Archaeology of the New Testament

[Into the Night]

The college educated person looks for literary context.

You don't get to speak for everyone. Omniscience fallacy.

Too many college students can't even read or write. They are functionally illiterate.

The Torah is a collection of Jewish stories compiled by scribes a thousand years after the events the events portrayed. There is no witness testimony. That literary context is pregnant with the potential for myth and allegory.

The NT was written by eyewitnesses, by people who interviewed the eyewitnesses, or people who knew the people who interrogated the eyewitnesses. The fact that Roman, Jewish, Christian, and archaeological sources all corroborate the historicity of some of the people and places described in the NT means we can approach the gospels as books that have at least some legitimate historical witness testimony in them.

The Torah is not the Bible, Cyborg.
The Old Testament is not the Torah.

The Old Testament contains events from an unknown length of time up to and including events leading up to the birth of Jesus Christ. It also describes the same God and the prophecies concerning the coming birth of Jesus Christ.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

One man's lecture is another man's discussion.

You're free to Christian-bash, push militant atheism and call it "debate" just as the Jesus Freaks are able to do the same, but I fail to see how two nutjobs screaming at each other is "discussion". YMMV.

 

[Into the Night]

If Jesus and Paul didn't really exist, and if the ministry and crucifixion of Christ are just fabricated stories, then Christianity as a religion is completely fraudulent.

This conditional is correct.

 

[Into the Night]

what if all religions are fabricated stories?

does that mean morality does not matter?

Go learn what 'morality' means.

 

[Into the Night]

Some would opine that EVERY religion that recognizes spiritual deities
is completely fraudulent
in the absense of any scientific evidence.

Science isn't 'evidence'. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. ALL observations are subject to the problems of phenomenology.
ALL religions are based upon some initial circular argument, otherwise known as the Argument of Faith. This not a fallacy in and of itself.

It is not possible to prove a circular argument True or False. Therefore, it is not possible to prove the existence of any deity True or False.

Science itself is completely atheistic. It does not care whether any deity exists or not.

Further, such an opinion is indeed more prevalent among college educated people, is it not?

To a degree, this is true. Beware the false dichotomy and the bigotry that goes with it here.
Colleges often contain courses and professors that don't know what science is, and try to claim an observation to be 'science', a religion to be 'science', etc. To them, 'science' is a Magick Holy Word, often used in an attempt to prove something True.

Science has no proofs. It is an open functional system. Proofs are only available in closed functional systems, such as mathematics or logic.

As for myself, I'm in harmony with the teachings of the NT
because they seem benevolent and useful
but not due to the recorded stories supporting them.

The stories are part of the teachings. Jesus Christ often taught using parables. This method of teaching is used by quite a few instructors.

Flight instructors, driving instructors, math teachers, science teachers, etc. all use parables.

 

[Ichabod Stain]

I am convinced that there is more to reality than matter and energy.

I don't think there's any question there is more to reality than the merely physical. There is definitely an immaterial reality in this universe.

The laws of mathematics, the laws of logic, love, trust, liberty, art, music, friendship, justice cannot be explained by electrons and quarks.

The creation of a lawfully organized and rational universe itself can be understood to point to some underlying higher rational agency.

As such, I am not quick to say that nothing exists beyond the physical and observable.


I really believe atheists for the most part are cultural Christians, even if not practicing Christians. Our civilization has been permeated so thoroughly for two thousand years by a Christian zeitgeist that it basically inculcates all of us.

no they aren't.

they're fucking marxist anti human mass murdering trash.

 

[Ichabod Stain]

Go learn what 'morality' means.

morality is the set of attitudes and behaviors that facilitate voluntary, cooperative, and mutually beneficial relationships.

morality is what facilitates a high trust society.

no you go, baked bean boy.

 

[Into the Night]

You've made it clear you're an atheist.

He is not an atheist. Like you, he belongs to the Church of No God. You are both theists.

The fact remains, atheist or theist, there's no proof of what came before the Universe nor if our consciousness transcends death. It's all a matter of belief, atheist or theist.

Why does there have to be something 'before the Universe'. How can there be something 'before the Universe'??
Atheism has no belief.

You don't need quotes yet you use them. Why?

I see no difference between a militant atheist and a Bible-thumping Jesus freak. Both are extremists who believe things without question but, worse, seek beat others over the head with their unsubstantiated views.

There is no such thing as a 'militant atheist', Sybil. Most Christians do not thump Bibles. False dichotomy fallacy.

You are describing yourself again.

