Yeah, I'll read it, but I'm familiar with the point of view already. Christ was a great moral teacher terribly misunderstood by his disciples. They recorded his teachings, but mixed them in with supernatural elements to lend them credibility to those stupid, gullible first century people. The church, actually created by Peter and Paul (who had radically different versions of Christianity), grew in directions that the real Christ would have never conceived of. Textual evidence, please? :) Reading with antisupernatural premises requires that we seek explanations for the existence of a text that has two seemingly irreconciliable facets: 1. Absolutely irreplaceable moral teaching. 2. Absolutely unacceptable supernatural elements. So many of those confronted with the above dilemma attempt to solve it using a scenario similar to the one described above. So form criticism seeks to cull out the "original source text materials" from the Gospels and free them from the addenda that's surrounding it. Unfortunately, there's no physical textual evidence for such a scenario and, even more unfortunately, these people never seem to bother justifying their antisupernatural premises :) Course, they can't.... Jim <<Hey, Jim, buddy, There are so many holes here that I can't beginto plug. Besides which, if I continue this discussion any further, I'll have to break out a few of my Bibles, and you KNOW how much I hate to read Christian Mythology. However, I will save this post so that we can return here AFTER you've read HOLY BLOOD, HOLY GRAIL by Baigent, Lincoln, et al. That will answer (& give scriptural evidence) virtually all of your points here. Every believer (& ex-believer) should read this book. The sequal ain't bad neither... Respectfully yours, Thor>> ___________________________________________________________________ Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.