Mark 10:25
“It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”
Luke 12:48
“From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.”
Karl Marx
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
Discuss.
Oh dear!
Pointing out that the teachings of Christianity in regards to economics have far more in common with Marxism than with glibertarian Randroid dogma and its dependence upon laissez fairies with invisible hands won’t sit well with wealthy born again
with a silver spoon in their mouth griftersevangelists.Can’t you commies just wait for your reward in heaven?
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
Matthew 25:40
One could add the words of the Buddha, Confucius, Chief Seattle, Kant, and Hillel.
What more evidence do those of little faith need of My law.
Nukular = Commonist
re 4: Don’t forget Susan Boyle!
re 3: That passage is the Christianist rationale for protecting blastocytes from ‘murderers’.
We really don’t know what Christ may have actually said or done, It seems that the MSM of the day didn’t get around to putting this stuff down on paper for a good thirty or forty years after that fateful Easter Sunday, and apparently all of the transcripts from his famous trial were somehow lost during the subsequent difficulties of civil war and destruction of the Temple.
So it seems to be a good bet that virtually everything we still have in the way of “original documents” has been hopelessly skewed by the reliably liberal “press” of that period and most certainly reflects their political agenda.
For all we know Christ may have been one of the same kind of Bible Thumpin’, HELLFIRE & DAMNATION preachers that seem to prosper in the mega-church pulpits and right-wing political parties of our own time. In fact, he probably was.
Bottom line is we are pretty much free to believe anything we like, to just re-invent him endlessly to conform to our own projected feelings of how an all-knowing, all-powerful, supreme creator may be constituted.
We wonder of His aesthetic dogma.
@8. Unkl Witz 02/14/2010 at 7:58 am
Never heard of the Gospel of St. Matthew and the Sermon on the Mount?
Never heard of the Gospel of Luke and Sermon on the Plain?
Workers of the World…my sincere apologies!
—Karl Marx
(Solidarność
1980 Gdansk)
For instance: Is the songtitle Lawdy Lawdy Miss Claudy an original Beatles title or merely another Diminutive Richard ripoff?
Goldy–
Ummmmmmmm, show us where in the Bible that GOVERNMENT is called to be the “MIDDLE-MAN” for all this goodwill?
You can’t, can you.
And that is the key point.
I can’t argue that we as individuals are called to do many things by God that go against our selfish, sinful nature.
However, Marx and the Progressive Movement take the quantum leap that what is called on us as individuals somehow becomes a call for power hungry, ineffective government bureaucracy.
Try again Goldy.
PS–
And why would any of this even matter to an Atheist??
8. Unkl Witz spews:
Yes we do. There are multiple accounts by numerous witnesses. You Atheists would rather deny the word of the witnesses. Means a whole lot of folks were liars. A conspiracy theory.
Is the Gospel just another Conspiracy Theory the Atheist Progressives believe in?
Cynical:
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.
(Isaiah 9:6,7)
Unfortunately, the Republican love to wrap public policy in the Bible…Abortion, Gay issues, Capital Punishment, etc…
If the saying went: ““It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”, that would be the most quoted verse of the Bible and used relentlessly to deny rights and opportunity to gays.
I think you now see the hypocrisy and bigotry.
Don’t know who said this, but he nailed it:
“Republicans have a special gift for cloaking self-interest in self-righteousness.”
I meant “gay man”
How come no edit feature anymore?
@13. Mr. Cynical 02/14/2010 at 8:50 am
Funny. Can you show us anywhere in the Bible where it talks about free markets?
You can’t, can you.
And that is the key point.
Cynical @14,
Actually, there is no strong evidence of a historical Jesus, despite the wealth of contemporary Roman records that have survived. The scriptures weren’t written for decades, even centuries after his death, and much of the authorship is in dispute.
So to claim as you do that “There are multiple accounts by numerous witnesses,” really overstates your case. There are no contemporaneous accounts (i.e. written at the time), and with the exception of some of the epistles of Paul, there is little evidence to support the authenticity of traditionally ascribed authorship.
That said, as a Christian, none of that should matter to you. Surely your faith is strong enough withstand the doubts of us non-theists.
14 Cynical ..
“witnesses” really? who …?”
BTW ..
There are a LOT more folks who witnessed Muhamud and Buddha … you wanna change religions?
While you are at it, how much did Paul witness? What about the books expunged by Rome?
OTOH, God post here a lot! Many more witnesses thane to the stuff yu wanna claim Jesus said. You willing to follow God?
while we are at it, the Mormons claim their elders communicate directly wi God today. You ready?
Goodness the libtardo brigade is out in force this morning.
Puddy cracks up with Goldy placing Karl Marx in his “Bible” study… Figgers Goldy would finally display his real bible, the Communist Manifesto. We all know from your various posts Goldy you try to argue class struggles from a disjointed point of view. Your supposed exploitation of your progressive class by conservatives is the motivating force behind your posts. We know what Marx was trying to say and you display your Marxian views each week Goldy.
BTW have you muzzled Jon DeVore?
Now regarding Jesus,
John the Revelator wrote his Gospel and Revelation during the same century. His eye witness account is accurate and true. You’ll finally recognize this when Jesus returns with His Father’s Glory in His second coming. All eyes will see Him return.
And of course you attack Paul. Acts Chapter 9:3-7…
And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
1 Corinthians 15:14-15 – And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ: whom He raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
1 Corinthians 15:17 – And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
Golly leftist peeps… Annas and Caiaphas bribed the Roman soldiers to tell lies about Jesus’ resurrection. Now what nationality were they again?
So when Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene, Cleopas and his friend, the remaining eleven disciples with Thomas claiming “My Lord and My God” don’t count?
Cynical:
It would appear that your faith in the fairy tale of Christianity exceeds both your knowledge of Scriptural Canon and the historical facts of that period.
Yes, there are four accounts of Christ’s life, but it’s clear all were produced well after his death. Over thirty years in the case of Mark, forty to fifty for Matthew and Luke, and perhaps as late a sixty for John.
It’s also clear that Luke and Matthew were written with material taken straight from Mark. What we would call plagiarism in this day and age. Additionally, the four accounts contain wildly divergent sets of facts regarding the Jesus’ life, facts that simply defy reconciliation. Finally, John’s account of Jesus differs so radically from the other three, one almost wonders if he is talking about the same man.
In short, Jesus was created, much like all other “Gods”, in the image of those whose interests he would serve. As situation that is repeated to this day.
So if the Right wants to remake Jesus into a warrior who hates the fags and foreigners, have at it.
pud,
Revelations was written by someone very much under the influence of psychoactive substances, which you’d recognize if you’d ever tried any. It has as much relation to reality as “Judy in the Sky with Diamonds” of “Purple Haze”, though it’s not nearly as interesting as either.
of “Purple Haze” >or “Purple Haze”
rob,
When Jesus comes again, the only psychoactive substance will be your mind melting from the knowledge of being led astray!
@26 Puddybud is Sad for Steve’s Loss 02/14/2010 at 10:32 am,
Why would you think atheists should be more scared of this 2,000 year old warning than a self professed Christian who routinely spews ignoring the admonition to turn the other cheek?
Golly Pud:
Your quotes all rely on the same dubious sources we were doubting to begin with: i.e. the canon of the New Testament.
Care to give it another shot?
@22 so why are these “eye witness” accounbts more credible than Joseph Smith? Or Muhamud?
For that matter you have read gthe words of God here. Are His words less credible than the redacted texts authorized by Emeperor Contantine?
pud,
“mind melting”? Where’s it say in the Bible that anyone’s mind is going to melt? Are you drinking this early? On a Sunday?
Sorry for the delay rob,
Puddy took Mrs Puddy to Patty’s Egg Nest in Muk-Town (rhp6033 should know the place) for Valentine’s Day Breakfast after giving her 4 containers of chocolate and lots of kisses.
Anyway the mind melting is a metaphor for Rev 6:15-17
And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?
Who will call for the rocks and mountains to fall on them except a non-believing atheist fool who’s mind is melting and is AGHAST at the return of the King of Glory? Peeps such as you Rob will prefer the rocks and mountains to fall on your non-believing atheist ASS rather than to face King Jesus.
rob
Isa 2:10 Enter into the rock, and hide thee in the dust, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty.
Isa 2:19 And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth.
Oh My MikeBoySkunk appeared… Need to see some more outliers, similar to your Biblical beliefs?
It’s obvious those New Testament guys were commies.
If you’re a practicing Christian you’re a commie too.
@4 “What more evidence do those of little faith need of My law.”
The wind, the sunlight, and the snow sure as hell didn’t come from a free market.
@7 If God wanted all embryos to be born, why did She create foxes to eat eggs?
Wait for it…
“we ylb arschloch” will call Puddy a religious fiend.
@11 “Workers of the World…my sincere apologies!—Karl Marx”
Yeah, they’re really prospering under wingnut capitalism, aren’t they?
Hey, I’m not saying Marx was right, all I’m saying is if he’d owned the right stocks he wouldn’t have had to write fiction for a living.
Jesus wouldn’t have been a hellfire-and-damnation type because he was a Jew. Judaism doesn’t include hellfire and damnation. Don’t blame him as a faithful Jew for what the Christians did many centuries after he lived, and don’t attribute to him what the gospel writers wrote many decades, in several cases, 100+ years after he died. If you don’t like the fact that he was a Jew, find somebody else to worship.
As the whole point of being a Republican is not having to work for a living, every worker represents another failure of Republicanism.
@13 “power hungry, ineffective government bureaucracy”
Yes, power hungry and greedy corporate bureaucracy works much better.
What is Herr Goebbels Himmler Dumb Bunny babbling about in #42.
Proud Goatist, translation please. Yous another of dem lawyer types.
@31;
More likely, (if Revelations were to actually happen, which it won’t) the hiders of face calling for the mountains to fall on them will be all the fake Christians out there voting Republican.
@14 Speaking of atheists, I see you guys are hiring them to take care of your pets after you go up.
Sarah68:
“Hellfire & Damnation” in the rhetorical sense, as in ‘repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand.’ Best evidence is that Jesus (Jeshua) was an apocalyptic Jew, something that was quite common at the time. And his message was likely that Yahweh was about to return very shortly to upend the current social order and restore the righteous to their proper place in the world.
Ironically, despite two millennia of constant and rather obvious re-invention by the Church, a position that is not too far from what your basic ‘tea-bagging’ Republican prays for today.
In short, they define Jesus and his teachings any damn way they want; because that’s what folks have always done with their gods and their religion. It’s all about foreign and domestic politics, and has nothing to do with life in the hereafter.
re 44: I see you are wearing Steve’s heart on your sleeve with that self-congratulatory new moniker.
You are an insincere poser.
Wow, Goldy says there’s little evidence for a historical Jesus?
Wrong.
By the standards of history there’s plenty of evidence for a historical Jesus. There’s evidence the new testament gospels that were later accepted by the church were in fact written down 30-60 years after the events descirbed and historians agree they have a core basis in fact that there was a guy named Jesus who was a religious leader and a bit of a rabble rouser who was crucified by the Romans.
Historians are pretty comfortable with oral traditions. You know, like when the Hemmings familiy says it has an oral tradition and this turened out to be true? They look at things like the root phrases and words used, were they Greek or Aramaic (or is it AMharic? whatever, the language Jeus used, the language spoke in those parts back then); whther there are added details in later accounts, and so on.
So in fact, historians not only believe Jesus existed but they pretty much agree that there are core parts of the gospels that are “more likely” and “less likely” to be what he said.
Notably, there’s no evidence he ever claimed to be a son of god or divine in any way.
There’s good evidence the core beliefs liberals like, like the sermon on the mount, may have been actually said by this guy.
Nothing is certain, naturally.
There’s good evidence that things like “In the beginning there was the word, and the word was god” etc. are just Greek philosophy dressed up as gospel. There are other little stories int he gospel, can’t remember which ones, which are just copied from other stories and tales circulating back then. I can’t remember if the prodigal son is one of those….but stuff like that.
These historians tend to prefer the first gospel which is shorter and simpler (“on the third day he arose from the dead”) to the later ones which are more complex (“on the third day there wa sa big storm and a blackout and a HUGE ASS boulder rolled away and he arose from the dead”) …..(note: NOT saying historians believe he arose from the dead, just that on the whole the first gospel is more likely to have more accurate stuff in it with inaccurate stuff then the ones written down later).
So the right wing idiots are wrong in saying things like it’s all true and also Goldy is wrong in saying there’s no historical evidence of Jesus. There is, using what historians reqard as evidence, which does include oral traditions later written down.
Y’all might want to read up on this stuff before making pronouncements about it.
How do I know this? I took a class called the historical jesus in a well known college. It was in the hisorty department and it was by a history professor and it laid out the four gospels side by side and you could just see the differences and where lies were added later. It also went into the actualy Greek and Amaraic (Amharic? whatever) words and discussed why just based on the words used some tales were not so likely, etc. while others fit better with the native language.
The same techniques used in evaluation or oral traditions for all the rest of history. It’
s a mistake to think that historians only believe in stuff that was written down.
Poll: Most Americans Want Health Care Reform
“[I]n the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll … [w]hen asked whether they want Washington to keep trying to pass comprehensive health-care reform, large majorities of both Democratic and independent voters, and more than two out of five Republicans, said yes — an overall majority of almost 2-1 supporting Obama’s plea that Congress not walk away from the issue.”
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....der14.html
@44 No thanks. Trying to explain the obvious to the stupid is wasted effort.
Re 15 and 17
“Government” here is a translation meaning authority, not civil governmnent. Involuntarily practicing charity through taxation isn’t charity. Personal relationships, personal duties and personal standards of behavior are what Christianity is about. Government is the necessary evil by which we maintain minimum standards of behavior and personal security.
We are a judeo christian society with strong cultural roots in the European traditions. This may be changing as Asian and other cultures make their emphasis felt. But to condemn all expression of the cultural and religious foundation on which our society stands is simply stupid.
I’d have thought you would have learned at least a little of these basic distinctions somewhere along the way. But then, you’re liberals who choose the nice bits of any philosphy while blindly ignoring the integral parts you don’t like.
Conservatives are trying to oust a Raleigh, N.C., city councilman under a state constitutional provision barring atheists from holding public office. SCOTUS ruled in 1961 that such laws are unconstitutional and unenforceable, but that isn’t stopping the wingnuts from asserting this 1868 provision.
“‘It’s local political opponents seeking to change the outcome of an election they lost,’ said [Councilman] Bothwell ….”
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....ess12.html
Roger Rabbit Commentary: Conservatives want up-or-down votes only when they win. The rest of the time they are tyrants of the minority party seeking to impose the tyranny of the minority on the majority.
@53 “Government is the necessary evil by which we maintain minimum standards of behavior and personal security.”
You are one twisted dude. Government is a constructive means by which we come together as a community to accomplish mutually beneficial goals. We use government to provide ourselves with parks, libraries, and schools that all can use. Some of us believe that public art has a place in our lives, too. We are not required to accept, and do not accept, your overly narrow vision of the proper roles of government in our lives.
All this historical revisionism is entertaining to me. It represents in brief the permanent adolescence that is liberal thought.
Don’t want to earn your living? Want to have kids you can’t afford and can’t be bothered to wait until you can? Well, then it’s the duty of society to provide you a job, housing, health care, and child care for all those things, by God.
Don’t want to deal with geo-political realities? Well, we need Obama to ‘repair our reputation’ around the world. Last I checked the president of the US represents, I don’t know, the US. But in the liberal mind he somehow represents the rest of the world too.
Don’t like all those pesky responsibilities and duties and consequences in religion. I know, I’ll take a pinch of Buddha, a taste of Confucious, a cup or two of the bits I like of Christianity (excising all those parts I don’t that ask me to behave halfway civilly) and create a Frankenstein religion that makes no sense and has no value! That’ll make me feel better, whether it makes sense or not.
There are several folks who we KNOW exist at the time whose lives may have given rise tio the Jesus myth.
As for the character in the story .. not so much. A lot of the gospels are factully incorrect .. eg the image of pharissees (jesus’ teachings are pharissaic)
Actually, this is NOT what happened. The evidence .. still not convincing BTW, is from DNA. There are also salve -descendents who claim GW .. ‘cept he was sterile.
Yes, and that sort of thing leads the Jesus Project to conclude that most of the NT was NOT the words of Jesus.
I am fairly well read on this and you are not correct. Some historians think J existed, others that the myth is a composite of Hille ben Pantera, etc. What is clear is that he had little if any contemporary impact since Josephus and Tacititus do not give him attention.
True .. if he has d one this he would have been subject to execution by the Jewish community for blasphemy.
No, someone said these things.. they were the teachings of the Pharisees led by Hillel.
Sorry, Jesus may have existed but he is likely a composite.
@53 “We are a judeo christian society with strong cultural roots in the European traditions.”
Bullshit. We are, and always have been, a melting pot of many different ethnicities, languages, religions, histories, and cultural traditions.
Re 55
I guess they didn’t teach Rousseau when you went to school.
pud,
my word, you Christians are a sadistic lot. Putting graven images of bronze age torture devices in your houses of worship and around your necks, and threatening anyone who doesn’t think like you with “melted minds”, etc. Why would anyone want to worship a god who treats people that way? And whatever happened to “Love your neighbor” and “Judge not lest ye be judged”? Eh, pud? You *read* your Bible yet?
Oh, and BTW, in case you didn’t get it from my first post, Revelations is the work of a psychotic. Quoting more of it at me doesn’t impress me. I’ve dealt with live psychotics, +thousand year dead ones don’t scare me.
Nonsense. We are and always have been largely Christian European. You can dislike this, if you like, but to deny historical fact is just not logical.
This may, as I noted, be changing. However, immigrants have 2 choices. They can pick a place whose culture better reflects thier values, or they can suck it up, learn English, and adapt.
Gee @49 makes a good point in his comments regarding the evidence for the historical Jesus. While he didn’t get much ink during his own lifetime, he certainly made a splash over the following two thousand years.
But I think the real reason we know about him at all says a lot more about Paul’s entrepreneurial abilities and salesmanship that anything Jesus ever said or did.
One could make the same argument about the historical Socrates: did he really exist or was he merely a literary device of Plato? In the end though, who cares? Nothing turns on the proof of his existence because that’s not issue. We’re discussing his teachings, not his existence.
Mark is thought to be the most reliable of the four canonical gospels because it is the earliest and yes, the simplest. It also says things that simply don’t make sense from the point of later theological positions that developed. Ironically this makes them more likely to be truthful. Sort of like the real-estate agent who has to disclose things that would make you think twice about buying the house.
But the last twelve verses of Mark don’t appear in our oldest and most reliable texts, and therefore must be regarded with a good deal of doubt. So it would appear that all the crap about resurrection was added later by folks with an eye toward marketing the faith and no real concern about historical accuracy.
Also, throughout its early history, a major percentage of the American population consisted of slaves who came from non-Christian societies with cultural roots in non-European traditions.
The other entertaining thing?
Athiests and other permanent children who can’t make the pretty elementary observation that some form of God must exist spend a LOT of energy trying to diminish, disprove, invalidate and otherwise belittle Christianity.
You’d think if they really didn’t believe they’d just ignore it.
@61 “immigrants have 2 choices. They can pick a place whose culture better reflects thier values, or they can suck it up, learn English, and adapt”
Bullshit. If they’re here legally, they can keep their language, religion, and cultural traditions, and there’s nothing you can do about it.
Re 63
Slaves who adopted Christian beliefs, and whose descendants are among the most self identifying as Christian today? Good argument!
Re 62
Let me guess… You were raised a Christian. You didn’t like being told what to do and how to do it, and spent a lot of years cherry picking history to water down Christianity, instead of simply rejecting it, like an adult would do.
If Christ wasn’t resurrected why bother studying the New Testament? Last I checked there’s no shortage of wise teachers from whom we can learn valuable lessons. No shortage of holy books from which to pluck the stuff we like while rejecting every thing that imposes duty or standards of conduct or consequences. In short, no resurrection, no Christianity.
Re 65
I went to school with a kid from the Phillipines. He was expected to speak Tagala at home, eat traditional cuisine and behave in a manner consistent with his ethnic background.
At school and outside the home he was expected to speak English, do well in school and sports, and conform to the larger culture.
I have no problem with Latin Americans bringing a family values emphasis we sorely need in this country. I have no problem with Asian cultures re-infusing the work ethic liberals hate so much. I have a problem with being asked to speak Spanish in my country. I have a problem with voting pamphlets in multiple languages, or court interpreters or anything else at taxpayer expense. Learn English, or get out.
@66 no resurrection, no Christianity.
Ouch! And you call yourself a Christian? No magic, no Christ? Is that what they teach at bible thumper school these days?
@68…Christ’s resurrection is an integral part of the story…..dont you think?
@56 I gotta hand it to you, it’s hard to find so many stereotypes, generalizations, and platitudes in one place.
@66 “Let me guess…”
No, it’s better if you don’t guess, because you’re not very good at it. You usually manage to guess wrong, and as a result, you’ve filled your brain with false perceptions of the world around you.
@67 Tagala is a plant. The kid spoke Tagalog.
I was educated within an intellectual tradition that took seriously the difference between a plant and a language. Sadly, we’ve become a nation that not only accepts ignorance, but glorifies it. I’m afraid America’s best days are behind it.
To Lost @64:
On the contrary, it was the theists who felt compelled to constantly “prove” and justify their mythologies, often resorting to torture and murder as a way of discouraging unbelief.
If it is so obvious there must be some form of god, why all the fuss? We certainly didn’t have to burn anyone at the stake because they didn’t believe in gravity.
As for disputing Christianity, it is remarkably easy. In fact it is difficult to imagine a more complicated web of implausibilities and outright contradictions.
Fortunately for the Church, most folks review of the literature doesn’t get much past Sunday School and they are quite happy to let someone else, their Pastor, do their theological thinking for them. Just as they are quite content to let Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh do their political thinking.
Hey SJ — glad you agree with what I said. Let’s review the bidding, ok?
SJ spews:
“There are several folks who we KNOW exist at the time whose lives may have given rise tio the Jesus myth.”
There was a guy named Jesus. that much is not a myth.
“As for the character in the story .. not so much. A lot of the gospels are factully incorrect .. eg the image of pharissees (jesus’ teachings are pharissaic)” — glad you agree with me.
“Historians are pretty comfortable with oral traditions. You know, like when the Hemmings familiy says it has an oral tradition and this turened out to be true?
Actually, this is NOT what happened. The evidence .. still not convincing BTW, is from DNA. There are also salve -descendents who claim GW .. ‘cept he was sterile.”
Um, SJ, this IS what happened. There were black oral traditions that TJ or his family had sex with slaves etc. Then, it turned out to be true. The point is that history has room for oral traditions.
“They look at things like the root phrases and words used, were they Greek or Aramaic (or is it AMharic? whatever, the language Jeus used, the language spoke in those parts back then); whther there are added details in later accounts, and so on.
Yes, and that sort of thing leads the Jesus Project to conclude that most of the NT was NOT the words of Jesus.” YOU IDJIT can’t you read? I NEVER said ANY of the words of the NT were the words of Jesus, only that there’s acceptable proof by real historians’ standards that a guy named Jesus existed and SOME of the stuff in the NT POSSIBLY is true although we can’t be CERTAIN.
“So in fact, historians not only believe Jesus existed but they pretty much agree that there are core parts of the gospels that are “more likely” and “less likely” to be what he said.
I am fairly well read on this and you are not correct. Some historians think J existed, others that the myth is a composite of Hille ben Pantera, etc. What is clear is that he had little if any contemporary impact since Josephus and Tacititus do not give him attention.” “he had little impact” = he existed, thank you for agreeing with me, then again you use a straw man. I NEVER said he had lots of contemporary impact at all! so I said most historians say he existed and you disagree. Well of course some historians deny it. So what?
“Notably, there’s no evidence he ever claimed to be a son of god or divine in any way.
True .. ” GLAD YOU AGREE WITH ME AGAIN.
“if he has d one this he would have been subject to execution by the Jewish community for blasphemy.” Irrelevant but apparently you feel a need to distract everyone when you agree with me.
“There’s good evidence the core beliefs liberals like, like the sermon on the mount, may have been actually said by this guy.
Nothing is certain, naturally.
No, someone said these things.. they were the teachings of the Pharisees led by Hillel.”
In this you score a point, but without you citing anything I can’t be expected to follow you. I am remembering something from a college class, you are citing something you know. Go ahead, give a link and we can find out what you’re talking about, ok?
“So the right wing idiots are wrong in saying things like it’s all true and also Goldy is wrong in saying there’s no historical evidence of Jesus. There is, using what historians reqard as evidence, which does include oral traditions later written down.
Sorry, Jesus may have existed but he is likely a composite.”
No need for the fake apology. Have you noticed that saying he’s a composite largely agrees with what I am saying? Which is that there’s parts of the NT which are definitedly not true as they come from other oral traditions and include stories antedating Jesus? So you mainly agree with me…you say he “may have existed” and i say as per historians’ approach to oral traditions he is likely to have existed. You say a composite, I say much of NT isn’t “true” (That is is more dubious”) and others is more likely to be true. Not much diff. there. I say there are historians who rely on oral traditions and have technicques for evaluating them and you don’t disagree. So in all, you mainly agree with me, thanks.
@69 Not really.
Folks followed Christ before his resurrection.
Oye, Perdido En El Mar Azul:
Quisiera que Vd. hablase espanol mas, jokay? Porque luego tendria mas confianza que sea Vd. un hombre intelegente y culto, con conocimients del mundo, y no un brute ignorante quien no sabe nada. No es tan raro hablar lenguas extranjeras. amigo. En Europa Y LatinO America la mayor parte de la gente bien educado puede hablar dos a veces tres idiomas. Fijese, para algunos de ellos es ingles lo cual es el idioma extranjero! Puede Vd. imaginar eso? De todos modos cuando alguin le pide que hable espanol, si no no tiene la inteligencia ni el caracter de aprenderlo, siempre puede contestarle, “No, soy un ignorante tonto y no puede hablar cualquier lengua extranjera. Tal vez el imigrante mexicano lo mas estupido en el estado de Washington puede hablar mas ingles que yo puedo hablar espanol, y sunponge que este hecho demuestre que soy yo mas estupido que cualquier mexicano aquie, pero es la verdar, yo no tengo yo mas energia para mejorme que el mexicano lo mas perezoso en el estado!
O si eso es demasiado large, puedes seciallamente decirle, “no, lo siento, soy un gran tonto chauvinistico, y no puedo comunicar
bien.”
De acuerdo, Perdido?
Ademas, tu “nombre de guerra” es perfecto parece bien perdido !
To Lost @66:
You are a bad guesser.
I was raised as a skeptic and an agnostic. And I was taught to think critically about all things. I was also encouraged to participate in social and cultural institutions to learn good manners and diplomacy. And I was deeply curious about religion and why it seemed to cause so much dysfunction in our world. Hence, I didn’t just ignore it as you might recommend. I spent a good deal of time studying it. It is an interesting topic.
Now it’s my turn: You were raised as a Christian, probably one of the more dogmatic varieties. Your early doubts and questions were met with hostility and threats of eternal damnation. You are not particularly curious or tolerant of other’s views. Hence, you took the simple route and made the leap of faith. And now you have no interest in hearing any words to the contrary.
Lost sez: “Athiests and other permanent children who can’t make the pretty elementary observation that some form of God must exist…”
And then sez: “..instead of simply rejecting it, like an adult would do.”
Typical theist, can’t make up their mind. And can’t spell atheist either.
And do tell, how is one to make the “…observation that some form of God must exist…” when you can’t see it, hear it, smell it, taste it, or feel it? Please provide any proof that any god exists; quoting the Bible doesn’t count.
Re 77
Speako de English or Shutto uppo.
okay so I googled hillel pharisees sermon on the mount. going right by the obviously Xian sources, it turns out that there is part of the sermon on the mount that restates the golden rule and the big claim is that this is consistent with what the pharisees taught including some dude named hillel. at that point I lost interest because SJ tried to say this somehow proves Jesus didn’t say the sermon on the mount stuff. Huh. IT actually cuts the other way…..what this guy named Jesus said was consistent with a whole school of Jewish thought? Makes sense to me. Usually, what a new guy says is both consistent and pushes it a bit further. Anyway, I had referred to the part of the sermon on the mount dealing with the meek who shall inherit the earth, you know, the most communicistic part. I like it that the studies of the historical jesus have said that THIS is one of the things in the gospels more likely to have actually been said by this guy named jesus.
I also googled around a bit and there’s roman sources for jesus as well so I really go back to my original point which is Goldy is wrong, flat wrong, in reporting that historians generally think there was no guy named jesus.
hey, I am not a christian by their definition, not believing in the divine nature of the dude, etc. but as one interested inhistory, morals, how religions are political mind control institutions, etc., it’s kind of fascinating that there is this one group hell bent to deny he existed and another group hell bent to claim every word in the gospels is true. both of you all are wrong.
why read the NT then, if no resurrection?
Um, it’s good to be well educated and read most everything, and most every respected moral and religious leader. Fuck, it’s good to read mein kampf, no? If you are only interested in the NT if you believe in resurrection you have a low level of interest in the world, not much curiosity, etc., this means you could be a right wing nutjob!
Re 69 and 76
The point wasn’t whether Christ, if you believe there was such a person had anything to say, or had contemporaneous followers.
The point was that absent the resurrection Christ was just another wise man saying things people wanted to hear. You and anyone else are free to have philosophical convictions in whatever form you wish. I don’t refer to whether you are Buddhist, Daoist, Christian, Jewish or athiest. That’s your choice. But to join a country club for the social life while hating golf, despite being common, misses the point.
lost still can’t spell atheist. a-t-h-E-I-s-t, for no god’s sake.
Re 79
No contradiction at all, friend. Some religions do lend themselves to acceptance of what works for you. Christianity is by its’ nature either wholly true or wholly false, hence ‘reject it like an adult.’ Doesn’t mean a person can’t believe in the Raven God or Shinto or whatever else they choose to accept.
I studied sciences in school and noticed the incredible order and beauty of creation. I’ve been in cathedrals and at museums where the best in human artistic endeavor is on display. An accidental explosion no more created the carved beauty of the cathedral than an accidental explosion created the organic beauty of the universe. A stick of dynamite in a paint factory will never create a Carravagio.
For your proof of a non-deistic origin of the universe? An explosion operated on what matter to create the universe? From where did that matter come. See, all you’ve done is move the question back a degree, not answer it, in a non-divine story like the Big Bang.
Re 83
Sorry Rob, didn’t realize spelling mattered to you more than content.
Re 78
Skeptics point to writings of Mother Theresa questioning her faith as evidence that it wasn’t strong. They say that if even this wonderful person could espouse Christianity while internally struggling with some of the issues it raises no-one really has faith.
On the contrary. I was raised to believe that a faith not vigorously questioned was one not worth having. I’ve studied comparitive religion in an extremely amateur way. I’ve worked my way through doubts and still have some unresolved ones. Put another way my library shelves have a number of classical works of fiction or philosophy I haven’t yet read. I’ve picked them up and put them back down without getting anything from them. What I know from experience is that as my reading and my intellectual life progress a time will come when those books speak deeply and clearly to me. Because it hasn’t happened yet doesn’t prove it won’t.
Re 77
While living in Italy I learned Italian. I didn’t need to, as most people in the larger towns can converse in English. But as a guest in their country I felt it incumbent on me to work within their culture. Besides, it made the experience of living there that much more enjoyable for me.
While travelling in France I tried to revive my high school French. Again, not strictly necessary. But it seemed courteous in a guest to try to live by the cultural ways of the place I was visiting.
While working in construction I’ve picked up some spoken Spanish. I don’t feel it required, as they sought to work and live in an English speaking country. But I learned more about the men and their lives by making the effort than I would have otherwise.
All of this is simply to illustrate that not wishing to obliterate my culture on the behalf of a guest to my country doesn’t indicate the bigoted world view you wish to ascribe to me.
To Lost @86:
The problem with your all in or all out view of Christianity, hinging on your belief in his resurrection is:
1. There is no credible evidence of it, and
2. Jesus isn’t the only one said to have been resurrected.
Do you regard others who have been “resurrected” as deities as well?
“No contradiction at all, friend.”
Seriously, you don’t see the contradiction in those two statements?
“didn’t realize spelling mattered to you more than content.”
I’m still waiting for some content.
“An explosion operated on what matter to create the universe? From where did that matter come”
Yeah, ok, you got nothing, just say so. I mean, if that’s your reasoning, then from where did your creator come? Who created the creator? And then who created the creator of the creator?
Some here might enjoy checking out the link below. I think this is a very good site. From there you can go to just about any translation of any of the known early Christian writings – and there’s quite a few of them that didn’t make it into the Bible. heh- Take that, you Gnostics! There’s informative discussion about the history of each, and great links as well.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/
Physicists don’t talk about the singularity “exploding”, rather, they speak of expansion or inflation, which the universe is still doing. Big difference. As a Christian, of course, when I encounter M-Theory, symmetry, branes, an expanding universe, parallel universes, an infinite universe, eleven dimensions (watch out for that nasty seventh D), massive black holes, microscopic black holes, cosmic background radiation, and sub-atomic particles being both here and there at the same time, why, I just close my simple mind and try to focus my thoughts on the little Baby Jesus and then lash myself with a spatula. Well, at least that’s what some people around here seem to think, anyways. Fine. Be they left or right, I’ve never cottoned to the company of shallow and insipid fools.
Re 88 and 89
So the game is to define something inherently outside of the realm of science in the terms of science. Very handy.
Religion, all religion, is a man-made attempt to define the indefinable. If a person assumes a creator he or she must assume that creator to be outside of time and space, infinite. Defining such an infinite within finite terms is a task doomed to failure from the start. When an astrophysicist does this it’s laudable to skeptics. When a theologian does, it’s contemptible. How’s that work exactly?
That’s because God is a Republican. Everybody knows that.
People talking in movie shows
People smoking in bed
People voting Republican
Give them a boot to the head
Steve @90:
Thanks for the link. I was not aware of this resource.
Not sure what to make of your subsequent “as a Christian” statement, but if you are a believer, we might have an interesting conversation.
Do forgive us for our characterization of Lost as lost….
How did Frommm define religion? One’s major frame of orientation coupled with some object of devotion? Something like that. For conversation’s sake, I whittle that down to one’s major frame of orientation in life. So I say that everybody has a religion and it has absolutely nothing to do with defining anything. Everybody says they’re this or that and most of the time it’s just bullshit. How we act out our values each day skims off the lip-service we spew and reveals what our real religion might be.
headless lucy@48 farts
Stupid idiot… Puddy used this for the last few days.
Butt of course being this is your 50th sock puppet, you are monotonic and moronic!
rob, conflates all religions together like the standard libtardo farts
Ever read the 10 Commandments? A certain religion, once populated by “we ylb arschloch” changed the original 10 Commandments and removed the graven images from them. Puddy follows the original 10 Commandments in the Pentateuch!
Steve, that was funny :)
Hi, Uncle. I do consider myself a Christian. But, you know, it might be better to say that I hope when it’s all over, that the way I’ve lived my life reveals that I’ve lived and acted out the values one normally associates with Jesus and his teachings. With that I couldn’t go wrong. Whether God is real or not, I’ll have still lived a decent life.
OK pud, I retract the graven image part so far as it refers to you. Now tell me again why I should worship your god, who threatens to melt my mind if I don’t.
The tremondous effort of the Atheist Progressives to deny Christ! Seems like an obsession based on your high value of your own intellect. Deny occurrences from thousands of years ago that have been well documented.
You all seem to think that your intellect means you are alive. But alas, you are dead and do not know it.
Revelation 3:1 (New International Version)
Revelation 3
To the Church in Sardis
Goldy..
I am comfortable in my faith.
Are you comfortable in yours?
@99 How you doing, my friend? I reckon we’ll soon return to the fun we have beating each other to a pulp over irrelevancies soon enough. But how about we just enjoy each other’s company for a few days?
You know something, remember that first post of yours the other day? I returned to it a few times. It brought tears to my eyes. You immediately recognized what was going on and were there for me. And here I just wrote about acting out one’s real values. I won’t forget that, Puddy, even after we return to the left-right paradigm and start scrapping again.
My goodness, my KLOWN friend is here as well. How are you doing, Mr. Klynical?
cynical,
Revelation was written by a psychotic, we don’t believe what it says, nor do we care. You got anything of substance to add?
Steve @various:
Sounds a bit like Pascal’s Wager; what have we got to lose, live a virtuous life and we either get – eternal bliss, or the satisfaction of having lived a virtuous life.
Not a bad bet; but intellectually, a cop out.
Problem is being a Christian these days means so many different things to so many different people; most of them very unattractive. And so few of them have to do with anything even remotely connected to living in virtue.
But….we are free to define ourselves, our beliefs and our interpretations of those beliefs as we like.
So much for an “interesting” conversation.
@106 “So much for an “interesting” conversation.”
Geez, and we didn’t even get started. Please excuse me, I feel a tear forming in my left eye.
Rob & Mr. C:
I really don’t know who wrote The Apocalypse of John, or for that matter whether he was psychotic. But I can say that virtually nothing he wrote has any relevance to anything that has happened since, save maybe the fact that innumerable hucksters have been using it to scare the bejeebers out gullible folks like Pud and Lost ever since, not to mention making a pretty good living by separating them from their money.
A tear no less:
Sorry Steve but if you can’t come up with something more provocative that a 350 year old argument for believing in a supreme being as revealed by the Roman Catholic Church, you should hang it up.
Movin’ on here.
“we don’t believe what it says”
My, I hope by “we” you don’t mean progressives. I’m admittedly not that big into the Book of Revelation, but all the same, if this is some progressive “we” thing, dissing Christians, then I might just have to consider surrendering my life-time lefty membership card. That’d be a shame as it says on there, “Member since 1961”.
“Movin’ on here.”
Well then, move on, dude, and have a safe journey. heh- God bless.
Steve,
OK, I retract the “we”. But honestly, I see so few moderate or left leaning Christians taking on the fundy/conservatives, it’s all too easy to just toss them all into the same boat.
Then again, maybe I just don’t hang out in the right places.
You know, it strikes me that the progressive trend of late is to be openly contemptuous of people of faith, both left and right. I see it in these HA comment threads in spades. You two, Daddylove, Zotz and more. If you all keep that up we’ll soon hand the control of government back to the Republicans. And I’m not going to thank you for that.
“I see so few moderate or left leaning Christians taking on the fundy/conservatives”
Just keep your eye on me. I’ll show you how it’s done. If there was an edit function I’d remove my thought @113. I probably shouldn’t have thrown you in there, Rob. My bad. I admit to be a little overly sensitive.
Take Uncle Witz, for example. I’m a long-time lefty commenter who has long enjoyed Uncle’s comments. But there he goes, spewing contempt and movin’ on. He seems to think that he knows what I believe and I haven’t even discussed my specific beliefs on HA. Ever. Go figure.
Get this, Rob, I merely thanked Puddy for his prayer for a broken woman dear to me whose son had committed suicide. I did that and Daddylove launches a long contemptuous rant, hating on Christians and then accusing me of being a Republican. Zotz chimes in, spewing more hate. When that happens, Rob, I view these people a little bit differently. We may agree on politics but I want nothing to do with them anymore. I will not associate or be identified with anybody hating on people of faith simply for their being people of faith. The very thought of my having stood with those two disgusts me.
Steve,
it’s a sensitive topic, and I’ll freely admit to holding a bit of a grudge against Christianity, both from my upbringing and from what the fundy/conservative alliance has done to the country. So, no apology necessary as far as I’m concerned.
@117 I understand. These days, what with the religious fundamentalism of many faiths that leads too many towards hate rather than love, along the strong association with extremist politics, it’s enough to turn a lot of good people off, even to the point of lumping it all together and labeling all people of faith as being nuts. But when we go that far, it’s just no good. I’d like to see those people on the left who do that reconsider and back off. Take this recent thing that happened here. There’s a splinter here now. Small, mind you, but it could easily grow bigger if some of our progressives continue down this road.
Steve @115:
Contempt? Nahhhh…you are well above my contempt.
Disregard? Yes, your coy remarks about being “a Christian”, only to follow with an ambiguous quote from Eric Fromm strikes me as disingenuous at best.
If you are a Christian, I accept and respect that. But now perhaps you can favor us by explaining what that means.
Again forgive me for not recognizing you as a long time lefty commentator on this site, or your credentials as such dating back to 1961. I was only nine years old at the time, but I too have the same “card” in my wallet.
