RE: Disproving the Bible
July 11, 2014 at 7:38 pm
(This post was last modified: July 11, 2014 at 7:47 pm by Jenny A.)
(July 11, 2014 at 7:18 pm)Purplundy Wrote: Weird. I thought the guy Christianity was named after would be the standard for Christianity, especially considering that he predates the Bible.
Yeah. But how would you determine just what he said and did?---Assuming of course that there is a historical Jesus that is anything like the one worshiped by Christians.
The Jesus Seminar took a pretty serious wack at the problem, but they hardly came up with definitive results. And if you take their results as gospel, there's not much gospel left:
Quote:*Jesus of Nazareth was born during the reign of Herod the Great.
* His mother's name was Mary, and he had a human father whose name may not have been Joseph.
*Jesus was born in Nazareth, not in Bethlehem.
*Jesus was an itinerant sage who shared meals with social outcasts.
*Jesus practiced faith healing without the use of ancient medicine or magic, relieving afflictions we now consider psychosomatic.
* He did not walk on water, feed the multitude with loaves and fishes, change water into wine or raise Lazarus from the dead.
*Jesus was arrested in Jerusalem and crucified by the Romans.
* He was executed as a public nuisance, not for claiming to be the Son of God.
*The empty tomb is a fiction – Jesus was not raised bodily from the dead.
*Belief in the resurrection is based on the visionary experiences of Paul, Peter and Mary Magdalene.
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.