(March 16, 2017 at 6:50 pm)Fake Messiah Wrote:

(March 16, 2017 at 2:27 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: The bible is a "choose your own adventure" book.
You can justify/condemn anything using it by skipping to the parts you want.

When you think about it N-S might be up to something: like he says the linear reading of Bible is wrong, because when you read it from beginning to the end you get a lot of people butchering people to please god and you think only a retarded maniac could think this book actually speaks something moral and good. But when you read it backward you get a lot of people bringing dead people back to life and suddenly it is a very moral book.

So, the buy-bull is iron age country music?

(March 17, 2017 at 3:28 pm)PETE_ROSE Wrote: I do not subscribe to any denomination of Christianity.  Neither did Christ, He was Jewish.  I don't attend church either, haven't in closing on a decade now.  I would prefer to stick to the King James or HCSB.

OK, I didn't know you are not tied to any denomination and I understand you - I wouldn't want to be tied with any of them since they're pretty messed up. Indeed, you must overturn the history of theology, rewriting it to conform to your liberal and I guess science-friendly faith (I mean is it science friendly?).

Certainly you're not going to fall into the trap like those guys Aquinas and Augustine, because they read the Bible literal and linear way or as you guys put it: "the wrong way" and concluded many things later refuted by science: a young Earth, instantaneous creation, the historical reality of Adam and Eve, paradise, and Noah and his Ark.

Indeed;

The religion about Jesus is Christianity

The religion of Jesus is Judaism

(March 17, 2017 at 1:13 pm)Brian37 Wrote:

(March 17, 2017 at 1:07 pm)Noari Wrote: The Quran is not set up in a time linear fashion. It is ordered from longest book to shortest. So, while you could compare uses of words or phrases, reading it from end to beginning won't change much.

Who cares what order the Koran or Bible or Jewish OT were written they were all written in an age of ignorance by humans who didn't know any better.

They were written by humans trying to understand the world around them. There are many reasons to desire to understand more about the texts and what they can teach us about these people, their time, their lifestyle, their understanding of the world, anthropologically, historically, sociologically, economically, politically. The theological veracity of the texts is not the only determinant of their importance as historical and cultural documents.

I actually think religion has much more to do with trying to understand the world within them than it does with the world they live in. We are a mystery to ourselves. People seem motivated to replace that with certainty, no matter how poorly founded.

(March 18, 2017 at 11:42 am)Noari Wrote:

(March 17, 2017 at 1:13 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Who cares what order the Koran or Bible or Jewish OT were written they were all written in an age of ignorance by humans who didn't know any better.

They were written by humans trying to understand the world around them. There are many reasons to desire to understand more about the texts and what they can teach us about these people, their time, their lifestyle, their understanding of the world, anthropologically, historically, sociologically, economically, politically. The theological veracity of the texts is not the only determinant of their importance as historical and cultural documents.

Do they give us any understanding about that time that we don't get from other, more reliable sources?  I don't think so.

(March 18, 2017 at 11:42 am)Noari Wrote:

(March 17, 2017 at 1:13 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Who cares what order the Koran or Bible or Jewish OT were written they were all written in an age of ignorance by humans who didn't know any better.

They were written by humans trying to understand the world around them. There are many reasons to desire to understand more about the texts and what they can teach us about these people, their time, their lifestyle, their understanding of the world, anthropologically, historically, sociologically, economically, politically. The theological veracity of the texts is not the only determinant of their importance as historical and cultural documents.

"Jew" is a religion, not a race, not a nation. "Christianity" is a religion, not a race, not a nation. Buddhist is a religion, not a race, not a nation. Islam is a religion, not a race, not a nation. Hindu/Sikh, also religions, not races, not nations. Nobody can leave their skin tone or facial features, but humans go from one religion to another all the time, and many simply ditch their former religion. Human beings are related by DNA going back way further than any written or even oral traditions. 

I do agree that it is important to know history, but one should NOT confuse a historian or anthtropolist with a theologian. A historian/scientist simply report without selling. A theologian sells, a preacher sells, and even an individual without a degree sells their society they think is great. Huge difference between history and science and a salesman trying to convince you you have the right club.

Jew is a religion that splintered off of the Canaanites and even Buddhism is a spin off of Hinduism. Sammy Davis Jr called himself a Jew and he was black. Don't know if Richard Gere is still a Buddhist but was reported to claim to be for a long time. There are white Christians and black Christians all over the world. There are light skinned Muslims and dark skinned Muslims all over the world. There are also white atheists and black atheists and former Muslims now atheists and even former Jews and former Buddhists now atheists.

There is only 1 race, the human race. Religions are POSITIONS people hold, they are not our DNA.

(March 15, 2017 at 10:18 am)PETE_ROSE Wrote: For this thread let us lump all denominations of atheism, agnosticism, and soft non deistic worldviews into one.

Feel free to state your  best argument or  compelling reasons.

LMFAO.

/thread

(March 20, 2017 at 1:54 pm)AceBoogie Wrote:

(March 15, 2017 at 10:18 am)PETE_ROSE Wrote: For this thread let us lump all denominations of atheism, agnosticism, and soft non deistic worldviews into one.

Feel free to state your  best argument or  compelling reasons.

LMFAO.

