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!
Current time: December 4, 2024, 2:40 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
"Gospel Quest" (or The Jesus Timeline)
#81
RE: "Gospel Quest" (or The Jesus Timeline)
(August 10, 2014 at 1:49 am)Undeceived Wrote: Also, this date allows for the all-so-interesting celestial dance between 3-2 BC, which may have been what the Magi saw:
http://www.bethlehemstar.net/setting-the...ists-star/
When you get to it, I'm just dying for you to show us the single point vectoring that enabled the magi and shepherds to pinpoint the right house with a stationary guide millions of miles away.
Find the cure for Fundementia!
Reply
#82
RE: "Gospel Quest" (or The Jesus Timeline)
(August 8, 2014 at 9:12 pm)Undeceived Wrote: DeistPaladin and Minimalist, you both have been around here long enough to have received apologists' answers to your arguments. But your arguments seem to me to boil down to two claims: the God of the Bible is evil, and he was authored by deceptive people.

This thread is devoted to one simple questions, are the Gospels reliable? Changing the subject won't make them reliable.

(August 8, 2014 at 9:12 pm)Undeceived Wrote: What if God is good, though? What if he is love itself, as 1 John 4:8 describes? DeistPaladin, every judgment in the Bible is preceded by years, sometimes hundreds of years, of God's pleading for the people to repent.



The whole OT is about god favoring one people of all others for reasons unknown. He does awful things to some of his people, accepts human sacrifice, and does much worse to non Hebrews. But none of these things are history. Would you like a whole new thread explaining why most of Genesis is impossible, the story of Exodus didn't happen, and Israel wasn't concurred by the Hebrews as described. There's nothing historical to speak of in the Bible until Kings and Chronicles and they aren't all that reliable. I'll do it, but only if you promise to actually refute what I say by engaging with the arguments and not by just citing huge apologetic documents---quote the relevant portions instead. Then try to defend them from counter arguments. Hint, you are doing nothing remotely like that here.

(August 8, 2014 at 9:12 pm)Undeceived Wrote: All of this history. One overarching message. Ask yourself what's more likely: a combination of coincidence and collaboration... or God caring?
What is most likely is that it is story written during the Babylonian captivity for the purpose of uniting the Hebrews using traditional and conflicting sources.
If there is a god, I want to believe that there is a god.  If there is not a god, I want to believe that there is no god.
Reply
#83
RE: "Gospel Quest" (or The Jesus Timeline)
Quote:Also, this date allows for the all-so-interesting celestial dance between 3-2 BC, which may have been what the Magi saw:
http://www.bethlehemstar.net/setting-the...ists-star/


Uh-huh...

I can't wait for the explanation of this little piece of the star shit.

Quote:9 After they had heard the king, they went on their way, and the star they had seen when it rose went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was.


Whatever blithering moron wrote this nonsense thought of stars as lights in the sky - not what we now know stars to be. Unless the explanation is that they were right and modern science is wrong!
Reply
#84
RE: "Gospel Quest" (or The Jesus Timeline)
(August 10, 2014 at 7:13 pm)Brakeman Wrote:
(August 10, 2014 at 1:49 am)Undeceived Wrote: Also, this date allows for the all-so-interesting celestial dance between 3-2 BC, which may have been what the Magi saw:
http://www.bethlehemstar.net/setting-the...ists-star/
When you get to it, I'm just dying for you to show us the single point vectoring that enabled the magi and shepherds to pinpoint the right house with a stationary guide millions of miles away.

Quote:In 3/2 BC, Jupiter’s retrograde wandering would have called for our magus’ full attention. After Jupiter and Regulus had their kingly encounter, Jupiter continued on its path through the star field. But then it entered retrograde. It “changed its mind” and headed back to Regulus for a second conjunction. After this second pass it reversed course again for yet a third rendezvous with Regulus, a triple conjunction. A triple pass like this is more rare. Over a period of months, our watching magus would have seen the Planet of Kings dance out a halo above the Star of Kings. A coronation.
Thats a shitload of information from a couple of dots in the sky movig closer and further away.
So the claim is that the star was the planet Jupiter. The christian site reeks of smoke and mirrors, you have to follow a number of pages to even find out what they claim the star is, and they make a horridly bad claim that the star standing still was simply the apex of the retrograde. Never mind that no stopping occurred, only a perception changed. The god that gave us the bible was certainly dimwitted..

From a .EDU site..http://climate.gi.alaska.edu/curtis/astro2.html
Quote:Saturn-Regulus Conjunctions 29 years 1 month + 11 to 30 days

Interval between successive conjunctions; excluding triple conjunction intervals. For the brightest and nearest Saturn-star conjunctions.

