With A Heavy Heart, I Say This to Atheists and Christians

[§outh§tar]

So? What do you consider an error in the NT? I have often talked to those who say there are errors and then they come up with something like Jesus in one place said: "Those who are not for us are against us" and in another said "if they are not against us they are on our part". This one is obviously just speaking to different audiences concerning different groups of people (the first concerns the Pharisees and the second concerns believers and followers).

Where would you like me to start from? The fact that the "inspired" apostles quoted from a Septuagint with over 6000 errors? Or the forgeries at the end of the Gospel of Mark? Or maybe the Johannine comma? Or shall we address the historical fabrications in the New Testament: the slaughter of innocents, Matthew's claim that at Jesus' last breath, a multitude of saints in the vicinity rose from the dead and entered Jerusalem, or that a cruel and terrible Roman leader hearkened and submitted to the whims of a Jewish mob?

 

[David F.]

I'm confused... If I make a new translation of the bible and put in falsehoods, then does that mean the bible is flawed and no one should read it - not even the early manuscripts I haven't been able to destroy? This is in effect what has happened to the end of Mark. The question is not whether the Septuagint has errors - it is a translation and, just like the KJV, it has errors. The question is, did the scriptures that were quoted have errors? Historical Fabrications? There are no commas in the Greek. I don't see any problem with the Pilot story - he was probably not any crueller than the average Roman of his time. He did not fear the Jews but he did fear Caesar - who would not permit him to kill everyone in the provence but would also not abide an uprising. Can you prove the dead did not rise at Jesus' last breath? Just because you can't explain a miracle does not mean it did not happen. You don't get to just make this up.

The Jews feel that some parts of the bible are more important than others - the Torah being the most important. Perhaps this is the tact you should take.

Where would I like for you to start - pick one. I will be happy to discuss, but I will already say that your emotions will cloud your judgement.

 

[Godless]

Now this is unique! a formall known theist (fighting for the faith) turn agnostic, or on his way of becoming an atheist. SouthStar vs David F. an individual who is in need of emperical evidence of China's existence!! LOL...LOL...

Eat him up SouthStar!!! this one should be a sinch!!.



G.

 

[Jenyar]

lambs and wolves

 

[okinrus]

I'm a little confused as well. How does Southstar know the Septuagint has 6000 errors? Only by a comparison with the Masoretic text could he determine whether a passage was an "error." But he would then be assuming the Masoretic text is perfect.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13722a.htm

Or the forgeries at the end of the Gospel of Mark? Or maybe the Johannine comma? Or shall we address the historical fabrications in the New Testament:

the slaughter of innocents

Historically it is possible. Although Josephus does not record this event, he does record that Herod was a cruel king.

Matthew's claim that at Jesus' last breath, a multitude of saints in the vicinity rose from the dead and entered Jerusalem

Possible as well. But note that this report in the Bible is second hand, so even if the report was wrong, the passage is valid.

or that a cruel and terrible Roman leader hearkened and submitted to the whims of a Jewish mob?

Again, this is based upon Josephus' assessment, and Josephus is not an infalliable wittness. He is biase, as being a Jew, and would be likely to consider Pilate's actions cruel even if Pilate was only moderately crule. Furthermore, Pilate could also be cruel in order to control the crowds; the crucifixion was systematic of a long record of character flaws.

 

[water]

M*W: Just because I don't believe what you believe, that doesn't make me full of hate and resentment. You and Jenyar are both so full of yourselves that in reality you are both empty souls. Anyone who believes in Christianity has lost their soul. Why shouldn't it be hated? Why don't you stick to posting on the forums where you can more knowledgeably post? The Religion Forum is not one of them.

I will only repeat what the ERK's already told you: Medicine Woman, you're judgemental as hell.

 

[David F.]

Now this is unique! a formall known theist (fighting for the faith) turn agnostic, or on his way of becoming an atheist. SouthStar vs David F. an individual who is in need of emperical evidence of China's existence!! LOL...LOL...
G.

Godless, you don't actually read posts do you? I said I did not have empirical evidence of China but I believe it anyway - without empirical evidence.

No doubt you misquote the bible too...

 

[David F.]

Oh, the slaughter of innocents was a reference to Herod's slaughter of the baby boys in Bethleham...

First, there is no outside reference, outside the bible, to this event. Second, in a small town like Bethleham - probably around 500 people - how many baby boys under 2 years old would there be - 5 or maybe as many as ten? Considering the cruel time they lived in, under Roman rule, when life was not very precious, it does not seem unduly surprising that the death of less than a dozen babies would cause any stir (after all we kill 1.5 million babies a year in abortion clinics). It would certainly be awful to the parents, but not really to anyone else. How is this an error in the bible?

