Page 4 of 19 [ 293 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 19  Next


Did Jesus really exist?
Yes 74%  74%  [ 31 ]
No 26%  26%  [ 11 ]
Total votes : 42

visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

04 Feb 2014, 6:45 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
Well, you don't live in the USA.

Over here, we have LOTS of people who take quite seriously what they consider to be a literal interpretation of the Bible. More seriously than anything else, including science. For them, Jesus is about to return, just after we've had a huge war to protect Israel from the Moslems. Remember, too: it is our religious folks who are not only the most vehemently opposed to gay rights and abortion rights, but the most hypocritical about it, too.

It is starting to look like Christianity was the biggest fraud ever perpetrated on the human race. The Koran and the Book or Mormon are obvious frauds. But, this one? "Believe in Jesus, and then you'll get to go to Heaven", becomes especially ridiculous if Jesus never really existed.

Moreover, the moral teachings, "turn the other cheek, just pay your taxes, and carry a Roman soldier's pack an extra mile for him", would seem to be consistent with simply wanting to keep the populace obedient and under control. An opiate for the masses. But, sure, the masses do need their opiates.


Why is the Quran a fraud? Why is the Book of Mormon a fraud? Even if we begin from the premise that they are entirely fictional, how are they any different than any other work of fiction that has been used by a community as a basis for a belief system?

You mustn't confound the work with the use that human beings make of that work. The pastor who tells you that Jesus is coming again is nothing new--the Millerites coped with The Great Disappointment, and there were plenty of Christians anticipating the Second Coming at the time of the first millennium.

But even if Jesus is entirely fictional, the teachings contained in the Gospels are no less useful as moral instruction. The fact that they have been abused by evil men posing as Christians does not diminish the fundamental merit of, "love thy neighbour as thyself."

I don't believe in a supernatural deity (or anything else supernatural for that matter). But I do not consider myself any less Jewish because of that, and I recognize great merit in what genuine Christians, Moslems, and people of all faiths take from their scriptures.


_________________
--James


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

04 Feb 2014, 8:15 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
Okay. Watch this interview with Joseph Atwill

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g40Eck6gW7U[/youtube]

and tell us what you think his agenda are.


I don't mean to pus out on you, but at the moment, I don't have 55 minutes to spare - we are about to have dinner, and watch The Master, with the late Philip Seymour Hoffman. After that, it's Agents Of Shield!


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

04 Feb 2014, 10:42 pm

visagrunt wrote:
Why is the Quran a fraud?


It was just this fellow Mohammed, sitting in a cave and pretending to get messages from the Angel Gabriel.

visagrunt wrote:
Why is the Book of Mormon a fraud?


It was just this fellow Joseph Smith who pretended that the angel Moroni showed him some golden plates, and he was able to translate them. There is absolutely no serious scholar who takes the Book of Mormon seriously.

visagrunt wrote:
Even if we begin from the premise that they are entirely fictional, how are they any different than any other work of fiction that has been used by a community as a basis for a belief system?


The first two were obvious frauds (basically one person running the show, and conning everyone else). With the Gospels, most people at least believed that they were based upon an actual person, even if they recognized that a lot of the material just wasn't possible. Now, it turns out that the gospels were just created by the Romans, for the purpose of exalting Titus. First century folks would have seen this, but, boy were the rest of us fooled.

visagrunt wrote:
You mustn't confound the work with the use that human beings make of that work. The pastor who tells you that Jesus is coming again is nothing new--the Millerites coped with The Great Disappointment, and there were plenty of Christians anticipating the Second Coming at the time of the first millennium.


And, boy were they fooled.

visagrunt wrote:
But even if Jesus is entirely fictional, the teachings contained in the Gospels are no less useful as moral instruction. The fact that they have been abused by evil men posing as Christians does not diminish the fundamental merit of, "love thy neighbour as thyself."


Of course, certain things are useful, no matter who first coined them. But, now we're able to look at the Gospels with a more critical eye. "Aha! Of course the Romans would have wanted the surviving Jews to take up a more pacifist view", etc.

visagrunt wrote:
I don't believe in a supernatural deity (or anything else supernatural for that matter). But I do not consider myself any less Jewish because of that, and I recognize great merit in what genuine Christians, Moslems, and people of all faiths take from their scriptures.