/thread

I will lump all the theists, deists and pantheists into one and explain why there are all wrong.

They appeal to the supernatural and there is no evidence that supernatural is a thing.

The end.

(March 17, 2017 at 6:55 pm)Brian37 Wrote:

(March 17, 2017 at 3:28 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: I'd start here. I cannot recommend it strongly enough. If he develops his thoughts on Mark demonstrating (contrary to received opinion) a high christology further it will surely have a profound effect on NT scholarship.

Reading Backwards

There is no "NT scholorship" anymore than being an expert on Star Wars makes Yoda real. Theologians are apologists nothing more. 

"Reading Backwards" yea so what? The first 3 original Star Wars movies ended up being prequels to which the following new movies were written after the fact to be stories BEFORE the original 3. 

There is no evidence that a man named Jesus existed outside the bible's claims to confirm he existed. The oldest gospel was written way after the alleged death of the Jesus Character.[1] Josephus does not count and also was not an "eyewitness". The first compiled completed book didn't get voted on until 329 at the Council of Nicea. [2] It took over 1,000 years from the OT to the first VOTED ON completed bible and over 40 authors with books left out. [3] It seems inefficient to me to have an alleged "all powerful" god take all that time and use flawed humans to complete it with even further revisions and newer versions since. Not to mention in that 1700 years since the first completed version even among Christian sects humans have been arguing and even murdering over those different interpretations. [4]

But lets pretend he did exist, he didn't, but lets pretend he did. He would not have been a god or the "son of a god". He would have simply been a man who looked at the current surrounding religions and decided to start a new one. Just like L Ron Hubbard, a si fi writer conned people so much Scientology was started. Nobody magically is born without a second set of DNA. Nobody survives the act of torture the death story would have you believe. 

The way the NT is written reads like people trying to score political points using a popular name of that era trying to compete to create a new movement. [5] It is far more likely during the alleged time that a legend was created over a movement to which a minority group stood up to authority. [6] Much like Plato's Apology is a story not a real account of Socrates challenge to authority. Everyone likes an underdog story.

It does not matter to me one bit if he existed, there is no evidence he did. It still would not make men with magic super powers real. It would merely mean a person managed to split off from the social norms of the time and start a new business. [7] No different than when Coke and Pepsi compete. No different than saying Yuengling beer is much older than Budweiser but both are still beer, and even today you have aspiring brewers making beer in their homes hoping to make it big.

There is no such thing as a magic baby with super powers and nobody survives rigor mortis. [8] There are just humans whom market claims, some truly believe what they claim, and some are flat out con artists and don't care.

1. One significant thing you seem to be overlooking is that without Jesus, there are no Christians. There is ample evidence of Christians and their beliefs outside the NT:
   A. EVIDENCE: There were churches in many major cities stretching from Palestine to Rome before Paul started to write his letters to them around 50ad. Not only were there churches, but they believed in the major events outlined in the gospels prior to the gospels and Paul's letters. 
   B. EVIDENCE: Tacitus referred to the large community of Christians in Rome regarding the events of 64AD
   C. EVIDENCE: Thallus discussed the crucifixion of Jesus around 52AD. His work is lost but was referenced by Julius Africanus in 221AD.
   D. EVIDENCE: Pliny the Younger asked Emperor Trajan in 112 on how to deal with the Christians. 
   E. EVIDENCE: Despite your attempt to exclude, Josephus was a historian writing mainly about the political struggle of the Jews with Rome for which Jesus was not an important figure (yet). Since Jesus was not of interest to Josephus' overall goal, his mention is important in confirming he existed. 
   F. EVIDENCE: Later the Talmud calls Jesus a sorcerer and that his power comes from evil spirits--which 1) recognizes Jesus exists and 2) does not deny the miracles--only their source

You may not like the evidence, but there is large amounts of evidence that points to the fact that Jesus not only walked the earth, but people genuinely believed he was the Son of God that came to make possible a relationship with God. 

2. The Christian community had decided long before 329 what books were to be regarded as authority. The way you summarize it is intentional because you think it strengthens your argument. However, it ignores actual facts.

3. The Jews would disagree. Ask them--they wrote it. 

4. Your complaint seems to be with people. 
 
5. Nope. It would be abhorrent to a Jew to propose (let alone find followers for) a new religion that deifies someone in order to play some long-game where any goals would not be achieved for generations. Your conspiracy theory is nonsense. 

6. Talk about no evidence. 

7. You cannot get around the fact that there is ample evidence that people believed the claims of Jesus immediately following his death--even prior to them being written down in the Gospels. You need to come up with a theory that accounts for all the evidence that is more plausible than what it appears to be. You have not. 

8. Your objection to the whole story seems to be that miracles do not happen. Well, if you object to evidence that miracles happen by saying we can't accept that because miracles don't happen, you are just arguing in a circle.

---

(March 20, 2017 at 2:07 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote:

(March 20, 2017 at 1:54 pm)AceBoogie Wrote: LMFAO.

/thread

I will lump all the theists, deists and pantheists into one and explain why there are all wrong.

They appeal to the supernatural and there is no evidence that supernatural is a thing.

The end.

Along with other things, the NT contains all kind of evidence. So, there seems to be evidence. You may not know enough about it to find it compelling evidence, but you can't make the claim there is none.