Community > General Religion Chat

Topic: something to think about
msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Thu 04/15/10 08:00 AM
The difference between Columbus and Michaelangelo having "discovered America" (though not really) and Painting the Sistine Chapel are far different than a few collected books written by an oppressed people, especially books that cannot agree on what God is or what God does. We're here on this continent, so we know someone (we call him Columbus) came over from Europe, which caused the natives a mountain of grief for many of years and then England a mountain of grief for many years and then the USA was born. There was a great artist that lived many years ago and we can see their work ... we call him "Michaelangelo". The Bible is a collection of different books that relate a great many tales that were told hundreds of times over in previous myths like Dionysus and Horus. Books in which not all versions are accepted. When Christianity came to Rome, Constantine held a forum in which the Bible (in somewhat current form) was debated on and what to include ... whether Jesus should be presented as a regular guy or a deity. King James gave us our most recent edition (proven by "King James Version"), taking out things he did not really care for himself. And what of those other books that didn't make the cut? Like the Gospel of Judas or that of Mary Magdalen (and the versions that name her Jesus' wife)? So if its been edited to fit those in powers' idea of what they want in a religion and its not the original word of God ... what makes it valid? it hasnt been Disproven,,,regarding columbus and michaelangelo, I would argue that because I am here, I know Someone or something caused me to be,,,,,,and i can see the nature all around me that either came from accidents or from some intelligence,,, The bible hasn't been disproven? Really? So the fact that there is no evidence whatsoever, except a story in the bible, that the Egyptians ever owned Jewish slaves doesn't do it for you? How about the story of Noah's Ark being copied, nearly word for word, from a Sumarian story of Gilgamesh(sp?)? Or Hell being an actual place, a trash dump next to Jerusolum(my spelling sucks today) where dead animals and the dead poor were dumped, not some mystical nether world one's unclean soul would go after death? These are but a few examples how wrong the bible is on just a few things of historical note. You pick a story from the bible of what you think is a factual account of history, and I'll show you where you are wrong. I dont wish to have a tit for tat over the details in the Bible. I will say that although I respect your reservations, I disagree that your reasons have been PROVEN either. For instance, concerning the story of Gilgamesh,, has it really been PROVEN beyond a doubt which story was first? I would like the link to that information if so...but I rather think it is just one POSSIBILITY that critics refer to.

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Thu 04/15/10 08:03 AM
If the lack of being discredited is the reason for that belief, then what of evolution? It has not been disproven and evidence grows in its favor. And, just to take this to the extreme, the presence of the Almighty Bob has not been disproven either and, truly, cannot be discredited, only proven highly improbable. So why, too, do you not believe in Bob? again, there is not the extensive literature to back up such a belief in Bob. There is plenty backing up a history in which Christ existed and plenty which correlates to what Christ taught of God. There is plenty which backs up evolution as well, which I tend to believe corresponds with creation,,,but thats another debate:) uh...actually, there isn't any literature backing up the existance of your Jesus, the Christ. Well, nothing that is accepted as genuine and historically accurate, anyway. The bible doesn't count. You can't use the bible to prove the stories in the bible are true. Ok, well, you could, but it wouldn't be a valid argument. great,, let me point you to other sources(although Im sure reason can be found to 'dismiss' them as well) "Testimonium Flavianum" Lucian of Samosata you can find others if you google 'non biblical accounts of Jesus Christ' they exist, but the bottom line is having the faith to accept them or not