Yes, but some of them are taking up things that are less meritorious. But, for most, it does make for a useful opiate. Something to do on Sunday mornings, and holidays to celebrate.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

04 Feb 2014, 11:30 pm

Here is the section from Josephus, which Mr. Atwill, beginning at about 25:00 in the above video, relates to the Last Supper story of the Gospels.

http://sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/war-6.htm

Quote:
There was a certain woman that dwelt beyond Jordan, her name was Mary; her father was Eleazar, of the village Bethezob, which signifies the house of Hyssop. She was eminent for her family and her wealth, and had fled away to Jerusalem with the rest of the multitude, and was with them besieged therein at this time. The other effects of this woman had been already seized upon, such I mean as she had brought with her out of Perea, and removed to the city. What she had treasured up besides, as also what food she had contrived to save, had been also carried off by the rapacious guards, who came every day running into her house for that purpose. This put the poor woman into a very great passion, and by the frequent reproaches and imprecations she east at these rapacious villains, she had provoked them to anger against her; but none of them, either out of the indignation she had raised against herself, or out of commiseration of her case, would take away her life; and if she found any food, she perceived her labors were for others, and not for herself; and it was now become impossible for her any way to find any more food, while the famine pierced through her very bowels and marrow, when also her passion was fired to a degree beyond the famine itself; nor did she consult with any thing but with her passion and the necessity she was in. She then attempted a most unnatural thing; and snatching up her son, who was a child sucking at her breast, she said, "O thou miserable infant! for whom shall I preserve thee in this war, this famine, and this sedition? As to the war with the Romans, if they preserve our lives, we must be slaves. This famine also will destroy us, even before that slavery comes upon us. Yet are these seditious rogues more terrible than both the other. Come on; be thou my food, and be thou a fury to these seditious varlets, and a by-word to the world, which is all that is now wanting to complete the calamities of us Jews." As soon as she had said this, she slew her son, and then roasted him, and eat the one half of him, and kept the other half by her concealed. Upon this the seditious came in presently, and smelling the horrid scent of this food, they threatened her that they would cut her throat immediately if she did not show them what food she had gotten ready. She replied that she had saved a very fine portion of it for them, and withal uncovered what was left of her son. Hereupon they were seized with a horror and amazement of mind, and stood astonished at the sight, when she said to them, "This is mine own son, and what hath been done was mine own doing! Come, eat of this food; for I have eaten of it myself! Do not you pretend to be either more tender than a woman, or more compassionate than a mother; but if you be so scrupulous, and do abominate this my sacrifice, as I have eaten the one half, let the rest be reserved for me also." After which those men went out trembling, being never so much aftrighted at any thing as they were at this, and with some difficulty they left the rest of that meat to the mother. Upon which the whole city was full of this horrid action immediately; and while every body laid this miserable case before their own eyes, they trembled, as if this unheard of action had been done by themselves. So those that were thus distressed by the famine were very desirous to die, and those already dead were esteemed happy, because they had not lived long enough either to hear or to see such miseries.

This sad instance was quickly told to the Romans, some of whom could not believe it, and others pitied the distress which the Jews were under; but there were many of them who were hereby induced to a more bitter hatred than ordinary against our nation. ....


Does he have a point? Or, is it too far fetched?

Here is

Mark 14 wrote:
While they were eating, Jesus took a piece of bread, gave a prayer of thanks, broke it, and gave it to his disciples. “Take it,” he said, “this is my body.”

Then he took a cup, gave thanks to God, and handed it to them; and they all drank from it. Jesus said, “This is my blood which is poured out for many, my blood which seals God's covenant. I tell you, I will never again drink this wine until the day I drink the new wine in the Kingdom of God.”



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,561

04 Feb 2014, 11:44 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
aghogday wrote:
And no.. this is a BBC documentary.. they do not publish 'fly by night' crap..

And YES .. it is narrated in part.. by one of the highest regarded religious scholars
in the world...

Enjoy..if ya get time and or wanna watch it.


Okay, I finally watched it. Very interesting. They've made the assumption that Jesus actually did exist. But, they seem to agree with everyone else that the Christian gospels missed the point.


Yes..unfortunately much IS left out OF THE NEW TESTAMENT..per the gnostic gospels..

