RE: If Only The Romans
December 31, 2014 at 4:05 pm
(This post was last modified: December 31, 2014 at 4:21 pm by Lek.)
(December 31, 2014 at 1:45 pm)Minimalist Wrote:Quote:A very large percentage of seminarians are completely blind-sided by the historical-critical method. They come in with the expectation of learning the pious truths of the Bible so that they can pass them along in their sermons, as their own pastors have done forPages 5-6 (it only goes downhill for your holy horseshit from there!)
them. Nothing prepares them for historical criticism. To their surprise they learn, instead of material for sermons, all the results of what historical critics have established on the basis of centuries of research. The Bible is filled with discrepancies, many of them irreconcilable contradictions. Moses did not write the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament) and Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John did not write the Gospels. There are other books that did not make it into the Bible that at one time or another were considered canonical—other Gospels, for example, allegedly written by Jesus’ followers Peter, Thomas, and Mary. The Exodus probably did not happen as described in the Old Testament. The conquest of the Promised Land is probably based on legend. The Gospels are at odds on numerous points and contain nonhistorical material. It is hard to know whether Moses ever existed and what, exactly, the historical Jesus taught. The historical narratives of the Old Testament are filled with legendary fabrications and the book of Acts in the New Testament contains historically unreliable information about the life and teachings of Paul. Many of the books of the New Testament are pseudonymous—written not by the apostles but by later writers claiming to be apostles. The list goes on.
Jesus Interrupted
Why do you accept Bart Ehrman's conclusions over the conclusions of other modern day bible scholars? I understand the historical-critical method and it's very inconclusive based on the great lack of conclusive evidence to back up the findings. That can be your opinion, but that's not the opinion of many other qualified scholars of day. The further away one get's from the event, the less ability he has to determine what actually happened. As for now, I'll go with the opinions of the ancient scholars who accept the traditional view of authorship.
(December 31, 2014 at 2:05 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: No, evil existed before sin. Genesis is very clear about that. Even as Adam and Eve were pure, your god allegedly created a "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil". If evil didn't exist, what knowledge could the fruit pass on to sully humans?
Additionally, you're absolving your god of his responsibility in creating evil. If I built a bomb and gave it to a child who knew nothing about bombs, and that child subsequently placed it unwittingly in a bus station and it killed 37 and maimed 174, would you throw the child in jail but absolve the bombmaker? Of course not. Yet your god is alleged to have created evil, created an agent to tempt humans into evil, and explicitly forbade his pet humans to learn about the nature of good and evil -- and for that, you castigate all humans as fallen, even as you exalt your god and claim him as the font of morality?
I'd suggest you think more about the nature of responsibility. If you left a loaded gun laying around the house and your toddler picked it up and killed himself while playing with it, you'd be prosecuted for felony child endangerment at the very least -- and rightfully so.
Even if God created evil as you say, he didn't create Adam and Eve containing evil. They chose evil when they chose to disobey God. I agree that we should all think more about the nature of responsibility. Adam and Eve, and us all, have a responsibility to make the right choices. Even as we are born into a sinful world, we still have the option to make moral or immoral choices. Atheists talk about our personal responsibility to make our lives to be meaningful and satisfying. Yet they go on and on about how it's all God's fault and we're all innocent pawns in the world. At the same time, They face the same messed up world as christians do and talk about how we can be happy and fulfilled. Which is it? Do we have responsibility for our lives or are we just innocent pawns under the thumb of an evil and monstrous God?
(December 31, 2014 at 1:55 pm)Minimalist Wrote:Quote:I'm afraid that if I grow up I'll become like you Mini!
Then remain a child, boy. You sound as if you are 8 and a not very precocious 8 at that!
You sound like a grouchy old curmudgeon. Why don't you lighten up and enjoy life for a change? Smile a little. It helps.
