Yes, Christianity is just Judaism with some adjustments.
New Testament scholarship
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
Jesus' entire ministry is a reform movement rejecting the 'Oral Torah', the Temple cult, and advocating a return to the written Torah of Moses, with a new Covenant that promoted the universalism implicit in the monotheism of the pre-Ezra theology. 'Christianity is Judaism completed' is a common belief and was in the past as well. Benjamin Disraeli thought so, atone time, anyway.
Yeah, whatever. All of it stinks.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
That's because they were all executed as heretics. LOL
IBDaMann
Well-known member
You don't get to speak for anyone but yourself. You don't get to pretend to speak for "scholars."
All you get to say is that you believe the characters of the New Testament were actual people and that the events of the gospels actually happened as recounted ... and that you cannot support your beliefs with any first-hand accounts from any historians.
You also may mention that others who share your beliefs similarly cannot provide any rational basis supporting those beliefs.
Nope. You need to support these assertions, and until you do, they are presumed to be merely your religious beliefs.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Well, if even Erhmann agrees, you must be right. Now that you put it that way, it seems so obvious.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Nice injection of "real time" to assign a bogus position.
It is precisely because historians rely on first-hand accounts that we have a credible academic discipline of ancient history.
Doesn't sound like it
Blatantly unconstitutional to require the Bible be read in public school. The importance of Christianity to western civilization can be covered in a secular context in European history and western civilization classes
I agree, Mormonism is a cult. It's only 150 years old, and there's no guarantee it won't fade away and lose it's appeal over time like all other cultic movements.
Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Taoism are thousands of years old and have stood the test of time because people seem to find there to be a permanent lasting central truth in them, even if there are embellishments.
I don't think there are many serious scholars of religion who study the Book of Mormon the way the do the New Testament, the Talmud, the Buddhist canon.
I don't see direct proof of miracles or magic. My interpretations of the New Testament on this thread are based on rational naturalistic explanations which don't invoke miracles.
Last edited:
By who? You don't know any history. The gnostic rubbish was never any big deal. Walther Bauer's and his protege Elaine Pagel's claims were all exploded by the Darrell Bock book and others.
No, it isn't. What is blatantly unconstitutional is claiming the establishment clause prevents it . Read it again; it prevents the Federal govt. from making any law banning it or interfering with it being taught in public schools. Churches services were held in Federal buildings, Thomas Jefferson himself attended them while building Washington. D.C. They were held in both the Treasury building and the Congressional building. The states could, and some did, have state favored sects, complete with taxing authority, to fund schools, in fact.
Rubbish.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
I wonder if there are ay other facts about Jesus that would be considered "widely accepted" among the 2 billion Christians in the world, any one of whom is more of a biblical scholar than your random atheist.....
I wouldn't call the virgin birth a widely accepted fact, like the five facts I listed.
The virgin birth is not well attested at all. It only makes a brief appearance in two Gospels, Mathew and Luke, and these two Gospels do not appear until the 80s AD - making them late additions to the body of textual evidence. That is suspicious.
The Virgin birth does not appear and is never mentioned in the earliest Christian sources Paul and Mark, nor in the independent attestation of John.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Agreed. I'm curious about what else @EdwinA is not being completely forthcoming about.
Not a lawyer, but as long as no religious preference is shown, they should be able to read out of all religious texts including any the students wish to share. If that doesn't happen, if teachers are punished for reading out of the Torah, the Quran or the Tibetan Book of the Dead, then there will be a lawsuit. I expect some brave teacher will drive this.
Example:
In the palace of intrinsic awareness, the genuine inner radiance,Is my spiritual teacher, [the unity of] the three buddha-bodies — Beyondspatial delineation, and supremely blissful.To you, I pray with fervent devotion
Yakuda
Verified User
Suspicious? Why it is suspicious?
I don't think there is any problem with schools having a copy of the Bible in the school library. I would assume the constitutional threshold is breached once teachers start giving lessons based on reading the Bible.
Historical research criteria is premised on the criteria of independent attestation. The more independent attestations there are, the more it is considered reliable historic data.
A virgin birth is a remarkable thing. It's odd that the earliest Christian literary evidence lets it go without mentioning it.
The Virgin birth is far more important to Christian theology than you are giving credit. It establishes the Divinity of Jesus which is a major tenet of Christianity.