The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Or God for that matter. He made us in His image and the earliest Humans were from Asia, so they must have been yellow/brown/whatever skinned. Yet, every Bible printed, every religious image in the Western world shows him as a white man. Why is that? Do you think it could be some subtle form of manipulation for us Honkys? The whole region of Bethlehem, Jerusalem, etc., is in the Middle East area, and I don't see no white folk about. Could it be that the Bible my old school gave me and forced me to learn from was lying to me?
My personal favourite theory, that explains everything about the man called Jesus, is that he was a time-traveller. Think about it. Some mystical bloke, giving it all "that" with extra sass - I'd be pretty lairy if I'd just time-travelled. Healing the sick with modern and future medicine. And he's white. The first time-traveller (if the End of Days hasn't come like you're cheerily predicting) will probably be some white-bred American bloke, so he'll be well-versed in the Bible. It's a good theory, don't knock it. Expect to see the film. Soon. Starring Mark Wahlberg as Jesus. And William Shatner as God. Probably.
My personal favourite theory, that explains everything about the man called Jesus, is that he was a time-traveller. Think about it. Some mystical bloke, giving it all "that" with extra sass - I'd be pretty lairy if I'd just time-travelled. Healing the sick with modern and future medicine. And he's white. The first time-traveller (if the End of Days hasn't come like you're cheerily predicting) will probably be some white-bred American bloke, so he'll be well-versed in the Bible. It's a good theory, don't knock it. Expect to see the film. Soon. Starring Mark Wahlberg as Jesus. And William Shatner as God. Probably.
Page:
Forest Fan wrote:
> What is the question you want answering loki?
The question that I quoted. In the message pointing out that you didn't answer it. That's surely very obvious.
> What is the question you want answering loki?
The question that I quoted. In the message pointing out that you didn't answer it. That's surely very obvious.
Starlight wrote:
> I reckon god got it right with the Dinosaurs, there was no racism, no
> religion and no war, some of them were just hungrier than the others.
If it wasn't for sin, there would still be Dinosaurs today.
> I reckon god got it right with the Dinosaurs, there was no racism, no
> religion and no war, some of them were just hungrier than the others.
If it wasn't for sin, there would still be Dinosaurs today.
RastaBillySkank wrote:
> Meh. He obviously has no answer and is therefore refusing to
> acknowledge it. I'll leave it now, safe in the knowledge that he
> looks like a prat.
The question being...?
> Meh. He obviously has no answer and is therefore refusing to
> acknowledge it. I'll leave it now, safe in the knowledge that he
> looks like a prat.
The question being...?
What is the question you want answering loki?
I reckon god got it right with the Dinosaurs, there was no racism, no religion and no war, some of them were just hungrier than the others.
Meh. He obviously has no answer and is therefore refusing to acknowledge it. I'll leave it now, safe in the knowledge that he looks like a prat.
RastaBillySkank wrote:
> That's not answering my question.
>
> Why, in one story does God create man and woman at the same time, and
> in the other man first and woman then from man?
>
> And why were these two stories written so far apart? Theological
> scholars have dated the two stories, and the first one in Genesis
> (which was actually written second) was written 500 years after the
> other.
>
> Care to explain rather than sidestepping the issue?
That didn't answer his question Forest Fan.
> That's not answering my question.
>
> Why, in one story does God create man and woman at the same time, and
> in the other man first and woman then from man?
>
> And why were these two stories written so far apart? Theological
> scholars have dated the two stories, and the first one in Genesis
> (which was actually written second) was written 500 years after the
> other.
>
> Care to explain rather than sidestepping the issue?
That didn't answer his question Forest Fan.
Forest Fan wrote:
> Jesus Christ lived and is still living. Fact.
The only person older than 2000 years old was David LoPan, and Kurt Russell saw to him. It was all in the relexes.
> Jesus Christ lived and is still living. Fact.
The only person older than 2000 years old was David LoPan, and Kurt Russell saw to him. It was all in the relexes.
God Created ANIMALS, then He created HUMANS.
RastaBillySkank wrote:
> That's not answering my question.
>
> Why, in one story does God create man and woman at the same time, and
> in the other man first and woman then from man?
>
> And why were these two stories written so far apart? Theological
> scholars have dated the two stories, and the first one in Genesis
> (which was actually written second) was written 500 years after the
> other.
>
> Care to explain rather than sidestepping the issue?
Answer the damn questions
> That's not answering my question.
>
> Why, in one story does God create man and woman at the same time, and
> in the other man first and woman then from man?
>
> And why were these two stories written so far apart? Theological
> scholars have dated the two stories, and the first one in Genesis
> (which was actually written second) was written 500 years after the
> other.
>
> Care to explain rather than sidestepping the issue?
Answer the damn questions
Page: