. They’re, their, there. Stuff that should have been sorted out before middle school.