Author Topic: Moral laws of the Bible  (Read 13586 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #232 on: May 02, 2012, 05:52:36 PM »
Why doesn't Paul ( the assumed earliest christian writer )  know the details claimed in the gospels of the passion narrative?
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #233 on: May 02, 2012, 05:54:30 PM »
What is the use of talking of Jesus being historical if the theologically necessary events in the old testament are all mythology?
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6582
  • Darwins +515/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #234 on: May 02, 2012, 06:12:23 PM »
...  all theists have a vague notion of what their god is like, but no two agree.
Is that so? What don't they agree on?
Jane, that is a condescending, trolling non-answer, and you know it. I assume that you are vaguely aware of an overarching philosophy called “Christianity.”? Yes?

Good, then we can proceed. Here are a list of people who have a vague notion of what their god is like, but fail to agree: (I keep the list handy for people who ask silly questions)

Amish, Anglican Church of England, Assemblies of God, Baptist, Christadelphians, Church of God, Church of Ireland, Eastern Catholic Church, Eastern, Russian and Greek Orthodox, Episcopal Church of Canada, Episcopal Church of United States, International Circle of Faith, Jehovah’s Witnesses Latter Day Saints (Mormonism, Lutheran, Mennonites, Methodists, Moravians, New Apostolic Church, Pentecostal, Plymouth Brethren, Presbyterian, Quakers, Roman Catholicism, Rosicrucians, Seventh-day Adventist Church, Unitarian Universalism, United Reformed Church, etc., ad nauseam.

You will see that each has its own off-shoots and that within each church there are people with different ideas of God.

I am really surprised that you did not know that.

Quote
Quote
It is well-known that much imagination went into the Bible and it is as about as reliable as a drunk.
No, it is not well-known.
Yes, this is exactly what I was talking about – you have no real knowledge of anything biblical, do you? You have simply swallowed a party line – “Don’t question God.”

I see Screwtape has responded properly to your point.

But I will just say to you, “Comma Johanneum” and Mark 16:9-20
Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12131
  • Darwins +646/-27
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #235 on: May 02, 2012, 08:31:46 PM »
Jane,

I do not believe you have accurate information.  At least, not regarding Julius.  Last I knew, we had loads of stuff they guy wrote - commentary on the Gallic War, the De Bello series (a trilogy before Tolkein!).   But you sound like a knowledgeable person.  So, I am going to look into this point about JC not being as well documented as JHC.   

Let me get to the point I was making here:
Quote
Does it matter if Socrates or Plato actually existed?  That is, if they didn't exist, that that affect what they said?  Is the same true of jesus H?

Yes it matters! Our understanding of the ancient world depends on being able to reconstruct with some accuracy what happened at various points in history. Much of what we know about ancient Greece is preserved in a relatively small number of manuscripts. The lives of both Socrates and Plato were enmeshed in the political events of their times. If they didn't exist, our sources of knowledge about those events is diminished.

You are speaking in terms of historical knowledge regarding their times.  All the stuff around them.  I was speaking regarding what they said, their philosophy, science, etc. .  Would Plato's Republic be diminished if he was fiction?  The same with Shakespeare.  It does not matter if Bill wrote it or the queen or some random slob off the street.  What matters is MacBeth is awesome.

Or, I'll go one farther.  The Buddha.  If Siddhartha Gauthama was fiction, it would make no difference.  Buddhism does not hinge on whether the stories about Buddha actually happened.  Not so for xianity.

That is just the old, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" reworded. Well, no. Evidence will do. Documentation is, one hopes, equally good for the mundane and the not very.

That is very dismissive of you.  Of course it is that. But it's more.  If anything about jesus H that is written in the NT is untrue, the whole thing unravels.  And we haven't even gotten into the works that did not make the cut.  Like the Infancy Gospel, just for starters.

Most, I suppose have been con men but not all. Where is it written that God can't use anybody he wishes to bring about a certain end?

No where.  the problem is how to tell them apart.  For me, it's easy. 


I have a point I also want to make later that springboards off of Omen's post
What is the use of talking of Jesus being historical if the theologically necessary events in the old testament are all mythology?
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1413
  • Darwins +25/-102
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #236 on: May 02, 2012, 09:48:14 PM »
Seppuku The questions of what laws are christians under seems to be a not completely uncommon question here.  And I do appreciate that you have formed some well thought out questions.  I intend to start a thread addressing this matter very soon.  I am going to wrap up this thread as soon as I can.

