I still don't understand why anyone would make up a person like the Biblical Christ..

[Dotard]

For fun and profit. Emphasis on the latter.

[The Grand Nudger]

I just don't understand why someone would make up the Cu Chulainn character. Firstly, there are all the fulfilled prophecies to consider. From the Brug na Boinde to the Tain bo Cuailgne, Cu Chulainn fulfills the prophecy given by Cathbad.

The writers also included embarrassing details, such as the fact that he was an absentee father who killed his son, believing him to be an intruder, because he refused to reveal his name and could not have recognized him any other way. The writers also included the fact that Cu Chulainn was known to take the wives of other men without shame or secrecy.

We have testimony that after his death, he appeared before St. Patrick and King Leogaire to help Patrick convert the King to christianity by warning him of the torments of hell.

For all of these reasons I can't help but believe that Cu Chulainn was a military leader that defended the herds of his people against the armies of the Queen of Connacht. The magic spears and breaking of geise were probably later inventions to console his followers after his death.

[Cinjin]

Where'd Dave4slumps go?? I'm awaiting his responses with anxious anticipation.

[Judas BentHer]

If you read the New Testament it pretty much supports slavery, telling the slaves to remain obedient unto their masters, while promising conversion to the new faith testified to by Paul's Jesus fiction, will make those slaves better people when they're dead. But in the meantime, remain enslaved because this world shall pass.

What prophecies from the Old Testament have been fulfilled?



I think also one has to consider that the Bible is a compilation of papyrus, scrolls, letters and mythologies, that were literally elected by at least 4 different councils of men, to become today's "closed canon". Which means, if one believes the Bible is "god's breath", the inspired communications from a supreme being unto mortal scribes, that that higher intelligence not only spoke to sinful men but other sinful men gathered together and decided what of god's inspirations were to be deemed worthy of being bound into what is today's Bible. And not only that, being a closed canon, it means that no matter what that higher power will never again have anything to say to the world.

And then of course, one has to consider if we are talking about an intelligence superior to humans, inspiring a book it needed to write through other lesser intelligences, in order to speak to us, then how is prayer to work? If it needs humans to speak to us, how can it possibly hear when we silently speak to it?
Furthermore, if we are to consider a higher intelligence having been responsible as the inspiration for the Bible, how is it that the Bible is errant? How can a supreme being make mistakes? Sort of in keeping with the question, how can a supreme being make faulty humans and then blame them for their god given faults?

The prophecies in the Bible are about as accurate as those of Nostradamus. So broad reaching and non-specific, that anything that happens can be attributed to them if one wishes to look hard enough to find a correlation.
And when we're talking about an omniscient (all knowing) god here, one that allegedly sees everything through all time because time is not a factor in that god's realm, then how is it that he can't be specific? And furthermore, how is it that the autographs are no longer available, those original texts that comprised the original source materials for what became today's Bible and as such, throughout the centuries all the different interpretations of language from Aramaic, unto Greek, unto Hebrew, unto Latin, appear throughout all 64 books. So that when someone today points out a discrepancy in scripture, an apologist or a theist can retort with, well that's because that word means this and that in this or that language.

Well that's just too bad, isn't it? Because one shouldn't have to have a veritable library of codex, the Gutenberg and a degree in Hermeneutics, in order to "read" today's Bible to their personal understanding wherein it all makes sense.

How could someone make up the Biblical Christ? Remember, Christ's myth arose at a time like today. When the majority of the world was enslaved and the minority were the slave drivers. Control mind, and spirit by giving hope to the living that says if the slave obeys earthly masters and invisible heavenly hosts, they'll reign as god's when the suffering is done, but only if certain rules are followed by what is afforded the opportunity on faith alone, for that enslaved majority to assume the elite position of having god's favor, and you'll control the body till it rots.

It's not true. There is no god, but you. You create and you destroy. You live your ideal Heaven or suffer your worst Hell.
And nothing unseen thinks you're special.

Jesus, is my gardener.
That's what's real.
All else is tax exempt fraud.
All the thinking person has to do then is ask themselves, can I live my life as if a lie will save me?

