For People Who Think There Was No Historical Jesus

[jstrodel]

world class = the ability to pursuade people, measured in thousands of books, that they don't have to do the difficult things the Bible asks them too.

[downbeatplumb]

Does he say "Mamma Mia" as well?

Damn you Stimbo, now I have that tune in my head.

---

world class = the ability to pursuade people, measured in thousands of books, that they don't have to do the difficult things the Bible asks them too.

You put your finger on it.
I just don't want to banish my wife till she's finished her "time" and sacrificed a bird or two so she can come back in the house.

Leviticus 15:25-15:30

No.... wait..... its that I can smell bullshit and the bible reeks of it.

[jstrodel]

When you say "smell bullshit", that is your cue to let "common sense" filled with all sorts of 21st century presuppositions enter in to a nuanced and complicated understanding of the ancient world and how that relates to a systemic philosophy and theology of life.

You are willing to reject any systematizing of your own, and base you rejection of the ancient world on pure 21st century prejudice, without questioning the strengths or merits of that prejudice or proving it in any way. Then you consider Christians fools because they do not submit what they do to the rigorous methods of science that play no part in your "smelling of bullshit".

[ThomM]

When you say "smell bullshit", that is your cue to let "common sense" filled with all sorts of 21st century presuppositions enter in to a nuanced and complicated understanding of the ancient world and how that relates to a systemic philosophy and theology of life.

You are willing to reject any systematizing of your own, and base you rejection of the ancient world on pure 21st century prejudice, without questioning the strengths or merits of that prejudice or proving it in any way. Then you consider Christians fools because they do not submit what they do to the rigorous methods of science that play no part in your "smelling of bullshit".

READ the BIBLE - from the first page to the last. IT is all ONE book.
IT is not 21st century prejudice that has people questioning it - although there are things we KNOW to be true today - that contradict the bible as it was compiled in the 4th century.

Now - we KNOW that genesis is pretty much a bunch of ancient myth and legend. IT has errors in the very first page (morning and evening on earth are cause by the rotation of the earth on its axis - based on which part of the surface is facing the earth at a given time - NO SUN - no morning and evening).

It is clear that the bible is a writing of ancient MYTH and legend - when they say that god created two great lights - the moon does not generate light - it only reflects the sun's light.

We also know that there are plenty of seed bearing plants that are POISONOUS to humans - so a human cannot use every seed bearing plant for food. They knew that 2000 years ago too.

THe story of Adam and EVE is a nice fairy tale - but there were LOTS of humans on earth long before 6000 years ago - and a god would have known that. S o - why did the christ - in his diatribe against WOMEN in 1 Timothy 2 - use the sin of EVE as a reason why women should be completely submissive to and have NO authority over men? ANd that is in the New Testament.

ANd what is the moral tale of the Great Flood - when you MUST consider that there were at least 10% of the population of people UNDER the age of reason and responsibility and could NOT have done anything to deserve to be "drowned".

How about the tale of the Passover - what did the first born of Egypt (Especially those under age as well) do to deserve to be MURDERED because the Pharaoh - over which they Had NO control - would NOT budge?

OR how about the tale of Abraham and Isaac. IT does not make sense.
WE are told that the "good god" does not TEMPT people - but he tempted Abraham to murder his son. OF course - Abraham should have REFUSED to do so - because god would NOT ask him to murder his son. ANd Abraham LIED to the god - when he said that Isaac was his ONLY son - because Ishmael was ALSO HIS SON..

EVEN if we ignore all of the errors -and contradiction of the bible - one would expect that there would be a massive amount of documentation of the christ on earth DURING the GOLDEN AGE OF ROME - where they recorded the results of Tortoise races - and we st\ill have those results.
And yet - there is NOT one single document extant - from the supposed time of the christ - that even mentions his name.

Now - let us go to the New Testament again. The christ was wandering in the desert - and the devil took him to an exceedingly HIGH place from which he could see ALL the kingdoms of the world. NOTE - since ONLY the christ and the devil would have been there - the story HAD to have come from the christ unless you want to admit that the passage was inspired by the devil. ANd the christ - being god - should have know that this is impossible - so would the devil if it existed as well.

