An Atheist Myth of Historical Evidences

Test the words of the witnesses. Do you have any evidence that they are lying or that they were deceived?

"A truthful witness gives honest testimony, but a false witness tells lies."

Were the authors of the gospels truthful or dishonest? Test their words against your own experience, and see what happens. You've got nothing to lose.

Almost the whole Bible is about people who find themselves on the first rung of a ladder to God. They almost never get any higher than the first rung. Every time the difference is between the people of spend their lives on the first rung, and those who don't. That is the difference between faith and no faith. Belief and disbelief. Going somewhere or staying where you are, spiritually.

I'm clinging to that first rung, and I am becoming more and more convinced that this ladder leads to one God alone and nowhere else, more and more aware that it does not change my world - it just gives me that edge of a perspective I would not otherwise have had. And as Dickens says in the Tale of Two Cities: "it has made all the difference".

Test the words, and it will give you some insight into their character, and their character will give you some insight into their intention, which will give you some insight to the kind of truth they point to. But as always, it's up to you whether you believe them or not.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Do you have the first bible and are you able to read it?! No! So how can you analyse the words of the witnesses? The only thing you've got are the translation by a believer of the translation by a believer of the bible writen by a witness that believes... Where are the original words?

Anyway, the fact that a witness believes what he says, is not a proof that he says the truth...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Good idea ...

Now, what was that criteria again? Wait, I remember: "Test their words against your own experience ..." Thanks, Jenyar, that certainly works for me.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

There is no such thing as a "first Bible", unless you mean the Hebrew Bible (we have the same one that was available when Jesus was alive - the Septuagint - readily available). We have copies of the originals, in the same language they were written in. If you do not trust the translations, go to SearchGodsWord.org and read the original Greek and Hebrew.

If you want a voice recording or a first edition, I'm sorry, but you will never be able to believe anything pre-15th century.

Fair enough.

 

Strange, you were the last person I thought would have experience of demon-possession.

Jesus took something that made us unclean (devils are sometimes also called "unclean spirits") and committed them to (traditionally unclean) pigs, and washed them (in the sea) with death (which is where we are going whether sent on not).

So it can be said that someone with a murderous spirit, is well on his way to committing murder. While we can only judge the deed (only after it has happened), God can judge the heart (whether you are "clean" or "unclean"). Jesus has provided his own body as a vehicle who took our sins into death, cleansing us from them so that we do not have to run over the cliff along with the rest of the herd, but can rise from death reborn with new hearts - new lives.

The miracle itself is meaningless. Even if you were there, witnessing it, and you didn't ask "what does this mean?", it would have held no significance for you. It wouldn't be an experience you could measure any truth by. On the other hand, if you had experienced the feeling of having been forgiven sin, and given a chance to begin anew, you would immediately recognize what happened - the truths would "line up". You don't have any experience that could "line up" with this, and therefore no means to verify its validity.

 

I was dealing with the Jesus life (New Testament) ... that was NOT available when he was alive.

You want to show that the Bible is right?

The Old Testament : God created the Earth , the animals and the humans a few thousands years ago... That was a good way to prove to the 18th century people that God was their master and to explain why/how they were alive. Now, can you still trust in it? That's just a way to explain some concepts of the christians (God created us, We are all brothers,...).

The New Testament : Some new ideas were needing a new story and then we had 4 guys (more credible than only one!) that told the story of Jesus - son of God, who can walk on water, whose mother is a virgin, who gives its food to the poor... well, he was a saint! Now I have to forget the Church : rich, powerful, that don't want to show that there are some mistakes in the Bible because it would mean that the people would not give their money anymore... (The Vatican still have the most wonderful library of the world... what a pity that no one can read these hidden books...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

)

My conclusion about Jesus :
- a hoax from the christian Church or,
- the best guru ever seen.

 

True. It would have been very strange indeed if people wrote about Jesus while he was alive, since his public ministry only consisted of the last three years of his life.

18th century? The Old Testament was translated into Aramaic by 400BC (the Aramaic Targums) and into Greek by 250BC (the Septuagint, or "70 books"). This is just the written form. (Check out the site How the Bible came to us).

Some of the contents date as far back as Sumerian culture, like parts of Genesis (and that is not to say that these weren't available even before that), and the prophets were real people who lived during the reign of the Israelite kings. What they said wasn't to try to prove that God was their "master", but to keep them from forgetting that God was their God.

"Hidden books" sound like conspiracy theory to me. And how can the Vatican hide mistakes in the Bible?

It is the wealth of the church that prompted the reformation, so that has been dealt with. If you don't want to see rich and powerful churches, I suggest you spend some time at a mission in Uganda or Iraq.

I'm afraid you are mistaken about the message of the Bible (and of Jesus). The message is for people who want to believe in God, and for people who realize the hold sin has over their lives. The gospel (lit. "good news") is that God has reached out to people, and made it possible to know Him and experience His love.

Maybe your conclusions are a bit premature or ill-informed. You have already shown that you are aware that the New Testament did not exist while Jesus was alive, so the Old Testament would be a "hoax from the Jews", which amounts to a "hoax by their prophets", which amounts to a "hoax by God".

If you think he was the best guru ever seen, you must believe that he was a sane, honest and trustworthy man. You can't come to that conclusion without reading the New Testament. Have you?

 

You missed the point... (or is it my mistake?). I mean that the Old Testament has been written in aim to explain how/why we are all alive. And it has been the only "truth" until the 18th century.
The Old Testament was there to say : "God created us, here is the story, believe us and follow our rules...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

"Conspiracy"?! No...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The fact that the Vatican hides some books is not the problem here. It could be a new thread.

I've got nothing against it, and that's not the problem neither.

"hoax from the Jews" -> yes
"hoax by their prophets" -> yes (if they are not a hoax themselves)
"hoax by God" -> you're going a bit too far, no? You're expecting that God said something to someone... I mean "REALLY said something to someone".

I did! I'm a Christian and I believed in Jesus until a few years... Do you know Rael? Does he believe that he is the son of an alien? Is he "a sane, honest and trustworthy man"? For me, that's the same with Jesus...

 

1. The most authoritative of the Targum is Targum Onkelos, a 2nd century CE endeavor.
2. The term Septuagint refers to number of translators, not the number of books, and (according to Josephus) only the Torah can claim such an early date, with the remainder of the Tanach being translated over the following century.

Well done, Jenyar! If one wishes to know how stories get fabricated by honest apologists, one needs only read your forays.

 

Thank you for pointing out my misquote, but I provided my source and anybody could find that out for themselves. Where do you think the Targum Onkelos came from? Are you suggesting the core of Judaism only came into existence after Christianity? Of course not.

It's very dishonest of you to suggest I like to fabricate my facts. But I have come to expect no less from you.

 

How does Rael's insanity, dishonesty and untrustworthiness make you to assess that Jesus also could not be "a sane, honest and trustworthy man"..?

 

That's the point! I don't believe in Rael (who is just a bastard that should stop the drugs) but he show that someone can say : "I'm different, trust me and love me", and that he will find someone to believe him...
Now my point is that Jesus was a man, born from an unknown man (maybe a Roman) and that believed that he was a "chosen". The good thing is the fact that he was not asking for money or women (not in the Bible at least). He was a "saint" (in a way) and he has been chosen to be the model of the Christians who have added some wonderful stories (walk on water, the blind man...).
Unfortunately, Rael could be a Jesus-like in a few centuries (in fact I don't think so, but who knows).

 

What we know about Jesus and what we know about his miracles share the same date. They were not "added later" any more than his whole history was added later (about 50-100AD - Jesus died at about 30 AD). The "wonderful stories" are all we know about Jesus, and the "model" we have derives from the "model" his followers had of Him. (source: Are the Biblical Documents reliable?)

You either have to accept Jesus was who he said he was, or reject everything you "know" about him. You can't just pick and choose which parts you like and which you don't - they're all part of the same history, and reported by the same people.

 

Wow! Don't you understand my point or don't you want to understand it? I will not tell you the same thing again and again...! Never heard "My father is the best : he can do that... he is that..."? Pfffff, think about it!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Your pervasive ignorance is beyond laughable.

From Onkelos the Proselyte under the guidance of R. Eliezer and R. Joshua (Babylonian Talmud Meg. 3a) in the 2nd century CE.

No, I'm suggesting that it is sophomoric to instruct others on a subject about which you are clearly clueless.

And, of course, that is not what I said. Just one more layer of confusion from Jenyar of the 70 Books.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Another way of looking at it is that the Sumerians worshiped some made up stuff which eventually influenced other peoples beliefs - who then took some of the Sumerians made up stuff and ADDED it to their made up stuff.

This is the truth of it.

Just stop and think about it for a moment.
Which one of these is not like the other .. which one of these doesn’t belong .. ..
1) The Inca's make up some stuff and poof some of it ends up in the Aztec religion.
2) The Hindi make up some stuff and poof some of it ends up in the Buddhist religion.
3) Sumerians make up and poof some of it ends up in the Torah.
4) The Persians make up some stuff (see Mithra) and poof some of it ends up Bible NT.
5) Christians make up some stuff and poof some of it ends up in the Qu’ran.
ALL of the above make sense.
6) The Aboriginal Australians make up some stuff and poof some of it ends up in the Bible.
Hmmmm . . . . can you see where I’m coming from?