The problem i see..is that freedom empowers ..
the common guy or gal and makes him or her harder to control..
with fear or
subjugation.

But there is more to this life than science can likely ever reproduce in a laboratory..

And i as an actual practicing scientist..in my life..in the field of archaeology..

in my much younger days..in my twenties...

i can personally vouch for this...

But again..the 'power and the mystery'..in the total potential that is a human being..
given the greater MORE FULLY NATURAL FORCE..CHI..TAO..DAO..QI..CHRIST ENERGY..GOD..ALLAH..GREAT SPIRIT..
KUNDALINI..

OR SERIOUSLY WHATEVER THE F** ONE (YAH FUN)..:);)
WANTS TO CALL 'IT'
'IT' IS REAL..
AND JUST IS
WH@ITIS
FOR THOSE WHO
COME TO EXPERIENCE..IT..
BUT FOR THOSE WHO DON'T...

This force ain't fair .. at least in this lifetime..
and dam..it sure ain't coming free..with the recitation..
of one verse..
JOHN 3:16...

The dam camel is much bigger..
than that metaphorical eye of a needle to get
tHERe..
for what i understand as
TOTAL HUMAN POTENTIAL..
LOGIC..EMOTION..MIND..
SPIRIT..SOUL..
AND HEART..
YAH..THAT AIN'T NO TRINITY
THAT'S
6!
A SIX POINTED STAR!

IF one wants to use
that metaphor
instead..
Or what the f**
666!

After all
IS said and
done..
AFTER ALL..
GOD IS
A
LAUGH
ANY
WAY...

THE KEY TO
THAT
IS SYNCHRONICITY
OR THE TAPESTRY
OF TRUE
REALITY..

That only some folks..
more fully see..

And yes..'The Matrix'..
is an excellent metaphor
for that..if one wants to look
to the TRUE PROPHETS..
IN OUR MODERN AGE..
IN POP
CULTURE...

(well i hope i did not give anyone..
a headache with all that...

as one might imagine..
my wife gets headaches..
when i try to explain this to her in real life..)

AND if ya think i talk loud and fast here..
in this virtual reality set up...

ya would not likely want to encounter..what IS
described in real life..AS the LIGHTENING..
OF MY VOICE..seriously i'm not kidding about that..
but tHere are no boundaries for me knowNOw..in TOTAL HUMAN
POTENTIAL!

AND YES! I MOST DEFINITELY
HAVE REAMS OF EVIDENCE..
DOCUMENTED FOR THAT2!

Available upon
request..:)
SERIOUSLY.


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

05 Feb 2014, 12:06 am

visagrunt wrote:

For a Christian, belief in a historical Jesus is entirely irrelevant to faith, and to compliance with the moral teachings of Christianity. In the presence of faith, salvation is not dependent upon whether or not the crucifiction and resurrection were historical fact or human fiction.

.


Really! are you quite sure about this.

The Resurrection forms the cornerstone of the Christian religion to quote Paul 1 Corinthians 15:14:

And if Christ was not raised, then all our preaching is useless, and your trust in God is useless. And we apostles would all be lying about God, for we have said that God raised Christ from the grave, but that can't be true if there is no resurrection of the dead. If there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then your faith is useless, and you are still under condemnation for your sins.


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,561

05 Feb 2014, 1:17 am

DentArthurDent wrote:
visagrunt wrote:

For a Christian, belief in a historical Jesus is entirely irrelevant to faith, and to compliance with the moral teachings of Christianity. In the presence of faith, salvation is not dependent upon whether or not the crucifiction and resurrection were historical fact or human fiction.

.


Really! are you quite sure about this.

The Resurrection forms the cornerstone of the Christian religion to quote Paul 1 Corinthians 15:14:

And if Christ was not raised, then all our preaching is useless, and your trust in God is useless. And we apostles would all be lying about God, for we have said that God raised Christ from the grave, but that can't be true if there is no resurrection of the dead. If there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then your faith is useless, and you are still under condemnation for your sins.


Well..YES..people make mistakes..particularly IN those days..of verbal transmission..written down somewhere 40 to 200 years after..said event..

BUT THE ESSENCE OF TRUTH NEVER CHANGES..

THAT PART
IS
TRUE..

BUT COMPLETELY
STILL
OPEN
TO INDIVIDUAL
INTERPRETATION..

