At What Point?

[Cypress]

I never said there was a coordinated conspiracy. Those are your words.

The NT are stories. Nothing more. Nothing less. In those stories are additions and subtractions. One could call the additions embellishments or fabrications is your choice. At the tomb, was it an angel or a young man?

I also never said all the disciples were dead. And yeah, Paul HEARD the stories. So, which of the several renditions is correct?

Now, having been given facts you never were aware of before, your only retort is to proclaim Paul is lying.

Holy Rollers say the NT is inerrant and literally true.

Militant atheists believe the NT is a pack of lies and deceptions.

That's fine, everyone is free to choose.

I've never heard any reputable religious historian announce there is no historicity anywhere in the NT.

I am in the middle between unyielding fundamentalism and strident atheism. I don't think semitic people of the ancient Near East even knew how to write analytical history, biography, journalism. Those are inventions of the Greeks, Romans, and Enlightenment era Europeans. I think NT is a mixture of parable, allegory, embellishments, myth, and events, sermons, and activities some of which are based on real people and events.

 

[Kafka]

Actually, I find him to be a reasonable and intellectually curious guy. It seems we have gotten off the tracks somehow on this one.

Oh he's definitely well read. But don't get on his bad side. He will then be incapable of using that intellect. He will only remember whatever it is he hates about the person and will attack.

He is VERY well read. Widely read and clearly not an idiot. But his inability to handle anyone so much as mildly disagreeing with him will show up sooner or later. The only person he allows any latitude with is Doc Dutch (Aka Dutch Commander AKA Dutch Uncle). He will always be welcoming and accepting of Doc's stuff. I think it is because they both have problems with their hatred of others.

 

[domer76]

Holy Rollers say the NT is inerrant and literally true.

Militant atheists believe the NT is a pack of lies and deceptions.

That's fine, everyone is free to choose.

I've never heard any reputable religious historian announce there is no historicity anywhere in the NT.

I am in the middle between unteoenty fundamentalism and strident atheism. I don't think semitic people of the ancient Near East even knew how to write analytical history, biography, journalism. Those are inventions of the Greeks, Romans, and Enlightenment era Europeans. I think NT is a mixture of parable, allegory, embellishments, myth, and events, sermons, and activities some of which are based on real people and events.

Agreed.

 

[Kafka]

Militant atheists believe the NT is a pack of lies and deceptions.

Ironic you complain about people trying to tell you what you believe and here you are, as usual, lying about others and telling them what they think.

It is astonishing how much hatred seethes inside you.

Try taking a breath and reading what others say.

 

[Cypress]

Ironic you complain about people trying to tell you what you believe and here you are, as usual, lying about others and telling them what they think.

It is astonishing how much hatred seethes inside you.

Try taking a breath and reading what others say.

For someone who read the bible "cover to cover" it seems like your missed some very key details.

You seem defensive that your long standing belief that the resurrection story only first appeared many decades after all the eyewitnesses to Jesus' ministry were conveniently dead -- is a belief which is incorrect.

 

[Cypress]

The story of the Resurrection of a dead Jesus may well be a coordinated fabrication.

My mind is always open to alternative rational explainations

And I have to much respect for religious scholarship to just let incorrect information slip though --> like the claim we only first hear about the resurrection many decades later in the four gospels.

 

[Kafka]

For someone who read the bible "cover to cover" it seems like your missed some very key details.

Not really. But I understand you must attack me and not engage the points.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Paul did meet Jesus, as described in Acts.

It was the mushrooms.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Christianity isn't tolerance, Sybil.

^^^
Claims to be a Christian.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

...Fact is, I have little doubt he went through the experience, because I went through an almost identical experience myself. But I was truthful enough to end up with an agnostic take...rather than trying to twist atheism to fit my result. I suspect he is using "atheism" because of the same reason so many other people who use atheism do. They seem to think it makes them seem strong.

It doesn't.

Agreed. Notice too that all such atheists are not only weak, but weak in mind if not a little whacky. Same goes, IMO, for those who are extreme theists.