 

[mustafhakofi]

you are a moron, life has never been precious to the religious, we still live in cruel times, as there are still more religious nuts, then sensible reasonable people.
you cannot compared an abortion, it's a womans right, it has f/all to do with a god/gods, with the actuel slaying of babies, because it was your gods will.
you kill more babies than you quoted, every time you jerk off.

 

[duendy]

just had a look at the original confession of this very long thread
i know how hoard it is to have one's belief challenged and even destroyed. VERy tough. but thats how we learn, explore

It is vitally important when looking at the Christian myth to understand its emergence form paganism!

this means to explore paganism...not necessarily to join 'it', but as in for the fun of exploring

what you find is that the whole myth of Jesus is not unique

but to cut a long story short for now cause i am gonna be busy cookin the tea in a mo

JESUS isn't some distant historical figure. really the whole myth of the god-man which Jesus is is reeally asking the human to realize their depth

but one has to be aware of what the policicalized version of the god-man myth did. it cut off sex, and earthiness...making all of that seem guilt-ridden. St Augustine for example conCOKted the myth of 'orignal sin' meaning it was the 'involuntary nature of the genitals' excitement that was the sin. that having lost control was disobeying 'God'....this idea will have justified celibacy
so, in other words, out natrual sexuality was made evil. we have been/are cut off from our natrual being.....Then, we have Jesus going to his "Father" in 'heaven'....all meaning AWAY from Earth....VERy unlike the god-man of the earth religions who is the very living ever dying ever regenerating Son of the Goddess.........Goddess unlike "God", who preceded the myth of the transcendental he-God, is immanent, meaning spirit is IN matter......so 'Son of' means of the Earth ANd spirit. there is no separation between Earth and heaven, body and spirit as came to be believed in the patriarchal cooption of the earth religion of the Goddess

remember the emphasis of Jesus Christ Son of 'God'....?

now with the god-man you eat and drink hir. this inolves eating and drinking ecstasy inspiring sunstances which afford the celebrant DIRECT experience

do you now grok that that became prohibited due to politcal power resons. then there is just left empty symbolism, and people worrying whether 'Kig Herod' really did kill them babies...and whether Jesus really did rise from the dead, etc etc...whilst all the while THe essential experience is yours and mine ecstatic experience here in this living Earth....?

 

[§outh§tar]

I'm confused... If I make a new translation of the bible and put in falsehoods, then does that mean the bible is flawed and no one should read it - not even the early manuscripts I haven't been able to destroy? This is in effect what has happened to the end of Mark. The question is not whether the Septuagint has errors - it is a translation and, just like the KJV, it has errors. The question is, did the scriptures that were quoted have errors? Historical Fabrications? There are no commas in the Greek. I don't see any problem with the Pilot story - he was probably not any crueller than the average Roman of his time. He did not fear the Jews but he did fear Caesar - who would not permit him to kill everyone in the provence but would also not abide an uprising. Can you prove the dead did not rise at Jesus' last breath? Just because you can't explain a miracle does not mean it did not happen. You don't get to just make this up.

The Jews feel that some parts of the bible are more important than others - the Torah being the most important. Perhaps this is the tact you should take.

Where would I like for you to start - pick one. I will be happy to discuss, but I will already say that your emotions will cloud your judgement.

David F,

You are missing the point. There are NO original manuscripts to compare with and therefore to claim any textual errors are the result of copyist errors as opposed to errors in the originals is simply dishonest. Moreover, I fail to see how the majority of even early manuscripts could then all contain these same "copyist errors". Do you not think to make such a claim is to put the cart in front of the horse? And therefore I ask why you place your faith in a Book, which even as you say, contains these "copyist errors". Is that too not dishonesty?

Oh and btw, I wasn't referring to a punctuation mark when I mentioned the Johannine comma.

I don't see any problem with the Pilot story - he was probably not any crueller than the average Roman of his time. He did not fear the Jews but he did fear Caesar - who would not permit him to kill everyone in the provence I don't see any problem with the Pilot story - he was probably not any crueller than the average Roman of his time. He did not fear the Jews but he did fear Caesar - who would not permit him to kill everyone in the provence

I beg your pardon? Pilate was not "permitted" to kill anyone? Are you looking at the same history I am?

Can you prove the dead did not rise at Jesus' last breath? Just because you can't explain a miracle does not mean it did not happen. You don't get to just make this up.

THANK YOU for proving my point. When there are absolutely NO reports whatsoever of saints like "Moses, Adam and Eve, Noah" (according to the story) rising from the dead, why do you choose to believe the account of the writer as true? In all honesty, do you truly believe that if saints arose from the Jerusalem vicinity and entered the city, that NO ONE whatsoever would even mentioned it. I am not talking about whether it is "possible" that everyone neglected it. I am asking whether you truly believe that such an event occured and that NO ONE but this "inspired" writer (not even the other Gospel writers like Luke, Mark, John) was witness to it?

It is not my emotions that are clouding my judgement. You are the one placing the cart before the horse. The onus is on you to show me why you believe in a Book with "copyist errors" as the Word of God especially since you don't even have the original epistles for reference. I am happy to continue as long as you understand that I am viewing this as objectively as I can. If you can give me a good reason, I will surely agree with you as everyone here is my witness.

 

[David F.]

David F,

You are missing the point. There are NO original manuscripts to compare with and therefore to claim any textual errors are the result of copyist errors as opposed to errors in the originals is simply dishonest. Moreover, I fail to see how the majority of even early manuscripts could then all contain these same "copyist errors". Do you not think to make such a claim is to put the cart in front of the horse? And therefore I ask why you place your faith in a Book, which even as you say, contains these "copyist errors". Is that too not dishonesty?

Where did I say there were any copyist errors? As a matter of fact, the Jewish scribes were particularly careful about not having any "copyist errors" by proofing the copy many time by many different people. I know there are no originals (how would an original last this long anyway?)

Oh and btw, I wasn't referring to a punctuation mark when I mentioned the Johannine comma.

There is NO PUNCTUATION in the Greek or in the Hebrew.

I beg your pardon? Pilate was not "permitted" to kill anyone? Are you looking at the same history I am?

I said Pilate was not permitted to kill "everyone" not that Pilate was not permitted to kill "anyone".

THANK YOU for proving my point. When there are absolutely NO reports whatsoever of saints like "Moses, Adam and Eve, Noah" (according to the story) rising from the dead, why do you choose to believe the account of the writer as true? In all honesty, do you truly believe that if saints arose from the Jerusalem vicinity and entered the city, that NO ONE whatsoever would even mentioned it. I am not talking about whether it is "possible" that everyone neglected it. I am asking whether you truly believe that such an event occured and that NO ONE but this "inspired" writer (not even the other Gospel writers like Luke, Mark, John) was witness to it?

You see, we simply don't know... Just like all the other miracles Jesus performed, there is no proof of either truth or falsehood - so I choose not to comment. This DOES NOT constitute an error.

It is not my emotions that are clouding my judgement. You are the one placing the cart before the horse. The onus is on you to show me why you believe in a Book with "copyist errors" as the Word of God especially since you don't even have the original epistles for reference. I am happy to continue as long as you understand that I am viewing this as objectively as I can. If you can give me a good reason, I will surely agree with you as everyone here is my witness.

I don't have to show you that there are no errors. That is impossible since no one can prove a negative. If you are claiming there are errors, they it is on you to show me an error.

Some things you might consider an error, are simply a matter of not understanding the culture the bible was written from/to. For instance: Did Abraham have one son or two (or seven). In some places the blble says he had one, and in others it says he had two (Isaac and Ishmael). This is a cultural difference. Abraham had one son of a slave woman (Ishmael) and one son of a free woman (Isaac). If you are using the word son to mean heir, then Abraham had only one (Isaac) but if you are using the word son to mean male offspring then he had two (he had even more with his third wife after Sarah died). This is not an error, this is a cultural difference and a lack of understanding on our part when we read about something which happened 4000 years ago.

 

[David F.]

you are a moron, life has never been precious to the religious, we still live in cruel times, as there are still more religious nuts, then sensible reasonable people.
you cannot compared an abortion, it's a womans right, it has f/all to do with a god/gods, with the actuel slaying of babies, because it was your gods will.
you kill more babies than you quoted, every time you jerk off.

I'm a moron? Why exactly are you thinking there would be some record of 10 killed babies after 2000 years? Are you being real? There are almost no records of anything which happened at that time - great wars and conquests, campaigns which lasted months or even years are almost entirely lost to us. I'm not trying to be insensitive, only realistic. There were no newspapers, no printing presses, almost no books (scrolls). Only the very most important happenings were ever recorded at all. Outside the bible, even the name Pilate is almost never mentioned. It is actually quite remarkable that this event was even recorded in the bible. According to John, the life and actions of Jesus would fill the world with books, yet he wrote only 21 little chapters.