And NONE of the above are truly scientific complaints. THey are simply facts. IF we use science we can justify saying that far more of the bible is nonsense as well - but we do not need to.

There is nothing that these religions said that is new - the so called golden rule - was said in the Rig Veda - long before the christ - and said by dozens of noted people before the christ as well. THe morality of the bible is nothing that is not in Confucius or Buddha - neither of which believe in a "god".

THe problem is that Education teaches us to question what is said - and when we determine that what is said is NOT true - or makes no sense - it would be stupid for a person to continue to claim something is true when they know it cannot be. So - once we determine enough of the belief is not true - we can reject is - as YOU have rejected lots of others.

IF you want to know what religion is true - ask theists.

IT is NOT xtianity - if you ask xtians - they will give lots of reasons why ALL of the sects of the religion are wrong.

Of course - they will also give lots of reasons why all of the other religions are false as well too.

Leaving NONE standing

When YOU can get ALL christians to accept the SAME story completely - get back to us - with the new bible - that has no errors in it

[Minimalist]

You are willing to reject any systematizing of your own, and base you rejection of the ancient world on pure 21st century prejudice

I'll take 21st century prejudice over 4th century horseshit, any day.

[jstrodel]

When you say "smell bullshit", that is your cue to let "common sense" filled with all sorts of 21st century presuppositions enter in to a nuanced and complicated understanding of the ancient world and how that relates to a systemic philosophy and theology of life.

You are willing to reject any systematizing of your own, and base you rejection of the ancient world on pure 21st century prejudice, without questioning the strengths or merits of that prejudice or proving it in any way. Then you consider Christians fools because they do not submit what they do to the rigorous methods of science that play no part in your "smelling of bullshit".

READ the BIBLE - from the first page to the last. IT is all ONE book.
IT is not 21st century prejudice that has people questioning it - although there are things we KNOW to be true today - that contradict the bible as it was compiled in the 4th century.

Now - we KNOW that genesis is pretty much a bunch of ancient myth and legend. IT has errors in the very first page (morning and evening on earth are cause by the rotation of the earth on its axis - based on which part of the surface is facing the earth at a given time - NO SUN - no morning and evening).

It is clear that the bible is a writing of ancient MYTH and legend - when they say that god created two great lights - the moon does not generate light - it only reflects the sun's light.

We also know that there are plenty of seed bearing plants that are POISONOUS to humans - so a human cannot use every seed bearing plant for food. They knew that 2000 years ago too.

THe story of Adam and EVE is a nice fairy tale - but there were LOTS of humans on earth long before 6000 years ago - and a god would have known that. S o - why did the christ - in his diatribe against WOMEN in 1 Timothy 2 - use the sin of EVE as a reason why women should be completely submissive to and have NO authority over men? ANd that is in the New Testament.

ANd what is the moral tale of the Great Flood - when you MUST consider that there were at least 10% of the population of people UNDER the age of reason and responsibility and could NOT have done anything to deserve to be "drowned".

How about the tale of the Passover - what did the first born of Egypt (Especially those under age as well) do to deserve to be MURDERED because the Pharaoh - over which they Had NO control - would NOT budge?

OR how about the tale of Abraham and Isaac. IT does not make sense.
WE are told that the "good god" does not TEMPT people - but he tempted Abraham to murder his son. OF course - Abraham should have REFUSED to do so - because god would NOT ask him to murder his son. ANd Abraham LIED to the god - when he said that Isaac was his ONLY son - because Ishmael was ALSO HIS SON..

EVEN if we ignore all of the errors -and contradiction of the bible - one would expect that there would be a massive amount of documentation of the christ on earth DURING the GOLDEN AGE OF ROME - where they recorded the results of Tortoise races - and we st\ill have those results.
And yet - there is NOT one single document extant - from the supposed time of the christ - that even mentions his name.

Now - let us go to the New Testament again. The christ was wandering in the desert - and the devil took him to an exceedingly HIGH place from which he could see ALL the kingdoms of the world. NOTE - since ONLY the christ and the devil would have been there - the story HAD to have come from the christ unless you want to admit that the passage was inspired by the devil. ANd the christ - being god - should have know that this is impossible - so would the devil if it existed as well.