 

[Into the Night]

I believe that Christians claim, when it's convenient, that the Bible is the word of god...until it's not... or until god "changes his mind" or until it's an inconvenient and becomes just a story.

That is all true and I also believe there's no god.

You cannot argue both sides of a paradox, Void.

 

[Into the Night]

Absence of any meaningful evidence. The only evidence is "Well, we can't explain where this all came from, so you can't say a god didn't make it."

Anything one reads, watches, hears, etc can be useful. I've gotten useful information from sitcoms.

Attempted negative proof fallacy. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism). You cannot make evidence supporting Christianity just disappear, Void.

 

[Into the Night]

Yes, we don't know, but not knowing isn't a license to invent an answer. Every gap in our knowledge used to be filled with gods: lightning, disease, the sun, mental illness. Over time, all of those gods has been pushed away by science.

When in Rome....

This is how discussions/debates work. Nobody is forced to participate.

You have already declared your religion. You cannot prove it True.

 

[Into the Night]

oh yeah.

they're all dead.

my bad.

What 'Gaza babies'??

 

[ZenMode]

You cannot argue both sides of a paradox, Void.

Actually, I can. I can say I'm an atheist and still understand the Bible, Christianity,etc.

 

[ZenMode]

Attempted negative proof fallacy. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism). You cannot make evidence supporting Christianity just disappear, Void.

Random words. No apparent coherency.

Ignored

 

[ZenMode]

So?
.

So, if God is omniscient, as the Bible states, then he knew that he was creating Satan, he knew that his flawed creation would have to eventually be drowned, based on his own requirement, he knew that Adam and Eve would eat the apple and result in all of the pain and suffering that he required would happen if they at the apple.

IOW, he, based on his own book, is a psychopath.

 

[ZenMode]

You have already declared your religion. You cannot prove it True.

Incoherent babbling.

 

[Into the Night]

You don't have to believe the Jewish story of Noah's ark is literally an accurate historical account to be a Christian.

Not a Jewish story. You seem to want to just ignore the Bible now.

Now, in your worldview nothing exists but electrons, quarks, and energy.

Did you forget protons, photons, leptons, bosons, neutrons, chemicals?
Do you even know what 'energy' is?

That means there is no ultimate meaning or purpose to anything,

Why? Light, for example, has a purpose. It allows you to see. Water has a purpose. You require it to sustain your own bodily functions, for one thing. Rain has a purpose. It purifies and distributes water. Air has a purpose. It's very weight keeps you alive. The oxygen in it is required to sustain your own bodily functions.

and humans do not really have any kind of innate value.

So you are valueless? Why do you continue to breath and eat and drink? Why are you here discussing anything on JPP?

So why do you have moral outrage about a flood?

Morality is not an outrage.

The only way you could be morally outraged is if you believe in an objective moral truth, an imperative moral obligation that stands independent of human opinion, human culture, or popular consensus.

Morality is not an outrage. Go learn what 'morality' means.

What exactly is this objective moral standard you are pointing at to justify your moral outrage?

Morality is not an outrage. Go learn what 'moral' and 'morality' mean.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

So, if God is omniscient, at the Bible states, then he knew that he was creating Satan, he knew that his flawed creation would have to eventually be drowned, he knew that Adam and Eve would eat the apple and result in all of the pain and suffering that he required would happen if they at the apple.

IOW, he's a psychopath.

Why do you single out Christianity when 1) both Jews and Muslims believe the same stories and 2) most of the world population believes in a post-mortem existence?

The Future of World Religions: Population Growth Projections, 2010-2050 | Pew Research Center

As of 2010, nearly a third of the world's population identified as Christian. But if demographic trends persist, Islam will close the gap by the middle of the 21st century.

www.pewresearch.org

World Religions: The Global Religious “Pie” (Part Two)

Interfaith, Interfaith News, Multifaith Community & Relgion News,

www.beliefnet.com

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Incoherent babbling.

Now you might understand why I've given up trying to discuss anything with JPP psychos.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

I really believe atheists for the most part are cultural Christians, even if not practicing Christians. Our civilization has been permeated so thoroughly for two thousand years by a Christian zeitgeist that it basically inculcates all of us.

I assume you refer to Europe and the Americas.
Are other continents thoroughly permeated by Christian zeitgeist?

I am ethnically Catholic, atheist in terms of not believing in anything supernatural,
and basically in line with NT teachings without actually believing the stories.

However, it seems to me that strict fundamentalist/evangelical/literalist American Christians are actually more OT oriented.