I normally don’t set out to disabuse Christians of their faith, any more than I would go around disabusing children of their belief in Santa Claus. Both are entitled to believe whatever fantasy is comforting to them.
However, when that “faith” spills over into political action, I become openly hostile. Particularly when that “faith” becomes openly hostile to the values I hold dear.
So Steve, regardless of whatever you wish to believe about Jesus of Nazareth, feel free, and by all means, feel free to tell me all about it. I would indeed be delighted to hear your thoughts, particularly if they are new and different.
And we will indeed “keep our eye on you” as a role model in “how it’s done.”
113. Steve spews:
I agree Steve-
The constant Christian bashing by Atheist Progressives destroys whatever semblance of a message or plan they have.
Same with Tea Partiers.
Republicans were in huge trouble…and the Angry Progressives bailed them out…and continue to do so.
Re 119
“However, when that “faith” spills over into political action, I become openly hostile.” So, the only valid motive for political activity is secular? With respect that is complete and utter nonsense, and it ignores what informs most peoples values, their respective religions.
“Particularly when that “faith” becomes openly hostile to the values I hold dear. ” What a remarkably arrogant thing to say! Your values are of course valid and praiseworthy (if unspecified in any way shape or form) but those Christians are hostile to them. So you don’t believe in love, or charity or humility I take it. How about treating others as you would be treated, a dissident philosophy if ever I heard one!
Best of luck to you, friend, and God Bless.
Hello Steve,
I am glad I could be there for you. While we will battle in the future, I promise to be a gentler person. I also promise not to treat you like “we ylb arschloch”. And I promise to speak to you in first person.
How’s that Steve. If I revert back to third person it’s because I was dealing with the arschloch who leaves a nasty taste with his hate 24X7.
Unkl Witz: “Yahweh” was God. God didn’t need to return; he was always there. Jesus wasn’t an apocalyptic Jew; he was a Pharisaic Jew — his teacher was Hillel, the leader of the Pharisees. Hillel, who said “That which is hateful to you, don’t do to your fellows.” That’s the original Golden Rule. If you’re not Jewish, don’t try to teach Jews their religion.
Well, Uncle, I was raised within the Christian faith. It’s what I knew. I turned against God when my Mom died when I was ten and bad things began to happen to me. I thought as a child and reacted as a child, blaming God for the loss of my Mom and all that followed. “Why did you forsake me?” As a teen and a young man I became increasingly bitter, capable of extreme violence, and was on the wrong path, whether one thinks in terms of Christian faith or not. I didn’t care about God one way or another. Still at a young age, I found another way to live, though I didn’t relate it to Christianity. I was able to nurture the values instilled in me in my early adolescence and turned my life around. If I had a role model at the time, it wasn’t Jesus, it was Bobby Kennedy.
I’ve traveled a long road. Along the way I’ve experienced things that are not easily explained or understood by me, and are certainly difficult to express. I found that, within the context of Christianity, specifically, the teachings of Jesus, I can make some sense of it all. It gives me a vocabulary, if you will, that I can use to express thoughts and ideas to people close to me in this life that would otherwise be difficult to express. I imagine that, if the framework of my childhood had been different, had I been raised in a different culture, I would have found a different context and a different vocabulary, but I hope the core beliefs would have been the same. But that wasn’t the case – Christianity is what is familiar and comfortable for me. Alas, belonging to, and being active in a church isn’t in my comfort zone. I do like to attend – it can feel really good to be amongst people who are, say, praying for world peace – but I belong to no church. My long-time girlfriend is a devout Christian in a far more traditional way than myself. She’s a Catholic. Heck, Uncle, I reckon that, by some folk’s measure, say Mr. Klynical’s, I’m not much of a Christian at all.
Did God speak to Moses? I really don’t know. I have no opinion. Whatever happened in the Bronze Age isn’t exactly central to my faith. I live in the here and now. I will say most assuredly that my belief is that God is real and that my life is blessed. I cannot and do not attest to the nature of God anymore than a physicist will attest to the true nature of reality at the sub-atomic level. The latest I hear from them is that reality is an illusion. heh- That’s reassuring. That’s what Freud said of religion. And what future has an illusion? As for my reference to Fromm, I’m only saying that talk is cheap. It’s easy to say one is a Christian. Too easy. I’m trying to say that I haven’t the objectivity to know for sure, but I hope that the way I live my life exemplifies the teachings of Jesus. I hope that I walk the walk. Truth be told, I fall on my face all the time. You can see it here. But all considered, Uncle, whacky faith or not, it’s certainly better than my being the murderous, cold-blooded bastard I’d be if I’d have continued on the path I was on.
Peace.
My goodness, that was a long post. This stuff is difficult for me to put into words, Uncle Witz.
@122 I feel the same way, Puddy. We’ll argue politics, we’ll get down to it, but I’m your friend and I know you’re mine.
Steve.
Thanks for the candor and honesty in your posts.
No problem Steve…
This is what I was discussing with you last week. Notice how your “progressive libtardo” friends first attack then come back and try to “pat you on the back for being a Christian”. To me that is so disingenuous and as we say in de ghetto… “mighty _______ of them”. They can fill in the blank.
Anyway Steve, I hope you are there to continue to lift up your lady friends spirits. I can’t imagine what she’s going through.
BTW, Steve have you ever seen someone give up their will to live? We saw someone take that attitude today in the hospital in front of his five kids. He’s 84 and it was tough as we are long-time friends of the family. It was my first experience seeing that.
Sarah68,
Yahweh IS God.
To tell the truth, as a kid I blamed myself for my Mom’s death. The only argument I ever had with my Mom was the night before she became terribly ill and died. And when she died, I believed it was my fault. It wasn’t true, but with the things that happened to me and my belief in God and my sense that God had abandoned me, I began to believe that I must truly be a horrible person and at fault for my Mom’s death. As a kid I really believed that. But I really wasn’t a bad kid. I was a good kid to whom very bad things happened. In hindsight, I can see blessings even in the nightmarish things that happened to me. Those things would have destroyed me if it weren’t for those values, decent values taught within the context of Christianity, instilled in me at an early age by my Mom.
My Mom was 40 years old when she died. Her name was Helen.
For me, God is real.
Steve,
Have you noticed who is MISSING in this thread?
“BTW, Steve have you ever seen someone give up their will to live?”
Yes. I saw that in my Mom, Puddy. She had been ill for a very long time, as long as I had known her. Her relatives had abandoned her, her faith was shaken, she knew she was dying, and I heard her beg many times near the end for God to take her.
Steve,
I’m sorry you had to live through that at an early age. Damn that sucks. I hope I haven’t opened any closed wounds.
“I can’t imagine what she’s going through.”
I reckon neither of us can, Puddy. I pray that her heart heals enough that she can live life again.
I couldn’t save her son. There was never any hope of that. My conversations with my “imaginary friend” have revealed the path I must follow. My girlfriend’s son is destroying his life. She is powerless to help him. I’m not. I know what I have to do now.
Sheesh. It’s the same stupid conversation with the same stupid phony religious nuts.
Religious Nut: Jeebus luvs you.
AthEist: Jeebus, Schmeebus.
RN: You’re going to hell.
A: How do you know that?
RN: My interpretation tells me so.
A: How do you know you’ve got the right interpretation?
RN: I just do. You’re going to burn, and I’m going to laugh. And then I get to make gubmit in the image of ME.
A: How about making it kind instead?
RN: You’re a heartless communist who twists scriptures.
A: You’re a heartless asshole who twists scriptures.
RN: No I’m not. I get to ignore whatever scriptures I want. My preacher said so. He said the ones that talk about queers and god-haters like you are REALLY important and the ones that talk about money I should just scratch out.
A: Pretty selective preacher, I’d say.
RN: Who cares what you say? You’re going to hell.
A: So you said.
RN: Why don’t you want to be like me?
A: I think we’ve covered that.
RN: You’re going to…
A: Whatever…
It’s always the same old thing.
No, Puddy. While there’ll always be sadness when I look back, I’m OK. I’ve healed my pain through knowing God. I can talk openly of these things. I can even laugh about these things now because for me, God is quite real.
@131 “Have you noticed who is MISSING in this thread?”
Daddylove and Zotz? Don’t worry, doggeril is covering for them.
@127 You’re welcome, Max.