And NONE of the above are truly scientific complaints. THey are simply facts. IF we use science we can justify saying that far more of the bible is nonsense as well - but we do not need to.

There is nothing that these religions said that is new - the so called golden rule - was said in the Rig Veda - long before the christ - and said by dozens of noted people before the christ as well. THe morality of the bible is nothing that is not in Confucius or Buddha - neither of which believe in a "god".

THe problem is that Education teaches us to question what is said - and when we determine that what is said is NOT true - or makes no sense - it would be stupid for a person to continue to claim something is true when they know it cannot be. So - once we determine enough of the belief is not true - we can reject is - as YOU have rejected lots of others.

IF you want to know what religion is true - ask theists.

IT is NOT xtianity - if you ask xtians - they will give lots of reasons why ALL of the sects of the religion are wrong.

Of course - they will also give lots of reasons why all of the other religions are false as well too.

Leaving NONE standing

When YOU can get ALL christians to accept the SAME story completely - get back to us - with the new bible - that has no errors in it

Your post has way too many points to respond to. Argue one of them with evidence and formal logic.

---

You are willing to reject any systematizing of your own, and base you rejection of the ancient world on pure 21st century prejudice

I'll take 21st century prejudice over 4th century horseshit, any day.

You will get a small view of the world then.

[Undeceived]

Hi, Thom. You have a keen mind. Let me see if I can answer some of your points.

Now - we KNOW that genesis is pretty much a bunch of ancient myth and legend. IT has errors in the very first page (morning and evening on earth are cause by the rotation of the earth on its axis - based on which part of the surface is facing the earth at a given time - NO SUN - no morning and evening).

I presume you're referring to the fact that there's no sun, yet the Bible refers to a "day." Genesis 5:
"God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day."

God is calling light "day." That does not mean an actual day with light (as we know it) passed. There was evening and morning--but those need not be determined by sunlight. I don't see the issue here. The Bible is vague, but the writer(s) of Genesis also knew that the sun determined what was a day. Obviously they were referring to something other than a conventional day with 24hrs between sunrises because there was no sun. No astronomical knowledge necessary.

It is clear that the bible is a writing of ancient MYTH and legend - when they say that god created two great lights - the moon does not generate light - it only reflects the sun's light.

A light is a light. The moon need not generate light to be called a light. Genesis was written for people on earth, from their perspective.

We also know that there are plenty of seed bearing plants that are POISONOUS to humans - so a human cannot use every seed bearing plant for food.

In Eden, there was no sin or disease or anything else evil. No seeds were poisonous. At least, that seems a reasonable interpretation. When sin entered the world, there was enough damage to go around.

THe story of Adam and EVE is a nice fairy tale - but there were LOTS of humans on earth long before 6000 years ago

This could constitute a whole thread by itself. I think you need to scrutinize your evidence very carefully. Radiometric dating can be innaccurate at times, especially after a global flood. If you seek evidence for the flood, look here: http://www.answersingenesis.org/assets/i...ting-4.jpg And here: http://creation.com/the-yellowstone-petrified-forests And here: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_Peat_..._they_form All these inconsistencies (even strata, petrified forests, coal beds) formed in same time frame--between the Paleozoic and Precambrian periods. Coincidentally, this is also when the Cambrian explosion, the largest recorded extinction in history, occurred.

S o - why did the christ - in his diatribe against WOMEN in 1 Timothy 2 - use the sin of EVE as a reason why women should be completely submissive to and have NO authority over men? ANd that is in the New Testament.

Paul wrote the letter, and it was directed towards a particular group of untrained Ephesian women. Paul is using Eve's story to illustrate that the Ephesian women are also vulnerable to deception, and therefore should not be put in a position of authority. And he is not so partial. 1 Corinthians 11:11-12:
"Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman."

ANd what is the moral tale of the Great Flood - when you MUST consider that there were at least 10% of the population of people UNDER the age of reason and responsibility and could NOT have done anything to deserve to be "drowned".
How about the tale of the Passover - what did the first born of Egypt (Especially those under age as well) do to deserve to be MURDERED because the Pharaoh - over which they Had NO control - would NOT budge?