So something that happens every 29 years or so, that has not been definitively matched to anything because a planet is not a star, that is millions of miles away moving in a direction that would be un-calculable before the invention of the telescope, this is your "proof" that jesus was born in the manner described in the gospels?

To a man walking on earth he could not orient himself with this as the earth is revolving and his perspective changes with the hour. The men of this time did not even own a watch. They in no way could have been guided to a house by Jupiter, or a real star.

This christian apology is not only childishly stupid, it is dishonest, as it is obvious that the story is written by one who knew nothing of the working of the cosmos nor knew anything about star reckoning. Even the sextant was not invented then.

You know the story that is being purported as factual, is not. You are lying to us. You are trying to deceive us so that we will mistakenly agree with your lies.
Find the cure for Fundementia!
Reply
#85
RE: "Gospel Quest" (or The Jesus Timeline)
(August 10, 2014 at 1:49 am)Undeceived Wrote: Also, this date allows for the all-so-interesting celestial dance between 3-2 BC, which may have been what the Magi saw:
http://www.bethlehemstar.net/setting-the...ists-star/

Ugh; not this Larson crap again.

I freely admit that certain minor details of my analysis might be flawed, owing to the paucity of the evidence provided. I have since revised my findings (and, time permitting, will be happy to do so again). Didn't make any substantial difference to the meat of it, though.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist.  This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair.  Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second.  That means there's a situation vacant.'
Reply
#86
RE: "Gospel Quest" (or The Jesus Timeline)
Let me know when you can track a "star" bouncing along the road between Jerusalem and "Bethlehem."

That should be entertaining.
Reply
#87
RE: "Gospel Quest" (or The Jesus Timeline)
(August 10, 2014 at 4:13 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote:
(August 9, 2014 at 12:14 am)Undeceived Wrote: Minimalist, are you saying that the majority of Bible scholars are wrong about the Bible? How is that different from saying astrophysicists don't know anything about stars?
I don't mean to make an argument from authority here, but neither should we resort to ad hominem.

Brakeman inspired me to respond to this post. When I first read it, I had disregarded it as the usual attempt to compare theology to science. I've grown a bit tired of pointing out how fields of science like astrophysics are studies of objective realities that are measurable and the tests/evidence can be conducted/discovered independently by another scientist in that field.

By "objective reality", I mean measurements of mass, kinetic energy, temperature, velocity, distance etc. can be measured in quantifiable ways. Personal opinions do not enter into it.

When an astrophysicist publishes an article, is it a straight line of facts, or is it an interpretation of the facts? For example, when they observe a star's "wobble" do they merely publish the sky coordinates on a timeline, or do they add their own hypothesis, namely that the "star" is actually a planet? In order to get anywhere in science, interpretations must be made, right?

(August 10, 2014 at 4:26 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: John's Jesus was still fuzzy on the identity issue but it was here that we start to see a Trinitarian Jesus, one who said "I and my father are one". Were you to read the Synoptics in isolation, you would not have any idea that Jesus was anything more than a holy man or a demigod offspring of Yahweh.

During Christ's trial, the chief priests ask Him point blank, "Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God." And He said,
• "I am." (Mark 14:60-62)
• "Yes, it is as you say." (Matt. 26: 63-65)
• "You are right in saying I am." (Luke 22:67-70)
Matthew 27:43 "He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, 'I am the Son of God.'"
In Mark 2:1-12, Jesus heals a paralytic. He had authority to forgive sins, which is something only God Himself can do. Then, to authenticate His claim, He demonstrated His power by healing the paralytic. Also, in Matthew 2:11; 14:33; 28:9, 17 and Luke 24:52 He accepts worship.
Matthew 1:23 "Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.'”
And then there's all the prophecies He fulfilled, something the synoptics authors could not have missed when they wrote:
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Miscellan...hecies.htm
In the Jewish context, a "son" is the heir and equal to his father. http://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-Son-of-God.html Moreover, Luke and Matthew make it clear the Jesus could not have been a demigod, since he was virgin-born.