As always with the way..
each unique human being..
perceives their world differently..
ranging from slight..
to extreme..
in YES ALL OF
REALITY..
THAT NOT ALL
SEE..
BUT SOME SEE MORE..
AND THAT'S A FACT
A SCIENTIFIC
one by
the way..

as i'm sure ya know
as a biologist..
or hope at least....


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

05 Feb 2014, 7:48 am

DentArthurDent wrote:
The Resurrection forms the cornerstone of the Christian religion to quote Paul 1 Corinthians 15:14:

And if Christ was not raised, then all our preaching is useless, and your trust in God is useless. And we apostles would all be lying about God, for we have said that God raised Christ from the grave, but that can't be true if there is no resurrection of the dead. If there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then your faith is useless, and you are still under condemnation for your sins.


Looking a couple of paragraphs above your quote:

1 Corinthians 15 wrote:
I passed on to you what I received, which is of the greatest importance: that Christ died for our sins, as written in the Scriptures; that he was buried and that he was raised to life three days later, as written in the Scriptures; that he appeared to Peter and then to all twelve apostles. Then he appeared to more than five hundred of his followers at once, most of whom are still alive, although some have died. Then he appeared to James, and afterward to all the apostles.


It does seem that Paul is talking about someone who actually did walk on the Earth in human form--rather than some purely mythic character that only existed somewhere in the clouds. I'd have to try to look at how people like Richard Carrier explain this one. Mr. Atwill seems only to focus on the Gospels rather than Paul's letters.

According to the Gospels, though, Jesus was raised to life two days later, rather than three days later.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

05 Feb 2014, 10:26 am

Here is a rebuttal of Mr. Atwill's book

http://caesarsmessiahdebunked.com/

It does contain some points worth considering, and I suspect that it will fully satisfy many of our Christian brethren. But, I suspect that many approach the subject with agenda that may be less-than-hidden (like, "I don't want to deal with any arguments that suggest that my faith is useless").

Here is an attack by Richard Carrier:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/4664

whose lecture led off this discussion.

Richard Carrier wrote:
Joseph Atwill is one of those crank mythers I often get conflated with. Mythicists like him make the job of serious scholars like me so much harder, because people see, hear, or read them and think their nonsense is what mythicism is. They make mythicism look ridiculous. So I have to waste time (oh by the gods, so much time) explaining how I am not arguing anything like their theories or using anything like their terrible methods, and unlike them I actually know what I am talking about, and have an actual Ph.D. in a relevant subject from a real university.


While Mr. Carrier obviously thinks very highly of himself, he raises some excellent points. And, the back-and-forth between Mr. Carrier and Mr. Atwill is interesting reading.



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

05 Feb 2014, 11:03 am

ArrantPariah wrote:
It was just this fellow Mohammed, sitting in a cave and pretending to get messages from the Angel Gabriel.
...
It was just this fellow Joseph Smith who pretended that the angel Moroni showed him some golden plates, and he was able to translate them. There is absolutely no serious scholar who takes the Book of Mormon seriously.
...
The first two were obvious frauds (basically one person running the show, and conning everyone else). With the Gospels, most people at least believed that they were based upon an actual person, even if they recognized that a lot of the material just wasn't possible. Now, it turns out that the gospels were just created by the Romans, for the purpose of exalting Titus. First century folks would have seen this, but, boy were the rest of us fooled.


That doesn't make them frauds. They are certainly fiction, but that is not enough to make them frauds. Fraud requires three elements: knowingly uttering a false statement with the intention that it will be relied upon, actual reliance, and a pecuniary loss resulting from that reliance. Even in the case of the devout Mormon who tithes as a result of belief in the BoM, that does not amount to fraud.

Quote:
Of course, certain things are useful, no matter who first coined them. But, now we're able to look at the Gospels with a more critical eye. "Aha! Of course the Romans would have wanted the surviving Jews to take up a more pacifist view", etc.


There's nothing wrong with a critical eye. And if your criticism is what it takes for you to justify your attitudes, then fill your boots.

But that does not mean that the value is in any way diminished for a person who does not share your critical perspective.

Quote:
Yes, but some of them are taking up things that are less meritorious. But, for most, it does make for a useful opiate. Something to do on Sunday mornings, and holidays to celebrate.


