How other faiths view Jesus at Christmas time

[Mornac]

As far the NT being like the Magna Carta, you are making my distinction exactly.

--There is no distinction. All historical documents are considered to be “historical documants”.

Actually every work of fiction is also an historical document insofar as its respective place in history but that doesn't mean, for example, that Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughter House Five is historically accurate.

--That is correct. Although these are considered secondary sources that possess matter-of-fact information about a time period or event. Primary sources on the other hand, were written precisely to record historical events. For example: the chronicle of a man’s life and death and the ensueing actions of his followers. This becomes even more evident when the events are chronicled by more than one witness.

I don't think there was actually a Billy Pilgrim who became unstuck in time, even though there was an incident wherein the allies fire bombed Dresden.

--And who was say, Joseph of Arimethea ? A fictional character with such a gripping personality that he appears in all four Gospels for having done nothing more than donate a burial place for the crucified Jesus? Tell me, what does this man contribute to the alleged “fiction” that these four men collaborated upon.

And insofar as the issue of whether or not there was actually a man named Jesus, what difference does that make?

--It makes the difference between the Messias having actually been sent by God to His people in fulfillment of His promise and it not having yet taken place.

It's the substance of the teachings that matter, not that the story is literally true.

--If the story isn’t true than the teaching doesn’t matter.

[vel]

--Either show me where I have ever said anything like that or apologize for making it up out of whole cloth.

Either correct me in an unequivocal fashion or I stick by my assertion. You have not made yourself clear. Given your obfuscation I am not responsible for misunderstanding your point of view, if I am misunderstanding your point of view.

--I don’t even hold it.

Fine. Then tell us in a clear, concise manner.

--You’re already well aware of my policy to answer any and all questions no matter how mundane and/or stupid. My mind is an open book. If you ever want to know what’s on it, you need only ask. That’s’ just as true today as it was the day I stepped in here.

Your policy is to spin your Vortex^TM. That is what you do.

[vel]

--There is no distinction. All historical documents are considered to be “historical documants”.

"All historical documents are considered to be "historical documents."

I don't even know what that's supposed to mean. There is a distinction between a document being something from history, and a document that is an accurate depiction of history. If you can't make that distinction then I can't help you.

[Mornac]

Either correct me in an unequivocal fashion or I stick by my assertion. You have not made yourself clear. Given your obfuscation I am not responsible for misunderstanding your point of view, if I am misunderstanding your point of view.

Fine. Then tell us in a clear, concise manner.

Your policy is to spin your Vortex^TM. That is what you do.

--I can only address your concerns if you are able to state what they are in a clear, consise manner. if you have any questions, your need only ask them.

[Mornac]

I don't even know what that's supposed to mean.

--It means that any document that occurs in history, be it the Stele of Hammurabi or a ticket to a Black Hawks game from last year, is considered to be a "historical document" insofar some evidence of history can be gleaned from it.

There is a distinction between a document being something from history, and a document that is an accurate depiction of history. If you can't make that distinction then I can't help you.

--It's all evidence. Some examples are simply more comprehensive than others.

[Observer]

Mornac is just a Catholic version of Velleity.

That is not a good thing.

[vel]

Mornac is just a Catholic version of Velleity.

That is not a good thing.

You're a mean-spirited, angry, Mr. Potter type-mope. How good is that?