F
FraterLibre
Guest
Bumper Sticker Summation
Jesus was an Essene and not heard.
Jesus was an Essene and not heard.
You didn't, but the 4 synoptic Gospels are the books usually described as the eyewitness accounts among conservative theologians. As for Herod, indeed there were multiple Herods, but Luke -by implications that can reasonably be inferred from his account of Herod's location/attitudes/activities- is pretty specific about which Herod it was that ordered the search for the baby Jesus, and unfortunately that particular Herod was already dead by the time the census was ordered.Fallen Angel said:Um, pardon me but my post does not specify Luke as one of the eyewitness accounts. Hel-lo!? As for his chronology being wrong, please give your source. Keep in mind too there was more than one Herod.
Actually I asked my pastor, a Doctor of Theology- a scholar who speaks, reads and writes Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and can read Aramaic - and he says that yes, a Jewish woman of the time could indeed legally and religiously divorce her husband. Sorry, but in this case I believe his education and credentials outweighs yours.
This might seem an arrogant kind of statement to make, but as I've been fond of saying (usually to managers just before their heads exploded); "Even if all the Angels in Heaven elected you to the post, gave you the salary and benefits package and then voted you a\ whopping great signing bonus, you still wouldn't be God." IOW; don't believe what your told just because your pastor seems to have the qualifications so far as you can tell; he also has an agenda.
Interestingly, in the NIV Bible, which I use as one of the best researched Bibles, Mark does not list the name of the locale, only "Jordan countryside". Which manuscripts are you talking about?
Why not? You're on a Fortean website, for goodness' sake!! Streange things DO happen!
This is the gist of the document my pastor referred me to:
"Manuscript Evidence for the New Testament
There are more than 24,000 partial and complete manuscript copies of the New Testament. These manuscript copies are very ancient and they are available for inspection now at various schools and museums. There are also some 86,000 quotations from the early church fathers and several thousand Lectionaries (church-service books containing Scripture quotations used in the early centuries of Christianity). Bottom line: the New Testament has an overwhelming amount of evidence supporting its reliability.
Why do you say they have not. Just because what has been found is not what you think of as evidence, that does not mean there is not validity and support for the scriptures in the digs that have been done.
Zygon said:If you can't pose even reasonable questions against a belief, it becomes dogma, and dogma, to paraphrase someone, is for the empowerment of tyrants and for the obedience of fools. How can anyone trust their Faith if they never question it? Asking questions isn't the same as doubting: it simply shows that you're awake!
But you don't seem interested in understanding why. (It's not a position I arrived at lightly, you know.) I know why you believe the opposite from me: it's all very comforting, gives shape to your world and helps you make sense of what might otherwise be bewildering or threatening. Meaning and purpose. Fine. I've no problem with you needing that, wanting that, choosing it, it choosing you, or whatever. But I do wish you'd post something that demonstrates to me that you're actually trying to see my POV. (Item: You still haven't addressed my assertion about the normal rules of evidence being thrown out as soon as it is even suggested that scripture might appear to be unsupported by the evidence. Indeed, I almost get the idea that you don't actually understand why I would identify that as a problem.)Fallen Angel said:You're making statements that clearly show your own thoughts feeling and beliefs are that the Bible is not the word of God, not a true telling of Jesus and his acts and words, and is not holy.
So you have no faith, you are quite literally being a devils advocate. Look up the literal definitions of those two words. That's you. Too bad.
Interestingly, discussing this thread with another board member, I was told I need to remember to pity those who are so unable to admit that they might be wrong, because those tend to be the same people who are never saved, because they can never admit that they are sinners.
Better to reign in Hell Than to serve in Heaven.
Originally posted by FallenAngel
Most people these days even deny the concept of sin, which many think leads to denial of the very concept of wrongdoing, which in turn leads to the sort of "every man for himself and fuck the rest of you" attitude prevalent in our society today. Let's face it, there are right and wrong behaviours, so what does my label (sin) matter?
morgantina said:a father that he said, was communicating with him from a place , that He was from himself in his Perfected self state of Righteousness
He walked this earth with 12 young men as his Apostles.
Funny that there are -12- orbits of the Moon
morgantina said:A man’s ‘ Temple’, was in those times, regarded as that -area- behind the -Eye-, that taketh of knowledge between the Sight and then the Thought of the materialized mind..
Christ was a Liar!
He was Not the son of a God of the universe.
He was Not...[/b]and so on until...Imported’s Ignorance of these sort of things or ideas, a World of adventure and dynamic -self -Living in Time and Space,....
Period!
This post is more truth than Christ ever told
Regards,
In fact, wouldn't it be more reasonable to blame Paul?
FraterLibre said:There were two, at least, operating back then. One was a religious zealot and rabble rouser, the other a political type. The latter had royal blood and married another with royal blood, (Mary Magdalene), and thus posed a serious threat to the powers that obtained.
These two were conflated at the Council of Nicea in 325 C.E. by Emperor Constantine.
It was not Jesus, either one, who was necessarily a liar, but rather that council, where xtianity as we know it today was put together. It was there that Jesus became the one figure we know today, it was there he was given magical powers and divinity, and so on.
So yell at Constantine, if lying outrages you. If not, pass the ketchup, please. I have a crucifiction to fake for the current regime.
Or is it crucial fiction? Political theater in any case, to excuse further looting.
FraterLibre said:This is the kind of variety and interesting diversity one can find with even a token look outside the blinkers.
I think you missed the joke. Paul Verhoven, the diretcor of such cinematic tour de force as 'Showgirls' and 'The Long Kiss Goodnight', not to mention 'Robocop' is a Jesus expert? If that isn't at least a gear change let alone funny, then I'm visiting from Earth-2.A) Because Verhoeven's known to you from another field you presume he has no expertise in another.
Ok, that seems like a reasonable description of debate to me. Person A holds viewpoint1, Person B, by what means they have at their disposal refutes it. Your point is?B) You mock and scoff like any true believer threatened by not only facts but imagination and alternative viewpoints.
Self evidently not the case, since you feel the need to point it out. I cordially suggest you remove the burr from your vent, and debate the point not the politics.C) I could not possibly care less about what you think, feel, write, or believe.
D) From now on do your own research and, incidentally, stop trolling while you're at it. Any one of your posts could be reported to a moderator. I know, I've been thwacked for far less.