Gwendolyn2009 Joined Thu 04/30/09 Posts: 328	Thu 04/15/10 09:55 AM
great,, let me point you to other sources(although Im sure reason can be found to 'dismiss' them as well) "Testimonium Flavianum" Lucian of Samosata you can find others if you google 'non biblical accounts of Jesus Christ' they exist, but the bottom line is having the faith to accept them or not The "support" that you offer is not support at all. The "Testimonium Flavcianum" is an apocryphal writing, left out of canonized versions of the Bible because its accuracy and veracity is in question. I find it interesting that many Christians are not aware of either the Apochrypha or the Pseudographia and when they hear about the works in those collections, assume that they are historically correct. Per wikipedia, Lucian "wrote a satire called The Passing of Peregrinus,[9] in which the lead character, Peregrinus Proteus, takes advantage of the generosity and gullibility of Christians. This is one of the earliest surviving pagan perceptions of Christianity." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucian Lucian was not "proving" the existence of Jesus, but satirizing Christians. His work was not intended to prove anything but the gullibillity of early Christians. Outside of the Christian Scriptures, there are NO concurrent historical accounts of Jesus, and even the scriptures were written after his death. To liken the writings mentioned above to "proof" is simply erroneous; it would be as if I took a fictional character and wrote about him/her or exaggerated the acounts of an actual person, i.e. if I claimed that George Washington was actually an alien. The Christian Scriptures alone cannot be considered proof of the existence of a historical Christ. If they can, then Gilgamesh must have had the fantastic adventures that are attributed to him! There must have also been a Hercules, a Perseus, and a Theseus who also had fantastic adventures (and those people could have existed, but they didn't perform 12 labors, didn't kill Medusa, and didn't kill the Minotaur). The Hebrew and Christian Scriptures do contain historical figures and historical events that are supported by archaeology, but if finding ruins mentioned in the Bible proves the existence of the Judeo/Christian god, then the Greek gods must also exist because Schliemann found the ruins of Troy!

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Thu 04/15/10 09:59 AM
great,, let me point you to other sources(although Im sure reason can be found to 'dismiss' them as well) "Testimonium Flavianum" Lucian of Samosata you can find others if you google 'non biblical accounts of Jesus Christ' they exist, but the bottom line is having the faith to accept them or not The "support" that you offer is not support at all. The "Testimonium Flavcianum" is an apocryphal writing, left out of canonized versions of the Bible because its accuracy and veracity is in question. I find it interesting that many Christians are not aware of either the Apochrypha or the Pseudographia and when they hear about the works in those collections, assume that they are historically correct. Per wikipedia, Lucian "wrote a satire called The Passing of Peregrinus,[9] in which the lead character, Peregrinus Proteus, takes advantage of the generosity and gullibility of Christians. This is one of the earliest surviving pagan perceptions of Christianity." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucian Lucian was not "proving" the existence of Jesus, but satirizing Christians. His work was not intended to prove anything but the gullibillity of early Christians. Outside of the Christian Scriptures, there are NO concurrent historical accounts of Jesus, and even the scriptures were written after his death. To liken the writings mentioned above to "proof" is simply erroneous; it would be as if I took a fictional character and wrote about him/her or exaggerated the acounts of an actual person, i.e. if I claimed that George Washington was actually an alien. The Christian Scriptures alone cannot be considered proof of the existence of a historical Christ. If they can, then Gilgamesh must have had the fantastic adventures that are attributed to him! There must have also been a Hercules, a Perseus, and a Theseus who also had fantastic adventures (and those people could have existed, but they didn't perform 12 labors, didn't kill Medusa, and didn't kill the Minotaur). The Hebrew and Christian Scriptures do contain historical figures and historical events that are supported by archaeology, but if finding ruins mentioned in the Bible proves the existence of the Judeo/Christian god, then the Greek gods must also exist because Schliemann found the ruins of Troy! I respect that you dont accept the literature. But my point was that it exists,, fAR beyond any literature about 'Bob'.