I know people who have died.
That’s why I an a consevative republican.
I love nyself and jesus and all who cabnresolve the crisis of American loyalty.
Wow, what a thread. I wish I’d been able to contribute. The texts Goldie posted, contrasted with Marx, lays out certain contradictions/consistencies the Religious Right avoids. Believing in Christ requires a Kierkegaardian leap of faith. Those who try to prove his existence, through some sort of historical record, betray his message. I took the leap of faith. So, swat me down.
Puddy, I actually spent St. Valentine’s Day with my wife. Imagine that. Among other things, we saw a movie, “Crazy Heart.” As an old, graying musician, a number of people have told me to see it. After seeing it, I wondered what message my friends might be sending me. Hey, Steve, you play un poco de guitar, si? Trade a few licks, perhaps? Let’s do it, man.
“I know people who have died.”
Small wurld. I know peeple who dont spel to gud.
@141 This really has been an odd thread. I’ve never posted such stuff here before.
We should consider asking Darryl to assist in exchanging email addresses for us so we can get together. Don’t you live on the west side of the sound as I do?
Indeed, proud leftist, this really has been a remarkable thread.
I am suprised that you did not use Acts 4 for this. After all this is where the followers of Christ sold everything they owned and layed it at th apostles’ feet. They used it to take care of the needs of those without. Oh wait, that’s right. There was no goverment forcing them to do it. It was devoted followers of Christ giving of there own free will. They didn’t give it to the goverment they gave to there Preachers. Oops. My mistake. OK that is how it is supposed to be done. Christians are supposed to give to those in need. To be friends to the widows and fatherless. Yes, there is not enough of this. The worst enemy of Christians is other Christians. When my Church tries to do ministry work the biggest stumblingblock is churches like Christian Faith Center with there prosperty gospel. Or churches like Citidel which tries to boost there membership by attacking and underminding other churches. It makes me sick. I am a soul-winner, (I admit that I am nit a very good one) I take the gospel of Christ to the people. I go door to door likr Jesus said to. I usuially leave an invitation and go. However, sometimes i do more if the person wants to hear. I never force anything on anyone. If I am asked to leave I do. I find that the christianity that most people see turns some people to what I bring.
My church gives. Our food bank go quickly and fills up quickly. We have no millionaries at my church. Perhase because they knoe that they would be treated just as well as a homeless man. My church loves to help. However, we may not help you in certain situtations. For example, if you are capable of working but not trying to find a job then we will probially not help you. (If there are children it is a different matter.) We do not do this because the goverment tells us to we do it to give God a good name. We follow his Word. Beware of preachers in palaces though. If they are getting rich from the ministry then stay away. Now About Marx and Christ. Marx wanys to force you to give to others. Jesus does not. Jesus wants you to give out of love. Jesus did not hate the rich. He also said in Mark that with God all things are possiable. Marx is dead and in Hell right now wishing that he listened to Jesus. If Marx could talk to us he would say Marxism is a lie and Jesus is the only way.
Steve @various:
Thank you for your thoughtful and sincere reply Steve. There is nothing in your post with which I would disagree. It sounds like your faith is very personal and something you take comfort in.
Are you a Christian? Who cares, why would if matter if you have found something you consider real, meaningful and you have turned it into a positive force in your life. Good for you Steve.
Does that mean everyone else needs to believe in the same thing you do? I suspect your answer would be no. Correct me if I am wrong.
“Did God speak to Moses?” Again, who cares? Nothing in my life turns on whether this did or did not happen.
Was Jesus a real person, a conflation of prior historical figures, or a literary confection of the Gospel authors? And again, it doesn’t matter. As Lost suggested, I will take and hold what makes sense to me and discard the rest. Why not?
“Correct me if I am wrong.”
No correction here as you’re quite right, Uncle Witz. And thanks for the thoughtful reply. This was a conversation that could have easily deteriorated into something ugly. One very good reason that it didn’t is because of the quality of your character. Same goes for Rob.
@146 Unki Witz
Who cares?
No one would care, least of all God, IF it were not for evangelism. Millions have died, entire cultures have been decimated, because of the Christian and Muslim assertions of having exclusive truth.
Belief in Jesus, Moses, Raven, Mithra, or Marx .. are all fine when these are personal matters.
75. gee spews:
Hey SJ — glad you agree with what I said. Let’s review the bidding, ok?
I think we do agree on a lot, but perhaps the main point ought to be that the Jesus of the NT, the great teacher and leader, probabakly never existed. This matters because in his name many have died.
There is a lot written about the period. One good comprehensive history I recommend is by Paul Johnson. I also can suggest, if you want, some books on the teachings of Hillel.
“So the right wing idiots are wrong in saying things like it’s all true and also Goldy is wrong in saying there’s no historical evidence of Jesus. There is, using what historians reqard as evidence, which does include oral traditions later written down.
Goldy is correct if he says that there is NO evidence to support the existence of Jesus as a major figure of the early aught century. I doubt Goldy would say there is evidence that Jesus did not exist.
BTW, there IS also no evidence that the saviour figure of the Toltecs (the person the Mayans and Aztecs though might be Cortez) did not exist either. There is also no evidence that Paul Bunyon, Robin Hood, Krishna, King Arthur, Abraham, or Zeus did not exist.
Maybe a better question for both of us is “why does it matter?” If Jesus was not to revolutionary leader of the NT, he was one of the people trying to find a way of dealing with the Romans. Those people certainly existed and their heritage is an important lesson for us all.
“BTW, there IS also no evidence that the saviour figure of the Toltecs (the person the Mayans and Aztecs though might be Cortez) did not exist either.”
Perhaps a having a few psilocybe mexicana mushrooms for lunch led the Aztecs to believe otherwise. Food of the Gods? :-)
SJ:
you’re wrong. Most historians agree someone named Jesus existed.
You admit he probably didn’t exist, thus you admit uncertainty, as of course, I do, too. The point is this:
historians do rely on oral traditions.
they have techniques for telling which stories are more likely or less likely to contain truth.
using these techniques they believe Jesus existed.
BTW if you google around you will find Roman references as well.
As far as Hillel, woo hoo, I got it. There were Jewish leaders who espoused philosophies similar to parts of what Jesus reportedly said in the NT…..this is not very salient as to whether Jesus existed, really. Someone in Jesus’ position, like someone in any place and time in history, builds on what preceded and reflects others’ thoughts…..big duh.
IMHO, it doesn’t matter if Jesus exists or not. What matters is how we try to live up the the guidelines associated with him, if we truly believe his message mattered.
—–
Those passages sure seem to go counter to the attitudes of most corporate Christians conservatives. According to their actions, “The wealthier you are, the closer you are to God. (TM)” Conversely, “If you are poor, you are evil and must be destroyed.”
I don’t think much of corporate Christians conservatives.
For example, some here spend way too much time professing their christian-ness then go argue for corporate tyranny.
SJ, to continue I tried to find this guy Johnson via googling and reading the first page of his book hisorty of xianity he seems to believe that Jesus existed: so if you have some QUOTATION you can give about how historians commonly believe Jesus didn’t exist, I’m all ears, really, providing a QUOTATION rather than your own assertion is a little more persuasive.
“There is a lot written about the period. One good comprehensive history I recommend is by Paul Johnson. I also can suggest, if you want, some books on the teachings of Hillel.”
Already noted Hillel merely proves things Jesus reportedly said were consistent with toher trains of thought, no big deal there.
““So the right wing idiots are wrong in saying things like it’s all true and also Goldy is wrong in saying there’s no historical evidence of Jesus. There is, using what historians reqard as evidence, which does include oral traditions later written down.
Goldy is correct if he says that there is NO evidence to support the existence of Jesus as a major figure of the early aught century.”
Ahhh, you twist words again. Goldy said historians don’t believe in Jesus at all. I took the opposing view: they do. I DIDN’T SAY THEY BELIEVED HE WAS A MAJOR FIGURE or was viewed that way then, and you are raising a straw man again.
” I doubt Goldy would say there is evidence that Jesus did not exist.” Who knows and who cares? We’re talking about what real historians say.
