Is Easter Really a Christian Celebration? ??

[Pudgy]

Do you see what I see? Fuzzy photos?

if you extracted those by cropping from a montage of accumulated photos on one large page, that would explain it.

[The Librarian]

The last one I posted in this thread is somewhat fuzzy......  

But this other one for example is not... 

 

 

[Pudgy]

If you look at the address “1879” at the top ( year built?), that’s not sharp, either. Solid colors make it appear sharper. If you don’t care, I don’t care. Merely a matter of observation about something about which I have no vested interests.

[The Librarian]

Since these were "recovered" from an older Google archive (copies from the JW-archive)... I wouldn't be surprised if they degraded the resolution on some of them.... sadly. ;-( 

[Pudgy]

That sounds like an explanation that most closely fits the facts. When they archive stuff, they probably bump the resolution down to 125 by 160 or something.

I like razor-sharp pictures so when I start running out of space, I start typing in all lowercase letters, to save disk space.

[Matthew9969]

On 4/11/2017 at 7:10 AM, John Lindsay Barltrop said:

@JW Insider "Constantine was not an emperor in the 3rd century

I guess when you make so many posts, as Bible Speaks does, it is probably easy to make a slip...........Constantine started his reign in 324 CE, easy to say 3^rd Century, when you look at 324, rather than the 4^th Century.......... Constantine the Great became the first "Christian" Roman Emperor, the "state cult" changed to "Christianity," (Inverted comas mine). Now, oddly enough, the first "Christian" emperors all still retained the title of Pontifex Maximus (a traditional title for Emperors) which, under imperial law (though not Church law), actually made them the "Head of the Church" ! It was by this authority, for example, that Constantine called the Council of Nicaea (325 AD) to settle the Arian controversy (Wikipedia)..............and of course Constantine adopted the views of Athanasius rather than those of Arius...........Athanasian Creed.......trinity doctrine.......and of course many other false doctrines associated with and still held by christendom today.

 

just my thoughts..........and a"little" more on Constantine

 

 

Yeah, he should have taken the red pill.

[Fausto Hoover]

3 hours ago, Matthew9969 said:

@JW Insider "Constantine was not an emperor in the 3rd century

I guess when you make so many posts, as Bible Speaks does, it is probably easy to make a slip...........Constantine started his reign in 324 CE

Also known as Constantine the Great, was Roman emperor from AD 306 to 337. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_Great

Roman Emperor Constantine called the Council of Nicaea in AD (324/325) when he became sole emperor.

https://www.worldhistory.org/timeline/Constantine_I/

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Constantine-I-Roman-emperor/Legacy

Constantine was a product of the late 3rd century.

Constantine was born probably in the later 280s CE. A typical product of the military governing class of the later 3rd century.

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Constantine-I-Roman-emperor

Nothing in past history can be absolute; it is often subject to interpretation and debate. Historians, archeologists, and scholars all bring different perspectives to the table, allowing for a variety of interpretations. For example, an anthropologist studying a particular culture may find evidence that supports an ancient practice that another anthropologist may dispute. Similarly, a historian may uncover an account of an event in history that another historian may dispute. Even the same historian may view the same event differently depending on the sources they use and the way they interpret them. The same can be said for archeologists; they may come to different conclusions depending on the artifacts they uncover. Furthermore, the interpretation of texts and other primary sources can also vary depending on the person interpreting them. It is crucial to bear in mind that nothing in previous events can be considered definite, and a diversity of standpoints and explanations are expected to coexist.

[Pudgy]

 

Esteemed scholars and sagacious beings, including Cartoon Canines and CGI Cats ….. gather 'round as we delve into the veritable labyrinth of epistemological wonderment!

In contemplating the nature of truth and the vast expanse of subjective experience, a PROPOSITION emerges, resplendent in its audacity—namely, that every individual's opinion, irrespective of its content, bears an inherent validity that warrants our unwavering reverence.

Behold, the richness of the human condition! Amidst the tapestry of diverse perspectives, each one, a unique facet of the intellectual cosmos, imparts unto us a glimpse into the boundless realm of possibility.

For in the realm of cognition, where knowledge intertwines with perception, the emergence of truth assumes multifarious shades, akin to a kaleidoscope of intellectual brilliance.

As we navigate this intellectual expedition, we encounter the paradoxical symphony of competing viewpoints, intertwining like the cosmic dance of binary stars.

While conventional wisdom may dictate the existence of objective truth, we find solace in the inherent subjectivity of human consciousness.

It is within this realm of subjectivity that the seeds of personal truth are sown, sprouting forth like wildflowers in the fertile soil of individual introspection.

Moreover, let us not forget the art of linguistic expression! Language, that formidable tapestry of symbols, imbues our opinions with a richness that transcends mere conveyance.

Each thought, ensconced within the intricate web of lexicons, becomes a prism refracting the light of meaning. As such, within this marvelous linguistic kaleidoscope, the veracity of every opinion becomes a vibrant spectrum of authenticity.

Gentle minds, let us not dismiss the notion that in the realm of intellectual discourse, our perceptions, influenced by myriad factors such as cultural upbringing, personal experiences, and cognitive biases, shape the contours of our truth.

Thus, as we strive to comprehend the unfathomable depths of existence, it becomes apparent that to deny the legitimacy of any opinion would be tantamount to obfuscating the fundamental essence of human thought.

Therefore, in our noble pursuit of enlightenment, let us embrace the extraordinary tapestry of human consciousness, wherein every opinion, no matter its absurdity or incongruity, bequeaths upon us a morsel of wisdom, and thus, contributes to the vibrant mosaic of collective knowledge. For it is within the interplay of diverse perspectives that the grand tapestry of truth is woven, its intricacies unfolding before our awe-stricken intellects.

Thus, I submit, with the utmost aplomb, that within the boundless domain of human cognition, every opinion, without exception, assumes the sanctity of inherent rightness.

May this PROPOSITION inspire us to engage in fruitful dialogues, fostering a milieu of intellectual growth and unfettered exploration. Let us raise our voices, dear scholars, and rejoice in the splendorous notion that within the realm of ideas, all opinions are forever right!

…. brought to you by PUDGYCOIN ! … the only digital currency in the ten pound box!

 

[Pudgy]

3 hours ago, Fausto Hoover said:

Furthermore, the interpretation of texts and other primary sources can also vary depending on the person interpreting them. It is crucial to bear in mind that nothing in previous events can be considered definite, and a diversity of standpoints and explanations are expected to coexist.

 

[Fausto Hoover]

I believe that to claim someone is wrong while being wrong themselves is a situation that can be described more concisely. What could a canine possibly understand?

Is this another MightyMouse moment? In the eyes of scholars, such an opinion would be considered insignificant.

[Pudgy]

57 minutes ago, Fausto Hoover said:

I believe that to claim someone is wrong while being wrong themselves is a situation that can be described more concisely. What could a canine possibly understand?

Is this another MightyMouse moment? In the eyes of scholars, such an opinion would be considered insignificant.

 

 

This is Great Stuff! The fact you say that in all dead seriousness is incredibly funny!

ESPECIALLY since I don’t even care if “scholars” even HAVE eyes!

[Fausto Hoover]

A mere unproductive conversation has rendered insignificant the opinion on fundamental principles of human thought, enlightenment, conscience, and collective intelligence, which could have been resolved with a more intellectual and thorough analysis.

What's the point of writing a long post about something that nobody cares about?