Are you constitutionally incapable of demonstrating respect for others' beliefs and opinions? Does your own self-image depend upon characterizing scripture as an opiate in order to infantilize believers?

Nobody is asking you to believe. But simple politeness suggests that you don't ridicule people who do.

I condemn evil people for the evil that they do; but I do not tar all Christians with the same brush.


_________________
--James


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,561

05 Feb 2014, 12:01 pm

Yeah..plus one on the statement above..

What many people 'fail' to realize is just how important the process of believing in a positive power of anything is in achieving...

actual positive results of affect and YES EFFECT in life...

While some people pooh pooh..the power of the PLACEBO EFFECT...research does show just how powerful..
the Power of belief..regardless of whether or not the object of belief is FULLY true or not...

Well..the NOCEBO EFFECT..is just as EFFECTIVE..AND AFFECTIVE..per the overall human condition..in even
producing objectively medically documented diagnosed disorders...

As i'm sure the 'good' doctor above..is fully aware of this in his practice... in real life.

But for the 'laymans' in the audience i will once again..provide a little visual documentary for those who have time or interest in viewing it..
here once again...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2hO4_UEe-4[/youtube]

Ya see.. there's the documented scientific evidence...a person can make themselves medically and physical ill..by believing they are gonna be ill..through the NOCEBO EFFECT/AFFECT fully just with the power of BELIEF..AND FAITH IF YA WANNA CALL IT THAT TOO..in whatever the object OF ILL THEY BELIEVE IS GONNA MAKE 'EM SICK..

NO MATTER IF IT IS FULLY 'TRUE' OR NOT..

AND YES THERE IS DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE..THAT THE BELIEF IN THE PLACEBO EFFECT/AFFECT no matter if the object of belief in GETTING WELL..IS FULLY 'TRUE' OR NOT...

SO THE BELIEF PER PLACEBO/NOCEBO..WHETHER HEALED OR SICK..IS ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL GIFTS OR DESTRUCTIVE FORCES FOR THE HUMAN MIND..

AND OH MY GOD! IF FOLKS ACTUALLY BELIEVING THAT JESUS DIED ON A CROSS ROSE UP FROM THE DEAD AND ASCENDED INTO HEAVEN AND IS SEATED AT THE RIGHT HAND OF THE FATHER AND WILL COME AGAIN IN GLORY TO JUDGE THE LIVING AND THE DEAD..

MAKES 'EM FEEL BETTER..AND HEALTHIER PER THE PLACEBO AFFECT/EFFECT...

THAN F** 'A' LET 'EM GO FOR IT..

IN THIS CASE A POTENTIAL LIE..
BECOMES THE TRUTH OF HEALING POWER..

THE TRUTH IS NOT ALWAYS THE TRUTH..
FOR THE BETTER 'GOOD' FOR HUMANITY..

OR FOR THAT MANNER THE 'WORSER' 'BAD' FOR HUMANITY..

'CAUSE FOR ONE SIMPLE REASON..
WHILE I DO NOT NEED THE PROMISE OF HEAVEN OR THE DIVINITY OF A MAN..TO FEEL GOOD..AND TO BE HEALTHY..

AND THE NATURAL HUMAN POTENTIAL OF THAT MAN AND OTHERS LIKE HIM..TO GAIN BLISS IN THE NOW IS GOOD ENOUGH FOR
ME TO HAVE BLISS..PER THE REAL LIFE PRACTICE OF WHAT THEY PRACTICED IN REAL LIFE..

IT ain't the same for SOME other folks..THAT ACTUALLY need to believe in these supernatural things to be happy and healthy..

AKA the friggin PLACEBO EFFECT AND AFFECT .. IN SOME CASES...

A REAL SCIENTIFICALLY DOCUMENTED HUMAN HEALING/PSYCHOLOGICAL AND EXISTENTIAL REAL LIFE IN EFFECT AND AFFECT MEDICINE..IN THE CASE OF RELIGION ..THAT AGAIN! IS REAL..WITH REAL SCIENTIFICALLY MEASURED BENEFITS..FOR HUMAN HEALTH AND WELL BEING...