 

[Kafka]

Indeed.

And the long bullshit story he offered

LOL. You will get along well with Doc Dutch. So much hatred inside you.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

This is Cypress standard "strawman". He will continue to lie about your position and mischaracterize it.

He is incapable of discussing a topic without attacking the other poster. (Unless it's Doc Douche....then he will trade stories about how smart he is)

My favorite post of the thread since it sums up all of your posts into three short sentences. Thanks!

LOL. You will get along well with Doc Dutch. So much hatred inside you.

A sweeeeeet QED. Perry claims others are the ones with hate in their hearts, not him.

 

[Phantasmal]

So, at what point do we tell our children that there is no Santa Claus, no Easter Bunny, or that babies don’t come from storks?

Where do we start providing them with critical thinking skills where they can begin to separate fact from fiction?

That people really can’t walk on water, that one boat can’t fit all animals, that rainbows are from the refraction of light, that people aren’t resurrected?

Where do schools draw the line on perpetuating myths without being at risk for offending someone’s theology?

8-10, the age of reason.

 

[Hume]

The story of the Resurrection of a dead Jesus may well be a coordinated fabrication.

My mind is always open to alternative rational explainations

And I have to much respect for religious scholarship to just let incorrect information slip though --> like the claim we only first hear about the resurrection many decades later in the four gospels.

The question is, why do people need to believe someone can die and come back to life.

 

[Litmus]

Good point, there wasn't a canon until centuries after the apostles and early Christians.

None of the Papal bulls, writings of the church fathers, or ecumenical councils are "canonical" either. But they carry equal weight with Catholics. It's only Protestants who consider biblical text the one and only authority.

If Jesus had just died on the cross and been entombed or buried, that would have been the end of that. His death would have proved he wasn't the Messiah. His followers would have dispersed and nothing more would have been heard of him.

If Paul and Mark had fabricated the resurrection account, it's curious thee still living witnesses to Jesus' ministry didn't protest.

The fact that Jesus' brother James became the leader of the Christian movement in Jerusalem after the crucifixion suggests to me something unusual happened to rally the apostles after the crucifixion. I look for sensible and rational explanations, and for me both miracles and coordinated conspiracies are problematic

no.

religion is valuable because of morality, not supernatural events.


stop trying to dumb it down to poison the well of morality.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Didn't dodge the question. I addressed it. You didn't like it because you hadn't thought that deeply about your question.

It seems you did. You linked David Koresh with Jesus then ran from it. You did, however, claim that the people dying at Waco were equal to the Apostles being martyred over the years for their beliefs about Jesus. It's not an apples-to-apples comparison, Perry, since those who died at Waco seem to have chosen death rather than surrender whereas the Apostles and those murdered at Mountain Meadows didn't choose to die.

 

[Kafka]

It seems you did. You linked David Koresh with Jesus then ran from it.

I didn't run from it. It still stands.

You did, however, claim that the people dying at Waco were equal to the Apostles being martyred over the years for their beliefs about Jesus.

Indeed. Believers dying for a fiction they truly believe. Tale as old as time.

It's not an apples-to-apples comparison

Nothing ever is for you guys.

, Perry, since those who died at Waco seem to have chosen death rather than surrender whereas the Apostles and those murdered at Mountain Meadows didn't choose to die.

Martyrs are martyrs.

 

[Into the Night]

I dreamt I met Elvis. Did I meet Elvis?

No. Why do you ask?

 

[Kafka]

No. Why do you ask?

Then clearly you don't know how Paul "met" Jesus.

 

[Into the Night]

But you keep making it into some grand conspiracy and lies. That isn't my hypothesis at all. You keep casting my point in the most DARK and EVIL manner so you can attack it.

But that was never my point. Yet you persist in the mischaracterization.

I honestly don't understand why you are incapable of discussing something without attacking me.

He has to. He belongs to the Church of No God. He must attack anything Christian, including making up shit whole cloth out of the Bible, to justify his beliefs. He's a fundamentalist.