Plain Jane I am glad you have drawn this distiction.  I have failed to do so at this point because I knew what would follow.  Please take note of what I told Seppuku.  You are more than welcome to participate.

Add Homonym See above.

Quote
It comes back to 'opinion' does it? You are believing what your church tells you, not reading the page. You said that you belonged to the JW camp because they were beyond reproach, not because you have to swallow dubious excuses.

If the text allows for difference in opinion but one harmonizes with science and one does not then which do you think is more likely to be correct?

velkyn Please read again.  Revelation 12: "And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads."  The only similarities with this and the beast of Rev 13 is the seven heads.  The beast itself here is described as a dragon.  The beast in Rev is not described as a dragon but has many more similarities with the beasts in Daniel. 

In addition "And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?" -- Rev 13:4.  Clearly the dragon and the beast are not the same.

Quote
nice ot see a good theist lie by claimign somethign will be removed from a thread and also claiming that everyone but him is "petty".

I always tell my children that it takes two to argue.  So no I do not hold myself guiltless.  My claim of something being removed was in reference to a thread I started in the shelter I started that broke the 500 word rule.  I said it will likely be deleted or moved.  It was moved.

Plain Jane

Quote
I am a teensy bit skeptical after having read a number of your posts which don't suggest any great familiarity with the Bible or the scholarship.

I agree.  This seems to be the case with some but not all.

Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4587
  • Darwins +104/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #237 on: May 02, 2012, 10:00:42 PM »
So if there are Dragons.....the Haida stories are also true? Seawolves,Seagrizzlies,Thunderbirds,Raven,Eagle,the Old man of the sea,the woman of the rivers(Ravens wife) . They are ALL real.....see when compared to Dragons,unicorns and Satan and his minions,,my stories,where you live in harmony with the land and its creatures make FAR more sense than your idiotic stories

 Thanks for making sense of the mythologies >:(
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Maggie the Opinionated

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Darwins +4/-52
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #238 on: May 02, 2012, 10:04:18 PM »
You have misused the term "primary source".
Luke stated he was not a primary source but secondary.  The only identification of Mark is from a man named Papias who was thought by other Christian writers to be possibly crazy.  He identifies Mark as John Mark, an assistant of Peter in Rome.  There is no identification for Matthew.  The Book of John alleges to be a primary source and was written by John dictating to his secretary Cerinthus.

Paul never met Jesus except by channeling so he is a primary source only on the things he says he did.
None of that is particularly a problem. We do not much care who the actual authors were. Those Gospels were written in the Apostles' communities and were accepted into the Bible because they met all the criteria for inclusion (had been read in the congregations, were known to be associated with an apostle, taught true doctrine, were popular and there may be one more that I am forgetting). Acceptance into the canon depended on meeting all the criteria. Thus the Didache, which was wildly popular and taught true doctrine was rejected for inclusion because it was not associated with an apostle. Luke is a bit of a mixed bag and he is a primary source for the birth of the Church since he is the author of Acts.
All in all, upon closer inspection there is not much left that would lend credibility to the gospels or any other book of the NT as evidence for a historical divine Jesus as described in the bible.

This is simply untrue. Again, the historicity of the man Jesus is not in doubt. Whether or not you believe that he is God depends either on faith, or, on weighing the historical claims and deciding whether or not they are strong enough to support belief. Most likely, some mixture of both.
Why doesn't Paul ( the assumed earliest christian writer )  know the details claimed in the gospels of the passion narrative?
What makes you think that he doesn't? He was a contemporary of Jesus, the first converts were Jews who would have been intimately familiar with the details--why would Paul, who is writing pastoral letters of admonition, encouragement, and settling doctrinal questions that are arising, etc., go into such matters?  In fact, it looks very much like the Gospels were written, as the first generation was dying off, in part to preserve such knowledge of the human life of Christ.

What is the use of talking of Jesus being historical if the theologically necessary events in the old testament are all mythology?
Who said that the "theologically necessary events in the OT are all mythology? I certainly didn't.