IT DON'T GET ANY BETTER THAN THAT FOR SOME FOLKS..
THAN BELIEVING IN A MYTH WHETHER IT IS THE RISEN JESUS CHRIST ASCENDED INTO HEAVEN...FOR A DREAM OF BLISS IN THE FUTURE..THAT MAKES A PERSON FEEL BETTER..TO GET HEALTHIER IN THE PRESENT NOW...

OR THE FRIGGIN LORD OF THE RINGS..
AS SO ELOQUENTLY SUNG
BY THE great group
STYX.

AS LONG AS A PERSON IS HEALTHY AND HAPPY IN THE NOW IN THIS LIFE..
IT DON'T FRIGGIN MATTER WHAT THEY BELIEVE IN
AS LONG
AS THAT
IS
REALITY..

THAT IS THE TRUTH ..THE WHOLE TRUTH..AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH..
ABOUT MYTH..
AS FAR AS I KNOWnow!

SOMETIMES A 'PARTIAL' OR 'FULL' LIE IS THE WAY TO BLISS TOO..
SO IRONICALLY IN THAT CASE..A LIE IN A WAY BECOMES THE 'TRUTH' idealistically
speaking..if ya will...

And by the way modern science suggests that autistic folks do not benefit as much..from
the placebo effect..per control groups in the general population..
and ergo likely not the deleterious affect/effect of the placebo effect as much..either..
if one wants to use common sense..for this newer studied phenomenon....

And it is already known that this applies to about 60 TO 70 percent of the general population...

So in this case perhaps..this is how some folks end up on the road to atheism..or agnosticism..
outside the doors of a structured church...

Religion just don't do 'em any good..potentially...

in objective reality..while it does some other folks a whole lot of good..
per the PLACEBO EFFECT/AFFECT AND WHAT MODERN MEDICAL SCIENCE UNDERSTANDS..
IS THE TRUTH ABOUT MYTH...!
for some human folks.

And yes there is a lot of good stuff in religion ..per general ethics..
and real life PRACTICES..THAT ARE IN ALIGNMENT WITH SIMPLE
HEALTH AND WELL BEING PRACTICES..AS SIMPLE AS THE PRACTICE
OF MODERATION..THAT are practiced..that with any simple common sense..
should be understood as a way to a more healthy way of life...

And social connection is already understood as the number #1 source of happiness..
for most social human animals..so oh my GOD it only stands to reason..
that if a person gains these connections through an organized church through the course of
life..through the similar real life established friends..it's all good man...
and yah..what is more important than happiness and bliss in life..
if a person is REALLY HONEST WITH THEM SELF.

MAYBE SOME FOLKS ARE TRUE MARTYRS BUT..NAH..MOST FOLKS WANNA BE HAPPY..
AND THAT'S
THE
TRUTH THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH..as far as i know
about that...

So here's that Video of Styx and the Lord of the Rings to end this monologue of mine now..
as yah ..that is what makes some of us Autistic folks happy to be able to FULLY EXPRESS OUR
IDEAS..IN A LONG MONOLOGUE..NOT like THE TWITTER FOLKS..THAT WANNA SAY EVERYTHING.
IN JUST 140 CHARACTERS..
OR WHATEVER...

AND yes if i did not use some form of that in my written communication..to accommodate that present
intellectual limitation..for some folks that have become slave to the twitter word..and world..

This really would be a huge wall of text..

But instead..it is somewhat..bit size chunks..one at a time..
for the Twitter folks...

i carefully calculate everything i do ..and in doing so as such..
i make it all sacred even..every movement i make walking like
a TAI CHI..or Zen Master...and the next thing..i do not know..
is it becomes flow..and i do not even have to think about
my way to bliss....

But i am odd..and i do not care what anyone else thinks..
i am a maverick..
not just a cow or sheep in the herd..or bird in the flock..

yah..Jonathan Livingston Seagull and all of that..

CHALLENGE YASELF..
BE DIFFERENT..IS MY PHILOSOPHY ABOUT
THAT2....
IN THE WAY AND STAY TO BLISS..IN NOW..
IN JUST MY LIFE..NOW!

A MONOLOGUE OF BLISS....

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nmc1bjLKVyQ&feature=kp[/YOUTUBE]

AND IF YA DO NOT LIKE MY AUTISTIC METHOD OF COMMUNICATION..

please just ignore me..i too..am here for support..
just to friggin be my OWN autistic self!
and that includes not worrying about what other
folks think..about my differences..and all of THAT!
2:)

WE ARE ALL DIFFERENT.
SO WHAT.. I'M JUST MORE DIFFERENT..THAN MOST PEOPLE
WHO ARE DIFFERENT..JUST MY REALITY..
THAT IS ALL..