Arcamedees Joined Wed 04/22/09 Posts: 1817	Thu 04/15/10 12:25 PM
If the lack of being discredited is the reason for that belief, then what of evolution? It has not been disproven and evidence grows in its favor. And, just to take this to the extreme, the presence of the Almighty Bob has not been disproven either and, truly, cannot be discredited, only proven highly improbable. So why, too, do you not believe in Bob? again, there is not the extensive literature to back up such a belief in Bob. There is plenty backing up a history in which Christ existed and plenty which correlates to what Christ taught of God. There is plenty which backs up evolution as well, which I tend to believe corresponds with creation,,,but thats another debate:) uh...actually, there isn't any literature backing up the existance of your Jesus, the Christ. Well, nothing that is accepted as genuine and historically accurate, anyway. The bible doesn't count. You can't use the bible to prove the stories in the bible are true. Ok, well, you could, but it wouldn't be a valid argument. well, the bible doesnt count to YOU. But it is literature that backs up the existence of Jesus. Just like the Lord of the Rings is literature that backs up the existance of Sauron...geezelueeze MsHarmony, how is it that someone of an adult age and reasonable intelligence just can not see the stupidity, the sheer childish silliness of this kind of circular logic?

Arcamedees Joined Wed 04/22/09 Posts: 1817	Thu 04/15/10 12:28 PM
great,, let me point you to other sources(although Im sure reason can be found to 'dismiss' them as well) "Testimonium Flavianum" Lucian of Samosata you can find others if you google 'non biblical accounts of Jesus Christ' they exist, but the bottom line is having the faith to accept them or not The "support" that you offer is not support at all. The "Testimonium Flavcianum" is an apocryphal writing, left out of canonized versions of the Bible because its accuracy and veracity is in question. I find it interesting that many Christians are not aware of either the Apochrypha or the Pseudographia and when they hear about the works in those collections, assume that they are historically correct. Per wikipedia, Lucian "wrote a satire called The Passing of Peregrinus,[9] in which the lead character, Peregrinus Proteus, takes advantage of the generosity and gullibility of Christians. This is one of the earliest surviving pagan perceptions of Christianity." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucian Lucian was not "proving" the existence of Jesus, but satirizing Christians. His work was not intended to prove anything but the gullibillity of early Christians. Outside of the Christian Scriptures, there are NO concurrent historical accounts of Jesus, and even the scriptures were written after his death. To liken the writings mentioned above to "proof" is simply erroneous; it would be as if I took a fictional character and wrote about him/her or exaggerated the acounts of an actual person, i.e. if I claimed that George Washington was actually an alien. The Christian Scriptures alone cannot be considered proof of the existence of a historical Christ. If they can, then Gilgamesh must have had the fantastic adventures that are attributed to him! There must have also been a Hercules, a Perseus, and a Theseus who also had fantastic adventures (and those people could have existed, but they didn't perform 12 labors, didn't kill Medusa, and didn't kill the Minotaur). The Hebrew and Christian Scriptures do contain historical figures and historical events that are supported by archaeology, but if finding ruins mentioned in the Bible proves the existence of the Judeo/Christian god, then the Greek gods must also exist because Schliemann found the ruins of Troy! yeah, what she said!

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Thu 04/15/10 05:08 PM Edited by msharmony on Thu 04/15/10 05:11 PM
If the lack of being discredited is the reason for that belief, then what of evolution? It has not been disproven and evidence grows in its favor. And, just to take this to the extreme, the presence of the Almighty Bob has not been disproven either and, truly, cannot be discredited, only proven highly improbable. So why, too, do you not believe in Bob? again, there is not the extensive literature to back up such a belief in Bob. There is plenty backing up a history in which Christ existed and plenty which correlates to what Christ taught of God. There is plenty which backs up evolution as well, which I tend to believe corresponds with creation,,,but thats another debate:) uh...actually, there isn't any literature backing up the existance of your Jesus, the Christ. Well, nothing that is accepted as genuine and historically accurate, anyway. The bible doesn't count. You can't use the bible to prove the stories in the bible are true. Ok, well, you could, but it wouldn't be a valid argument. well, the bible doesnt count to YOU. But it is literature that backs up the existence of Jesus. Just like the Lord of the Rings is literature that backs up the existance of Sauron...geezelueeze MsHarmony, how is it that someone of an adult age and reasonable intelligence just can not see the stupidity, the sheer childish silliness of this kind of circular logic? this is nonsense actually, the lord of the rings is ONE book by ONE author in this century, an author who labels it as fiction. A fiction book by one author, who authenticizes it is a fiction book and with NO other literature suggesting otherwise,, is quite different than the bible.. A Collection of books, from sevaral authors over a period of time,, all writing them as testimonial with supporting literature from other authors as to their potential authenticity. I do not see stupidity or silliness in accepting such an ABUNDANCE of work from so many authors over so much time. I do however find it troubling that others should belittle and ridicule such HISTORICAL testimony and time tested faith. If you dont believe it , thats fine, but unless someone can PROVE its not true (which is difficult ,, proving a negative). Unless someone can come up with a better explanation for the blessings around me or the feelings inside of me.. I will attribute them to God. Others are free to attribute them to biology, genetics, auras or whatever else and I will not belittle them for it.