...  all theists have a vague notion of what their god is like, but no two agree.
Is that so? What don't they agree on?
Jane, that is a condescending, trolling non-answer, and you know it.
I know no such thing. You have made a vague claim and failed to substantiate it.
Quote
I assume that you are vaguely aware of an overarching philosophy called “Christianity.”? Yes?
No. I know of a religion called Christianity. It is not a philosophy, per se, but is a set of beliefs to which one assents or not. These beliefs are codified in the Nicene Creed and in the slightly older Apostles' creed.

Quote
Here are a list of people who have a vague notion of what their god is like, but fail to agree: (I keep the list handy for people who ask silly questions)
What do you keep for people who find you slightly comical? Do you suppose I did not know what you were getting at? I gave you a chance to rethink it but, alas, to no avail.

These denominations do not have vague and differing notions of what God is like. They have differing doctrinal perspectives on matters such as infant vs believer's baptism, the Eucharist, once saved always saved? etc. But none of us have vague and differing notions of what God is like. Nothing is better attested in the New Testament than that.

By the way, not all the groups in your list are Christians. Those that are not tend to have very different ideas, obviously. The Mormons, for example, believe in a material god who has a wife, they do not believe that Jesus is God, etc.

Now certainly individuals everywhere may be misinformed or badly informed. One sees that on all atheist sites when atheists who clearly don't have a clue come up with the wildest nonsense that they earnestly believe is What. Christianity. Teaches. There is nothing one can do about that except hope that the light of natural reason will someday shine on them.

Quote
you have no real knowledge of anything biblical, do you? You have simply swallowed a party line – “Don’t question God.”
ROTFL! The wildness of your claims has me in stitches. It is totally unrelated to anything I have written. Perhaps I best clue you in-- I was raised in an agnostic home. I never stepped foot in a church until I was 21 and a tourist in Rome. I converted in graduate school where I majored in German medieval and neo-Latin literature. I have been studying the Bible, Old and New Testament history and related matters formally and on my own for 20+ years. Now this doesn't make me an expert but I feel perfectly competent to claim that I have *some* real knowledge of *some* biblical matters. What do you bring to the table?

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4587
  • Darwins +104/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #239 on: May 02, 2012, 10:09:13 PM »
Jane does Jesus fufill ALL OT tests to qualify as the messiah? as you have studied both OT and NT,is it concrete? Are the Jews wrong when they say Jesus failed?
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Alzael

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3577
  • Darwins +112/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #240 on: May 02, 2012, 10:15:55 PM »
Jane tell you what, let's play a game.

I'll list two pieces of historical evidence which prove Ceasar, and you only have to provide one piece of evidence for Jesus, and we'll go back and forth and see who runs out first. I'm even giving you the advantage by only requesting you provide one piece. Keep in mind that the bible cannot prove Jesus' existence.

Number 1

Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC) was a contemporary of Julius Caesar.

In Caesar's struggle with Pompey, Cicero, then governor of Cilicia, sided with Pompey but he was then subsequently pardoned by Caesar.

Then in March of 44 BC Cicero was a witness to Caesar's murder, though he was not a part of the conspiracy.

Following the assassination, Cicero made a series of speeches known as the "Philippics" which called on the Senate to support Octavian against Mark Antony. Cicero's "Second Phillipics" was an eulogy of Caesar's conquest of Gaul.

In total there are nine hundred preserved letters written by or sent to Cicero. Many of these letters contain correspondence to and from Ceasar himself or about Ceasar.

Number 2

Sallust, a Roman historian, politician, and novus homo from a well-known plebeian family. He was born at Amiternum, was an opposer of the old Roman Artistocracy and was later a partisan of Ceasar. He is the earliest known roman historian and wrote several works which still survive more or less intact. Among them are the "Bellum Iugurthinum" which speaks of Ceasar as well as we possess several letters and other writing to and from him which speak of Ceasar.

All right. I eagerly await your evidence for Jesus.

As an aside, if you're going to try things like Tacitus and Epi then keep in mind that they are both frauds and forgeries and do not count. You can do a ten second google search and find that out.

Let the game begin.

"I drank what?!"- Socrates

"Dying for something when you know you'll be resurrected is not a sacrifice.It's a parlour trick."- an aquaintance

Philip of Macedon: (via messenger) If we enter Sparta, we will raze all your buildings and ravage all your women.
Spartan Reply: If.

Offline Maggie the Opinionated

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Darwins +4/-52
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #241 on: May 02, 2012, 10:22:03 PM »
No thanks. I don't accept your rules anymore than a real historian would.