PLEASE just let me be..
smiles and please
have a great day..if ya will..
i would not want to tell ya..
what to do....directly

if ya get my drift..2


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

05 Feb 2014, 12:27 pm

visagrunt wrote:
That doesn't make them frauds. They are certainly fiction, but that is not enough to make them frauds. Fraud requires three elements: knowingly uttering a false statement with the intention that it will be relied upon, actual reliance, and a pecuniary loss resulting from that reliance. Even in the case of the devout Mormon who tithes as a result of belief in the BoM, that does not amount to fraud.


Mohammed may have believed that he was actually communicating with the Angel Gabriel. I think that Joseph Smith's testimony was deliberately false, and that the Book of Mormon does not merit any sort of scholarly inquiry. Which means that the devout Mormons who tithe are being defrauded.

visagrunt wrote:
But that does not mean that the value is in any way diminished for a person who does not share your critical perspective.


People may believe whatever they wish.

visagrunt wrote:
Quote:
But, for most, it does make for a useful opiate. Something to do on Sunday mornings, and holidays to celebrate.
Are you constitutionally incapable of demonstrating respect for others' beliefs and opinions? Does your own self-image depend upon characterizing scripture as an opiate in order to infantilize believers?


While I may regard religion as an opiate that infantilizes believers, I don't think that my self-image is dependent upon this.

visagrunt wrote:
Nobody is asking you to believe. But simple politeness suggests that you don't ridicule people who do.

I condemn evil people for the evil that they do; but I do not tar all Christians with the same brush.


You're the one who asked

Visagrunt wrote:
Why does anyone suppose that this matters in the slightest?

For a Christian, belief in a historical Jesus is entirely irrelevant to faith, and to compliance with the moral teachings of Christianity. In the presence of faith, salvation is not dependent upon whether or not the crucifiction and resurrection were historical fact or human fiction.

And if one is not a Christian, then a historical Jesus provides absolutely no additional weight to the relevance of any of the teachings attributed to him.


and I made an effort to answer. Some of us are just interested in the topic, even if we aren't religious. No book has had a greater impact on Western Civilization than the Bible. Hence, the Bible is at least as worthy of critical reading as an other work of fiction.

Plenty of translations are available, and anyone who wishes may pick up a copy and read it.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

05 Feb 2014, 1:00 pm

Regarding Mr. Atwill's comparison of the Last Supper story to the cannibalism recounted by Josephus:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/4664

Mr. Carrier wrote:
Except that in Paul and the Gospels the idea of eating the flesh of Jesus makes far more sense as a Jewish theological scheme of salvation than as some vastly obscure joke no one got. Surely you know scholars agree Jesus is equated with the atoning lamb whose flesh is and was in fact eaten by Israel, and not only that, but eaten in substitution for human flesh [EDIT: e.g. at the Passover, that of everyone's firstborn; at the original Yom Kippur, that of Isaac, Abraham's firstborn]. It is thus a message of communion and salvation, a means to enter the true Israel and thus win the salvation promised by God to Israel. That’s quite clearly the meaning, not some joke on cannibalism.