 

Jenyar,

But that is simply not true. There has been substantial research that has been completed that shows how the Jesus myths were constructed and with significant confidence of their dates. For example the 5 sets of miracle stories that mimic the Exodus stories originated in N.Palestine at around 50CE. These entered Mark at around 80CE and were propagated from there. The creation of the miracle stories was important to those at the time since a god figure would not be credible if he could not perform miracles.

Put in perspective: there was no TV, no radio, no telephone, very few books, and most people were illiterate. The overwhelming primary form of entertainment and news distribution was creative verbal story telling. Now given that even modern supposed objective news readers add emphasis and bias then it is not difficult to imagine how embellished stories became myths some 2000 years ago. Given that reality there is no way that any of the fantasy stories you are reading can in any way be reflective of truth or actuality. It is not so much that the authors were dishonest but that myth making was the normal way of operating.

I don’t see why not. There is always a possibility that some of the mythmaking was less imaginative than others. But that all of it is myth to some degree should not be doubted.

So as far as the bible is concerned –

• It is filled with scientific errors, contradictions and numerous other errors.
• Many of its myths are not even original, but were derived from earlier middle eastern myths.
• The authors are largely anonymous.
• The canonization process is largely haphazard and accidental.
• It does not serve as a good moral guide and in fact had been largely responsible for the atrocities committed by believers.

In short, the Bible is not a "good Book".

But why do you believe it? What is it about you that you buy the story and I don’t?

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/bibleanalysis.html

 

I found The Origins of Christianity and the Quest for the Historical Jesus Christ to be an interesting read.

 

Evidence?

 

Your vast knowledge is awe-inspiring...

On second thought, I take that back. Judging by your multiple interjections regurgitating other people's ideas, I have to conclude that you know nothing but what you can scavenge off the internet. That being said, I admire your objective scepticism. At least you don't tolerate assumptions from either side of the fence.

'The Targum to the Pentateuch was composed by the proselyte Onkelos at the dictation of R. Eliezer and R. Joshua.'
This statement is undoubtedly due to error or ignorance on the part of the scholars of Babylonia, who applied to the Aramaic translation of the Pentateuch the tradition current in Palestine regarding the Greek version of Aquila. (Jewish Encyclopedia: Targum Onkelos)

The Aramaic Targum: "The Aramaic translation of the Bible. It forms a part of the Jewish traditional literature, and in its inception is as early as the time of the Second Temple." (Jewish Encyclopedia: Targum)

600BC: Hanging gardens and tower of Babel (re?)built (Neo-Chaldean timeline)

Moses: Torah and "Oral Law" become established in Hebrew, Interpretation is known as "Halakah" and "Midrash Halakah"
"Some of these originated at the time of the Prophets; but others are much older, and are, perhaps, even Sinaitic, having been transmitted orally, and committed to writing by the Prophets (comp. Sanh. 22b). They are called also "Dibre kabbalah" (Words of Tradition)." (Jewish Encyclopedia: Oral Law)

598BC: Babylonia captures Jerusalem
587BC: Aramaic becomes the international medium of exchange (The history of Aramaic)
586BC: Solomon's Temple destroyed, Diaspora Jews in exile to Babylon (Babylonian Judaism)
538BC: King Cyrus (the anointed) overthrows Babylon and frees the Jews, who bring Aramaic back to Judah, replacing ancient Hebrew as their native tongue.
536BC: Work on the Second Temple begins
It becomes necessary to translate and interpret the Hebrew Torah and Oral Law into Aramaic. Interpretation is provided along with the reading or recitation of the Law, and is known as "Targum" (translation)

516BC: Second Temple consecrated (70 years after destruction of the first)
"As an intepretation of the Hebrew text of the Bible the Targum had its place both in the synagogal liturgy and in Biblical instruction, while the reading of the Bible text combined with the Targum in the presence of the congregation assembled for public worship was an ancient institution which dated from the time of the Second Temple" (Targum)
(Later written down in 200AD, this material became knows as the "Mishnah".)
450BC: The Torah begins to gain recognition as Jewish Scripture
1982: Hebrew revived as Israel's official language

As you can see, the date of 400BC I gave previously to the Aramaic Targum is even conservative. Why would they only become necessary in the 2nd century, 700 years after Aramaic replaced Hebrew as the official language? The Babylonian Talmud reflects the early Babylonian influences, and probably also compensates for the establishment of Middle-Aramic (200 BC - 200 AD).

There's a difference between instructing and informing. Ignorance is not lack of knowledge, it's lack of information. It's up to you whether it becomes knowledge or whether you just ignore me on grounds of prejudice.

What you said was:
"Well done, Jenyar! If one wishes to know how stories get fabricated by honest apologists, one needs only read your forays."
Possible interpretations:
1. I'm a dishonest apologist (an illogical conclusion)
2. I'm an honest apologist, who
-a)fabricate stories (the conclusion I drew)

What did you mean, CA?