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1413
  • Darwins +25/-102
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #242 on: May 02, 2012, 10:24:15 PM »
So if there are Dragons.....the Haida stories are also true? Seawolves,Seagrizzlies,Thunderbirds,Raven,Eagle,the Old man of the sea,the woman of the rivers(Ravens wife) . They are ALL real.....see when compared to Dragons,unicorns and Satan and his minions,,my stories,where you live in harmony with the land and its creatures make FAR more sense than your idiotic stories

 Thanks for making sense of the mythologies >:(

These are obvioiusly symbols.  Sorry if you cannot/will not recognize this.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12224
  • Darwins +268/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #243 on: May 02, 2012, 10:26:17 PM »
Just symbols, like Jesus.
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4587
  • Darwins +104/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #244 on: May 02, 2012, 10:26:45 PM »
Ahhhh the symbol game,,,,,when it is a contradiction,its metaphorical YAAA   Dragons were they real or imaginary?
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Alzael

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3577
  • Darwins +112/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #245 on: May 02, 2012, 10:30:48 PM »
No thanks. I don't accept your rules anymore than a real historian would.

What rule was that? The only rule that I laid out was that you had to use actual historical sources. I only specifically ruled out three sources because they are obviously not evidence of Jesus.

You were the one who claimed that there was all of this evidence. So why can't you produce even one iota of it?

"I drank what?!"- Socrates

"Dying for something when you know you'll be resurrected is not a sacrifice.It's a parlour trick."- an aquaintance

Philip of Macedon: (via messenger) If we enter Sparta, we will raze all your buildings and ravage all your women.
Spartan Reply: If.

Offline Alzael

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3577
  • Darwins +112/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #246 on: May 02, 2012, 10:32:16 PM »
These are obvioiusly symbols.  Sorry if you cannot/will not recognize this.

What makes you say that? How does one reliable separate the two?

There are many Christians who would disagree you after all. What gives you the right to say that they're wrong?
"I drank what?!"- Socrates

"Dying for something when you know you'll be resurrected is not a sacrifice.It's a parlour trick."- an aquaintance

Philip of Macedon: (via messenger) If we enter Sparta, we will raze all your buildings and ravage all your women.
Spartan Reply: If.

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1413
  • Darwins +25/-102
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #247 on: May 02, 2012, 11:40:30 PM »
Ahhhh the symbol game,,,,,when it is a contradiction,its metaphorical YAAA   Dragons were they real or imaginary?

Please note the Bible itself shows that revelation was presented as symbolism.

"A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place. And he sent forth his angel and presented [it] in signs through him to his slave John,"  Revelation 1:1
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1413
  • Darwins +25/-102
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #248 on: May 02, 2012, 11:43:27 PM »
In addition the Bible identifies the "dragon" as Satan so this must be symbolism since Satan is a spirit.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline caveat_imperator

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 197
  • Darwins +6/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #249 on: May 03, 2012, 04:16:45 AM »
You were the one who claimed that there was all of this evidence. So why can't you produce even one iota of it?

Maybe she's too scared to admit she has nothing?
You can't prove a negative of an existence postulate.

Offline Maggie the Opinionated

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Darwins +4/-52
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #250 on: May 03, 2012, 07:23:39 AM »
No thanks. I don't accept your rules anymore than a real historian would.

What rule was that? The only rule that I laid out was that you had to use actual historical sources. I only specifically ruled out three sources because they are obviously not evidence of Jesus.
I am not going to indulge you any further in this nonsense beyond this message. Let me say this plainly. Anyone who claims that the documents of the New Testament are not primary historical source material does not have even the slightest clue what history is and how it is done. Therefore, discussing this subject with such a person would be as rewarding as trying to teach algebra to a two year old. One can try but it will not be pleasant and ther will be no reward for doing so.

« Last Edit: May 03, 2012, 07:27:24 AM by Plain Jane »

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10854
  • Darwins +280/-37
  • Gender: Male
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #251 on: May 03, 2012, 07:36:01 AM »
I'm not a historian[1], but like most methods of gathering knowledge[2], theirs should be something like this (when they find something that has a bunch of claims on it, like the Bible):
#1 - Read the claims.
#2 - Look for supporting evidence.
#3 - If the evidence is overwhelming in the claims' favor, assume them to be true. If not, disregard them.

