OK, Christians! I have my KJV!

[chimp3]

Whatever.

Every picture tells a story.

Only back when Rod Stewart and Ronnie Wood were good together!

[The Grand Nudger]

Sounds like my religious library.......  

Seconded on the book of morons.  That one pretty much loses me right from the start.  I even tried skipping..see if it got better toward the end, right?  Not so much, imo.

[vulcanlogician]

A quran, and the vedas, and the gita, and the edda, and a couple shelves worth of mythological anthologies and collected superstitions from around the world...some are even in english..and i've read a couple pages!

The rest are just there to make me look smart to guests I never invite and in case I run out of firewood.

Since you brought up the Gita...

I think it's wonderful spiritual poetry. Sometimes when I get stoned, I'll crack it open and let my mind be absorbed in it. Other times, on a pretty day, I'll take it out into a field and read it, using as a lens to interpret the bright and sunny portion of the cosmos that stands before me.

In the morning I bathe my intellect in the stupendous and cosmogonal philosophy of the Bhagvat Geeta, since whose composition years of the gods have elapsed, and in comparison with which our modern world and its literature seem puny and trivial; and I doubt if that philosophy is not to be referred to a previous state of existence, so remote is its sublimity from our conceptions. I lay down the book and go to my well for water, and lo! there I meet the servant of the Bramin, priest of Brahma and Vishnu and Indra, who still sits in his temple on the Ganges reading the Vedas, or dwells at the root of a tree with his crust and water jug. I meet his servant come to draw water for his master, and our buckets as it were grate together in the same well. The pure Walden water is mingled with the sacred water of the Ganges.

I've studied several literalist commentaries on the Gita. They are foul. For instance Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada's commentary echos Biblical inerrantists--it reads the verses as authoritative. But, aside from this (if you ignore the commentary) Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada's translation is pretty good. But in all his expertise concerning Hinduism, his words seem little more than insignificant baggage when laid aside the Gita's profound words. Thoreau's commentary is more apt, more free, more prone to harmonizing with the Gita, than encapsulating it into a wretched doctrine.

We all know how the wizard of Oz claimed he was a "good man" but a "bad wizard." Likewise, The Bhagavad Gita is a "good poem" but a "bad doctrine." Perhaps it is so with all religious texts. Maybe even the Christian Bible would have something to teach us all if it were not so confounded, strangled, and made obscene by those who would want to shape its moral profundities into a ball and chain which they would attach to the ankle of the world.

In case you are wondering what prompted this post:

---

---

[Drich]

If I were to take your bible and show you everything you believe to be true, a lie. you would hate me and or God for destroying how your little world works.  

That said if you have a question or there is something holding you back, now is the time to ask it.

Why do you continue to believe in manifest bullshit?

Do you not understand the word manifest?

man·i·fest1
ˈmanəˌfest/
adjective

1. 1.
   clear or obvious to the eye or mind.
   "the system's manifest failings"
   synonyms:
   obvious, clear, plain, apparent, evident, patent, palpable, distinct, definite, blatant, overt, glaring, barefaced, explicit, transparent, conspicuous, undisguised, unmistakable, noticeable, perceptible, visible, recognizable
   "his manifest lack of interest"
   
   
   

[size=undefined]
verb
[/size]

1. 1.
   display or show (a quality or feeling) by one's acts or appearance; demonstrate.
   "Ray manifested signs of severe depression"
   synonyms:
   display, show, exhibit, demonstrate, betray, present, reveal; 
   formalevince
   "she manifested signs of depression"
   

Hmmm To believe in what has been manifest is to believe in what is obvious to the eye or mind by definition 1. So to answer your question I believe in what has been made manifest because again it is obvious to my eye and mind to what the truth of God is.

Lets say you were leaning over to definition 2 the one I had in mind when I read your question.

Hmm seems to me to be made manifest is to in this case have God make Himself real before you... 

