Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
After reading various works from Bart Ehrman two names keep cropping up.
One is Celsus and the other Prophyry - The Latter even wrote 15 volumes of refutation of the Christian faith and from other sources the church found him a big threat.
What angers me is that Prophyry seen holes all over the Christians faith and belief structure and their writings yet his work was Destroyed.
Perhaps the reason that Christianity looks so legitimate today is because they managed to use Prophryrys arguments to fix the problems in their fucked up belief then burned his work so no one can see the out right lies the Church added / changed or deleted to make it more consistent.
I find myself so completely angry with the Church and Christians for this Injustice - You can never expect anyone to follow your faith or believe a word of it when in the early foundations of your faith you suppressed any criticizm.
One thing I challenge all Christians on here is one that Prophyry noted!
Quote:) Referring to Mark 16:18, Porphyry writes: "In another passage Jesus says: "These signs shall
witness to those who believe: they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover. And if they
drink any deadly drug, it will hurt them in no way." Well then: the proper thing to do would be to use
this process as a test for those aspiring to be priests, bishops or church officers. A deadly drug should
be put in front of them and [only] those who survive drinking it should be elevated in the ranks [of
the church].
If there are those who refuse to submit to such a test, they may as well admit that they do not
believe in the things that Jesus said. For if it is a doctrine of [Christian] faith that men can survive
being poisoned or heal the sick at will, then the believer who does not do such things either does not
believe them, or else believes them so feebly that he may as well not believe them." page 50
Know to be honest just the fact that guys kidke this existed and wrote in this time speaks to me about just how much the pax romana and the era of the 5 good emperors was a time of learning.
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
I would also recommend John W Haley's book Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible for further reading.
Much has been written on both sides of the debate with respect to discrepancies/contradictions and the Bible.
If it could be proven beyond doubt that God exists... and that He is the one spoken of in the Bible... would you repent of your sins and place your faith in Jesus Christ?
If a Christian made an argument based on the end of Mark, it would take two seconds for an atheist to note that the authenticity of that passage is disputed.
It is not disputed. It is bullshit which was tacked on later.
Learn the fucking difference.
Monkeyman, you might see if you can find "On The True Doctrine." Joseph Hoffman has reconstructed Celsus' work by stripping out all the bullshit that Origen used to "refute" him.
As with modern xtians, Origen apparently thought that all he had to do was spout some pious blather and all the problems would vanish. He was wrong.
Um...you used the word "disputed." Which is a little like saying that creationism and evolution are equivalent theories. They are not. Evolution is a theory. Creationism is horseshit.
The only dispute here is among xtian fundies who refuse to admit that their books have been edited.
(April 23, 2014 at 5:56 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Um...you used the word "disputed."
And it is. Personally, I lean toward your position on it. Some don't. Hence, a dispute. Interestingly, you quibble with a Christian who agrees with you rather than slamming the atheist who made an argument from the passage.
After reading various works from Bart Ehrman two names keep cropping up.
One is Celsus and the other Prophyry - The Latter even wrote 15 volumes of refutation of the Christian faith and from other sources the church found him a big threat.
What angers me is that Prophyry seen holes all over the Christians faith and belief structure and their writings yet his work was Destroyed.
Perhaps the reason that Christianity looks so legitimate today is because they managed to use Prophryrys arguments to fix the problems in their fucked up belief then burned his work so no one can see the out right lies the Church added / changed or deleted to make it more consistent.
I find myself so completely angry with the Church and Christians for this Injustice - You can never expect anyone to follow your faith or believe a word of it when in the early foundations of your faith you suppressed any criticizm.
One thing I challenge all Christians on here is one that Prophyry noted!
Quote:) Referring to Mark 16:18, Porphyry writes: "In another passage Jesus says: "These signs shall
witness to those who believe: they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover. And if they
drink any deadly drug, it will hurt them in no way." Well then: the proper thing to do would be to use
this process as a test for those aspiring to be priests, bishops or church officers. A deadly drug should
be put in front of them and [only] those who survive drinking it should be elevated in the ranks [of
the church].
If there are those who refuse to submit to such a test, they may as well admit that they do not
believe in the things that Jesus said. For if it is a doctrine of [Christian] faith that men can survive
being poisoned or heal the sick at will, then the believer who does not do such things either does not
believe them, or else believes them so feebly that he may as well not believe them." page 50
Ehrman hasn't a clue what he's talking about, when it comes to his wild theories on the early church.
Porphyry believed that Daniel was written late, a sceptic's view that's now been well disproven...
For Religion & Health see:[/b][/size] Williams & Sternthal. (2007). Spirituality, religion and health: Evidence and research directions. Med. J. Aust., 186(10), S47-S50.-LINK
The WIN/Gallup End of Year Survey 2013 found the US was perceived to be the greatest threat to world peace by a huge margin, with 24% of respondents fearful of the US followed by: 8% for Pakistan, and 6% for China. This was followed by 5% each for: Afghanistan, Iran, Israel, North Korea.-LINK
"That's disgusting. There were clean athletes out there that have had their whole careers ruined by people like Lance Armstrong who just bended thoughts to fit their circumstances. He didn't look up cheating because he wanted to stop, he wanted to justify what he was doing and to keep that continuing on." - Nicole Cooke
Jesus said these signs will accompany those who believe. If there is a group of christians and there are individuals in the group who have done these things, then they are a witness to the believers. Those who believe will able to show that these things have happened among them, not that they all are able to do those things. Paul was bitten by a poisonous snake and was unaffected (Acts 28:3-6). Peter healed the sick (Acts 5:15) and the apostles spoke in tongues (Acts 2:4). I don't know of a biblical reference about anyone who drank poison and survived, but if there are examples of the other things happening, I don't see any reason why this would not have taken place also.