This seems to be the question, "Why do bad things happen to good people?" The answer is, there are no good people. "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Rom 3:23). Ephesians 2:3 states that we are all "by nature children of wrath," or, by nature, sinful. Our hearts are not pure, and never have been. Being under the age of reason does not matter. That is why we so desperately need God's forgiveness and cure.

WE are told that the "good god" does not TEMPT people - but he tempted Abraham to murder his son.

To "tempt" means to entice someone to do something by appealing to their personal desires. Abraham did not desire to murder his son. I believe the word you are looking for is "command." God can command anything. He told Abraham to sacrifice his son so that we might read the story, which happens to be a perfect pre-enactment of Jesus' sacrifice. Isaac stands for us. We deserve to die, but God provides the ram (Jesus) to take our place on the sacrificial altar.

OF course - Abraham should have REFUSED to do so - because god would NOT ask him to murder his son.

Abraham thought the same as you, which is why he told Isaac "God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering" (Gen 22:8). He trusted God to spare or resurrect Isaac.

Abraham LIED to the god - when he said that Isaac was his ONLY son - because Ishmael was ALSO HIS SON.

Isaac was the only son of the promise (Gen 21:12).

one would expect that there would be a massive amount of documentation of the christ on earth DURING the GOLDEN AGE OF ROME - where they recorded the results of Tortoise races - and we st\ill have those results.

Historians in Jesus' day were either Pharisees or subjects of Herod or Pilate, all of which despised him. Mentioning Jesus would have been a form of honor, which they obviously refused to give. And you overstate the circumstances. There are no contemporary mentions of Pilate either (while archaeology confirms his existence). Nor was much attention given to the other pretend Messiahs who came along every couple years.

There is nothing that these religions said that is new - the so called golden rule - was said in the Rig Veda - long before the christ - and said by dozens of noted people before the christ as well. THe morality of the bible is nothing that is not in Confucius or Buddha - neither of which believe in a "god".

The golden rule:
In Confucianism: “Do not impose on others what you do not wish for yourself.”
Buddhism: "Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful."
Hinduism: "One should never do that to another which one regards as injurious to one’s own self."
Humanism: "Do not do to others what you would not want them to do to you."
Jesus: "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets."
Do you see the difference? The Bible calls for agape, or self-sacrificial love. The closest Buddhism comes is in its denial of the self-- "since the self doesn't exist we ought not to care for it." But we should expect some religions to come close, because God is our common Creator. He made us in His image, instilling us with a conscience able to discern between right and wrong.

When YOU can get ALL christians to accept the SAME story completely - get back to us - with the new bible - that has no errors in it

The Bible is prone to no error, people are. Would you throw away a book simply because some individuals misunderstand it?

[FallentoReason]

In Eden, there was no sin or disease or anything else evil.

Correct. The snake and its temptation upon Eve was not evil in the slightest.

The Bible is prone to no error

Correct. It is in fact the rest of the ancient world that decided to ignore a census that our Lord recorded in Luke's Gospel.

[Minimalist]

You will get a small view of the world then.

As long as it is not the delusions of ignorant theistic fools, I'll be just fine.

[downbeatplumb]

.

You are willing to reject any systematizing of your own, and base you rejection of the ancient world on pure 21st century prejudice, without questioning the strengths or merits of that prejudice or proving it in any way. Then you consider Christians fools because they do not submit what they do to the rigorous methods of science that play no part in your "smelling of bullshit".

The ancient world lacked modern tools and methods and believed an awful lot of rubbish.

Religion is just one way in which they were wrong.

They firmly believed in the "dog heads" which were people who had the heads of dogs.

The Eastern Orthodox Christian church even had one as a saint.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynocephaly

Their beliefs in the humors of the body led to stupid treatments for illnesses and countless needles deaths.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humorism

Their history recording was haphazard and was mainly propaganda.
Especially where it came to powerful kings and battles. and then you have hagiography were extremely spurious stories are presented as fact.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hagiography

Then there was alchemy,scrying and all kinds of other bullshit.

What was needed was a way of separating fact from bullshit.
Enter the scientific method.
This is the only way to actually get to the truth.
If something is not knowable by the scientific method then I call bullshit.