Well He did. and I continue to believe because I absolutely know that He did and continues to support and care for me. In essence you are asking why do I believe in face of all the evidence God has granted me....

If this is truly your question then know your mind heart have grown so cold to the truth you do not care what truth is you simply want to follow what you think is right.

[The Grand Nudger]

Obvious bullshit is obvious, lol.

[Jehanne]

If this is truly your question then know your mind heart have grown so cold to the truth you do not care what truth is you simply want to follow what you think is right.

I believe that Jesus was a Jewish apocalyptic prophet who was born and raised in northern Galilee.  As a child, Jesus probably suffered from some sort of neurological disorder, but he became a charismatic preacher who developed a small following with his belief that the "Son of Man" (an angelic being) would come down (Jesus believed in a flat Earth, as did his contemporaries, Paul included) from Heaven to deliver the Jewish people from the Romans.  After a year or two of preaching, some of Jesus' followers convinced him to take his message south to Jerusalem; after arriving, Jesus found his way to the Temple, and there was an altercation between Jesus and the Jewish establishment.  The Romans intervened almost immediately, and Jesus was arrested and taken into Roman custody.  A short time later he was interrogated by a Roman official (he and Pilate probably never even met), and Jesus was found to be eccentric and given to flights of apocalyptic imagination and statements.  The Roman authorities, as they did often, consulted with the local Jewish authorities, and it was soon thereafter determined that Jesus needed to be put down.  Pilate gave the order, and Jesus was publicly executed by crucifixion.  After his death, his body was taken down, tossed into a nearby pit, where it was consumed by ravenous dogs.

Heartbroken, some of Jesus' followers began to have visions of the "risen" Christ, and stories began to be circulated about his teachings and life, which were retold, redacted, and eventually, began to be written down in some 40 different "gospels" a generation to two after Jesus' death.  Paul, an epileptic, also began to have visions of Jesus, and he, as with Jesus, had some neurological issues, which led him to go off the religious deep-end.  Eventually, the new religion began to form itself, from the bottom-up, and with embellishment after embellishment, the new religion began to remake Jesus and his teachings in its own image.

[vorlon13]

Obvious bullshit is obvious, lol.

Well sure, when it's Hindu stuff, or Muslim stuff, or Scientology stuff. But Christian stuff comes with it's own guaranty of unbullshittery !!!

[Brian37]

Why do you continue to believe in manifest bullshit?

Do you not understand the word manifest?

man·i·fest1
ˈmanəˌfest/
adjective

1. 1.
   clear or obvious to the eye or mind.
   "the system's manifest failings"
   synonyms:
   obvious, clear, plain, apparent, evident, patent, palpable, distinct, definite, blatant, overt, glaring, barefaced, explicit, transparent, conspicuous, undisguised, unmistakable, noticeable, perceptible, visible, recognizable
   "his manifest lack of interest"
   
   
   

[size=undefined]
verb
[/size]

1. 1.
   display or show (a quality or feeling) by one's acts or appearance; demonstrate.
   "Ray manifested signs of severe depression"
   synonyms:
   display, show, exhibit, demonstrate, betray, present, reveal; 
   formalevince
   "she manifested signs of depression"
   

Hmmm To believe in what has been manifest is to believe in what is obvious to the eye or mind by definition 1. So to answer your question I believe in what has been made manifest because again it is obvious to my eye and mind to what the truth of God is.

Lets say you were leaning over to definition 2 the one I had in mind when I read your question.

Hmm seems to me to be made manifest is to in this case have God make Himself real before you... 

Well He did. and I continue to believe because I absolutely know that He did and continues to support and care for me. In essence you are asking why do I believe in face of all the evidence God has granted me....

If this is truly your question then know your mind heart have grown so cold to the truth you do not care what truth is you simply want to follow what you think is right.

No sorry. It doesn't work like that.

All you are doing with your word salad is the same thing people of other religions do.

"Manifest" in the way you treat it all your are arguing is "It is obvious to me."