(August 10, 2014 at 4:26 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote:
Quote:Also, this date allows for the all-so-interesting celestial dance between 3-2 BC, which may have been what the Magi saw:
http://www.bethlehemstar.net/setting-the...ists-star/
3-2 BCE would have been later than 4 BCE. Herod died in 4 BCE and so he couldn't have been talking with the wise men two years later.
The website makes the case that Herod died in 1 BC. There's a case for it, too:
http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/...608x245953
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-aki...-of-jesus/
None of this is conclusive; it just goes to show how little we know. The Bible is ambiguous. Any "proving" or "disproving" it will probably involve a lot of opinions. If the gospels are true, its authors would have focused on doctrine and the character of Jesus-- their contemporaries were well aware of recent events, a preliminary block of evidence would have served little purpose. If the gospels are false, there are no mathematical contradictions to indicate such.

(August 10, 2014 at 7:13 pm)Brakeman Wrote: When you get to it, I'm just dying for you to show us the single point vectoring that enabled the magi and shepherds to pinpoint the right house with a stationary guide millions of miles away.
I can't stand behind the website 100% (it's not scripture), but you might find it interesting. It involves science (imagine that)! Larson uses a professional astronomy program to determine the stars' formation at the time of Jesus' birth. It included one star/planet (Jupiter) coming into conjunction with several others, touching the Leo and Virgin constellations. Thus, the Magi would interpret royalty (Jupiter) from the tribe of Judah (Leo/lion). And they would go to the palace in Jerusalem and ask Herod if he knew anything about this king, which is exactly what they did.
Reply
#88
RE: "Gospel Quest" (or The Jesus Timeline)
(August 10, 2014 at 7:53 pm)Minimalist Wrote:
Quote:9 After they had heard the king, they went on their way, and the star they had seen when it rose went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was.
Whatever blithering moron wrote this nonsense thought of stars as lights in the sky - not what we now know stars to be. Unless the explanation is that they were right and modern science is wrong!
You can read the website's explanation. I won't go into great detail here, as the topic has its own thread. Basically, in 3BC the conjunction would have appeared to be in the west, when viewed from the Middle East. And as the months of travel pass, it would have appeared to be overhead when they arrive. We know what the constellations looked like. Check out the evidence for yourself, but let's stay on topic here.
Reply
#89
RE: "Gospel Quest" (or The Jesus Timeline)
(August 11, 2014 at 3:31 am)Undeceived Wrote:
(August 10, 2014 at 7:13 pm)Brakeman Wrote: When you get to it, I'm just dying for you to show us the single point vectoring that enabled the magi and shepherds to pinpoint the right house with a stationary guide millions of miles away.
I can't stand behind the website 100% (it's not scripture), but you might find it interesting. It involves science (imagine that)! Larson uses a professional astronomy program to determine the stars' formation at the time of Jesus' birth. It included one star/planet (Jupiter) coming into conjunction with several others, touching the Leo and Virgin constellations. Thus, the Magi would interpret royalty (Jupiter) from the tribe of Judah (Leo/lion). And they would go to the palace in Jerusalem and ask Herod if he knew anything about this king, which is exactly what they did.

The website is not "interesting" it is fundamentally dishonest. They are picking out little bits of things that an astronomy program said was occurring during the claimed period and trying to convince people that it was the "appearing of a star" that was mentioned in their "big book 'o crazy."

First, Jupiter is not a star, man didn't know that at the time, science discovered that later. The bible would have been wrong if it called Jupiter a star.

Second, the light reflected from jupiter had been observed and known proceeding this date. It did not just "Appear" at that time.

Third, from wikipedia,
Quote:In 3–2 BC, there was a series of seven conjunctions, including three between Jupiter and Regulus and a strikingly close conjunction between Jupiter and Venus near Regulus on June 17, 2 BC. "The fusion of two planets would have been a rare and awe-inspiring event", according to Roger Sinnott.[57] Archaeologist and Assyriologist Simo Parpola has also suggested this explanation.[58] This event however occurred after the generally accepted date of 4 BC for the death of Herod. Since the conjunction would have been seen in the west at sunset it could not have led the magi south from Jerusalem to Bethlehem.[59] It also does not fit with an event seen at rising that might have started them on the journey.
Meaning Wrong time/date, AND Wrong direction in the sky!

And lastly, you have dishonestly evaded and dodged the fact that you can't guide people to a house with a star millions of miles away, which is the main event of the story. The story is pure hokem and you are a liar to pretend that it isn't. That's the problem with christians, they are the worst liars. They claim that morals come from god and that he is the truth, but then they spend their day lying to convince others of his morals and truth. Disgustingly dishonest people..
Find the cure for Fundementia!
Reply
#90
RE: "Gospel Quest" (or The Jesus Timeline)
(August 11, 2014 at 3:31 am)Undeceived Wrote: When an astrophysicist publishes an article, is it a straight line of facts, or is it an interpretation of the facts? For example, when they observe a star's "wobble" do they merely publish the sky coordinates on a timeline, or do they add their own hypothesis, namely that the "star" is actually a planet? In order to get anywhere in science, interpretations must be made, right?
Even when interpretations are made, the scientist must justify their beliefs with evidence or be, metaphorically, crucified by their peers.