The Bible failed step #2. There was no magical demigod, no magical virgin, no magical tree, no magical rib, no magical flood, no magical talking bush, no magical whale, no magical anything.

You seem to think that their method is something like this:
#1 - Read the claims.
#2 - Assume they're true.
#3 - Write about them as if they were.
#4 - Take the rest of the week off.

Now, granted, I don't actually know how they do it, but if they do what you seem to think they do, they're utter retards.
 1. I think those are the guys who do what you're talking about.
 2. Actual knowledge; not that "spiritual" BS.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Maggie the Opinionated

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Darwins +4/-52
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #252 on: May 03, 2012, 07:42:06 AM »

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10854
  • Darwins +280/-37
  • Gender: Male
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #253 on: May 03, 2012, 07:44:28 AM »
Excellent refutation, Plain Jane. Talk to me in fifteen years, when you're 23. Maybe then you'll have some sort of cognitive ability.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Maggie the Opinionated

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Darwins +4/-52
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #254 on: May 03, 2012, 07:49:09 AM »
  Hey, I don't waste time. I answer as befits the post!

While Wiki is not my first choice as a source of reliable information, its article on history as an academic discipline is pretty good but basic. You might like to familiarize yourself with it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10854
  • Darwins +280/-37
  • Gender: Male
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #255 on: May 03, 2012, 07:51:44 AM »
Lucifer awaits for the link that says that historians just read whatever was written and assume it to be true, rather than performing even one iota of research.

By the way, does your logic apply to the Qur'an?
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Quesi

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +371/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #256 on: May 03, 2012, 07:52:57 AM »
Jane-

I think that Alzael (and others) are asking if you can identify any historical records or artifacts from the lifetime of Jesus.  Are there tax documents?  Records of his execution?  The Romans, as I understand it, were pretty good record keepers. 

He met with a Jewish king, on the Jewish Sabbath, (in violation of Jewish law) so that was a REALLY big deal.  Are there any Jewish records of this meeting?  As a carpenter, he must have built things, and his followers must have considered the things that he built especially precious after his death.  Are there any documents that were written about his miracles while he was alive? 

As I stated earlier, I was raised to believe that a historical Jesus existed.  I know that there is mounting evidence suggesting that he didn't.  I have not studied the evidence enough to have developed a personal opinion.

You are clearly a scholar who has a strong personal opinion on this topic, so I'm assuming you have studied the evidence.  As a scholar, can you present evidence that supports the conclusions you have reached? 

Offline Quesi

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +371/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #257 on: May 03, 2012, 07:55:10 AM »
Lucifer awaits for the link that says that historians just read whatever was written and assume it to be true, rather than performing even one iota of research.

By the way, does your logic apply to the Qur'an?

The Qur'an was dictated by God himself.  That is what distinguishes it from the other monotheistic holy books. 

Offline freakygin

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
  • Darwins +8/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #258 on: May 03, 2012, 07:57:50 AM »
Ahhhh the symbol game,,,,,when it is a contradiction,its metaphorical YAAA   Dragons were they real or imaginary?

For now, Dragons = Symbol / Metaphorical.
But when asked "Why bible didn't mention dinosaurs"
Suddenly Dragons, Bahemoth, Leviathan become real.  :laugh:
If you argue correctly, you're never wrong..

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10854
  • Darwins +280/-37
  • Gender: Male
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #259 on: May 03, 2012, 07:58:57 AM »
The Qur'an was dictated by God himself.  That is what distinguishes it from the other monotheistic holy books. 

True. It was the actual God, not the phony YHWH who tried to take God's name, who dictated the Qur'an to his loyal followers.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Ivellios

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1077
  • Darwins +52/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Seek and Ye Shall Find
Re: Moral laws of the Bible
« Reply #260 on: May 03, 2012, 08:12:14 AM »
By the way, does your logic apply to the Qur'an?

Plain Jane, this is one of the main reasons that the Bible cannot be included as proof. Otherwise you'd have to accept the Qur'an as proof that Allah is the one true god and same thing for every other "Holy Book."

For every verse in the bible you can pull to prove Jesus, a Muslim can pull a verse to prove Mohammed what Allah's (the one true god) final prophet. So after the Bible and Qur'an cancel each other out, what do you have to convince a Muslim or a Muslim to convince you? I'll tell you one thing, we Know Mohammed existed... we just don't believe in him being a Prophet without proof.