If yes, god bless.
If no, hallelujah and enjoy the reality while it lasts.
Bible god is the first worst sinner. Worship that? Jesus, are you kidding me?

[Godscreated]

With all due respect to everyone on this site, why would any of this be made up???

Cash, power and control:

Ask the leaders of the Mormons, the Scientologists and the John Frum cultists on Tanna Island.

Christian leaders - much the same.

Like there was a lot of money and power to be gained from the poor of those days. What kind of power over the poor would have been of use back then, surely you guys are smarter than that,well maybe not. Paul worked as a tent maker during his ministry, he gave up wealth to be a preacher and a tent maker, how does that fit with your theory. My pastor gave up a job as a nuclear engineer to become a pastor, this holds true for many men down through time. Your theory holds no water, check your bucket it has many holes.

[The Grand Nudger]

You believe that Paul did these things. Why is that?

[coffeeveritas]

I thought you were mabus for a second, and I got all excited.

And then you weren't

Why: power. It's a nice thing to have, but you being poor probably don't understand it

I get the "Jesus was an apocalyptic who was crucified for sedition and his followers made up a story" argument. I of course think there are several flaws with the argument, but I can see the basic logic of it. I don't however see "power" as a possible motive here. This was not a lucrative money-making scheme either.

Considering the evidence it appears that the early followers of Christ actually lost livelihoods and social standing. Their particular ancient culture was honor/shame based, and being a Christian was shameful to both Greeks and Jews. So the only thing being a Christian got you was kicked out.

As for the disciples themselves, they didn't become the heads of a lucrative empire, most of them actually passed up the opportunity to be well respected teachers in their community in favor of a life on the road. And then there's the whole "getting killed" part. James, John, Andrew, Peter, and Matthew seemed to have a fairly stable livelihood, and everyone of them except Matthew already had good standing in the community. The rest of the disciples we don't know about, but the main figures in the early church were most likely stable members of a community and James and John were probably from a well connected family (the "beloved" disciple's family was connected to the high priest, however you choose to interpret that phrase).

Everything we know about the early church tells us that these people had nothing to gain by their profession of faith. It wasn't until Constantine that Christianity had any benefits in terms of power, money, or social standing. I can see that some people think they were deluded or crazy, but they were not power-players. Maybe there's some argument to the contrary that makes more sense, but I haven't heard it. If you or anyone else have any more insight into this position I do value a chance to understand another position through conversation. Thanks for your thoughts friends!

[Minimalist]

Like there was a lot of money and power to be gained from the poor of those days.

Never stopped the fucking church from not stealing everything that wasn't nailed down, G-C.

After a long time it seems the fucking protestants have finally wised up to the scam.

http://www.alternet.org/story/72539/

Nearly 2,000 years later, some who claim to speak in Jesus' name are taking a different view. Consider Bishop Eddie Long, who pastors a megachurch in Lithonia, Ga. With a salary approaching $1 million a year and a nine-bathroom mansion situated on 20 acres, Long's choice of vehicles reflects his opulent lifestyle: He drives a $350,000 Bentley.

But I bet he walks around with "Praise Jesus" on his lips, eh? They are nothing but of bunch of con men, G-C. You've fallen for a load of shit and wasted your whole life groveling to these criminals.

[The Grand Nudger]

Everything we believe about the early church tells us.....

(editing mine and bolded)

[Judas BentHer]

Oh, I was so optimistic in 2007. *sigh*


Then my bubble burst in 2011 with the poke of the typical reality let down as we all know the Senate isn't going to smack Televangelists when they need the votes from their loyal sheep following.



"Creflo Dollar". What a name. Cree flow a dollar into my pocket every time I preach bull to the sheep. Hallelujah for the giving waters!


(Check out the "Inside Edition" feature down the page) A fleet of private jets. A private airfield right beside his estate. and a fleet of jets.
"My lifestyle follows the scripture." Bullshit. He can't even form the sentence to support that contention. He knows he's lying. And what's anyone going to do about it? Not a damn thing.

But the Senate made just as fake a show of trying to look like their constituents concerns were the Senate's concerns too. Con men! All of 'em.