donthatoneguy Joined Wed 03/31/10 Posts: 311	Thu 04/15/10 09:55 PM
Actually, to be fair ... the Lord of the Rings was THREE books, there was also The Hobbit, the Silmarillion and various other short stories written by J. R. R. Tolkien all dealing with Middle Earth and its historical events. Also, keep in mind that all of these authors from "different time periods" were all just that ... from different time periods writing about the same set of events that none of them witnessed.

Arcamedees Joined Wed 04/22/09 Posts: 1817	Fri 04/16/10 09:10 AM
If the lack of being discredited is the reason for that belief, then what of evolution? It has not been disproven and evidence grows in its favor. And, just to take this to the extreme, the presence of the Almighty Bob has not been disproven either and, truly, cannot be discredited, only proven highly improbable. So why, too, do you not believe in Bob? again, there is not the extensive literature to back up such a belief in Bob. There is plenty backing up a history in which Christ existed and plenty which correlates to what Christ taught of God. There is plenty which backs up evolution as well, which I tend to believe corresponds with creation,,,but thats another debate:) uh...actually, there isn't any literature backing up the existance of your Jesus, the Christ. Well, nothing that is accepted as genuine and historically accurate, anyway. The bible doesn't count. You can't use the bible to prove the stories in the bible are true. Ok, well, you could, but it wouldn't be a valid argument. well, the bible doesnt count to YOU. But it is literature that backs up the existence of Jesus. Just like the Lord of the Rings is literature that backs up the existance of Sauron...geezelueeze MsHarmony, how is it that someone of an adult age and reasonable intelligence just can not see the stupidity, the sheer childish silliness of this kind of circular logic? this is nonsense actually, the lord of the rings is ONE book by ONE author in this century, an author who labels it as fiction. A fiction book by one author, who authenticizes it is a fiction book and with NO other literature suggesting otherwise,, is quite different than the bible.. A Collection of books, from sevaral authors over a period of time,, all writing them as testimonial with supporting literature from other authors as to their potential authenticity. I do not see stupidity or silliness in accepting such an ABUNDANCE of work from so many authors over so much time. I do however find it troubling that others should belittle and ridicule such HISTORICAL testimony and time tested faith. If you dont believe it , thats fine, but unless someone can PROVE its not true (which is difficult ,, proving a negative). Unless someone can come up with a better explanation for the blessings around me or the feelings inside of me.. I will attribute them to God. Others are free to attribute them to biology, genetics, auras or whatever else and I will not belittle them for it. Ok, to be clear, I never doubted your intelligence, MsHarmony. Nor your wisdom, except in regards to your belief system. If you felt I was belittling you, I apologize. It is only your arguments on this subject, which in my opinion are, so frustratingly simplistically stupid, it boggles my mind. If we met in real life, I think we could be friends. But I'd never ever want to broach any subject of any religious significance. I could pick apart your response, perhaps I will at a later time, but right now, I'm just tired of this...