THAT is not an argument.

It is "manifest" to Muslims and "obvious" to them Allah is correct.

It is "Manifest"" to Jews and "Obvious" to them Yahweh is correct.

It is "Manifest" to Buddhist and "Obvious" to them Buddha is correct.

It is"manifest" to Hindus and "Obvious" to them Brahma is correct.

GET IN LINE, take a number.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I once dropped a hammer on my foot.  That was when I learned about 'manifest density'.

Boru

[Drich]

If I were to take your bible and show you everything you believe to be true, a lie. you would hate me and or God for destroying how your little world works.  

That said if you have a question or there is something holding you back, now is the time to ask it.

Mark 1:28 And immediately his fame spread abroad throughout all the region round about Galilee.

Luke 4:14 And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee: and there went out a fame of him through all the region round about.

Luke 4:37 And the fame of him went out into every place of the country round about.

Luke 5:15 But so much the more went there a fame abroad of him: and great mul­ti­tudes came to­gether to hear, and to be healed by him of their in­fir­mi­ties.

Yes I know this conundrum, shall we call it does appear regularly in these discussion but I thought perhaps you might have some new input. If Jesus was so famous then why is there no mention of him in history?
Drich, if you could address this without using the tired old apologist Josephus/Tacitus fall back then I'm pretty sure you will garner much respect around these parts.
I know it's a big ask but if you could just this once look at the story through the eyes of a non believer then you will understand why I refuse to believe it. Drich the story does not make sense.

There is. It's just what was known goes into much detail it is considered a religious text rather than a 3rd party source, unless it was an offical document. For example look at what we call "the book of Luke or the book of ACTS" written by an affiliated non-jew/christian commissioned by what was believed to be a very wealth roman official for his own personal enlightenment. Luke's recording of the book of luke was written before He was converted. it for him was just the documentation of what was known by Paul. Yet this effort is dismissed as a religious text even though a 3rd party person wrote it.


That said what is not considered religious texts has to be tied into a greater work or an official report. Now if we had a complete library of all ancient writings and jesus shows up as much as he does, then your question wold be valid. as it stands however with less than fraction remaining of what was once written it is foolish to say Rome did not write about Christ. It is like having a collection of old TV guides that ranged from 1978 to 1988 then someone asking you can you prove via your tv guides that regan was indeed an actor... after all if President Regan was an actor should the most powerful man of that time who shared a vocation with the people normally featured in TV guide?
TV guid does indeed mention regan as an actor but ironically not during his tenior as president except in passing. it's not till 2017 did they write a large story about Him.

The point drags over to Christ in that without a complete record of what was written we can not say conclusively how much was written. Remember the Heart of Rome was burnt out under Nero (which was after Christ) which if I remember correctly included over 6 scriptoriums which included in the clearing of the way of the collocium at the end of the 1st century.

Now all of that said... Here are some examples of roman officials and non religious third party people acknowledging Jesus in that time:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Christ
There is a mentioning of Jesus being executed by  pilate in His work the "Annals"

Then Nero Himself wrote endless edicts concerning Christians/the state's position against their beliefs and their punishments. He worked endlessly to purge Christianity from Judaism from Christianity or rather removing the legit religion/from superstitions of 'christ.' once christianity was classified as a superstition it's believers could be persecuted
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecutio...man_Empire

The argument here being if Nero did not know of Christ/Christianity why work so hard in trying (300 years) to obliterate the faith?

We have the writtings of pilate

we also have the letter of lentulus
https://orthodoxwiki.org/Letter_of_Lentulus

Not to mention the 1/2 dozen go to's Christ start out with first josepheus ect..

We have more than 20 solid eamples and you don't seem to be aware of one. why because no matter what history will produce it will never be enough. for eample, if you include what is written about Christ in the bible and in secular writtings, there is more written about Him durning that time period than anyone else including julius ceasar... yet for you that is not enough because despite fact that is not what you want to believe.