NO... GOD DID NOT KILL THE BABIES IN BETHLEHEM... HEROD DID! Who is the moron who speaks about things he knows nothing of? At least I have read the only account that still exists, have you?

Abortion is not a choice it is a life! It is you baby killers to whom life is no longer precious. I suppose Hitler said the same about his killings - it was, after all, legal in his government - and they were after all, only Jews (or as you would say, only a fetus). Genocide.

 

[§outh§tar]

mustafhoki, would you mind kindly showing David how many massacres God advised His people to indulge in? Or how many babies and pregnant mothers they slayed in the name of "righteousness"? Or how many virgins God ordered His "unwilling" warriors to take as "booty" (however literally you want to take that).

David, I'll answer more directly later. Just too tired from answering too many people..

 

[Persol]

Only the very most important happenings were ever recorded at all.

Funny how blood lines and timespans are considered 'important happenings', yet are contradictory.

NO... GOD DID NOT KILL THE BABIES IN BETHLEHEM... HEROD DID! Who is the moron who speaks about things he knows nothing of? At least I have read the only account that still exists, have you?

Your reading of that account is noticably slanted....

Abortion is not a choice it is a life!

Cows are also life... as are tumors. What's your point? The question is whether it should be given the full right of a human. Obviously sperm/eggs/tumors are not, and babies are. Your cut-off point of conception is arbitrary and not actually supported by anything besides your screaming rants.

 

[David F.]

Hey David you want to talk about killing?

2 Kings 2:23-25
From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some youths came out of the town and jeered at him. "Go on up, you baldhead!" they said. "Go on up, you baldhead!" He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the LORD . Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the youths. And he went on to Mount Carmel and from there returned to Samaria.

God is such a great guy isn't he!

Killing? I see no killing here. Read your own post. It says they "mauled" the youths. The word maul is fromt the Hebrew word <i>bakaw</i> which means to rip, to tear, to break open. This does not mean kill. No killing here.

Maybe what you should learn from this is how important God thinks it is to repsect your elders!

 

[David F.]

Cows are also life... as are tumors. What's your point? The question is whether it should be given the full right of a human. Obviously sperm/eggs/tumors are not, and babies are. Your cut-off point of conception is arbitrary and not actually supported by anything besides your screaming rants.

See, this is what happens when people forget to worship God and start to worship nature - life becomes arbitrary. The life of a cow becomes just as important as the life of a baby. This is where the truth of God is changed into a lie, and the creature is worshipped more than the Creator (Romans 1:25).

 

[David F.]

mustafhoki, would you mind kindly showing David how many massacres God advised His people to indulge in? Or how many babies and pregnant mothers they slayed in the name of "righteousness"? Or how many virgins God ordered His "unwilling" warriors to take as "booty" (however literally you want to take that).

David, I'll answer more directly later. Just too tired from answering too many people..

SouthStar, like it or not, the killing of the Caananites was necessary. We didn't know why until 19th century archeology. As it turns out, the land of Caanan was riddled with incurable (at least at that time) venerial disease. The plauge was even rampant in the animals (how exactly did it get there, yuck). The virgins were probably the only ones not infected (there was so much pedifilia that even the young boys were infected). The Israeli soldiers were given the <i>option</i> of sparing the virgins. They did not just rape the young girls though. They were told to bring the girls home with them but not touch them. They then had to shave every hair off of their bodies and trim their nails (to make sure there was no disease anywhere on their bodies) and then they had to wait for a month. Only then, if the soldier still wanted to, did they marry the girl. I suppose they could have just left the young girls to starve to death, but that doesn't seem too humane, now does it.

 

[MagiAwen]

David F.

Killing? I see no killing here. Read your own post. It says they "mauled" the youths. The word maul is fromt the Hebrew word bakaw which means to rip, to tear, to break open. This does not mean kill. No killing here.

So... erm.... mauling is true and just in the name of your god? Doesn't sound like a being I would want to worship.

See, this is what happens when people forget to worship God and start to worship nature

I see so.... worshiping something that exists (nature; the life of the world) is worse than worshiping something you are simply told exists with no other proof than stories that man wrote?

- life becomes arbitrary.

If you actually slow down your little head to READ what Persol wrote you will see that he was referring to your "cut-off point of conception" being arbitrary.

The life of a cow becomes just as important as the life of a baby.

Do you have something against cows?

This is where the truth of God is changed into a lie, and the creature is worshipped more than the Creator

You will do well the day you realize the only "creator" is man, as he is who created your god.

 

[David F.]

You will do well the day you realize the only "creator" is man, as he is who created your god.

Perhaps we will stand before the throne of Jesus together and you can tell me that again.