For example, Jesus clearly is presented as one who merges the Passover Lamb and the Goat of Atonement of Yom Kippur. The Barrabas story clearly indicates this (he is the “scapegoat” of Lev. 16, as his name means “Son of the Father” and thus we have two “Sons of the Father,” one taking on the sins of Israel and being released into the “wilderness,” i.e. the mob, and the other being sacrificed to atone for the sins of Israel). This is the theme in Christian theology throughout all the NT documents, where the sacrifice of Jesus atones for the sins of Israel just like the Goat of Yom Kippur and yet is also the Passover Lamb that unites Israel and wards off God’s wrath. For example, it is by sharing the flesh of the lamb and bread of Passover that one joins or exits the promise of salvation, by joining or exiting the body of Israel, therefore it is by sharing the flesh and bread of The Savior (which is what the word “Jesus” means) that one joins or exits the true body of Israel. There is no cannibalism here, any more than there is “cannibalism” in eating the ram substituted for Isaac–rather, it is a ritual by which one joins the body of Christ by sharing [symbolically] in his flesh, and thus sharing in his fate, which is eternal life (see my discussion in The Empty Tomb, p. 145, etc. [EDIT: I say much more about this, with citations of the scholarship, in my forthcoming book On the Historicity of Jesus]).
The ingenious congruence of texts makes this quite clear as the intended meaning of the Eucharist, and I see no joke here–this is clever and serious. Note my emphasis of key vocabulary:
John 1:29: “On the morrow he seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold, the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world!”
Thus Jesus is declared to be both the Lamb of Passover and the Goat of Atonement all rolled up in one. Because he is the Lamb who atones, we eat him just as we eat the lamb, and gain the same benefits thereof.
So, therefore:
1 Pet. 1:18-20: “Ye were redeemed, not with corruptible things, with silver or gold, from your vain manner of life handed down from your fathers; but with precious BLOOD, as of a LAMB without spot: the blood of Christ: who was foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world, but was manifested at the end of times for your sake.”
And this principle of substituted flesh is already Jewish [in Gen. 22:4-18] … That establishes the principle of substitution, “on the third day” eating the flesh of the ram in the place of “[Abraham's] only son” and by doing this God will guarantee every good thing.
Hence Jesus does this by connecting Yom Kippur with Passover, wherein the lamb must be eaten [in Exodos 12:3-15] … One Passover Lamb that can feed everyone will do, all the Jews will kill the lamb (just as the Gospels and Paul portray as having happened), and those who eat its flesh and take its blood as a sign will be saved from destruction, while those who do not share of the Passover blood and bread will be cut off from Israel (thus by sharing the sacred bread one joins the body of Israel). The symbolic parallel here is clear in Paul [in 1 Cor. 5:4-8] …
Thus, Jesus is our Passover, by eating his flesh we join the congregation by joining the body of Christ and thus we share in his fate. That is why Paul routinely says the Church is Christ’s body, which it becomes by consuming his “flesh” symbolically–in the same way that wine was widely regarded as the blood of Bacchus, and grapes his flesh.
This is in fact the mainstream view–most scholars agree with the general interpretation above. This is the theory that your theory (2) is competing against, and the evidence so far looks stronger on our side than on yours.


This was one of Mr. Atwill's key points, and I think that he has been shot down.

The Gospels seem not to have been merely a joke created by the Romans. But, I think that some of Mr. Atwill's points may have some validity (e.g., Titus being the "Son of Man" purportedly prophesied by Jesus).



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

05 Feb 2014, 2:14 pm

ArrantParriah-

In regard to Christ's two days versus three days in the tomb - - it has to be remembered, he had been buried late Friday, then resurrected Sunday morning. While that is not a complete seventy two hours, it goes to show you that while fundamentalists are Biblical literalists, God obviously is not. 8)


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

05 Feb 2014, 3:53 pm

DentArthurDent wrote:
Really! are you quite sure about this.

The Resurrection forms the cornerstone of the Christian religion to quote Paul 1 Corinthians 15:14:

And if Christ was not raised, then all our preaching is useless, and your trust in God is useless. And we apostles would all be lying about God, for we have said that God raised Christ from the grave, but that can't be true if there is no resurrection of the dead. If there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then your faith is useless, and you are still under condemnation for your sins.


That kind of literalism is exactly what is wrong with a lot of self-described Christians who act in the belief that they have a monopoly on virtue.

When faith is grounded not in a belief in historical fact, but rather in a belief that events like the Exodus and the Resurrection are valuable as groundings for moral guidance whether or not they actually took place, then people of faith are better equipped to make their faith a part of their daily lives, and to see its teachings as always speaking in the present tense, for all times, rather than a fixed pronouncement, millennia old, that are of limited relevance to our age.

It is the mere thought of the divine that inspires us to recall, "that which is hateful to you do not do unto others." You don't need scripture to tell you that, but it is as good as guide as any of Aesop's fables.


_________________
--James


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

05 Feb 2014, 6:09 pm

If you have a few hours to kill, here is a debate: William Lane Craig vs Richard Carrier

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaUd234Q3GU[/youtube]

(and, I realize that I'm probably the only one here who is interested enough to sit through it).

But, anyway, you do get a Christian perspective.