“BTW, there IS also no evidence that the saviour figure of the Toltecs (the person the Mayans and Aztecs though might be Cortez) did not exist either. There is also no evidence that Paul Bunyon, Robin Hood, Krishna, King Arthur, Abraham, or Zeus did not exist. ”
this kind of mocking faux argument is really not an argument at all. It’s just a more refined way of …. an ad hominem attack. It’s very passive aggressive, SJ. If you are trying to dispute with me by telling me for me to believe in the existence of a religious leader named Jesus back in yonder days …. based on a whole class I took in college…in the HISTORY department…..is aking to be believing in the easter bunny, you’re just being a jerk. Cut it out. You’re better than that. You are off on a side track of making a faux analogy that just because there’s no evidence of santa claus and there’s no evidence of jesus therefore beliging in one is the same as believeing in the other one but like most arguments by analogy YOU HAVE NOT SHOWN THE PREMISE OF YOUR ANALOGY YOU JUST ASSUME IT and as noted you haven’t provided any QUOTATION at all from legit historians indicating that most of them don’t believe in the existence of a guy named Jesus.
so to review, first you fail to directly prove your point, then you raise a straw man by twisting words with that all important qualified “a amjor figure” THEN you proceed to a faux argument by analogy which simplyl rests on your unsourced original assertion and is mere repetition.
Not a very persuasive track record, at this point I am thinking you must not even HAVE a quotation that proves your point.
“Maybe a better question for both of us”
and now the typical final stroke of someone losing an argument, CHANGE THE SUBJECT.
This is laughable.
” is “why does it matter?””
Um, because history is cool? I don’t care if Jesus was a minor or major figure, it is what it is, I really don’t care if he is divine or not I sort of accept morality without getting intot he details of theology….but just as I am interested in the founding of Rome, the creation fo the alphabet, you know, IT’S KINDA INTERESTING to find out if this guy WHO SEEMS TO HAVE INSPIRED THIS REALLY BIG RELIGION was actual….or not. Because it’s history, that’s why.
“If Jesus was not to revolutionary leader of the NT,”
AGAIN, RAISING A STRAW MAN, i didn’t say every word of the nt was accepted by historians……
” he was one of the people trying to find a way of dealing with the Romans.”
Notice how now you have slided into accepting the potential truth of my main point…so really, you are arguing with right wing wingnuts who push religion, not with me.
“Those people certainly existed” which isn’t at all proof that a guy named jesus existed and was a relig. leader, duh so your point is totally irrelevant….
” and their heritage” is probably more important to you as a Jew, I think you are by yoru monicker, and you are trying to recast Jesus as a mere political activist and a Jew…fine….but in fact you still haven’t given any quote from mainstream or legit historians indicating the consensus is ag. his having existed and being some kind of religious leader….
“is an important lesson for us all.”
Thank you for your overweening pedagody. but really if you read over your post you’re not arguing or proving anything you’re just asserting and twisting, as usual.
Question for you. what’s the big deal with admitting yes, this guy existed and was a relig. leader? Note, I’m NOT saying he was major or even that most of what is in the NT is true. My personal belief is politics corrupts so it’s likely 80% of it isn’t true and of course all this crap about being god certainly isn’t true….but anyway, is it just that it would seem to make a concession to the Christians to even admit there was a guy named Jesus who lived and who was a religious leader and his existence then lead, however corruptly and twistedly and erroneously to the entire Christian religion and all its twisted and corrupt structures?
You seem strangely unwilling to concede this most minimal point. It’s not all made up hooey, why does that bother you so much?
I think Moses Bhudda and Mohamed existed…and certainly probably 90% of whatever they did and said got twisted and contorted and used for politics over the centuries…..
See at bottom your’e saying Christianity is not just wrong and twisted and misued for politics but is essentially a hoax in a way that other religions are not. I think that’s wrong, speaking historically. The guy existed he was a religious leader and others started making it into a Church which inevitbaly makes it something all about power and politics and very corrupt…..to me some of the toher religions are less corrupt…. because they’re less organized! But at the core of each one there is historical truth and btw, speaking morally, kind of a common moral truth, too. While this conclusion fits my conception of the world rather conveniently, liking to believe in diversity and such, I do believe it.
Seems the question is, can you really be a christian who says they follow everything in the bible, and be rich, if you don’t spend a sizable amount of your fortune helping the poor?
Either you are going to go to hell because you are lying to yourself that you follow all the passages in the bible, and don’t pick and choose the ones that suit you,
Or you are going to go to hell, if you resist spending money helping the less fortunate, be that through taxes or serious tithing.
BlueJohn,
God requires a 10% tithe. God also requires a good free will offering. Most people give sparingly, some liberally. Puddy usually gives 10% offering as God has blessed The Puddy’s. God says through Malachi in Malachi 3: he will open the windows of heaven with a blessing. We do other missionary things as we see fit, such as Tsunami Relief in 2004, Katrina in 2005, Myanmar 2008, and our Haiti 2010 project right now. That’s all we can do. We work through ADRA. SeattleJew and Puddy discussed ADRA. Contact “we ylb arschloch” for the original links.
Puddy wishes he could do more. How God views this will be known by The Puddy’s at the judgment but we try to follow the Bible in the spirit of generous giving and helping those in need as stated in Matthew 25.
Is the 10% tithe all the rich man from the bible is supposed to give, or is that the minimum?
If I had 100 million, all I would have to tithe is 10 mil to the Unitarians and spend the remaining 90 mill on fast cars, liquor, union busting and off shoring American jobs to china and I’d get into heaven?
151 antichrist
1. The Pharisaic movement, unlike Jesus and his followers before Paul, was a pretty big thing, in fact their resistance to Rome’s eventual destruction of Jerusalem.
2, No, you can google all you want but you will not find any contemporary references to Jesus. The closest is some text in Josephus that all scholars agree is a forgery. After that there is another reference in Josephus to James who maybe the BROTHER of Jesus.
3. Not sure what you are tryiong to say abiout Historians. I do not think you will find many who think Jesus of the NT existed as a major contemporaneous figure. Literary only sugegsts that someone wrote parts of what is attributed to Jesus .. no evidence this author had any more to0 do with the guy in the story than there is that Muhamud got his words form Gabriel.
SJ,
All the more reason to ridicule Christians who believe in the Son of God? That’s okay. We’ll take your ridicule and continue to believe. You can hold that view you came from an amoeba, Puddy believes he was originally created in the image of God before sin appeared on Earth.
Antichrist:
Not that big a deal, other than history is i9mportant to me. I KNOW that Muhamud exostes and Joseph Smith existed. I am fatrly sure Hillel exosted. I am reasoably certain that Moses, as descibed in the Torah, did not exist but there may have been some sort of figure on whom the story is based. Jesus is pretty much the same.
As for his legacy, that is a big deal. Bertrand Russell, for example, blames the Jews for an awful lot of horrible stuff done by Christians. We might deserve it IF Christianity was derived from Judaism rather than from Roman state religion and Greek philosophy. YOU may not care, but millions of us hace died mover just this issue.
Because blaming Judaism and the Pharisees for the Christian religion is wrong. BTW, Christinaity has done good things too .. and those do derive from its connections to the Greek philophers and Roman state.
Because Christians, in the name of this man,, have killed many of my ancestors.
The same literary analysis you cite says most of the Buddha and the Prophet’s sayings are thw work of individuals. We also have a far better historic recortd to deal with. Moses .. most likley he is 90% fictional.
Yep.
BUT .. ChirsitiNIty has also invented good things .. long after jesus’ time or even the founder (Paul).
Charity, Democracy, Science .. arfe nto things to sneeze at.
John XXIII, Cesar Chavez, Jefferson .. great teachers.
Blue John,
Where is the generous offering Blue John? You are only giving that back to God because He demands it. But where is the love offering? Where is the sacrificial offering?
The issue with the rich young ruler was his love of self. Jesus telling him to sell what he had and give to the poor was a test to see if he would get off of his riches and share them with poor peeps. Unfortunately the story said he failed. Jesus showed the young man he was destitute in the love of his fellow man. Contrast this man with Zaccheus. When his problems were identified by Jesus… what did Zaccheus do Blue John?
But there is more to the story Blue John. Puddy suggests you read the whole story and what Jesus said after the eye of the needle comment. Riches don’t get you into heaven, but your belief in Christ. You can have money and get into heaven, it’s how you use those riches is what counts.
So Blue John, far be it from Puddy to tell you how much to give as an offering. That’s your issue.