Quote:During Christ's trial, the chief priests ask Him point blank, "Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God." And He said,

"The Christ" means "The Anointed One" or "The Messiah". It does not mean "God incarnate".

"Son of God" does not mean "God incarnate". You'll notice I included "demigod offspring of Yahweh" in my list of things you might call Jesus if you only read Matt, Mark and Luke.

Nice try, though.

Quote:In Mark 2:1-12, Jesus heals a paralytic. He had authority to forgive sins, which is something only God Himself can do. Then, to authenticate His claim, He demonstrated His power by healing the paralytic.
He articulates that he'd been given the authority, calling himself "the Son of man".

Quote:Also, in Matthew 2:11; 14:33; 28:9, 17 and Luke 24:52 He accepts worship.
As the son of and intercessor for Yahweh.

Quote:Matthew 1:23 "Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.'”
This quote refers to Isaiah 7 which refers to a child who will be born to show the king of Judea that God is with him and he would prevail against the Syrians. Isaiah was not speaking of a future messiah nor of any son of God and certainly not of God incarnate.

Quote:And then there's all the prophecies He fulfilled, something the synoptics authors could not have missed when they wrote:
I'll review this website later but I've seen this argument in the past. The "prophecies fulfilled" are either lies about the OT scripture or unverifiable claims by the story.

Quote:Moreover, Luke and Matthew make it clear the Jesus could not have been a demigod, since he was virgin-born.
So was Perseus, the son of Zeus.

Quote:The website makes the case that Herod died in 1 BC.
That's a pretty fringy claim to say the least. Will review that website later.

Quote:their contemporaries were well aware of recent events, a preliminary block of evidence would have served little purpose.
First of all, there was little agreement in the first few centuries of Christianity about the details of Jesus. There was a wild variety of different stories told which included even whether or not he lived as a physical being or merely was an apparition that seemed to exist. That last opinion I mentioned was held by the Docetic Christians and they were a serious problem for what became the Orthodox view if the Bible is any indication. There are not one but two condemnations of the Docetics in scripture and these condemnations are not made, as one would expect, by referring them to recent history but rather in the language of faith.

The Bible Wrote:1John 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
Additionally, this apology would seem to rely upon the assumption that the ancient world was populated by commando fact checkers that would descend upon the authors like a team of ninjas to cry "false" if there was any rabbinic scribbling that was not so.

The reality is that the path from myth to urban legend is a short one and even today, with fact checking just a Google search away, people get confused about recent history. Ronald Reagan was president within my lifetime and yet his character has been completely re-written to suit Republican adoration. Few in the GOP seem to be aware he raised taxes, cut an ran in Lebanon and made deals with Democrats.

Finally, Christianity had its critics but their works are lost to us. We only know of them as they were quoted by Christian theologians for refutation.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
...      -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
...       -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Gospel of John controversy Jillybean 13 1599 June 12, 2024 at 10:54 pm
Last Post: Prycejosh1987
  Mark's Gospel was damaged and reassembled incorrectly SeniorCitizen 1 488 November 19, 2023 at 5:48 pm
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  Embellishments in the Gospel of Mark. Jehanne 133 18904 May 7, 2019 at 9:50 pm
Last Post: Amarok
  How can you prove that the gospel of Mark is not the "word of god"? Lincoln05 100 15020 October 16, 2018 at 5:38 pm
Last Post: GrandizerII
  The Gospel of Peter versus the Gospel of Matthew. Jehanne 47 7667 July 14, 2018 at 12:22 am
Last Post: Godscreated
  The Anonymous Gospel Manuscripts athrock 127 28409 February 9, 2016 at 1:46 am
Last Post: Minimalist
  Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles = Satanic Gospel Metis 14 4753 July 17, 2015 at 12:16 pm
Last Post: dyresand
  Why do gospel contradictions matter? taylor93112 87 22117 April 28, 2015 at 7:27 pm
Last Post: Desert Diva
  The infancy gospel of thomas dyresand 18 7797 December 29, 2014 at 10:35 am
Last Post: dyresand
  In Christianity, Does Jesus' Soul Have Anything To Do With Why Jesus Is God? JesusIsGod7 18 7840 October 7, 2014 at 12:58 pm
Last Post: JesusHChrist



Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)